wilkommen

6 ms·

1.
by wilkommen 2mo ago
I think a linear battlefield is one in which there is a "front line", which was a given for prior wars but maybe not as much anymore. Future wars might see adversarial forces mixed among each other spatially more than in the past.
2.
by wilkommen 2mo ago
The arguments in this article seem very similar in spirit to the ones mad in "The Sling and the Stone" book by Thomas X. Hammes.
3.
by wilkommen 3mo ago
This is just a way to keep the AI bubble going. The American people will not benefit from having a "stake" in AI companies. Doing so will serve only to expand the amount of capital available to AI companies for them to waste on a
4.
by wilkommen 3mo ago
I agree that regulatory pressure is a market force (I wish more people understood this), but I disagree that capital intensive things that must be done right can only be done by big organizations - quite the opposite. If the regulatory envi
5.
by wilkommen 3mo ago
The root cause of the dynamic you're highlighting here is wealth inequality. The more unequal the distribution of wealth in a society, the more concentrated wealth becomes geographically, because as wealth inequality grows, society beg
6.
by wilkommen 3mo ago
Couldn't they have just mandated that Polestar cars in the US must not be able to connect to the internet? That would pretty much negate any potential foreign threat related to "connected cars". Just make them... not connecte
7.
by wilkommen 3mo ago
I have had the chance recently to meet my boss's boss and my boss's boss's boss at my current job and it is amazing how in this era of robber-baron capitalism we seem to be promoting exclusively the most unserious, irresponsi
8.
by wilkommen 3mo ago
How is China reducing the consumption of transport fuels? Is that driven by changes in individuals' fuel consumption patterns or by a change on the industrial side?
9.
by wilkommen 3mo ago
Yes, it's much different in other countries. See https://substack.com/@doks/p-198191751
10.
by wilkommen 3mo ago
Good companies go bad because the American financial system and thus the companies that live within that system are geared for "shareholder returns" as the primary objective of existence for the corporation. If the objective of th
11.
by wilkommen 3mo ago
Yeah Pearl Jam did take a huge career hit trying to fight them, and that's admirable, but they shouldn't have had to do that. Why should artists carry the burden of having to sacrifice their careers to fight an illegal monopoly? T
12.
by wilkommen 3mo ago
Could it be this podcast? https://www.organizedmoney.fm/p/emergency-pod-the-live-natio...
13.
by wilkommen 3mo ago
Ticketmaster uses their monopoly power to unfairly squeeze the venues and the artists too. They're using their monopoly power to squeeze all sides of the live music marketplace - fans, artists, venues, and promoters. So the bad guys ar
14.
by wilkommen 4mo ago
The stuff that old people need in their retirements to live is getting more expensive due to the types of shenanigans that PE firms are doing. So their pensions appear solvent now but when those old folks actually retire, their money won&#x
15.
by wilkommen 5mo ago
None of these cases destroyed any of the defendants' monopoly status, so while there have been some "actions", there certainly haven't been any effective ones.
16.
by wilkommen 5mo ago
We need a cleansing forest fire of aggressive, effective antitrust enforcement. All we gotta do is enforce the laws that are already on the books, and do so in the spirit of the existing body of case law precedent.
17.
by wilkommen 5mo ago
Only anti-trust action against big tech to break their ad monopoly (to make journalism profitable again) and breaking up media conglomerates (to reduce concentration of power in the journalism industry) can save journalism from becoming jus
18.
by wilkommen 5mo ago
I like that, I think your method is better than mine - it's simpler so it's harder to game. It punishes the right thing.
19.
by wilkommen 6mo ago
I agree - I think there should be a rule that prevents anyone who buys a stock from selling it inside the following 2 years or so. And another rule that says every stock must pay a dividend that is a fixed percentage of the company's p
20.
by wilkommen 6mo ago
There's only so much land in the places where people want to live. You can't increase the housing supply enough to stop housing from being an asset in a society where wealth is sufficiently unequally distributed. By virtue of its
21.
by wilkommen 6mo ago
I think that building more housing helps, but a lack of supply is not the only cause of high housing prices. Wealth inequality is also a huge driver, possibly the primary driver. If wealth is allocated in a society in a sufficiently lopside
22.
by wilkommen 7mo ago
I find it reassuring. More people are waking up from our collective trickle-down, "free market hypothesis" fever dream and are starting to understand that there's nothing natural or rational about the stock market - it's
23.
by wilkommen 7mo ago
I think in the short to medium term, they will continue expanding the availability of credit and expanding the money supply when crashes happen in order to keep asset prices high. At some point there will be a breaking point, but I think 20
24.
by wilkommen 7mo ago
Idk how people write posts like this anymore. Clearly the stock market isn't rational, and prices of stocks are not tied to financial fundamentals. Stocks are essentially a deflationary alternative currency that only people with dispos
25.
by wilkommen 7mo ago
nominative
26.
by wilkommen 7mo ago
The entire stock market basically functions as a funnel of wealth from the middle class to the rich right now. When OpenAI and Anthropic IPO, they'll be megacap stocks and 401ks and pension funds the world over will invest in them. The
27.
by wilkommen 8mo ago
College-taught "best practices" and especially "software development patterns" can pretty much go straight into the trash bin when you start your real software development job. They're not inherently bad, they'
28.
by wilkommen 8mo ago
Too many people try to find work in competitive fields where there are fewer jobs than applicants and spend years tearing their hair out trying to make it happen without success, and all for nothing. Go where you're wanted, especially
29.
by wilkommen 8mo ago
The FTC defines monopoly, the courts define monopoly when private litigants bring monopolization cases and via precedent, and Congress defines monopoly via lawmaking. Of course it's subjective, everything is subjective when it comes to
30.
by wilkommen 8mo ago
Solution is to prosecute private monopolies out of existence, by enforcing the Robinson-Patman Act and the Sherman Act.

More ›