US Military DIGGING Graves! Iran War Plan EXPOSED! w/Scott Ritter (Video - 51mn)

   Almost forgot Scott Ritter and his energetic commenting. But some of his points are, well, to the point. 

   We are barreling into an energy crisis of epic proportion. Out of a daily oil consumption of a little more than 100 million barrels per day, the Hormuz Strait represented about 20% or 20 million barrels. Other producers around the world have increased production, compensating 10 million barrels. We have therefore been short 10 million barrels for over 6 months now. Depleting reserves has reduced the shortfall by a little less than half, so 5 million barrels and finally, the higher price of oil has reduced demand by the remaining 5 million barrels so that we now have an unstable equilibrium at a much lower level than last year. 

   This cannot go on much longer. Eventually demand and supply will have to find a new balance. Either the war ends and production rises again although this won't be instantaneous and may take one to two years or prices will rise to cancel the 5 million barrels current shortfall and we enter a deep recession. 

   Trump has said clearly that he won't back down and the Iranians as we discussed at length in earlier posts can lose all the battles, they won't lose the war as it is technically impossible for the US to assert military superiority in the Gulf in the long term. What the US army could not do in Vietnam with 500,000 soldiers 50 years ago, they won't do either against a much more sophisticated enemy in a much larger country.   

   This alone guaranties that we're heading into very choppy waters. Add to this the AI bubble which is about to burst in the US, the Chinese real estate debacle which is depressing demand in the country and the absurd European energy policies which are akin to slow suicide and it is not a stretch to predict that the coming months will be extremely tumultuous. What we are witnessing in Europe right now is little more than a foretaste of things to come.  

   Here's a scenario: Trump will lose the mid-term elections (80% probability). He will attack Iran. The price of oil will skyrocket to over 130 and maybe 150 dollars per barrel. Iran will strike back reducing production further. The political climate in Europe first, then in the rest of the world will get extremely nasty. Either oil demand will crash or rationing will be implemented. Eventually conflicts both internal and external will explode around the world as desperate governments try their luck in foreign adventures. 2027 is only 2 months away but the outlook is not rosy to say the least, and it still can easily get worse...    

US Military DIGGING Graves! Iran War Plan EXPOSED! w/Scott Ritter

⚡ALERT: A.I. INSIDER- "Don't TALK TO IT" with Canadian Prepper (Video - 1h40mn)

   A long but fascinating discussion with many points I disagree with but still want to know more about and definitively worth thinking about. Canadian Prepper will naturally err towards doom and gloom but even without falling into the catastrophe trap, entertaining these issues, causes and consequences, risks and remedies is I believe a worthwhile exercise. 

   Over the years I have become more and more ambivalent towards AI. Still very enthusiastic but at the same time more circumspect. The risks are real, not the extinction part which is still farfetched but the mayhem part where AI generates problems faster than we can fix them which we are already witnessing with more complex and frequent hacks.      

   The most fundamental problem which the whole alignment movement is missing is the emergent aspect of AI. You CANNOT understand AI with a reductionist mindset and approach. It is like trying to understand psychology with chemistry. When Connor Leahy says that we do not understand how intelligence and emotions are generated he is completely missing the point. You cannot "explain" intelligence emerging out of trillions of loops from the transformers. It is an emergent phenomenon and consequently the right approach is to observe and describe, not to analyze what happens at the GPU level where there is literally nothing to observe. 

   Likewise, many of the points discussed are little more than wishful thinking. The concerns are real but a "pause" in AI research or testing is ludicrous. It will simply not happen. Conversely, testing the newest models for defensive purpose before releasing them sounds like a good idea. So, in the end, I tend to agree concerning the general theme of the discussion: There are better ways and not so good ones to approach AI research. We need an open, non dogmatic approach to the subject. The question is to know if our society is capable of handling such a complex discussion in a fruitful manner. This is not at all obvious.   

⚡ALERT: A.I. INSIDER- "Don't TALK TO IT"