‘I Don’t Have The Bandwidth To Deal With Anne’

“I don’t have the bandwidth” for certain people is a wise approach. How can you reduce the amount of bandwidth people need to navigate me?

Grok says:

Reducing the “bandwidth” others need to navigate you involves making interactions smoother, clearer, and less draining. Here’s how:
Be Clear and Direct: Communicate your thoughts, needs, and boundaries concisely. Avoid vague or ambiguous language that requires others to guess your intentions.

Set Expectations Early: Let people know your availability, response style, or preferences upfront (e.g., “I’m slow to text back but always reply within a day”). This reduces confusion and follow-ups.

Streamline Decision-Making: When collaborating, offer a few clear options or a strong starting point instead of open-ended discussions. For example, suggest, “Let’s meet at 3 PM or 5 PM—pick one,” rather than “When are you free?”

Practice Active Listening: Pay attention to others’ cues and confirm understanding (e.g., “So you’re saying X, right?”). This prevents miscommunication that wastes time and energy.

Automate or Delegate Low-Value Tasks: Use tools like shared calendars, auto-replies, or templates for routine interactions. For example, a FAQ doc for common questions about your work saves repetitive explanations.

Respect Others’ Time: Stick to agreed schedules, avoid unnecessary tangents, and summarize key points in conversations or emails. Brevity shows you value their bandwidth too.

Cultivate Self-Awareness: Reflect on how your behavior (e.g., mood swings, indecisiveness) might tax others. If you’re unpredictable, work on consistency to make interactions easier.

Filter Your Circle: Politely distance yourself from high-maintenance relationships that demand disproportionate energy, reserving bandwidth for mutually low-effort connections.

By being predictable, respectful, and efficient, you lower the cognitive and emotional load others need to engage with you.

Posted in Psychology | Comments Off on ‘I Don’t Have The Bandwidth To Deal With Anne’

America’s AI Advantage

American workers are about the hardest-working and most productive workers in the world, and they can buy more stuff per time worked then most any other nation in the world.

It’s not surprising that American business is way ahead in adopting AI. Optimism makes it easier to innovate and Americans are about the most optimistic and enthusiastic people in the world.

These generalizations are based on my first-hand observations combined with what I have read and heard.

If your job includes writing and research, AI will make your writing and research sharper and better. If you jump on AI now, you may be the only person in your workplace who’s using it. In 18 months, in certain information sectors such as law and coding, you will either use AI or you don’t have a job. AI is already far better at making a medical diagnosis than doctors.

Grok says:

The piece paints a vivid picture of AI’s transformative impact on business and society, with the U.S. leading the charge. It’s a compelling narrative, grounded in data like the $109 billion in U.S. AI investment in 2024 and the stark contrast with China ($9.3 billion) and the UK ($4.5 billion). The argument about U.S. structural advantages—flexible labor markets, massive capital flows, and a relatively hands-off regulatory environment—holds water, especially when you consider historical tech adoption cycles like the internet boom and the app economy. The point about Trump’s budget bill preempting state-level AI regulation is intriguing, as it could indeed streamline deployment, though it risks glossing over ethical or safety concerns that fragmented regulation might otherwise address.
The mention of China’s DeepSeek and its open-source approach is a sharp counterpoint, highlighting a potential blind spot in U.S. dominance. Kai-Fu Lee’s perspective—that Chinese firms lag in enterprise spending but excel in consumer AI apps—adds nuance, suggesting the U.S. lead isn’t unassailable. The idea that open-source models could bypass U.S.-China tech decoupling is a critical insight, as it underscores the difficulty of controlling intangible digital flows compared to physical chips.
However, the piece leans heavily on optimism about productivity gains without fully grappling with the social fallout. The reference to Anthropic’s CEO warning of 50% entry-level job losses in one to five years is alarming, and the nod to youth unemployment linked to AI rollouts feels underexplored. Steve Bannon’s prediction about AI disruption fueling 2028 election tensions seems plausible, but it’s a bit speculative without more context on voter sentiment or political platforms.
The comparison to Europe’s slower AI adoption is well-supported, but it risks oversimplifying Europe’s challenges. “Tighter labour regimes” and “fragmented markets” are real, but cultural attitudes toward risk and innovation, plus GDPR-like regulations, also play a role. The piece could’ve dug deeper here.
Overall, it’s a strong analysis that captures the U.S.’s AI momentum and its economic implications while flagging real risks like job displacement and geopolitical competition. It’s bullish on American business but doesn’t shy away from China’s potential to disrupt via open-source AI.

Posted in AI, America | Comments Off on America’s AI Advantage

Bond Yields

Peter Zeihan talks about how bond yields must increase as baby boomers retire. There’s less capital available. Does this make sense?

Grok says: Peter Zeihan’s argument that bond yields must increase as baby boomers retire due to less capital availability has some logic but requires unpacking. As boomers retire, they shift from saving to spending, drawing down assets like 401(k)s and pensions. This reduces the pool of capital for investment, including in bonds. Basic supply and demand suggest that a smaller supply of capital chasing bonds could push yields up, as issuers (governments, corporations) need to offer higher interest rates to attract buyers.
However, it’s not a slam-dunk. First, capital isn’t just domestic—global investors, including sovereign funds and younger generations in other countries, can fill the gap. Second, central banks like the Fed can suppress yields through policies like quantitative easing, as seen post-2008. Third, if boomer spending slows economic growth (e.g., via reduced labor force participation), demand for borrowing could drop, keeping yields lower. Finally, automation and productivity gains could offset capital scarcity by boosting economic output.
Zeihan’s point assumes a relatively closed system with fixed capital flows, which oversimplifies global markets. Yields might rise, but it’s not inevitable—depends on policy, global trends, and economic conditions. Historically, yields have stayed low despite demographic shifts (e.g., Japan’s aging population). Check 10-year Treasury yields: they’ve fluctuated more with Fed policy than demographics alone.

Posted in Bonds | Comments Off on Bond Yields

No Joke: Making Jewish Humor

Ruth Wisse writes in her 2014 book:

* The young man was most disagreeably surprised when the proposed bride was introduced to him, and drew aside the shadkhen — the marriage broker — to whisper his objections: “Why have you brought me here?” he asked reproachfully. “She’s ugly and old, she squints, and has bad teeth …” “You needn’t lower your voice,” interrupted the broker, “she’s deaf as well.”
Two Jews meet in a railway carriage at a station in Galicia. “Where are you going?” asks one. “To Cracow,” replied the other. “What a liar you are!” objects the first. “If you say you’re going to Cracow, you want me to believe you’re going to Lemberg. But I know that in fact you’re going to Cracow. So why are you lying to me?”
A schnorrer, who was allowed as a guest into the same house every Sabbath, appeared one day in the company of an unknown young man who was about to sit down at the table. “Who is this?” asked the householder. “He’s my new son – in – law,” the schnorrer replied. “I’ve promised him his board for the first year.”

* Freud put up with anti – Semitism in much the same way that he accepted civilization with its discontents (to paraphrase the title of one of his most famous works). 6 He therefore welcomed joking as a compensatory pleasure — the expressive venting of people who lived under the double weight of their own disciplining heritage and the collective responsibility to behave well among the nations. Herzl, in contrast, wanted to alleviate anti – Semitism for the betterment of Europe as well as the Jews.
…At issue here is the degree to which the two men’s approval of Jewish wit was proportional to their respective plans, if any, for Jewish rescue.

Posted in Humor, Jews | Comments Off on No Joke: Making Jewish Humor

Beliefs Are Like Possessions

When people most need to feel special, they are most likely to adopt special beliefs such as Holocaust denial or 9-11 truthism. Childless people are more likely to adopt exciting beliefs because their ordinary life does not provide sufficient excitement. If I had children, my beliefs would likely be less exciting because I would find that my kids provided me with all the excitement I needed.

I think the below analysis is more right than wrong, more frequently valid and useful for understanding reality than not.

Psychologist and political scientist Robert P. Abelson writes in 1986:

One finds or adopts beliefs with personal or social appeal. Other beliefs were received in childhood before one had much say in the matter. One shows off one’s beliefs to people one thinks will appreciate them, but not to those who are likely to be critical. One is inclined to ornament beliefs from time to time, especially when communicating them to others (Tetlock, 1983). If anyone is critical of them, one feels attacked and responds defensively, as though one’s appearance, taste, or judgment had been called into question. One occasionally adds new beliefs to one’s collection, if they do not glaringly clash with those one already has. It is something like the accumulation of furniture. One is reluctant to change any of one’s major beliefs. They are familiar and comfortable, and a big change would upset the whole collection. Beliefs that have been handed down from parents might constitute an exception. If one is young and trying to establish an independent identity, one might want to chuck out inherited beliefs and everything that goes with them, and start all over again on one’s own. Also, if fashions in certain beliefs change, and one is the kind of person who likes to keep up with fashions, one may change one’s unfashionable beliefs.

* Bem’s (1967; 1972) self-perception theory, at its extreme, can be taken to assert that people never have attitudes or beliefs; they merely invent appropriate things to say to suit the circumstances surrounding the occasions on which they are asked about them.

* Circumstances Inducing Possession of a Belief

Public commitment to a belief
Suffering for a belief
Explaining a belief
Elaborating a belief, or tracing its origins
Defending a belief
Attributing longevity to a belief
Becoming aware of the value of a belief

* Psychological Sources of Belief Value

Functionality

Instrumental (What the belief promises, via mediation or wishfully)
Expressive (Who the belief says you are: your groups, experiences and feelings)

Attributes

Sharedness (Is the belief in favour with other people?)
Uniqueness (Does the belief imply unusual taste?)
Defensibility (Can the belief be justified as sound?)
Extremity (Is the belief sharp, intense, “the most”?)
Centrality (Does the belief fit with other beliefs?)

* Believers are motivated to act in such a way as to increase the values of their beliefs, from whatever sources these arise. In general, then, belief value will tend to increase during time of possession.

* When threatened, beliefs tend to increase in value, via whatever sources are most malleable and useful.

* There are at least two kinds of costs associated with the adoption of a belief: opportunity costs and sunk costs. By an “opportunity cost,” economists refer to an alternative benefit which is given up by virtue of a particular action. If you pursue an attractive but time-consuming avocation, for example, you sacrifice time which might be used to earn money. In the belief context, there is the possibility that the adoption of one belief might forestall the opportunity to possess other beliefs.

* More common is the situation in which present beliefs must be abandoned in order to adopt new ones. Since the present beliefs have some value, their abandonment is costly. I refer to this as the “sunk cost” attaching to the loss of present beliefs. Presumably an individual would not abandon present beliefs if their sunk cost exceeded the apparent value of the beliefs which would replace them.

* For the art and practice of persuasion, the moral of the theory would seem to be that to give someone a new belief, you’ve got to “sell” it to them as something they would find of value, and you have to get them to exercise it a bit and make some commitment. This is analogous to an automobile salesman pointing out the attractive features of a new car and letting the customer experience them with a trial spin.

* Beliefs are objects which provide values to their owners. The bases for these values have little to do with the probable truth of the beliefs. This is a crucial fact both psychologically and sociopolitically. Competitions between ideologies depend substantially upon which belief system provides greater value to its proponents.

* Among academics, there is in principle more of a skill component in the act of believing, with greater attention to the logical consistency between arguments, and more emphasis on the desirability of reality tests, difficult though they may be. There is also a norm of openness to belief challenge, and (hopefully) a respect for the potential validity of such challenges. Ideally, in such an environment beliefs are treated as products of an openly shared skill.

Are friends like possessions? Do we make friends or lose friends in similar ways to how we make our beliefs and accumulate possessions? We might build friends that have social and personal appeal. We make friends in childhood because they are there. We might show off our friends. Sometimes we adopt new friends at the cost of old friends.

Posted in Academia | Comments Off on Beliefs Are Like Possessions