Do current trends in drone technology favor offense or defense?

by  Tyler Cowen in

At first people thought that drones favored defense, since Ukraine, in its war against Russia, was defending successfully with drones.  But now Ukraine is using drones to attack Russia, and Russian oil refinery assets and warships.  It is less obvious that drones are defensive assets on net.  Furthermore, Russia is now using more electronic jamming, and more weapons that are drone-avoiding or drone-resistant, thereby limiting the defensive value of drones.

Overall, current drones seem to increase the vulnerability of fixed assets such as tanks or troop formations, or for that matter oil refineries or Moscow or Ukraine fixed landmarks.  A very large and sophisticated U.S. aircraft carrier might be able to repel the drones (albeit at high dollar cost), but a bunch of tanks in an open field will not have comparable protection.

In the abstract, “mid-valued assets become more vulnerable” could favor either offense or defense.

The more obvious trend is that it favors nations willing and able to lose lots of mid-sized assets.  That is either because a) the nation doesn’t care, because it is evil, or b) because the nation can replace them quickly, for instance by building more tanks or by drafting more soldiers.

So could it be that in the long run steady state (albeit not today) drones favor the more evil nations?  Factor a) is clearly a marker of evil, whereas factor b) might be modestly correlated with evil.  I consider this an unconfirmed hypothesis, but it reflects my thinking at the moment.

Some triumphs of 19th century liberalism

by  Tyler Cowen in

Here is an outline of part of my lecture.  I presented “free trade” (NB: it wasn’t totally free), the classical gold standard, and some modicum of free immigration (not everywhere) as three successful and mostly stable pillars of 19th century classical liberal achievement.  Of course that was for limited parts of Western Europe and North America only, and with major exceptions for women, blacks, and more.  Nonetheless, something in that formula worked, at least when it was actually appplied.  Here is the outline:

Extreme trade protectionism after Napoleonic Wars

Later sliding scale for tariffs, maybe 50% rate of effective protection?

Complete free trade for Corn [wheat] during the 1840s, Cobden and Bright and Anti-Corn Law League

Terms of trade arguments: Robert Torrens, J.S. Mill

Protectionism does best when inelastic demand for your exports, elastic demand for your imports (two-country model)

The tariff in essence helps your buyers collude as one

That can outweigh the efficiency losses from the tariff

Removing labor from the corn sector also can boost British manufactures

What were terms of trade for GB then?

Jeffrey Williamson paper 1990 – Repeal helped the working class, hurt the landlords

Doug Irwin (EJ, 2021) – Efficiency-neutral but broadly egalitarian

American farmers were big winners

Greatest liberal triumph of the 19th century?

The other great triumph – the classical gold standard – dating from 1815-1914

Price-specie flow mechanism

Overvalued exchange rate – 1815, 1920s for Britain

Nassau Senior, Four Lectures on the Transmission of Precious Metals, 1827

Henry Thornton, An Enquiry into the Nature and Effects of the Paper Credit of Great Britain, 1802 – prices, interest rates, exchange rates

Steve Levitt on the future of economics

by  Tyler Cowen in

It’s really, right now, I think the profession is very inward-looking. It’s rewarding people who do things that are seen as hard. It’s really blurring the lines between theory and empirics was structural in a way that it is an experiment that I personally don’t think has worked out very well. And so, I think that it’s not that, I mean, the great ideas you’re talking about like Black-Scholes are few and far between anyway. But the rewards are not there for people who have practical insights are not rewarded greatly in the profession. The rewards come to people who make innovations, theoretical innovations, right? Who come up with new techniques, who do hard stuff that other people can’t do. So, I think in that sense, economics is going to become, my prediction is that economics is going to become less and less relevant, more and more inwardly focused. And honestly, I wouldn’t be that surprised if economics ends up going the way of anthropology or sociology, which works prominent and thought to be very promising and important disciplines, but have fallen dramatically in their stature because they ended up being more arcane and more focused inwardly. So, I have a really bad feeling about the future of economics, and I don’t see an easy way to change it.”

That is from Jon Hartley’s podcast with him, transcript included.

The El Salvador tax reform

by  Tyler Cowen in

El Salvador’s Congress approved on Tuesday a reform to remove income taxes previously imposed on money from abroad, in a move to attract more foreign investment.

Money flows from abroad in forms such as remittances and investments in companies will now be exempt from tax, lawmakers said.

Prior to the reform, incomes equal to or greater than $150,000 had to pay a rate of 30% at the time of entry into the country.

There is no extra reason to click on this link.  Here are other pieces.  “Good, if you can keep it,” as they say…

Milei update

by  Tyler Cowen in

The shock therapy administered by Milei and his economy czar Luis Caputo right after the Dec. 10 inauguration is showing results. In a severely recessionary context, inflation is slowing down (February prices rose 13.2% in monthly terms compared with 25.5% in December) while foreign reserves grew by more than $7 billion despite debt repayments. Deposits on local dollar-denominated bank accounts have also recovered. Last week, Argentina’s sovereign spread (a measure of country risk) dropped to the lowest in more than two years and the nation has received the enthusiastic backing of the International Monetary Fund, its single largest creditor.

The exchange rate — historically the Argentine economy’s key indicator — has recently appreciated in parallel markets and now trades at just 15%-20% over the official peso, opening the door for authorities to consider unifying the currency market. As local economists have argued, it’s time to start dismantling the byzantine currency controls that have long strangled Argentina.

The flipside of the government’s deep spending cuts, however, is a near-collapse in economic activity, with industrial production falling more than 12% year-on-year in January and construction retreating even more.

And:

At the same time, the parallel peso’s appreciation in a context of high inflation is leading to a loss of competitiveness, with Argentina fast becoming expensive when measured in dollars. The result adds to speculation that a new devaluation will soon be unavoidable, reversing gains in the fight on inflation. “Our base scenario considers a correction of the exchange framework in May,” Buenos Aires-based consultant Equilibra said in a recent report. Monday night’s measures by the country’s central bank can be seen as an attempt to tame this appreciation.

The government’s gamble is that, by the second quarter, a strong crop from Argentina’s high-powered farmlands spurs a rebound in activity that helps contain some of the social discontent produced by the measures.

Here is more from Juan Pablo Spinetto at Bloomberg.  And from the FT:

Argentina’s Senate has rejected President Javier Milei’s sweeping emergency decree to deregulate the economy, in a major blow to the libertarian leader and his attempt to deliver reforms for the crisis-stricken country. Senators voted 42 to 25 to reject the decree, with four abstentions. Issued in December it modifies or eliminates more than 300 regulations affecting the housing rental market, food retailers, air travel, land ownership, and more.

So further progress on the libertarian front may be tough.  Also from the piece:

“This is a worry for the market because the president is on the verge of losing . . . the only set of substantial economic reforms he has been able to introduce so far,” he said. Milei already opted to withdraw the other plank of his legislative agenda — a multipronged omnibus bill aiming to overhaul the Argentine state — from the floor of the lower house last month after lawmakers rejected several key articles.

Things could be better.

Non-binary gender economics

by  Tyler Cowen in

Economics research has largely overlooked non-binary individuals. We aim to jump-start the literature by providing data on several economically-important beliefs and preferences. Among many results, non-binary individuals report more gender-based discrimination and express different career and life aspirations, including less desire for children. Anti-non-binary sentiment is stronger than anti-LGBT sentiment, and strongest among men. Non-binary respondents report lower assertiveness than men and women, and their social preferences are similar to men’s and less prosocial than women’s, with age an important moderator. Elicited beliefs reveal inaccurate stereotypes as people often mistake the direction of group differences or exaggerate their size.

Here is the new NBER working paper by Katherine B. Coffman, Lucas C. Coffman, and Keith Marzilli Ericson.  P.s. comments are closed.

Marc Andreessen and I talk AI at an a16z American Dynamism event

by  Tyler Cowen in

a16z has issued the talks from that event, and we are issuing it too, as a bonus episode of CWT.  But note it is shorter than usual, and not the typical CWT format — this was done for an audience of actual DC human beings!

Excerpt:

COWEN: Why is open-source AI in particular important for national security?

ANDREESSEN: For a whole bunch of reasons. One is, it is really hard to do security without open source. There are actually two schools of thought on information security, computer security broadly, that have played out over the last 50 years. There was one school of security that says you want to basically hide the source code, and you want to hide the source code precisely. This seems intuitive because, presumably, you want to hide the source code so that bad guys can’t find the flaws in it, right? Presumably, that would be the safe way to do things.

Then over the course of the last 30 or 40 years, basically, what’s evolved is the realization in the field (and I think very broadly) that actually, that’s a mistake. In the software field, we call that “security through obscurity,” right? We hide the code. People can’t exploit it. The problem, of course, is: okay, but that means the flaws are still in there, right?

If anybody actually gets to the code, they just basically have a complete index of all the problems. There’s a whole bunch of ways for people to get the code. They hack in. It’s actually very easy to steal software code from a company. You hire the janitorial staff to stick a USB stick into a machine at 3:00 in the morning. Software companies are very easily penetrated. It turned out, security through obscurity was a very bad way to do it. The much more secure way to do it is actually open source.

Basically, put the code in public and then basically build the code in such a way that when it runs, it doesn’t matter whether somebody has access to the code. It’s still fully secure, and then you just have a lot more eyes on the code to discover the problems. In general, open source has turned out to be much more secure. I would start there. If we want secure systems, I think this is what we have to do.

Marc is always in top form.

Those new service sector jobs, squatter removal edition

by  Tyler Cowen in

Via the excellent Samir Varma, hail to Handyman Flash Shelton:

After local law enforcement couldn’t help, Shelton spent days dissecting laws around squatters’ rights. He managed to get rid of the women within a day by drafting a lease agreement with his mother designating him the legal resident of the home, then took over the house when the women stepped out one day and barred them from re-entering.

Now he uses his experience to provide squatter removal services for others and has successfully helped several landlords in California reclaim their homes.

“I think it’s just something that is coming to light … and I believe that it’s going to get worse,” Shelton told Fox News. “Squatters’ rights were never intended to allow the takeover of residential maintained properties. So until we make it criminal, it’s just going to keep happening, and people are going to be afraid to rent out or buy.”

In October, a 4,000 square foot, five-bedroom Atlanta home was taken over by squatters who ran an illegal strip club inside on weekends and kept horses on the property, neighbors told WSB-TV. Ultimately, the FBI arrested four people residing in the trashed house.

Another Atlanta resident discovered squatters had broken into her property that she was selling. She said there was prostitution, drug use and $30,000 worth of damage done to her home.

Here is the full story, here is (gated) LA Times coverage.

Wednesday assorted links

by  Tyler Cowen

1. The largest worms on earth.

2. AI safety is not a model property.

3. Dan Schulz podcast with Nabeel Qureshi, with transcript.

4. African influencers who make it big in Brazil.

5. “Films that promote risk-taking sell more in entrepreneurial societies today, rooted in traditions where characters pursue dangerous tasks successfully.”

6. Prompt library for Claude.

7. Be careful what you wish for: “The proposed legislation may force app stores to remove TikTok. But restricting access through web browsers or already-installed apps—which would be necessary to really limit the platform’s reach—would represent another level of intrusive regulation.” (WSJ)