Thought For The Day - 10 August 2026

There's been a tsunami of ink spilled on AI and data centers of late. But I've not run across the nasty issue: if MAGAnauts write the laws and rules such that Batshit J. Fucking Moron^©Tillerson and his successors get control of AI, then truth (social!!) goes out the window. Just as with crypto: he was agin it until someone (Miller??) whispered in his ear - "you can make billions!! the greatest grift of all time!!" And so it was. Everything will be MAGApropaganda 24/7. Just like Orwell predicted. Ayatollah 49% Don^© has done so much to eliminate truth and intelligence already. So, not only the billions, but full control of the population. Just like Kim and Putin and Hitler and Mao. What to give the dictator who has everything.

I Told You So - 10 August 2026

Dedicated readers must recall how these missives have excoriated the decline of the econ world over the years, pointing to Samuelson as the (nearly) patient zero of the epidemic. What Samuelson and his followers have done is to re-define macro as just the sum of the micro, with no account for how the Damn Gummint can do favor, or ill, to either the whole economy or corruptly favor (ill) supporters or opponents. One need go no further than Batshit J. Fucking Moron^©Tillerson to see this in action. And, of course, he claims top grades and honors from Wharton, while there is no record of him earning any such. He only spent his last two years there (after only getting into Fordham, easy commuter school in NYC) getting a BBA (or a BS, reports vary) in something (no longer offered) called Real Estate Economics (reports vary as to whether it's explicitly Wharton or just Penn). IOW, he don't know shit from shinola in any kind of serious econ. Although, being a bigly builder (well... once a long time ago), he demands easy money. After all, Other People's Money most always pays the bill.

The contribution of Samuelson et al is said to be more "rigour" in the discipline. But what that really means is that econ is just micro, aka, business unit. The good thing about micro, is that it's data rich (or, should be) since a business has all the records of its activity. Ya don't need no damn lying statistics when you have a population dataset. But that does allow one to concoct all manner of "mathematical models" of business activity. And, of course, it doesn't surprise that the micronauts then make the leap to re-define macro as just aggregate micro.

But, of course, FDR and his cabal did understand that the Damn Gummint can be a significant economic actor, for both good and ill. Ill, mostly, means inflation, but can also mean tipping the scale for and against the blessed and the cursed; as seen by the Damn Gummint. And now we have it codified by The Gang of Six^© that POTUS is the Damn Gummnit, ya know Fascist Dictator. What could possibly go wrong? Well... the specter of a Guns n Butter great recession is coming toward front of mind for the Bond Vigilantes.

Well... just as Batshit J. Fucking Moron^©Tillerson denies elections can be fair and accurate, when he or his lose, the fact that most macro data is survey sample based is the opportunity to deny that any macro decision need be based on data which is obviously manipulated by communists. It's all fake, anyway. It's simpler and better to just reward my benefactors and jail my opponents; just like Marcos and the like. We'll win no matter what the data ends up saying. And, if it says the whole exercise was bogus, there's always Fake News to shoulder the blame. Bari will see to it.

Now we get some views from a Harvard econ prof (which Batshit J. Fucking Moron^©Tillerson never could be) that Warsh is up to his ass in shit. Well... he doesn't really say "shit". But that's clearly what he means.

Consider the call for better data. Mr. Warsh correctly notes that the nation's existing data architecture could be improved. What stands today relies largely on household and business surveys that face declining response rates, and it takes time to collect and process them.

Do you really think that Batshit J. Fucking Moron^©Tillerson would welcome better data??? In a pig's eye, he would.

Prediction - 7 August 2026

Well... ya gots Kalshi and Polymarket. Now ya gots me.

So, for the inaugural shot in the dark, hows about an answer to why Cornyn, Tillis, and (just now) Cassidy decided it would be bettor for each to suck Hate filled, Petty, Paranoid, Demented, Dictator Don's dick than Do The Right Thing for the Constitution and democracy? The answer: K street. Ground zero for the political and monetary craven. Now that they've been bounced from position of lucrative insider information, thanks to Our Malignant Narcissist^{©John Gardner}, their only hope for as much of a lucrative sinecure is K street "consulting". The Constitution and democracy can't compete with that. If you're a money grubbing craven Right Wingnut MAGAnaut.

All we need do is watch the Fake News come the new Congress, and see where each lands. I rate it a slam dunk.

It really is all about the money.

Ballard Partners, which counts Attorney General Pam Bondi and White House chief of staff Susie Wiles among its alumni, signed more than 200 new clients after Trump's election. It led K Street last year with more than $88.3 million in lobbying fees — a 350 percent increase from 2024.

Ya think any of the Three Mouseketeers is willing to piss off Batshit J. Fucking Moron^©Tillerson and get blackballed from that fountain of money? Really?

Thought For The Day - 6 August 2026

Caught a snippet from a Lamestream TeeVee news feed. Some medPro stated what I've found to be obvious since the start of Covid-19: it's an animal to human skip, just like SARS and MERS before it. I suppose that, because the brunt of both was elsewhere on Mother Earth, the Right Wingnuts didn't bother to conjure a dark conspiracy. I guess they hadn't heard of Fauci then.

Pie in the Sky - part the second

All those many months ago, when I first read reports about the Best New Idea in AI, the orbiting Data Centre, I nearly blew lunch. Clearly, these guys don't know shit about physics or engineering. I put off puting up the obligatory diatribe, assuming that some Lamestream Pundit with access to numbers and real engineers, would do so. It's taken longer than I expected, or I don't obsess as much as Dear Reader might think.

Well... today I found such a diatribe... sorta of.

In an interview, McCalip says his initial rough calculations a few years ago suggested that data centers in space would cost in the range of 7 to 10 times more, per gigawatt of capacity, than their terrestrial counterparts. "It just wasn't practical," he says. "Not even close." But when Elon Musk began publicly backing the idea, McCalip revisited the numbers using publicly available information about Starlink's and Tesla's technologies and capabilities.

So, the Main Smartest Guy in the Room (all the time)^© began beating his drum (or other appendage, hehe) for the effort. And, as one might expect, he pushed his LEO Taxi Service in service to in orbit data centers.

What so many ooh and aah over, the reusable lifter, is really Olde Tech. 1 - reusability was demonstrated at least as far back as the SRB for the Space Shuttle, 2 - the landing on a dime from re-entry goes back to at least the Apollo missions landing on the Moon (you can, I expect, find them on youTube; unless, of course, the moon landings were all FAKE). Nothing new here, move on.

So, the author then backtracks bigly when he accounts that these orbiting data centres would be mated to Starlink locations

Bottom line, with some solid but not necessarily heroic engineering, the cost of an orbital data center could be as low as three times that of the comparable terrestrial one. That differential, while still high, at least nudges the concept out of the instantly dismissible category. "I have my particular views, but I want the data to speak for itself," McCalip says.

It's not of no significance that The Musk Ox's taxe service is limited to LEO, not geo-whatever very high orbit. What's the diff, you might ask? Well... very high orbit is well above atmospheric friction, so falling out of orbit is a rare occurence. With LEO, on the other hand, falling out of orbit in short order is part of the taxi service bargain.

If you visit the innterTubes you'll find: Starlink sats last 5-7 years and 1 or a couple plummet to Mother Earth daily.

For this illustration, we picked a configuration with an aggregate 1 GW of capacity. The network would consist of some 4,300 satellites, each of which would be outfitted with a 1,024-square-meter solar array that generates 250 kilowatts. The data center on that satellite, powered by the array, might have at least 175 GPUs; McCalip notes that a popular GPU rack, Nvidia's NVL72, has 72 GPUs and requires 120 to 140 kW.

Notice, of course, that the author elides the need to replenish the sats. My wild ass guess? Such a host of orbiting data centre component sats could never be fashioned as an on-going concern; The Musk Ox couldn't keep up with the replinishing requirement. And consider two other snags: cooling all those motherfuckers and "wiring" those 4,000 units into a whole data centre. Much easier to do the wiring here on Mother Earth. Ah, but Arizona, data centre ground zero, is on the verge of going waterless. Air cooled computers, mainframe and mini, have been in service for decades, but these AI fashioned ones... nope. Ain't much air up there in space. Cooling is still up in the air. hehe.

Free cooling is perhaps the biggest misconception. Space is cold, but it also has no atmosphere. That means the best heat-removal mechanisms, conduction and convection, are off the table. The only option is radiation. To prevent a chip from overheating in space, a large, costly surface area is required to dissipate the energy and then radiate it.

Stupid is as stupid does.

The governing equation for radiative cooling, the only type of cooling available in space, is known as the Stefan-Boltzmann Law. It states that the amount of power you can radiate is proportional to the area of the radiator times its temperature to the fourth power.

Oops - part the first

Well... y'all should still know that I've grown even more skeptical of AI as the months have passed. Hundreds of billions of dollars on a tech whose TAM is based solely on axing all labour from the economy (in particular those well educated office/lab workers in Blue States whose 10% of the income distribution make 50% of consumption). So, how much axing will it take to reach the tipping point of global collapse of aggregate demand? And, naturally, that will spark The Permanent Great Depression. No one who works can work to get moolah to spend on stuff, and the companies that make stuff have no buyers. And all those Smartest Guys in the Room who bought up every last CPU and GPU to make AI will never see a dime of profit from this "investment". Neato. Some things don't require really elaborate war games to predict.

Day by day, the dam holding back collapse of AI, and before it's even finished being built and running as intended, takes another step to oblivion. Wel... here's today's bit of news.

Situational Awareness, a fast-growing hedge fund in San Francisco founded by 20-somethings that invested heavily in A.I., put out an emergency call for help to rivals in the past 36 hours, seeking to sell more than $10 billion of its stocks to shore up its plummeting portfolio, according to three people briefed on the call.

What was that story about a kid name Icarus? Or that olde (German?) adage: "we are too soon old and too late smart."

Eating

Years ago some pundit (Marc Andreesen), remarked that software will eat the world. Boy, has he ever been shown to be an idiot. AI is 99.44% hardware, and the rest is 100+ year old stats. Now we get the dire skinny from Jeff Sommer:

These big companies are able to categorize the money as an investment — a capital expenditure — and not as an expense. So under current accounting rules, the bulk of the spending has not yet counted against their gaudy earnings. That is helping to propel the stock market to new heights under rosy assumptions that A.I. will transform the world, and that the companies behind it will be making money.

Just like man's laws, accounting rules are also manmade. Unlike, for example, the laws of thermodynamics. Even the laws of economics are manmade, not natural. So, what does it all mean, Mr. Natural?

One day earlier, IBM's shares lost 25.2 percent. That was its steepest daily decline since the 1960s, and it was set off by an earnings shortfall that its chief executive attributed, in part, to the spending underway on A.I. data centers. "We did not anticipate the magnitude of the capex reprioritization," Arvind Krishna, the company's chief executive, wrote in a letter to investors. Other companies spent so much money to build A.I. foundations, he said, that there wasn't as much left as expected for software service companies like IBM.
[my emphasis]

It's stll not clear to me, anyway, how AI's TAM can amount to anything more than labour replacement. If that really does decimate employment, who'll have moolah to buy all those Bongo Bits? Or, will 'modern economies' devolve into a 'modern dark ages' with only the oligarches having need of the only 'product' made by this modern economy: fancy financial services? With the amount of billions of Bongo Bucks going into each entity's 'data centres', is there enough labour in the world to satisfy the bond holders? Much less show a tidy profit?

There are already rumblings in the high yield market surrounding concerns that the explosion in issuance has bubble-like characteristics similar to that of telecoms in the early 2000s or energy in 2015 to 2017, when investor enthusiasm outweighed a sober assessment of risk. These same critics also worry about the potential for overbuild or overcapacity, i.e. the massive demand fails to materialise, or that despite the strong tenant base, these contracts have yet to be tested.

When it's the Damn Gummint, the 'bond vigilantes' come to the rescue, or corpse feeding. We'll see how they do with such, mostly, private paper.