Spodnji komentar Robina Brooksa je identičen temu, kar trdim že desetletje in pol: namesto, da bi utrdil EU in povečal njeno konkurenčnost, je evro – z enotno monetarno politiko (one size does not fit all !) in zategnjeno ročno zavoro pri fiskalni politiki – omejil fleksibilnost držav z evrom glede možnosti spodbujanja svojega gospodarstva. Evro na članice evrskega območja deluje, kot da bi vam zvezali obe roki na hrbtu (vzeli avtonomijo glede monetarne in glede fiskalne politike) in nad vas poslali huligane (krize, energetske in tehnološke šoke) – ne morete se braniti, kaj šele, da bi nasprotnike (krize, izzive) premagali. Evro ni prinesel tega, kar so politiki pred njegovo uvedbo obljubljali – ob povečani konkurenčnosti tudi večjo konvergenco med državami EU. Spodnji graf je iz analize, ki so jo ekonomisti IMF naredili ob 20 obletnici evra na temo evra in konvergence (Economic Convergence in the Euro Area: Coming Together or Drifting Apart? (IMF, 2018)). Slika prikazuje sigma konvergenco med članicami z evrom (sigma konvergenca je dinamika razpona ravni BDP per capita med članicami, merjena s koeficientom variacije (KV); če KV upada, se razlike med članicami zmanjšujejo, če se povečuje, se tudi razlike med članicami z evrom povečujejo). Slika kaže, da:

• do uvedbe evra (1999) se je KV med razvitimi članicami (EU-12 – rdeča krivulja) zmanjševal, kar pomeni, da je prihajalo do trendne sigma konvergence,
• po uvedbi evra je v prvem desetletju prišlo do stagnacije KV (sigma konvergenca se je zaustavila),
• po finančni krizi (po 2009) pa je KV začel naraščati, kar pomeni da je prišlo do divergence med članicami, in
• do leta 2015 so se razlike glede BDP per capita med članicami z evrom povečale na raven iz 1960-ih let!

Do konvergence je prišlo zgolj s članicami evra iz novih članic EU iz vzhodne Evrope (modra krivulja), ki so se zaradi zakonitosti beta konvergence (manj razvite države dosegajo višje stopnje rasti) približevale stopnji razvitosti EU-12 držav.

Torej evro je prinesel obratno od tega, kar so politiki napovedovali in obljubljali.

Ja, EU bi bila precej močnejša brez evra. In tudi brez enotnega trga (Single market) in skupne energetske politike, skupne politike konkurence in skupne politike državnih pomoči. Da o skupni podnebni politiki in napačnemu usmerjanju držav v razogljičenje prek nestanovitnih OVE virov ne govorimo.

Za razumevanje spodnje slike je treba vedeti, da se je kolaps nemške industrije začel že leta 2019 (leto dni pred Covidom). Štirje ključni razlogi:

1. visoke cene električne energije: permanentni šok vse od leta 2010, ko je nemška vlada začela zapirati jedrske elektrarne in masivno subvencionirati obnovljive vire energije, kar je vodilo v višje cene elektrike (višja cena energije, dodatek za OVE, omrežnina); med letoma 2008 in 2019 se je znesek vseh dajatev na električno energijo v Nemčiji podvojil – povečal se je iz 85 na 160 EUR/MWh!
2. tehnološki šok (kitajski šok 2.0): kitajska podjetja so v ključnih sektorjih za Nemčijo (avtomobilska in elektro industrija) prehiteli nemška in nemški izvoz v Kitajsko je začel pešati; zaradi nizke inovativnosti in želje po tehnološkem prerstrukturiranju se tehnološka vrzel med kitajskimi in nemškimi podjetji samo še povečuje;
3. energetski šok po začetku vojne z Ukrajino: z začetkom vojne v Ukrajini so se cene plina astronomsko povišale, nakar je prišlo do prekinitev dobav plina in danes so cene plina za nemška podjetja približno 3-krat višje kot pred vojno;
4. izpad izvoza v Rusijo: med letoma 2021 in 2024 se je nemški izvoz v Rusijo zmanjšal za približno 19 milijard evrov (iz 26,6 na 7,6 milijard evrov) oziroma več kot 70 %, kot posledice sankcij in prestrukturiranja trgovinskih tokov po ruski invaziji na Ukrajino.

Brez resnega tehnološkega prestrukturiranja, brez spremembe energetske politike pri elektriki in brez končanja vojne v Ukrajini in ponovne vzpostavitve dobav poceni ruskega plina bo nemška industrija nadaljevala ta dramatični kolaps. Tukaj ni nobenega žarka upanja na obzorju, tukaj ni nobenega možnega pozitivnega presenečenja (out of the blue), pač pa so potrebne korenite spremembe dosedanjih politik nemških vlad in strategij nemških podjetij.

Ta korak nemškega Volkswagna je sicer logičen glede na sposobnosti razvoja in kapacitete za proizvodnjo čipov za umetno inteligenco na Kitajskem (ki jih v Evropi ni), kljub vsemu pa zveni kot ironija glede na visokoleteče trditve Evropske komisije o strateški avtonomiji na tem področju in nedavno napovedana vlaganja v to področje ter glede na zadnja dogajanja glede nizozemske Nexperie. To seveda pomeni, da bo Volkswagen trajno (vsaj za desetletje ali več) strateško odvisen od uvoza teh čipov iz Kitajske. Vrašanje pa je seveda, če bo sedanji Volkswagen sploh preživel oziroma v čigavi lasti bo čez 5 let. Definitivno pa EU zaradi tega ne bo mela dobrih kart, če bi se hotela igrati trgovinsko vojno s Kitajsko.

In the race to develop autonomous driving technology, German automotive giant Volkswagen is taking a significant step by developing its own artificial intelligence (AI) chips in China, reported German Press Agency (dpa).

“By designing and developing the System-on-Chip here in China, we are taking control of a key technology that will define the future of intelligent driving,” chief executive Oliver Blume said on Wednesday at the opening of China’s International Import Expo (CIIE) in the Chinese city of Shanghai.

Carizon, a joint venture between Volkswagen’s software subsidiary Cariad and Chinese autonomous driving computing specialist Horizon Robotics, is tasked with developing the chip that processes data from cameras and sensors for driving.

Volkswagen expects delivery within the next three to five years.

For the first time, Carizon is not only developing software for automated driving but also an AI chip, said Cariad board member Peter Bosch.

Blume explained that the Volkswagen Group’s strategy is encapsulated in a five-year plan. The mission is to become a leader in automotive technology, according to Blume.

The announcement from the carmaker based in the northern German city of Wolfsburg comes amid a chip crisis triggered by the dispute over the company Nexperia.

The Dutch company primarily produces standard chips used in large quantities in the automotive industry. However, China’s export stoppages of Nexperia chips and concerns over potential supply disruptions are affecting European manufacturers, highlighting their dependence on these high-tech products.

Vir: New Straits Times

Tonight, Zohran Mamdani was elected mayor of New York City, winning by an election with higher turnout than any mayor’s race in 50 years. At a time when leading figures in the Democratic Party seem practically complicit in the abuses and outrages of the Trump era, Mamdani offered his supporters an unsullied message of hope.

During the campaign, Mamdani liked to remind his audiences that New York is the richest city in the richest country in the history of the world, and that its government could do more for its residents. While his opponents described New York as broke, dysfunctional, and crime-ridden, Mamdani talked about the city as a lovely, if chaotic, place—full of tumult and injustices, yes, but also of life and possibilities. In criticizing Israel’s destruction of Gaza, Mamdani has barely flinched. These things convinced many young voters, in particular, that Mamdani might have what it takes to follow through on his promises. They voted for him because they could imagine a city with free buses; because they thought that the idea of freezing rents in the city’s million or so rent-stabilized apartments sounded fair, even if they didn’t live in rent-stabilized apartments themselves; and because they liked the idea of New York being a place that offers universal child care to kids as young as six weeks old.

The status quo—obscenely high rents, ludicrous corruption in City Hall, Democratic officials skirting around the killing in Gaza—had gotten too bleak. Mamdani emerged, untainted by the past, and suggested that you didn’t need to accept any of these things in order to win.

Vir: Eric Lach, New Yorker

Zelo preprost odgovor na to vprašanje je: Ker so KItajci naredili odprtokodni sistem za razvoj UI in ker so bolj odprti do aplikacij UI, zato bodo te aplikacije bolj široko vpeljali in uporabili. Arnaud Bertrand je bil v spodnjem komentarju članka v Financial Timesu glede tega zelo plastičen: iznajdba parnega stroja sama po sebi ni bila nič posebnega, kar jo je naredilo pomembno, je aplikacija parnega stroja v industriji in transportu, kar je povzročilo industrijsko revolucijo in omogočilo Britaniji, da se je gospodarsko izjemno razvila in pridobila prednost pred vsemi ostalimi.

This is rare enough to be highlighted: an actually good Financial Times article on the state of the AI “race” between the U.S. and China.

Three interesting points that stood out to me:

1) The fact that “for a general-purpose technology such as AI, long-term advantage often comes down to how widely and deeply technologies spread across society.”

This is because, at the risk of pointing the obvious, benefits from a new technology come from using it widely, not just creating it. You wouldn’t get any benefit from discovering the steam engine in and of itself: what drove productivity gains (and ultimately Britain’s advantage in the industrial revolution) was spreading and using this technology in its society.

And China has advantages here, as the article notes, since they’re unarguably better at orchestrating society-wide transformation, as that’s all they’ve been doing for the past 3 decades.

Nadaljujte z branjem→

Marko Golob

Ob nedavni zaostritvi in posledični (začasni?) omejitvi trgovinske vojne se je boleče razgrnilo vprašanje varnosti reprodukcijskih verig, še posebej v primeru redkih zemelj.

»Neznosna lahkotnost«, s katero se je ves Zahod ujel v past, je več kot presenetljiva, še posebej, če upoštevamo, da se je podoben incident zgodil leta 2010 ob kitajsko-japonskem incidentu ob otokih Senkaku oz. Diaoyu (po Kitajsko). Ko je Japonska zavrnila Kitajsko zahtevo o izpustitvi kitajske ladje, ki je po japonskem mnenju kršila japonsko suverenost nad otoki (za katere Kitajska trdi, da so njeno zgodovinsko ozemlje), je Kitajska uvedla embargo na izvoz redkih zemelj na Japonsko. Japonska je dobesedno kapitulirala v enem dnevu. Zakaj? Ker bi se praktično v trenutku ustavila vsa japonska elektronska industrija.

Ne bi se spuščal v upravičenost zahtevkov glede otokov Senkaku oz. Diaoyu (čeprav gre za zelo zanimivo zgodovinsko temo), lahko omenimo samo, da bi moralo biti že tedaj in tudi največjim idiotom jasno, da se s strateško neodvisnostjo kritičnih surovin in tehnologij ne gre igrati. Da je ni cene, ki bi razumnim ljudem preprečila vzpostavitev suverenosti nad tem kritičnim področjem.

Nadaljujte z branjem→

Germany used to produce 31% of their electricity from nuclear power back in 1997. There was zero reason to shut them down, just leftist ideology.

Now Germany’s electricity rates are 3x higher than the USA, factories are closing and moving to China, the USA and other countries.

The jobs are moving to countries with cheaper energy and less regulations. Germany’s economy is collapsing as the high paying jobs move countries with rational policies.

Lousy policy has consequences.

How the US spent tens of millions of dollars to trick the world into believing that the Chinese had genocided an entire minority group.

But they couldn’t find a single victim. 

The story of the rise and fall of the Uyghur Genocide Hoax is a stunning example of the power of Langley and Washington DC in global brainwashing.

Full details in the video, but some key points are below.

1.) The idea of fighting Islamist terrorism by creating tough re-education camps to instill patriotism came from France, NOT from China.

China’s de-radicalization program was different, focused on vocational training, education in the arts, and language courses.

2.) The stunning plan from the CIA-adjacent group known as the NED was to rebrand China’s vocational program as a series of “mass killings” and “atrocities” amounting to “genocide”.

The plotters met at a June 2019 conference in Washington, where NED leader Carl Gershman said the goal was to leave China “on the ash heap of history”, adding: “I believe that will happen.”

Nadaljujte z branjem→

Hinton, the godfather of AI, said it best: we built the learning algorithms, but we no longer understand what they’ve built.

That’s the paradox of deep learning. We designed the rules for how these systems learn, yet the internal logic of their neural networks has become too complex for us to fully grasp. Millions or even trillions of parameters interact in ways no human can trace.

We can observe what they do, we can measure accuracy, behavior, and output but not truly explain why they do it. Their reasoning isn’t transparent; it’s emergent.

In a sense, we’ve created alien intelligences born from our math, still tethered to our code yet evolving patterns we can’t decode. The machines are doing something beyond our comprehension and that might be both the most exciting and the most unsettling thing about the age of AI.

“Bernard, what is the purpose of our defence policy?”
“To defend Britain.”
“No, Bernard. It is to make people believe that Britain is defended.”
“The Russians?”
“Not the Russians, the British! The Russians know it’s not”

Vir: Yes, Prime Minister