No worries... right?
Good morning.
The attached, from the Bloomberg article "US-Friendly Nations Slash Treasury Purchases by 60%, Led by Asia," points to a development that I've been writing about:
Historically dependable buyers and holders of US government bonds have been pulling back, driven by both local and global factors.
As such, the buyer base has been shifting towards more tactical, short-term investors and traders.
#economy #markets #bonds #yields
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change faces perhaps the most serious crisis in its nearly 40-year history — but it is too precious to lose
go.nature.com/48gGgkb
Juan Enriquez retweeted
Sam Altman's one-person company prediction is coming true. Anthropic just bought one. The founder of Mithril Medicine used Claude to take a muscular dystrophy antibody treatment from concept to proof-of-principle in mice in 18 months, with just himself, Claude, and part-time consultants. The technical report is great. I will quote:
'The week opened with the handover of two cell-based assays, cell adhesion and flow cytometry, within our team, while eleven questions remained open with the assay CRO. In two sentences, one of us asked Claude to review the latest emails between the outgoing assay lead and the assay CRO and to recommend next steps for the handover, and gave it the link to the handover folder. Claude returned a bottom line after 96s and a full plan with five drafted emails after 18 min. For the full plan it read six email threads, the handover folder, two slide decks and two reports, all in the mailbox and file store to which we had given it access. Four working days later, nine of the eleven questions had an answer in writing and the other two had been left to pilot experiments. The adhesion screen was thereby set out in writing. The CRO drew the plate map to the format that our team had requested, Claude compiled the run order and the material calculation from the production data, and one of us reviewed and approved them.
On day 4, the production CRO delivered its data package, a report of 341 pages, which one of us forwarded to Claude in two sentences, with the request to review it, share observations and recommend next steps. Claude returned a bottom line after 2 min 40s and, once it had read every page, a visual synthesis of all 113 constructs after 7 min 53s. The synthesis arranged the constructs on the grid of 14 by 8 arms. Claude marked 82 constructs for screening as is, seven for additional polishing, and the 24 constructs of three laminin-binding arms to be held back from the cell-based assays on production criteria. Each of the 113 constructs thus had a proposed next step in less than 8 min.
Claude had recommended binding kinetics for all 113 con-structs, and on day 7 one of us challenged this plan. Claude defended it within 27s, arguing that affinity would show whether the three arms merit further work. One of us overruled this recommendation and set the three arms aside on production criteria. Their material remains in storage. Four minutes later, Claude had revised its memo, the working page, the run order and three unsent drafts from 113 to 89 constructs. It had also applied the ruling to three dependent steps in the unsent drafts, each flagged for our veto. The exchange took 7 min 36s from challenge to new plan, and every affected email was still an unsent draft. After the ruling, eight emails drafted by Claude went out on the same day to three CROs and a consultant.
Over the whole week, Claude drafted 17 emails, each in answer to a request from one of us, and we sent 12 of them, each after editing. With its drafts, Claude listed 41 points, such as tube fills, shipping conditions, recipients and assay settings, for which it had found no written statement of ours, so that we could confirm, change or strike each before sending. We kept some, struck others and changed one. Among the passages that we kept were proposals for controls. One draft proposed a comparison of polished and unpolished material on one sensor chip, to size the error that impurities cause in the rest of the panel. Another requested a buffer control diluted like the most dilute sample, so that any effect of the buffer appears at its largest. These proposals concerned the measurement of constructs that had already been produced, and each reached a CRO only after one of us had reviewed and approved it.
Juan Enriquez retweeted
This is honestly shocking.
Three months ago, Hong Wang was awarded the Fields Medal for resolving the Kakeya conjecture in three dimensions.
Today, OpenAI released a proposed proof of the conjecture in ALL dimensions.
And that’s not all. It also announced a proposed existence proof for quantum chromodynamics and a proposed refutation of the Exponential Time Hypothesis.
Experts say that, if confirmed, these would be Nobel prize and Turing award level discoveries respectively.
A journalist just asked me: “What remains for humans to do?”
I think it’s becoming increasingly clear that more and more problem solving will be automated.
But humans will remain crucial in determining the direction of discovery. Deciding which problems are worth solving.
Because the value of a discovery depends on our needs, our priorities and the kind of world we want to build.
There will be a shift from problem solving to problem setting.
I also think there will be huge individual differences.
People with strong critical thinking skills, creativity and imagination will be supercharged by AI.
People without those skills risk surrendering to it.
I’m particularly concerned for children, who may never develop these skills.
I think epistemic literacy - how to distinguish information from knowledge - is the single most important skill we should be teaching.
What is missing?
90 DAYS WITHOUT POWER, RANKED
You are not leaving.
The roof is fine.
The grid is just gone.
No power, no water pressure, no store deliveries, for 90 days.
In each category we will go from most important to least important.
The categories are ranked too.
The roof is covered, so water comes first, then food, then everything that keeps those two usable.
90 days is what you should be prepared for. Most official lists say 3 to 14 days. Those are minimums, not plans.
WATER
Without it you have days. One gallon per person per day.
90 days is 90 gallons per person. A family of 4 needs 360.
Water filter (a gravity filter is the best buy)
Food grade barrels or water bricks
Unscented bleach to treat stored water
Your water heater tank holds 40 to 50 gallons. Know how to drain it.
Rain collection (check local rules)
FOOD
Rice and beans are the backbone.
If you cannot afford freeze dried meals, load up on rice and beans.
Rice has about 1,650 calories per pound. Dry beans about 1,570.
2,000 calories a day for 90 days is about 110 pounds per person, or four 5 gallon buckets.
Cooking oil, salt, sugar, spices
Peanut butter
Canned meat and vegetables
Powdered milk
Multivitamins
Freeze dried meals if you can afford them
Eat the fridge first, then the freezer, then the pantry.
COOKING AND FUEL
Food you cannot cook is just weight.
Camp stove plus fuel for 90 days
Extra propane or butane
Lighters and matches
One pot with a lid
Never run a stove or heater indoors without ventilation.
HEAT
Cold is the quiet killer.
Wood stove or a safe indoor rated heater
Fuel for it
Wool blankets and sleeping bags rated below your coldest night
Pick one room, close it off, and live in it
Carbon monoxide detector with batteries. Not optional.
SANITATION
This is what ends up killing people in long outages.
5 gallon bucket with a toilet seat lid
Heavy trash bags
Kitty litter or sawdust
Bleach
Soap and hand sanitizer
Toilet paper, a lot of it
MEDICAL
Prescriptions. Ask your doctor about a longer supply.
First aid kit
Pain and stomach relief
Any glasses or contacts, plus a spare pair
A printed first aid manual
LIGHT AND POWER
Headlamps and lanterns
Batteries, rotated
Solar panel with a power bank
A generator is a bonus, not a plan. Fuel goes bad and it is loud.
INFORMATION, CASH AND NEIGHBORS
Cards stop working when the power does.
Battery or crank radio
Cash in small bills, silver and gold if you have it
Paper copies of IDs and contacts
Know your neighbors. Trade skills, not just supplies.
MORALE
Books, cards, games, something for the kids.
Boring beats hungry. Bored beats panicked.
THE FIRST 72 HOURS
Fill the bathtub and every container you own before the water stops.
Fridge and freezer stay shut. A full freezer holds about 48 hours.
Charge everything while you still can.
Cook and eat what will spoil first.
Obviously we could add security and it is important but depending on where you are, what your aloud to have/own I'm not going into great detail on that.
What I can say is have a plan, talk it over with your family, everyone has a job. Don't be afraid to talk to your neighbors you know as well to make sure they are doing their part if you plan on working together.
Feel free to add anything I may have missed. Anything you may think would be of added value for others to read and share.
Book mark this, come back to it, create a check list.
To be clear, I am not a survivalist. This is not survival advice. This is only my setup that I am following with my family. If nothing else maybe just a reminder.
ISO Ledger 🛡
30 year loss
Greenland has now lost more ice than it has gained for 30 consecutive years, losing around 135 billion tonnes in the year to August 2026.
Even with a relatively cool start to summer and less melting than in previous years, the ice sheet continued to shrink.
carbonbrief.org/guest-post-g…
Nobels become reviewers
OpenAI just announced that its model proved the Standard Model of physics actually exists.
That sounds absurd. It's not.
For 70 years, physics has had a dirty secret.
Quantum field theory is the most accurate theory humanity has ever built. It predicts properties of the electron to more than 10 decimal places. The LHC, the Higgs boson, the chips in your phone all run on it.
And yet no mathematician had ever proven it exists.
Physicists have been using it like a recipe that works every single time, without anyone being able to prove the dish is a coherent object. We built cathedrals for 70 years on foundations nobody had verified.
The problem is so hard that in 2000 the Clay Institute made it one of its 7 Millennium Prize Problems, $1M each. In 26 years, only one has been solved (Poincaré, by Perelman, who refused the money).
Here's the timeline OpenAI just published:
September 9, 2026: their model produces a proof that Yang–Mills theory exists.
September 18: it extends it to QCD, the full theory of the strong force, with quarks.
Then to a completion of the Standard Model.
October 16: the Yang–Mills proof is formalized in Lean, meaning a machine checked every single logical step.
To understand why this is insane, you need to understand the problem.
Forget particles as tiny balls. The universe is made of invisible oceans stacked on top of each other: an electron field, a photon field, a gluon field. A particle is just a wave on one of those oceans.
But in quantum mechanics, the oceans are never calm. They ripple at every scale. Zoom in, you see smaller ripples. Zoom in again, smaller still. It never stops.
So when you do the math, those fluctuations add up to infinity.
Physicists found a trick called renormalization: subtract one infinity from another, and what's left matches experiment perfectly. It works. But mathematically it's duct tape. Nothing guaranteed there was a real object underneath.
Now the hardest case: Yang–Mills, the theory of gluons.
Gluons are the glue holding quarks together inside every atom in your body. And unlike light, they interact with each other. Two light beams pass through each other. Two gluons collide and stick. The field feeds on itself. That's what made it untameable.
The key that unlocks it won David Gross the 2004 Nobel Prize: asymptotic freedom.
The strong force gets weaker the closer you look. Think of a rubber band between two fingers. Close together, it's slack and the fingers move freely. Pull them apart, the tension explodes. That's why you never see a lone quark.
And that's the gift: the infinities come from tiny scales, and tiny scales are exactly where the theory goes calm. You zoom in, the monster falls asleep.
The method: turn spacetime into a grid, like pixels. On a grid, everything is finite. Then refine the grid, again and again, and prove the picture converges instead of exploding.
A mathematician named Balaban did a huge part of this in the 1980s and never finished. The construction sat open for 40 years. According to OpenAI, the AI closed it.
Now look at who's reviewing it.
David Gross, the Nobel laureate whose mechanism makes the proof work.
Arthur Jaffe, who literally wrote the Millennium Prize problem and co-founded the Clay Institute.
Plus Douglas, Klebanov, Nekrasov.
The man who wrote the question is now reading a machine's answer.
And in the same blog post, almost in passing: the Exponential Time Hypothesis in computer science is false, and the Kakeya conjecture is solved in every dimension.
Three bombs in one post.
Honest caveats, because they matter:
This is not the full Millennium Prize. The Clay problem has two parts: existence and the "mass gap". OpenAI claims existence only.
The physics materials aren't public yet. Gross's group chose to write it up themselves first.
Lean verifies the logic, but experts still have to confirm the formal statement really captures what physicists mean.
And it changes zero predictions. Physicists won't calculate anything differently tomorrow. It proves the ground under the cathedral is real.
But the craziest part isn't the theorem.
It's the scene.
Nobel laureates are now acting as interpreters of what a machine discovered. OpenAI calls its proofs "raw research data" and refuses academic credit.
For centuries, science worked one way: humans discover, then humans explain.
We may have just entered the era where machines discover, and humans explain.
Truth in advertising
Juan Enriquez retweeted
Here’s one example of how gutting OpenAI’s release of hundreds of solved math problems was for mathematicians. A powerful piece from Cornell math professor @stevenstrogatz theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/1…
Juan Enriquez retweeted
“China doesn’t have a Mexico. Europe doesn’t have a Mexico. We do.”
Texas billionaire Ross Perot Jr. says a fully integrated North America has the demographics and resources needed to compete globally, calling Mexico key to the region’s ability to “grow and prosper." He spoke at Bloomberg Invest Dallas bloom.bg/3UL0b7P
Juan Enriquez retweeted
Meta had an internal PR plan to try and discredit Jon Haidt because he was a critic of social media.
Meta was going to recruit academics, like Andrew Gelman, to write take down pieces. They were trying to turn academics against one another through a "whisper strategy".
This is a very serious problem for open academic debate. If academics who share negative evidence about a platform are targeted by campaigns to smear our credibility, we are in deep, deep trouble.
This creates a very serious conflict of interest for anyone who is paid to do this.
law360.com/articles/2542517/…
Go watch Sorkin movie.
Meta had an internal PR plan to try and discredit Jon Haidt because he was a critic of social media.
Meta was going to recruit academics, like Andrew Gelman, to write take down pieces. They were trying to turn academics against one another through a "whisper strategy".
This is a very serious problem for open academic debate. If academics who share negative evidence about a platform are targeted by campaigns to smear our credibility, we are in deep, deep trouble.
This creates a very serious conflict of interest for anyone who is paid to do this.
law360.com/articles/2542517/…
Don't worry. Be happy.
👀 A satellite study led by the University of Reading finds heat loss from the north Atlantic has fallen 18 per cent in 40 years.
It's among the strongest signs yet that the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, the ocean current system that carries heat north to Europe, is slowing. The study is still in peer review.
newscientist.com/article/259…
Evidence based
Chomsky was wrong.
Researchers found your brain doesn’t store language the way every textbook since 1957 claims.
For decades, the undisputed rule of linguistics, led by Noam Chomsky, was that human language is hierarchical.
We were told our brains process language using complex "grammar trees." That we secretly build deep, abstract, mathematical rules in our heads before we speak.
This new paper proves that is completely wrong.
Researchers at Cornell University analyzed how people actually process and produce language in real time.
They found sequences. Linear chunks.
When we speak, we aren't calculating deep syntactic rules. We are just predicting the next most logical sequence of words based on the context of the words right before it.
We string linear chunks together.
If this sounds familiar, it should.
This is exactly how Large Language Models like ChatGPT work.
For years, critics have dismissed AI as "just a next-token predictor." They said it isn't truly intelligent because it doesn't understand deep grammatical hierarchies like humans do.
But this paper suggests humans don't use those hierarchies either.
We are just predicting the next chunk.
Language isn't a rigid tree of mathematical rules. It's a linear stream of contextual predictions.
We thought we were building AI to mimic the complexity of the human brain.
It turns out, the human brain was just running a simpler algorithm all along.
Juan Enriquez retweeted
Chomsky was wrong.
Researchers found your brain doesn’t store language the way every textbook since 1957 claims.
For decades, the undisputed rule of linguistics, led by Noam Chomsky, was that human language is hierarchical.
We were told our brains process language using complex "grammar trees." That we secretly build deep, abstract, mathematical rules in our heads before we speak.
This new paper proves that is completely wrong.
Researchers at Cornell University analyzed how people actually process and produce language in real time.
They found sequences. Linear chunks.
When we speak, we aren't calculating deep syntactic rules. We are just predicting the next most logical sequence of words based on the context of the words right before it.
We string linear chunks together.
If this sounds familiar, it should.
This is exactly how Large Language Models like ChatGPT work.
For years, critics have dismissed AI as "just a next-token predictor." They said it isn't truly intelligent because it doesn't understand deep grammatical hierarchies like humans do.
But this paper suggests humans don't use those hierarchies either.
We are just predicting the next chunk.
Language isn't a rigid tree of mathematical rules. It's a linear stream of contextual predictions.
We thought we were building AI to mimic the complexity of the human brain.
It turns out, the human brain was just running a simpler algorithm all along.
Juan Enriquez retweeted
In the rush to build data centers, companies are starting to use their own off grid gas generators. This results in much higher emissions – 60% to 80% – compared with using their local electricity grid and risks locking in longer-term fossil dependence.
Elon Musk now literally holds the off switch on Anthropic's $2 trillion IPO.
Anthropic's filing shows it has agreed to pay Elon's AI company up to $120.5 billion for computing power. And starting early next year, either side can walk away with 90 days' notice.
The deal is with SpaceXAI, the SpaceX unit that used to be xAI, and it rents Anthropic the Nvidia chips that run Claude.
In May, the price was $1.25 billion a month for one data center in Memphis. Reuters reported the confidential draft of this filing put the total at $84.5 billion. The public version filed today says $120.5 billion.
Once all the capacity arrives in December, the bill jumps: Anthropic expects to pay Musk about $3.1 billion every month.
Anthropic reportedly brought in $16.8 billion last quarter, which works out to about $5.6 billion a month. So more than HALF of what Anthropic earns today is about to go to one supplier.
Now here's where it gets really insane:
The lock-in on those contracts ends in January and March 2027. After that, either side can cancel with 90 days' notice. Fortune reported in July that the clause gives SpaceX a way to take its chips back if Grok suddenly needs more.
Grok competes directly with Claude.
And in February, Elon publicly called Anthropic's AI evil.
So the company selling itself to the public as the safe AI lab is about to run a huge share of its product on hardware owned by its loudest critic. That critic also owns a direct competitor, and he can start the 90-day clock in early 2027.
The filing does warn that some of Anthropic's compute suppliers build their own AI models, and that warning reads very differently once the supplier is Elon.
And Elon needs this deal just as badly: SpaceX's CFO has promised $100 billion in annual revenue by the end of this year. At full speed, Anthropic's rent comes to about $9.3 billion a quarter. That's more than the roughly $7.6 billion SpaceX's entire AI business brought in last quarter.
So 2 of the biggest IPOs in history are now holding each other up, and both of them have a 90-day exit.
Anthropic has a real argument here. Computing power is the scarcest thing in AI right now, and Amazon's cloud capacity for 2027 is reportedly largely sold out. The filing even admits Anthropic badly underestimated how much compute it needed in the past. Grabbing every chip on the market is the rational move, and the same clause lets Anthropic leave if cheaper capacity shows up.
But public buyers deserve 2 things before the listing: Anthropic should publish how much of Claude runs on SpaceX hardware and what happens to its customers if that notice ever arrives. And it should get the 90-day exit removed for the full length of the contract, the same way its other big compute bills are locked in.
Until then, anyone buying ANT at $2 trillion has to answer one question for themselves:
Who do they trust to keep Claude running in 2027, Anthropic or Elon Musk?
Anthropic has filed an S-1 registration statement with the SEC related to its proposed IPO.
Read more: anthropic.com/news/s1-sec
Legal disclaimer: A registration statement relating to these securities has been filed with the SEC but has not yet become effective. These securities may not be sold, nor may offers to buy be accepted, prior to the time the registration statement becomes effective. This post does not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy these securities, nor shall there be any sale of these securities in any state or jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities laws of any such state or jurisdiction.
"Statistically significant negative correlation with employment growth and a statistically significant positive correlation with unemployment."
Replying to @JimPethokoukis
My sons are working their way through college, and this is the stat that worries me. The impact is two to three times larger for entry-level workers. The first rung of the ladder is where AI is cutting first.


































