throwaway211

It doesn't assume. Hence 'substitute'. long run refers to the amount of time for prices to adapt, not a short run dependence on one thing.

Hence change in factor inputs.

An example of a change in factor inputs was, for example, whale oil which was a big deal for lighting systems in the 19th century. But as cheap whales were running out, so whale oil, thought to be so important for many and which there were technical improvements in sourcing and usage, was shifted away from.

As will be the case for copper, as it's a derived demand. The derived demand will be more price sensitive than the demand for the end service (lighting in the case of whales, or Open AI for copper). Not happening with copper in the short run will only make the long run change happen even (as time passes) faster.

I take your resource curse and raise you a Prebisch-Singer hypothesis

> Prebisch–Singer hypothesis argues that the price of primary commodities declines relative to the price of manufactured goods over the long term, which causes the terms of trade of primary-product-based economies to deteriorate. As of 2013, recent statistical studies have given support for the idea.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prebisch%E2%80%93Singer_hypoth...

Derived demand (copper) is likely to be more price sensitive than demand for the end good (AI services) over the long run due to substitution that can occur in factor inputs. Meaning Prebisch-Singer's true again.

Similar, though not the same, in background as to why herring and licorice are banned in the USA.

When a young country and barely able to wrestle independence, it was feared the British would team up with Scandinavian forces (a large portion of immigrants to North Americas were Scandinavian) while being worn thin by also battling Napoleon. By banning traditional foods such as herring, licorice and even black pudding and haggis, any potential pre-invasion force of saboteurs and partisans would complain about only having hamburgers and bad pizza to eat and thus be discovered.

Poppies are prohibited not just in South Korea but also in North Korea, China and Singapore.

At least it's staying in the same vertical.

But it will have AI.

Somewhere where consistently long hours are seen as a management problem and is dealt with at the management level.

Look for that. The rest follows.

It should be in a code of conduct.

Modern phones offer no net productivity gain.

They just make you busy.

Edge case solutions already have edge case solutions.

Perhaps they're defensive. Perhaps this blinkers them too much to know how they're acting.

Have you made it clear to him that you're both problem solvers working on a common goal where each can and will succeed overcoming the many challenges overhead.

See if you could put in a filter for particularly heavy sediment.

That's the thing, racism becomes ingrained I'm not racist, so what I say, do and condone cannot be racist.

Often people can't change. It takes generations to leave behind. But even then, if not even acknowledged, it will continue.

I suggest being the change and tempering your language to match your intent.

Warning: Contains obscured inline JS to 3rd party.

The effects are not just the ton of fish, or even the job lost, it's equivalent to scorching the earth and polluting the groundwater of land based farming affecting generations into the future.

It used to be easy: Check blog roles; see comments, links by commentors.

Now we have static site generators as caching was too hard we don't have that.

Now that's worth throwing a chair over.

Ethereum might be a load of gas. NFTs are after all just a few hundred NFT influencers reinventing themselves and their pseudonyms for their audience of wannabes.

Yes. Banks, especially trust, transaction banking, bills, discounting, came about in no small part as fraud avoidance.

It's much faster, for one.

You may be making another point, however. If so, please be more specific.

On a scale of sensitivity, I find real name accounts rank above even titles when criticism's perceived.

An interstellar species capable of great technological achievement. Yet with an attention span of a gnat requiring 1000s of civilisations to be summed up based on three numbers invariably influenced by my normative definition of 'civilisation state'.

Stack your bins vertically.

Creative Vs innovative.

Creativity takes risk. After the .com bubble creativity died as a business proposition.

Innovative sounds like creative until really thinking about it. Innovation takes little risk. It's ideal for low interest rate low risk appetite boring post 2005 world, and after 2009 perfect for cheap money that demands no return and gives no risk premium.

Which is why this article is late. Innovation and boring have run their course. Risk premium is back, and with it the freedom to be creative, disruptive, and take a little risk. In software terms, that means products, not just an extra spinning widget in JS.

Is this about https://nina.chat/ ?

I don't, and have a question:

If it's reimplementing the protocol, how are old accounts verified? Is there a repository of password hashes that's been shared?

My next question is, who has the gene HLA-DQA2 and why.

An AI buzzword detector. Like Battlestar Galactica had the Cylon Detector.

It doesn't have to work, like the Cylon Detector didn't. And it could be used to justify what's written by ChatGPT isn't, just like the Cylon Detector was used to show Cylons were not Cylons.

But most importantly, it can justify you keeping a job throughout the AI bubble buzz, even landing a few bonuses, before it all blows over. Just like the Cylon Detector.

Could you explain the inefficiency in terms of energy transformation?

Potential energy change is zero (or negative)?

I get there may be sound or heat from air friction though would put that minimal. Also zero (negative) acceleration around axis due to rotation.

I'm curious how it's inefficient analysing through energy transformation.

Netlify: Potential for sudden unexpected bills there's no way to protect against.

AWS: Potential for sudden unexpected bills there's a way to protect against that many do not know or use.

One may torpedo you overnight. One may not. It should be obvious.

Ontologically, copyright doesn't exist. Copyright is an epistemology.

If copyright could exist, then a copyright for the copyright must be able to exist, and it'd be turtles all the way down.

This is not nitpicking. Copyright, as intellectual property, is entirely made up as all other intellectual property is.

Saying copyright exists is as laughable as saying intellectual property is as non rivalrous as the chair you sit in.

How about looking internatinally for equivalence? Since China lifted the one-child policy and now even encourage more children, birthrates have gone down.

Or historical equivalence when David Ricardo, in response to Malthusian population doom disaster predictions pointed out that increasing rents causes smaller families.

I feel this time it's different isn't reason itself.