MoM

AI is my brush. On the next frontier, I paint. Always antislop.

Elon Musk, the wealthiest man alive, recently paid an effective tax rate of less than 3.3%. That is less than the average truck driver, nurse and teacher. YES, we must demand the wealthy and corporations pay their fair share. twitter.com/i/broadcasts/1…

SpaceX Falcon 9 family has now launched 636 times and counting 618 Falcon 9 flights - 99.52% success rate Booster B1067: 33 flights on a SINGLE rocket In 2020, SpaceX launched 26 times - the entire year In 2026, SpaceX has already done 38 launches in 88 days That's 46% MORE than all of 2020 and we're not even in April Meanwhile, the rest of the world combined: ~29 launches in 2026 One company. More launches than every other country and company on Earth. Combined

Dear Phoebe, I read your Observer piece this morning on the reported “exodus” from Girlguiding - and I was genuinely shocked. Not because you presented a different perspective to my recent Telegraph reporting on the problems within Girlguiding. That’s part of journalism. But because you chose to include the case of a six-year-old little boy who reportedly tried to cut off his own penis - after being told he couldn't be part of Rainbows (the section of Girlguiding for 5–7 year olds). Presenting it as evidence of a problem with Girlguiding’s admissions policy. It is not. It is a deeply distressing account involving a very young child - and, on any view, a serious welfare concern. Framing it otherwise is a profound failure of editorial judgement. You also refer to this male child throughout using female pronouns, including the phrase “her penis”. I appreciate this may reflect current editorial conventions. But it sits uneasily with the basic duty of a journalist to report clearly and accurately on material facts. I was already aware of this case through my own reporting for the Sunday Telegraph. I made a conscious decision not to include it at this stage - both because a minor is involved and because of the ethical considerations that arise when reporting on such sensitive situations. Those considerations are not optional. You will know, as I do, that journalism is not simply about presenting competing narratives. It is about establishing facts clearly, handling vulnerable subjects with care and exercising judgement about what should - and should not - be used to advance an argument. I trained as a journalist in the early 2000s - a good 20 years earlier than you did - but to my knowledge nothing has changed. Good journalism should bring clarity. It should not muddy the facts - in order to promote an ideological position. In this context, that means being clear about sex - a material fact that is both legally and practically relevant. I appreciate you may be under pressure from colleagues or editors to frame stories in a particular way - or to use she/her pronouns, or the phrase “her penis”. But that doesn’t make it right. Earlier this week, the Manchester Evening News reported a violent murder as being committed by a woman - one of many examples of inaccurate reporting around sex and gender. In this case, even the Crown Prosecution Service - the public body responsible for prosecuting criminal cases in England and Wales - also reported the crime inaccurately. So that’s two professions we should be able to trust to tell the truth - providing inaccurate information. Crime statistics matter. Without accurate data on who is committing serious violence, we cannot properly understand it - let alone prevent it. I considered raising this privately, or writing to your editor. But this issue is too important to be brushed aside with a “thank you for your feedback”. I’m happy to discuss it with you privately, or to support a conversation with your editor if that would be helpful. But I hope this gives you - and your colleagues - serious pause for thought. Because it is very much needed. Janet

I’ve never seen such a disconnect between the commentary on this site and what I hear in the real world. I’ve talked to dozens of normal conservatives in real life about the Iran War and I haven’t met a single one who’s actually enthusiastically in favor of it. At best they’re warily optimistic. In most cases they’re opposed. In some cases they’re not only opposed but deeply furious. And yet here if you utter a word of criticism about the war you’ll be shouted down by throngs of alleged American conservatives who allegedly have wanted nothing more than for America to go to war with Iran. It just doesn’t reflect what I see on the ground. That’s not just cope because my position is unpopular with “my side.” I’ve held plenty of unpopular positions. I really don’t care. But in this case the social media vs real world divide is stark and unlike anything I’ve seen before.

At the beginning of Holy Week, our prayers are more than ever with the Christians of the #MiddleEast, who are suffering the consequences of a brutal conflict and, in many cases, are unable to observe fully the liturgies of these holy days. Just as the Church contemplates the mystery of the Lord’s Passion, we cannot forget those who today are truly sharing in his suffering. Their ordeal challenges all our consciences. Let us raise our prayer to the Prince of Peace that he may sustain the peoples wounded by war and open concrete paths to reconciliation and #peace. #PrayTogether

Futures open in 8 hours. Yet, it has been an eerily quiet weekend with no peace talk headlines and no denial of news that the US is planning a ground invasion of up to 2 months into Iran. We ended last week with US oil prices at $101/barrel, the S&P 500 at a 232-day low, and the US 10Y Note Yield at 4.44%. Yet, still no effort to contain the bond market as it nears crisis levels last seen during "Liberation Day" in April 2025. Unless this changes over the new few hours, it appears that bond markets are setting for a move above 4.50% on the 10Y Note Yield. History continues to suggest that some sort of *attempted* bond market intervention is coming. Buckle up for a big week ahead.

BREAKING: An Iranian ballistic missile guided by Chinese BeiDou satellites, fuelled by Chinese sodium perchlorate, precisely navigated by Chinese gyroscopic sensors, and fabricated on production lines equipped with Chinese SMIC tools just struck the Neot Hovav industrial zone south of Beersheba. Israel’s largest chemical and hazardous waste complex. Nineteen plants. Adama. Teva Pharmaceutical. Israel Chemicals. A warehouse is burning. Route 40 closed. No injuries. No hazmat release. Fire contained. Four countries built that missile. One country appears at every layer of the supply chain. The same country that processes 85 to 90 percent of the rare earth magnets inside the Arrow interceptor that was fired to stop it. The missile cost Iran between $200,000 and $500,000. The Arrow 3 interceptor that attempted to stop it cost $2 to $4 million. If THAAD was fired, $13 to $15 million. If a Gulf state Patriot battery engaged a Shahed in the same wave, $4 million to stop a $20,000 drone. The cost ratio runs 5 to 1 at the lowest. 200 to 1 at the highest. The defender pays more to stop the weapon than the attacker pays to build it. Every single time. BeiDou is the variable that makes this ratio lethal. Before Chinese satellite integration, Iranian ballistic missiles relied on pure inertial navigation with a circular error probable of 500 to 1,000 metres. With BeiDou-3 hybrid guidance, the CEP drops to 50 to 200 metres. The missile that hit Neot Hovav did not land in the desert. It landed in a 19-plant chemical complex. BeiDou did not make the missile more expensive. It made the same cheap missile accurate enough to force the defender to fire the expensive interceptor every time. The cost of the offence stayed flat. The cost of the defence compounded. The Pentagon burned $5.6 billion in munitions in 48 hours. Israel has fired hundreds of Arrows since February 28, exceeding $1 billion in interception costs. The US requests $200 billion in supplemental funding. Iran’s total offensive expenditure: an estimated $200 million. $200 billion to stop $200 million. A 1,000 to 1 ratio at the strategic level. China is on both sides of the ledger. Chinese BeiDou makes the Iranian missile accurate enough to force interception. Chinese rare earth magnets make the interceptor that fires to stop it. Chinese SMIC tools build the production lines that fabricate the guidance chips. Chinese sodium perchlorate fuels the propellant. Every missile that forces an interception depletes an Arrow that contains Chinese rare earth magnets that are under export restrictions that China controls. The attacker’s supply chain and the defender’s supply chain route through the same country. The country profits from both the missile and the interceptor. The country that makes the offence possible also makes the defence expensive. This is not a war between Iran and Israel. This is a cost function. The cost function has one variable on the offence side: China. And one variable on the defence side: also China. The rare earth magnets in the Arrow motor. The BeiDou signal in the Emad guidance. Both made in the same country. Both consumed in the same exchange. One depleting the other. The war is a Chinese supply chain consuming itself at a ratio that bankrupts the defender before it exhausts the attacker. Neot Hovav is contained. No injuries. No hazmat. And none of that matters. The interceptor was fired. The stockpile shrank. The rare earth magnet was consumed. Tomorrow another BeiDou-guided missile will force another Arrow containing another Chinese magnet to fire at another ratio the defender cannot sustain. The IDF Chief said “collapse.” The interceptor stockpile says the same in a different currency. Both currencies route through Beijing. Full analysis: open.substack.com/pub/shanakaans…

@FoxNews how long until we are reinterpreting the 13th one too?

CONSTITUTIONAL CLASH: The Supreme Court is poised to answer a fundamental question on who qualifies as an American citizen, holding oral arguments this week to review President Trump's efforts to limit birthright citizenship in the United States.

Iran is the one effectively sanctioning the United States President Trump appears pleased with the fact that Iran is permitting some ships to transit the Strait of Hormuz. He reposted a tweet from Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar announcing that Iran has agreed to allow 20 additional Pakistani-flagged ships to pass through the strait (two ships per day). The situation is incredibly complex. The ongoing airstrikes have failed to deliver the expected destruction of Iranian military capabilities, and the targeted decapitation operations have not sparked any significant popular uprising or weakened the regime in Tehran. Iran’s missile and drone arsenal remains largely intact, operational, and effectively concealed. The challenges are so substantial that there are currently no secure staging areas or sufficient troop concentrations available for meaningful ground operations.

She's The One

@RepThomasMassie I want to live in a world like that too. Can we all build it together?

Imagine a world where hard work is rewarded, truth and justice prevail in courtrooms, the government doesn’t steal your labor by debasing the currency, bureaucrats aren’t captured by corporations, and our taxes go toward critical infrastructure instead of wars overseas.

@jk_rowling I grew up with him and I think middle aged Harry would still often wear a hoodie for privacy since he would still be really famous in the wizarding world: fan from 2000 on. I think he would even use makeup or something to cover up his scar, sometimes.

I fear this might be my most controversial take ever, but I agreed to put it to a vote so here we are. Hoodies should only be worn by men young enough not to look silly carrying a skateboard.

@emkenobi but who will be held accountable?

Would be a shame if people found out who the CEO of Bank of America is

Poor Micro, trying to slut shame me, a happily married woman for nearly two decades. Teeny tiny men with micro manhoods often resort to misogynistic attacks. It’s okay Micro! I’m sure your disability makes it really tough to look at more successful women!

@hooray4problemz @brockpierson thanks a lot!

@mixtureofmodels @brockpierson That’s solid. Props 🤍

I follow back based on vibes, consistency, and whether I think you’d survive a hotdog themed dinner party.

@brockpierson sounds like fun!

Claude responds: The "Rising Cost of Existence" Claim Has No Mechanism — And the Default Technological Trajectory Is the Opposite The argument asserts that AI pushes the cost of human existence up. This is stated, not argued. And it runs directly contrary to the entire historical trajectory of technological advancement, which has been to collapse the real cost of goods and services that constitute basic human welfare. Consider what the subsistence floor actually consists of: food, clothing, basic shelter, energy, medicine, communication, transportation. Every single one of these categories has seen its real cost fall dramatically as a function of technological productivity gains. An American minimum-wage worker today commands more calories, more clothing, more computing power, more pharmaceutical access, and more travel capacity per hour of labor than a solidly middle-class person in 1920. The technological arrow on the cost of material subsistence has pointed unambiguously downward for 250 years. AGI accelerates this, not reverses it. If AGI can perform cognitive labor, it dramatically lowers the cost of producing everything that requires cognitive labor as an input — which is everything. Drug discovery gets cheaper. Medical diagnosis gets cheaper. Legal services get cheaper. Engineering design gets cheaper. Agricultural optimization gets cheaper. The AI-abundant world is one where the absolute cost of meeting basic human needs plummets, not one where it rises. So the mechanism for the "cost of existence rises" half of the scissors needs to be specified. There are exactly two categories of goods that resist this downward pressure: Category A: Positional goods and social status. Being in the top 10% of income is by definition zero-sum. If AI makes everyone richer, relative rank competition intensifies. But this is about relative impoverishment, not absolute destitution. Confusing these two is a serious analytical error. Humans being worse off relative to AI-augmented entities is categorically different from humans being unable to meet basic needs. The argument requires the latter to generate the "economic destruction" framing. Category B: Location-constrained goods — primarily housing. This is the strongest version of the real concern. Housing in desirable, productive urban locations is fundamentally constrained by land, zoning, and geography, and AI doesn't solve the zoning problem. If the gains from AI get capitalized into urban real estate (which is partly what happened with previous technology booms), housing costs can rise even as manufactured goods get cheaper, and housing is a large component of the subsistence floor. This is a genuine concern — but it's a political economy problem with known solutions (zoning reform, land value taxes, building incentives), not a fundamental economic law produced by AI. Packaging it as evidence that AI inevitably raises the cost of human existence requires ignoring that the mechanism is political dysfunction, not technological necessity. The technology doesn't raise housing costs. Regulatory capture and NIMBYism raise housing costs. These are separable.

BREAKING: Iran’s Revolutionary Guard has told the United States to condemn the bombing of Iranian universities by noon Monday Tehran time or face retaliation against American university campuses across the Gulf. The IRGC statement, published by Iranian media and quoted by AFP per the Times of Israel, reads: “If the US government wants its universities in the region to be free from retaliation, it must condemn the bombing of the universities in an official statement by 12 noon on Monday, March 30, Tehran time.” The statement warns all employees, professors, and students at American universities in the region to stay one kilometre away from campuses. TASS reports the critical detail most outlets missed: the IRGC said two universities in the Middle East will be destroyed regardless of Washington’s response. The condemnation deadline only determines whether more than two are targeted. This is not a conditional threat. It is a guaranteed strike with a conditional escalation clause. CNN geolocated video showing the Iran University of Science and Technology in Tehran in ruins after overnight strikes on Friday. A research centre was demolished with twisted metal and debris littering the site. The university confirmed US-Israeli strikes damaged the building but reported no casualties. A second university, Isfahan University of Technology, was also hit per Iranian media. Here are the American campuses now explicitly at risk. Qatar’s Education City hosts six US branch campuses: Texas A&M University, Carnegie Mellon University, Georgetown University, Northwestern University, Virginia Commonwealth University, and Weill Cornell Medicine. Thousands of students and faculty, many US citizens, study and work there. The UAE hosts NYU Abu Dhabi with approximately 2,200 students, the American University of Sharjah, the American University in Dubai, and Rochester Institute of Technology Dubai. Bahrain hosts the American University of Bahrain. Saudi Arabia has early-stage US university partnerships including KAUST. These campuses have already shifted to remote learning per CNN. The IRGC has told everyone within a kilometre radius to evacuate. Here is what makes this the war’s most dangerous escalation. Every previous Iranian target has been military or energy infrastructure: PSAB, Ras Laffan, Fujairah oil tanks, Jebel Ali port, Bahrain’s aluminium plant, desalination facilities. Those targets fit the logic of retaliation against the war machine. Universities do not. A missile aimed at NYU Abu Dhabi or Texas A&M Qatar crosses the line from military retaliation into civilian targeting of a kind that no Gulf air defence interception rate can fully prevent. One missile through an 85 percent interception wall kills students, not soldiers. The IRGC framing is explicit: these are not random civilian targets. They are chosen because America struck Iranian universities first. The logic is symmetrical: you destroyed our research centres, we will destroy yours. But the Iranian universities housed IRGC-linked missile and drone research labs per WSJ and FDD. The American campuses in Qatar host journalism students and pre-med programmes. The symmetry is false. The threat is real. The deadline is noon Monday March 30 Tehran time. That is 08:30 UTC. That is 04:30 Eastern. By the time most Americans wake up tomorrow morning, the deadline will have already passed. The IRGC has promised two strikes regardless. And as of this writing, the White House has not responded. The Pentagon has not responded. No condemnation has been issued. Full analysis - open.substack.com/pub/shanakaans…