My pronouns are handsome and brilliant. Proud graduate of the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
United States
Joined February 2011
- Tweets6.3K
- Following183
- Followers298
- Likes770
Rob Edwards retweeted
If you're a young American, or a Democrat who's a little confused about where all this is going, read this. It's long. It's worth it.
Start with misery.
For almost all of human history, misery wasn't a crisis. It was the default. Your ancestors were born poor, lived poor, buried half their children, and died poor. Around 1800, roughly 9 out of 10 humans lived in what we'd now call extreme poverty. Even kings lived worse than you: no antibiotics, no anesthesia, no light after sunset.
Today it's around 1 in 10.
That didn't happen because someone finally designed the perfect system. It happened because, in a few corners of the world, people were left free enough to trade, try, fail, and try again. Property rights. Prices. Contracts. Rule of law. Boring words. They built everything you have.
Now meet Friedrich Hayek.
An Austrian economist who watched his continent fall to two ideologies that both promised to organize society from the top. In 1944 he wrote The Road to Serfdom. A year later he wrote a short essay that should be required reading in every high school: The Use of Knowledge in Society.
His insight is simple and devastating. The knowledge needed to run an economy doesn't exist in one place. It's scattered across millions of heads: the baker who knows flour just got expensive, the nurse who knows which shift is understaffed, the farmer who knows his soil. No committee, no ministry, no genius can gather it all. Prices are the miracle that lets all that knowledge talk to itself without anyone being in charge.
When you replace prices with plans, you don't get a smarter economy. You get a blind one.
His friend Karl Popper made the same point about history itself in The Poverty of Historicism, a book dedicated to the countless people who died because someone believed history had a destination and that he alone knew the way.
Then the 20th century ran the experiment. Not once. Everywhere.
The Soviet Union was planned from Moscow. It collapsed in 1991, after famines, gulags, and bread lines in a country with some of the best farmland on earth.
Mao's China gave us the Great Leap Forward and tens of millions dead of hunger. Then Deng opened markets in 1978, and roughly 800 million people escaped extreme poverty. Same people. Same culture. Different rules.
Korea: same peninsula, same language, same ancestors. Look at a satellite photo at night. One half is lit. The other is dark.
Germany: one nation split in two. The side that called itself the workers' paradise had to build a wall to stop its workers from leaving.
Venezuela has the largest proven oil reserves on the planet. Nearly 8 million people have fled it.
Cambodia lost about a quarter of its population in the name of starting over from year zero.
Every time. Different continents, different cultures, different leaders, same ending. At some point it's not bad luck. It's the design.
"But I mean Denmark." Fair. But Denmark isn't socialist. Its own prime minister told a Harvard audience in 2015 that Denmark is a market economy. The Nordics are free-market countries that chose to fund a big welfare state with the wealth markets created. That's a debate worth having. It's not the same debate.
Now let me tell you about my country.
France is the closest thing the developed world has to a live test of "the state will take care of it." Public spending is around 57% of GDP, among the highest on earth. Public debt is above 110% of GDP. The national education system employs over a million people, one of the biggest employers in the world.
And right now, French high school students are blockading hundreds of schools. Their complaints: not enough teachers, crumbling buildings, overloaded schedules. On October 1st, the entrance hall of a high school in Nantes was destroyed by a deliberate fire during a blockade.
Read that again. In the country that spends more than almost anyone and centralizes more than almost anyone, kids are in the street because the system can't give them a teacher and a building that works.
And the demand you hear most? More funding. More state. More of what built the problem.
I'm French. I get the anger. The anger is legitimate. The diagnosis is backwards.
One ministry in Paris trying to run thousands of schools is Hayek's problem in miniature. The principal knows which teacher is missing. The parents know which roof leaks. The ministry knows a spreadsheet.
So here's what I want to say to every young person, in France or in America, who's tempted by the idea that the system just needs more power to finally get it right:
You're allowed to want it. That's your right. But you don't have to guess. You have something no generation before you had: the full archive. Every experiment has been run, documented, photographed, counted. The famines have numbers. The walls have dates. The boat people have names. The night photo of Korea is one click away.
Your ancestors paid for that knowledge. Some with their savings, some with their freedom, many with their lives. They left you the results.
Respect your ancestors. Read what they left you.
Read Hayek. Read Popper. Read Solzhenitsyn. Read Orwell, who was a socialist and still told the truth about totalitarianism.
And then build. Because the thing that pulled humanity out of misery was never a plan. It was millions of free people trying things.
That's you. That's the job.
Rob Edwards retweeted
Annual COP summits convened by the United Nations for the past 30 years serve as a financial scheme to extract trillions of dollars from gullible Western nations.
The manufactured crisis sustains a perpetual state of fear and alarm about a feigned collapse of climate stability - a condition that has no basis in planetary history. This manufactured crisis has served as a tool to achieve distinct political and economic advantages.
This seeks to shift decision-making power from elected national governments to unaccountable, pan-globalist institutions. The traditional democratic choices and fundamental freedoms valued in Western society are being systematically dismantled. Economic stability is being eroded as nations lose industrial wealth to nations like China and India.
China now dominates the rare earth market and builds around 90% of the world's turbines and solar panels, plus components. It has expanded its coal power plants to become the greatest producer of clean coal power in history.
Erasing national boundaries and centralising control makes the human world more fragmented, easier to manage, and less capable of resisting or reversing a top-down global restructure.
The Net Zero transition opens up new avenues for corporate profit, allowing a global elite to influence international policy to suit their bottom lines under the guise of environmental stewardship.
The narrative of a climate crisis represents a profound bid for political power and financial control. The Earth is a resilient, self-regulating biological environment, that has thrived under vastly warmer and more carbon-rich conditions than those we experience today.
The true threat to contemporary society is not a changing climate, but dismantling national sovereignty, loss of economic stability and erosion of democratic freedoms in pursuit of a micromanaged, borderless world.
Rob Edwards retweeted
The evidence of history suggests the modern climate agenda is designed to reshape human society, weaken sovereignty and consolidate centralised global control.
The foundational flaw of the climate narrative is the omission of context. We were told current temperatures and CO₂ levels were unprecedented, yet geological history tells the exact opposite story. For the past 34 million years - since the glaciation of Antarctica, and driven by tectonic shifts and changing ocean currents - Earth has been locked in the Late Cenozoic Ice Age.
These conditions intensified 2.58 million years ago into the Quaternary glaciation, characterised by long, brutal glacial periods interrupted by temporary, warmer interglacials, like the Holocene we live in today.
During the past 541 million years of exploding biological diversity (the Phanerozoic Eon) the global temperature has averaged 24°C, ranging from 18°C to 34°C peaks. This is fully 9°C warmer than today’s calculated average of 15°C. We are living in unusually 'cold times' and there is no likelihood of an urgent global warming or climate change facing human society.
The other nemesis comes in the form of CO₂, which is the foundation for photosynthesis, agriculture and the rise of complex life on Earth. Rather than suffering from an excess of CO₂, Earth has been experiencing a long-term carbon decline.
Prior to the industrial era, low CO₂ levels contributed to global aridity, the retreat of biomass and loss of ancient rainforests. An increase in atmospheric CO₂ represents an opportunity for life's biological resurgence, as a fertiliser that stimulates biological growth and expands the planet's agricultural produce.
The natural world has endured genuine, cataclysmic upheavals - but this is not one of them. The great extinction events of the past - such as the Carnian Pluvial Episode or the End-Permian extinction - played out over tens of thousands to millions of years. Yet the biological world survived, adapted and survived.
When the planet experienced sustained, greenhouse conditions, life didn't collapse - it flourished. During the Eocene Epoch 56 million years ago, palm trees grew in the Arctic, ice disappeared from the poles and lush rainforests and endless biology blanketed 85% of the Earth's landmass.
Far from a wasteland, the Eocene was a time of astonishing biological abundance of food and a massive radiation of mammalian life. The lessons of history show us that warmer conditions are not to be feared; they are catalysts for biological resilience and growth.
The brief fluctuations of past decades do not constitute a climate crisis; they are evidence of a temporary, microscopic blip in geological time.
Rob Edwards retweeted
Earth has emerged from multiple past glaciations following roughly the same pattern for the last 2.58 million years - with 5–6°C warming occurring approximately every 100,000 years.
Past warming on this modest scale did not trigger global environmental catastrophes. The five major extinction events in Earth's deep history were linked to vast volcanic events, such as large igneous provinces, rather than modest interglacial warming. Reducing a complex planetary system to an apocalyptic climate crisis over a geological blink of an eye, ignores both this geological record and modern satellite observations.
Earth’s biosphere is ancient, dynamic and incredibly resilient. Ongoing warmth and available atmospheric carbon are driving a measurable recovery in global green leaf cover - a process continuously recorded by NASA satellites. But over geological time, atmospheric CO₂ has experienced a steady long-term drawdown, depleted by silicate weathering and carbon absorption from expanding biological life.
Atmospheric CO₂ is not a nemesis for life on Earth; it is the foundation of life, the essential driver of photosynthesis, primary plant productivity, and oxygen regeneration. Furthermore, there is no paleoclimate evidence that CO₂ variations trigger the onset of ice age glaciations or interglacial recoveries.
The paleoclimate record demonstrates that CO₂ follows rising temperatures on multi-millennial scales, while the net-zero agenda rests on the premise that CO₂ leads temperature rise. Antarctic ice-core records (EPICA Dome C, Vostok) show that temperatures consistently rise several hundred to a thousand years before CO₂ increases.
This lead–lag relationship has been well-documented in published literature for over two decades (Caillon et al., 2003; Pedro et al., 2012; Parrenin et al, 2013).
What initiates a deglaciation are the well-established Milankovitch orbital cycles, followed by ice-sheet retreat, declining surface albedo and shifts in ocean circulation.
In this process, CO₂ acts as a feedback mechanism (IPCC AR6 WG1 Ch. 5; Shakun et al., 2012).
Only after the oceans - particularly the Southern Ocean - have warmed for centuries does dissolved CO₂ outgas from the deep, gradually elevating atmospheric levels and amplifying the warming trend.
Rob Edwards retweeted
THE LIE OF 'RENEWABLE' ENERGY
Oct 9, 2026 · Jonathan Cohler
They are not 'renewable.' The materials run out fast. The supply chains run on child labor and forced labor. The equipment runs on fossil fuels. The whole system is a one-generation extraction cycle with a green label slapped on top. Calling it 'renewable' is a lie.
Nothing about this is 'renewable.'
Nothing about this is 'clean.'
Nothing about this is 'ethical.'
Calling it any of these things is a lie.
INTRODUCTION
Say the word 'renewable' and a normal person hears 'this does not run out.' That is the lie.
The sunlight does not run out. The wind does not run out. The machines that catch them are made of metals, and the choke-point metals run out fast. Dysprosium, within this generation. Silver, meaningfully drawn down across several build cycles. Tellurium, already at a hard cap for the thin-film technology that uses it. Neodymium and lithium reserves are not immediately exhausted, but the Chinese separation and conversion chokepoints already bind the chain.
A big wind turbine needs a magnet. That magnet needs a metal called dysprosium. The world mines about 2,000 tons of dysprosium a year, roughly 87 percent from China and 11 percent from Myanmar. The separation step that turns ore into usable metal is almost entirely Chinese, and that choke point already governs global allocation. Studies put cumulative demand through 2050 at 176,000 to 318,000 tons, which crosses China's current stated dysprosium reserve somewhere between 2032 and 2049. Global reserves outside Myanmar sit around 800,000 tons in that literature; the whole stock is not drained, but the Chinese slice is. A separate China-demand study puts electric vehicle motors at 41 to 56 percent of cumulative dysprosium demand through 2050 and wind at 18 to 24 percent. EVs are the bigger pull.
A solar panel needs silver. One big push to replace power plants with solar uses up roughly a fifth of the known silver reserves. The panels wear out in 25 years and have to be built again. Thrifting and recycling stretch the supply. At the stated buildout the silver draw is still a serious fraction of global reserves across several decades of maintenance.
One kind of thin solar panel uses a metal called tellurium. The world only produces enough tellurium each year to make a tiny slice of the solar panels being built. That kind of panel cannot scale. Full stop.
A share of Congo's cobalt is dug out by hand in artisanal pits. The artisanal fraction of Congolese supply has fallen from about 20 percent in the mid-2010s to a few percent today, but it is where the child labor sits. UNICEF estimated in 2014 that about 40,000 children worked in all mines across southern Congo. A 2024 Congolese government report identified 16,845 children specifically in the cobalt chain between 2019 and 2022, most between 12 and 17. People die in collapsed pits. Amnesty International, the BBC, the Washington Post, and NBC have all documented it.
China produced about 93 percent of the world's polysilicon in 2024. Xinjiang's share of world polysilicon output has run from the mid-20s to about 45 percent depending on year. Forced labor of Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang's polysilicon production is documented by the US government, the UK government, Sheffield Hallam University, and the Associated Press, and triggers US import restrictions under the UFLPA.
When the turbines wear out in 20 years, the blades mostly get buried in US landfills. Europe runs them through cement kilns, where the glass becomes raw material and the resin burns as kiln fuel. The panels get crushed; most go to landfill because recycling costs more than the recovered material is worth. The batteries get thrown out at low recycling rates.
The sunlight is free. The wind is free. The machinery is a strip mine with a 20-year expiration date, drawing on a cobalt supply chain with a small but documented artisanal fraction worked in part by children, shipped on diesel freighters, and dumped in a hole.
The numbers behind the TRUTH
For anyone who wants to check the math. Mining and reserve figures from USGS, buildout figures from IEA, dysprosium demand scenarios from the published 2022-to-2050 cumulative-demand paper and a separate China-demand study, cobalt supply breakdown from the Cobalt Institute, labor figures from UNICEF, Amnesty International, and the Congolese government's 2024 cobalt-chain report, polysilicon figures from Bernreuter Research and Sheffield Hallam University, forced-labor findings from the US (UFLPA) and UK government.
THE METALS
Neodymium. World rare earth oxide mine output was about 390,000 tons in 2024. Praseodymium-neodymium oxide supply was roughly 90,000 tons, approximately balanced with magnet demand. Nd oxide prices fell from about $134/kg in 2022 to about $56/kg in 2024. The constraint shows up at scale and by turbine type: direct-drive permanent-magnet turbines use roughly 180 kg Nd/MW; geared turbines use 12 to 50 kg/MW. Most onshore wind is geared. The pressure point is scaled offshore direct-drive, plus EV motors (the larger growth term), plus electronics, plus defense, all drawing on the same stream. Refining and separation of neodymium is almost entirely controlled by China.
Dysprosium. Production is roughly 1,000 to 2,000 tons a year. Over 1988 to 2021 the mine split was about 87 percent China and 11 percent Myanmar; separation is near-total Chinese control. Dy is a small fraction of rare earth deposits and the heavy rare earth that gives NdFeB magnets their high-temperature performance for offshore service. The 2022-to-2050 cumulative demand range of 176,000 to 318,000 tons crosses China's current stated dysprosium reserve in 2032, 2034, 2038, or 2040 under the static case, moving to 2038 to 2049 if that reserve grows at 2 percent a year. USGS does not publish a dysprosium reserve; the Chinese figure comes from the referenced literature. Global reserves outside Myanmar sit around 800,000 tons in that same literature; the cumulative range does not drain that stock, but it does drain the Chinese share. A separate study of China's own dysprosium demand puts electric vehicles at 41 to 56 percent of cumulative demand and wind at 18 to 24 percent. Dy-reduced and Dy-free magnet research exists; it is not yet the volume product.
Terbium. About 400 tons a year of production. Loadings in magnets are a fraction of Dy loadings. Not a one-buildout exhaustion story, but another concentrated supply with no non-Chinese refining at scale.
What binds first. Dysprosium at scaled EV motor and permanent-magnet wind production is the first heavy rare earth to bind hard. Cumulative demand to 2050 crosses China's current stated dysprosium reserve in the 2032-to-2040 window under the static-reserve case, moving to 2038-to-2049 if that reserve grows at 2 percent a year, if magnet chemistries stay Dy-rich. Global reserves outside Myanmar (~800,000 tons) are not drained by that cumulative range, but the China-concentrated share is. Terbium is a concentrated supply with no non-Chinese refining at scale; lower loadings than dysprosium mean a longer exhaustion timeline, and the geopolitical dependency is identical. Neodymium reserves are not immediately exhausted, but the Chinese refining chokepoint can close overnight, and reserves held in uneconomic grades do not substitute for refined metal on any useful timescale.
SOLAR
Silver. Crystalline silicon cells use about 10 tons of silver per gigawatt, down from about 50 tons/GW roughly fifteen years ago through aggressive thrifting. World silver mine production was 25,300 tons in 2024. USGS reserves are 610,000 tons. Photovoltaics took roughly 6,000 tons in 2024, around a quarter of mine output. A 12,400 GW scaled buildout at 10 tons/GW requires about 124,000 tons of silver, roughly a fifth of known reserves. One buildout. Then rebuild every 25 years. Compounded against industrial, electronics, and jewelry demand, the pressure is real; the reserves are not immediately exhausted.
Tellurium. Cadmium telluride thin film is roughly 5 percent of the module market. Modern CdTe cells use about 15 tons Te/GW. World refinery output is around 1,000 tons a year, already a hard cap on how much CdTe can be built annually. CdTe cannot scale to carry the whole market.
Indium. Byproduct of zinc refining with roughly 900 tons a year of output. A constraint on CIGS thin film and on transparent conductors, not on the dominant silicon PV path.
Polysilicon. Not a scarcity problem. An energy problem (silicon purification is coal-fired in Xinjiang) and a labor problem (documented forced labor in that same region). Covered below.
Copper, Aluminum, and the Grid
The IEA figure of about 80 million kilometers of new transmission and distribution by 2040 is real. High-voltage overhead transmission conductors are predominantly aluminum (ACSR, AAC, AAAC). Copper dominates in distribution cabling, generator windings, EV motors, and building wiring. USGS copper reserves are about 980 million tons; mine production was about 23 million tons a year in 2024 and 2025.
Ore grades have fallen over the last century. Industry shorthand puts the drop from about 2 percent copper in 1900 to about 0.5 percent today; this is a sector-wide approximation, not a USGS global time series, and the decline is real but uneven across deposits. Lower grade means more rock, more diesel, more water, and more energy per ton. The scaling cost of continued extraction is where the system actually binds, not a single reserve-exhaustion number.
STORAGE
The wind does not blow all the time. The sun sets every night. Any intermittent-generation system needs firming.
Lithium mine production reached about 222,000 tons in 2024 and an estimated 290,000 tons in 2025. USGS reserves are around 37 million tons. The resource is not immediately scarce. The pressure is on refining, cell manufacturing, and the pace of capacity growth.
Backing one day of US electricity (about 11 TWh) entirely with lithium-ion batteries is impractical. That is a design choice. Pumped hydro, long-duration flow batteries, compressed air, hydrogen, and massive overbuild with curtailment are the alternatives. Each carries its own materials bill and its own siting problem. A grid-scale firming solution matched to a wind-and-solar-dominant system at full load, through winter and dark weeks, at any defensible cost, does not exist today.
THE CHILDREN
More than 70 percent of the world's cobalt comes from the Democratic Republic of Congo. The artisanal share of Congolese production has fallen from about 20 percent in the mid-2010s to a few percent today, but it is where the child labor sits. Children work in unregulated pits with no safety gear and die in collapsed workings for a few dollars a day.
UNICEF's 2014 estimate counted about 40,000 children working in all mines across southern Congo, not cobalt alone. A 2024 Congolese government report identified 16,845 children specifically in the cobalt chain from 2019 to 2022, most between the ages of 12 and 17. Amnesty International, the Washington Post, Sky News, the BBC, and NBC have documented the artisanal cobalt labor conditions. Siddharth Kara's 2023 book Cobalt Red lays out the artisanal system in detail.
The cobalt goes to trading houses, then to Chinese refineries, then into the batteries that power electric cars and store wind and solar electricity. Industrial Congolese cobalt and artisanal cobalt enter the same refining chain. Chain-of-custody auditing has improved but cannot fully segregate the artisanal fraction once it enters the mixed smelter stream.
China produced about 93 percent of the world's polysilicon in 2024. Xinjiang's share of world polysilicon output has run from the mid-20s to about 45 percent depending on year. Documented forced labor of Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang's polysilicon production has been confirmed by the US government (UFLPA), the UK government, Sheffield Hallam University, and the Associated Press. Panels built with Xinjiang polysilicon are blocked at US borders unless importers can prove otherwise.
Lithium in the Atacama Desert is drawn as brine at rates documented to lower water tables and depress freshwater availability for indigenous Atacameño communities who have farmed that land for a thousand years. The water conflict is real and the communities are losing ground. The lithium goes to batteries.
Nickel in Indonesia and the Philippines is clearing rainforest and running rivers red with laterite tailings. Workers die in refineries that would not pass a safety inspection anywhere in the West.
Rare earth mining in Baotou, Inner Mongolia has produced a radioactive sludge lake miles across. Farmers downwind report elevated cancer rates. Livestock die. Crops fail. Baotou (the Bayan Obo deposit) is the main source of light rare earths including neodymium. The heavy rare earths that permanent-magnet offshore wind depends on, dysprosium and terbium, come from southern Chinese ionic clay deposits and from Myanmar, with their own documented environmental harms.
The industry is built on this. Not as an unfortunate side effect. As a structural dependency. Separated dysprosium and terbium at volume have no non-Chinese substitute at current prices and current refining capacity; Lynas has begun separated heavy-REE output but at tons per quarter, not at scale. Polysilicon has non-Xinjiang alternatives, both non-Xinjiang Chinese capacity and non-Chinese capacity (Wacker and others), and the market is adjusting under US import restrictions, though Xinjiang still carries a large share. Cobalt has partial alternatives (Indonesia supplied about 14 percent of mined cobalt in 2025), but the artisanal Congolese stream still enters the same mixed refining chain.
THE WASTE
Solar panels last 25 years. Wind turbine blades last 20 years. Lithium batteries last 10 to 15 years.
Wind blades are fiberglass and epoxy and cannot be melted down. US practice is landfill: blades are cut with diamond saws and buried in enormous landfills in Wyoming, Iowa, Texas, and elsewhere. Europe has moved to commercial cement-kiln co-processing, where the glass becomes raw material and the resin burns as kiln fuel. China's Solid Waste Law bans landfilling blade composites; the modeled routes are incineration, cement-kiln co-processing, pyrolysis, and mechanical recycling, but recycling capacity is still underdeveloped and not industrialized.
Crystalline silicon panels contain lead in their solder and connectors. Cadmium telluride panels contain cadmium. For most panels the recycling cost exceeds the value of recovered materials. Most get crushed and landfilled, and the toxins can leach into soil.
Less than 5 percent of consumer lithium batteries get recycled. EV pack recycling rates are higher where infrastructure exists, but still far from closed-loop. In 20 years the first wave of this equipment is waste. In 40 years the second wave. The piles of debris are already starting to appear.
Rob Edwards retweeted
The left loved Elon Musk when he was building electric cars and taking NASA contracts. The moment he bought Twitter in October 2022 and started firing bureaucrats, the affection evaporated overnight.
Musk built SpaceX from scratch, slashed the cost of orbital launches by roughly 90% compared to legacy contractors like Boeing and Lockheed, and made reusable rockets standard practice. He did this with private capital, not Pentagon blank checks. Tesla pushed battery technology further in a decade than the federal government's Department of Energy managed in forty years of subsidized research. The left celebrated all of it loudly, because the outcomes fit their climate narrative.
Then Musk spent $44 billion of his own money to buy a speech platform, restored accounts the previous management had quietly suppressed, and cut Twitter's bloated workforce from 7,500 employees to under 2,000. Leftists proficised doom. The platform would not last out the year; it would be buggy ass hell. Productivity held. The platform survived. The bureaucracy turned out to be dead weight, exactly as free market thinkers have always described it.
Now the same journalists who praised him as humanity's savior call him a fascist. His actual crime was demonstrating, publicly and irreversibly, that most institutional headcount exists to protect itself rather than produce anything you can use.
Leftists don't oppose billionaires. They love Gates and Soros. They do oppose billionaires who stop being useful to progressive power structures. Musk stopped being useful in 2022. Best of all, many of them still drive Teslas because they still love the product more than they hate Elon. A truly pathetic bunch.
RT @PeterDClack: Earth's atmosphere is 99.96% nitrogen, oxygen and argon - yet carbon dioxide is less than a tenth of 1%.
A global climate…
Rob Edwards retweeted
Suppose that once a week, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100.
If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay £1.
The sixth would pay £3.
The seventh would pay £7.
The eighth would pay £12.
The ninth would pay £18.
And the tenth man (the richest) would pay £59.
So, that’s what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every week and seemed quite happy with the arrangement until, one day, the owner caused them a little problem.
“Since you are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost of your weekly beer by £20.”
Drinks for the ten men would now cost just £80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes.
So the first four men were unaffected.
They would still drink for free but what about the other six men?
The paying customers? How could they divide the £20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?
They realized that £20 divided by six is £3.33, but if they subtracted that from everybody’s share then not only would the first four men still be drinking for free but the fifth and sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.
So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fairer to reduce each man’s bill by a higher percentage.
They decided to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.
And so, the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (a 100% saving).
The sixth man now paid £2 instead of £3 (a 33% saving).
The seventh man now paid £5 instead of £7 (a 28% saving).
The eighth man now paid £9 instead of £12 (a 25% saving).
The ninth man now paid £14 instead of £18 (a 22% saving).
And the tenth man now paid £49 instead of £59 (a 16% saving).
Each of the last six was better off than before with the first four continuing to drink for free.
But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings. “I only got £1 out of the £20 saving,” declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, “but he got £10!“
“Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a £1 too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!”
“That’s true!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get £10 back, when I only got £2? The wealthy get all the breaks!”
“Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison, “we didn’t get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!”
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next week the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him.
But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important – they didn’t have enough money between all of them to pay for even half of the bill!
And that’s how it works.
Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy and they just might not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.
Rob Edwards retweeted
Insufferable moral posturing, luxury middle class beliefs from someone who has had all the benefits of the cheap abundant energy that provide 90% of the difference between modern life and the stone age
And wants to deny the poorest of the world the same opportunities
And sells it not only as the correct opinion to have, any other opinion isn’t just wrong, it’s evil
Perfect example of the power of narrative over substance
Leads to massive misallocation of resources, prolongs poverty unnecessarily, economic damage and distraction from real pressing environmental issues
Rob Edwards retweeted
The world consumes roughly 28 million tonnes of copper every year—a mass equivalent to five Great Pyramids of Giza.
Yet that refined metal is just the tip of the iceberg of a far more monstrous physical reality. Beneath those 28 million tonnes of copper sits a massive geological footprint: billions of tonnes of blasted rock, colossal volumes of chemical tailings, vast energy expenditures and trillions of litres of water. This is all fresh, relentless demand.
Crucially, up to 75% of that copper never enters individual turbines, solar panels or electric vehicles. It goes into the invisible grid infrastructure required to link everything together and make it function. When you trace 28 million tonnes of copper backward into the Earth, the true scale and cost is staggering.
The drive to overhaul the global energy structure rests on a profound misunderstanding of physics: it treats energy supply as a 'software' problem while ignoring the devastating raw material gridlock caused by manufacturing billions of solar panels and over a million wind turbines, with hundreds of thousands more in the pipeline.
When an energy system shifts from reliable, high-density fuels—hydrocarbons and uranium—to low-density, intermittent sources like wind and solar, the physical apparatus needed to capture, convert, stabilise and transmit that diffuse flux just explodes.
It becomes an absurd trade-off: expending colossal amounts of finite, high-grade fossil fuels upfront simply to dig up materials for low-density generators—generators that can never run a steel mill, power an ocean cargo vessel or sustain international air travel.
Mining is already a vast consumer of continuous energy. As global copper ore grades decline—frequently dropping to 0.5% or lower—the mass of rock that must be dug, hauled, and crushed grows exponentially per unit of recovered metal.
Crushing rock alone accounts for roughly 3% to 4% of total global electricity consumption. Demanding billions of additional tonnes of processed metal creates a self-defeating loop: huge volumes of reliable, baseline power are consumed just to extract the raw materials needed to construct weather-dependent hardware.
Yet the primary metals drain does not come from the turbines or arrays themselves. It stems from the enormous physical web needed to transport that energy across vast distances. Diffuse generators located hundreds of kilometres from cities require unprecedented volumes of step-up transformers, substations, high-voltage transmission lines and regional grid overhauls.
The heavy overhead wiring looping across the landscape regularly dwarfs the metal required to build the turbine in the first place. Because two centuries of industrial civilisation have already extracted the highest-grade deposits, meeting future demand forces miners to dig deeper, crush harder and manage billions of tonnes of toxic slurry.
This is a twin crisis: the escalating physical cost of ore recovery on the front end, and an unprecedented tsunami of industrial e-waste bound for landfills on the back end. The physical limits of this model are not dictated by how much metal remains in the crust, but by the soaring energy penalty required to dig them up and refine them.
Heavy industrial processes—blast furnaces, chemical synthesis, cement production and deep-shaft mining—all need continuous, high-temperature thermal energy and uninterrupted high-voltage power. Intermittent turbines and panels cannot reliably deliver that dense power to sustain heavy industry, let alone an entire national economy.
The ultimate irony is that the staggering industrial muscle needed to build, maintain, and periodically replace these diffuse energy systems relies entirely on the coal, oil and gas they were meant to replace.
The dream of a fully weather-dependent industrial grid ignores physical reality. It overlooks a looming nightmare of endless ore extraction, refining bottlenecks, and perpetual grid expansion.
Rob Edwards retweeted
Carbon dioxide is the fundamental building block of terrestrial life, yet it has been recast as a global pollutant.
Its biological role was forgotten in the heady rush to create an immense economic and political juggernaut. These carbon targets are leaving the West hollowed-out, a diminished force wilting in the soaring industrial glow of China—a nation with the world's largest fleet of coal-fired power plants, and building more by the week.
CO₂’s influence on atmospheric warming has been portrayed as the 'control knob' for planetary climate. In reality, the physics of CO₂ are dictated by its absorption spectrum, which follows a curve of diminishing returns. Each additional unit exerts less radiative energy than the last. It's not the sole driver of planetary climate.
When viewed through the lens of geological history, Earth sits in a relatively cold interglacial epoch. During the Last Glacial Maximum, atmospheric CO₂ plummeted to near 185 ppm, approaching the starvation threshold for land plants.
Today's CO₂ rise to ~426 ppm sparked a rousing planetary green recovery—a trend documented extensively by NASA's satellite observations and routinely leveraged by commercial growers, who enrich greenhouse air to 1,200+ ppm to maximise crop yields.
Despite these biological windfalls, the climate change roller coaster is still powered by computer models, while the long haul of geological history is dismissed as irrelevant. Hydrocarbon fuels still account for roughly 81% of primary global energy, compared with 6% delivered by wind and solar. This is a poor return on trillions of dollars in capital expenditure over four decades.
Dense, reliable power is crucial for heavy industrial manufacturing, international shipping, aviation and freight. The modern world can't actually function only on wind and sunlight. Abandoning the physics of energy density leaves Western nations fiddling while their industrial foundations burn. The world faces an estimated $21 trillion price tag simply to re-engineer electrical grids for intermittent generation. Demand for even more copper will be stupendous.
The result of all this is a profound geopolitical imbalance, as Western nations deindustrialised, and manufacturing and supply chains packed up and went abroad. Almost all heavy industry ground in a general slowdown, leaving half empty industrial estates, and out-of-work steelworkers looking for jobs in the service industry or perhaps pizza joints.
Only a vigilant bank manager might notice dust gathering on unused banknotes.
🤖 Made with AI
Rob Edwards retweeted
We live on a historically cold world, where the average planetary temperature currently sits at a chilly 15°C.
We are rarely reminded that Earth remains far colder in the current age than its long-term average of 22°C–25°C, maintained across the 541 million years of the Phanerozoic Eon. A planetary warming of two or three degrees is unlikely to trigger an existential crisis; historically, it never has under conditions comparable to today.
The blunt reality is that we are still living through the Late Cenozoic Ice Age—the most extensive global cooling event since the Karoo Glaciation, which lasted 105 million years across the Carboniferous and Permian periods. By contrast, our current ice age began 34 million years ago with the initial glaciation of Antarctica.
Humanity and our symbol-driven culture evolved against this cold, drying backdrop. We now inhabit its most intense phase: the Quaternary Glaciation, which has persisted for the last 2.58 million years. At the Last Glacial Maximum, roughly 26,000 to 20,000 years ago, massive continental ice sheets reached depths of 3 to 4 kilometers (10,000 to 13,000 feet).
Modern humanity is fortunate to exist during the Holocene interglacial—a 11,700-year warm period during which virtually every artifact of human civilisation, along with all historical empires, emerged.
This deep timeline reveals that while modern mammals are an ice-age-adapted lineage, human civilisation thrives in the warmth. Yet the present climate narrative relies on an institutional framework that largely disregards Earth's geological history.
Orbital mechanics dictate the macro-climatic epochs of our planet over millennia, yet contemporary debate focuses almost exclusively on micro-trends from recent decades. Earth continuously responds to these orbital variations, first mapped by Milutin Milankovitch.
On shorter timescales, climate behavior is driven by natural variability in solar irradiance, ocean circulation, atmospheric water vapor, and volcanic activity; over deep time, it is anchored by the slow movement of tectonic plates.
The global oceans, atmospheric water vapor, and cloud cover account for the vast majority of the planet's radiative warming. Furthermore, the geological record shows that deep ocean outgassing of dissolved CO₂ typically lags thermal changes by centuries, unfolding over millennia as ocean masses adjust.
To focus entirely on a trace gas is to overlook the scale of these broader planetary systems. It also overlooks the gas's biological utility: NASA satellite records confirm a widespread expansion of global green foliage over recent decades, driven significantly by carbon dioxide acting as a plant nutrient.
Ultimately, the UN inspired climate agenda collides with thermodynamic reality. A modern industrial society requires the continuous high energy density provided only by conventional fuels—a baseload capability that intermittent sources cannot replace.
Rob Edwards retweeted
Part 1 of a 2-Part Series - Scientific & Geological Reality
The primary driver of the modern climate transition to renewables is not about atmospheric physics.
It's built around opaque institutional meddling in economics, corporate investment, attacks on national sovereignty and the rise of globalist-socialist activism, known as Glozism.
It has little to do with the spectroscopic behavior of carbon dioxide, a trace gas chiefly enabling photosynthesis and replenishing the world's oxygen supply. The climate change ideology is not built on sound physics either—it's driven by those who control the science, the movement of money and ownership of energy and land, all eroding national sovereignty.
The role of CO₂ across the biosphere is generally overstated, a bid to mislead society to accept what is an economically destructive, corporatised and politically centralised transition from the traditional and dependable hydrocarbons, coal, oil and gas. We must restore perspective in this debate.
What we are seeing is an analytical leap from obscure climate data to a global 'crisis' requiring an industrial scale response, defined as Net Zero. There are no limits to where empirical observation ends and where speculative computer modeling begins.
We can all acknowledge the basic infrared absorption properties of CO₂. But the narrative ignores its diminishing impact curve, where it's influence decline on a descending logarithmic curve. The more CO₂ there is, the smaller the gradient of warming. All past catastrophic climate events involved massive sudden eruption of toxic gases, including CO₂. There is no comparison with today's modest rises in either CO₂ or temperatures.
These large events are almost all due to the eruption of large igneous provinces, upwelling magma, lava and airborne toxins belching from huge tears in the fabric of the world's continental crust. These processes usually last for thousands to millions of years. But we see them as blips in the geological record, then assume our modest modern climate variability is somehow a more rapid crisis threatening the collapse of society and weather systems.
Throughout this highly publicised campaign, actual climate has been decoupled from the empirical science and converted into a permanent political governance model. This is seen in the annual series of COP summits, designed to magnify the extent of the assumed crisis, raise the financial stakes yet still downplay public discussion.
The physics are clear. Earth is in an atypically cool geological epoch with historical plant-growth constraints, due to low CO₂ levels in the air. Current CO₂ concentrations (420 ppm) and global surface temperatures need to be viewed against broader geological baselines.
These include the Holocene Optimum, the much warmer Eemian interglacial period, and hotter Phanerozoic average temperatures over 540 million years. Long-term average temperatures of 22°C–25°C compare with today's cooler 15°C.
The 1850–1900 was the baseline from the Little Ice Age—one of the coldest multi-century periods of the past 10,000 years. Defining modern trends against an anomalously cold starting point creates an artificial illusion of the trajectory of modest warming.
This deliberate practice masks the bigger environmental picture: Vast oceanic thermal capacity, atmospheric mixing and temporal smoothing mechanisms.
Evidence from millennia of planetary variability are being compressed into brief, highly selective windows, converting natural variations into a 'Code Red' or 'Control Knob' rhetoric.
These fallacies argue that a single trace gas is the master thermostat of complex planetary atmospherics. This ignores the history of long-term solar cycles, oceanic inertia, cloud feedback mechanisms, and geothermal variables.
Global satellite records (MODIS/VIIRS) confirm net planetary greening and enhanced, upbeat agricultural output driven by carbon fertilisation.
Rob Edwards retweeted
Part 2 of a 2-Part Series: Financial and Industrial Engine
The policy and financial machine (the real climate engine) are the actual structural drivers of the global climate agenda.
Led by the United Nations, this campaign has allowed uncontested and usually distorted physics, to strip away the any point of debate. It forbids, even seeks to criminalise, public debate about the global warming agenda. It has become a self-fulfilling prophesy, blaming human society for the world's carbon reservoir.
Bureaucratic mission creep also traces how international bodies (like UN agencies, non-governmental regulatory apparatuses) expand their operational scope from treaty mediation and peace-keeping to global economic and energy planning. Research grants, political mandates, and media coverage all reward alarmist projections while diminishing empirical studies from the past.
It is a shift in wealth and governance, a systematic transfer of financial resources from Western nation-states into international administrative funds, under a banner of climate reparations and global equity.
The energy density paradox contrasts low-density, weather-dependent power sources (wind and solar) with high-density, reliable baseload generation (nuclear and advanced hydrocarbons).
The ecological costs reveal the immense physical footprint of industrial wind and solar projects, plus extensive land clearing and destruction of rural habitats. It also entails massive mining intensity, for copper, lithium, cobalt and rare earths.
This leads us to unresolved end-of-life disposal and toxic lifecycle waste (blade burial, panel leaching). The economic impact on society explains how artificial energy scarcity via forced industrial transformation drives energy poverty.
This UN-led campaign has de-industrialised domestic manufacturing, transferred western wealth and manufacturing to China and disproportionately burdened working-class communities.
Rob Edwards retweeted
The Illusion of a Climate Crisis: Part 1 of a 2-part series.
To understand the true nature of Earth’s climate, don't look through the narrow window of recent decades, but at the vast expanse of geological history.
When viewed through the lens of deep-time, the current narrative of a impending 'climate crisis' doom is fundamentally disconnected from planetary reality. The evidence of history suggests the modern climate agenda is a highly orchestrated political and financial mechanism, designed to reshape human society, weaken sovereignty and consolidate global control.
The foundational flaw of the climate narrative is the omission of context. We were told current temperatures and carbon dioxide levels were unprecedented, yet geological history tells the exact opposite story. For the past 34 million years—since the glaciation of Antarctica driven by tectonic shifts and changing ocean currents—Earth has been locked in the Late Cenozoic Ice Age.
These conditions intensified 2.58 million years ago into the Quaternary glaciation, characterised by long, brutal glacial periods interrupted only briefly by temporary, warmer interglacials, like the one we live in today.
During the Phanerozoic Eon—the last 541 million years of exploding biological diversity—global temperatures averaged between 18°C and 26°C, several degrees warmer than today’s average of roughly 15°C. Furthermore, rather than suffering from an excess of carbon, Earth has been experiencing a long-term carbon decline.
Prior to the industrial era, low CO2 levels contributed to global aridity, the retreat of biomass and the loss of ancient rainforests. An increase in atmospheric CO2 represents an opportunity for life, acting as a fertiliser that stimulates biological growth and expands the planet's carrying capacity.
The natural world has endured genuine, cataclysmic upheavals. The great extinction events of the past—such as the Carnian Pluvial Episode or the End-Permian extinction—played out over tens of thousands to millions of years. Yet the biological world survived and adapted.
When the planet did experience sustained, greenhouse conditions, life didn't collapse—it flourished. During the Eocene Epoch around 56 million years ago, a genuine planetary hothouse emerged. Palm trees grew in the Arctic, ice disappeared from the poles, and lush rainforests blanketed 85% of the Earth's landmass.
Far from a wasteland, the Eocene was a time of astonishing biological abundance of food and driving a massive radiation of mammalian life. History proves that warmer conditions are not to be feared; they are catalysts for biological resilience and growth.
A central argument used to manufacture an emergency today is the pace of recent changes. Between 1900 and 2000, global atmospheric CO2 rose from approximately 300 ppm to 370 ppm, accompanied by a modest temperature rise of 1.1°C to 1.4°C.
However, there is absolutely no precedent in Earth’s geological record for a permanent, fundamental climate shift occurring on a timescale of mere decades. The cyclical shifts of the ice ages are driven by the Milankovitch Cycles—long-term variations in Earth’s orbit—not by minor decadal fluctuations in trace gases.
The brief fluctuations of past decades do not constitute evidence of a climate crisis; they are evidence of a temporary, microscopic blip in geological time. The oceans and the natural world face no structural threat of collapse.
If the data does not support a climate emergency, what is driving the relentless push for global decarbonisation? The answer isn't environmental, it's institutional. The coordinated destabilisation of global energy production is a remarkably recent phenomenon, beginning in earnest after 1988.
It follows a bureaucratic blueprint designed to foster public fear and justify a massive restructuring of the human world.
IMAGE: we have to look past recent decades and view the vast expanse of geological history.
Rob Edwards retweeted
Climate Change is the "perfect theory" for the true believers. Everything proves it:
Hot=climate change
Cold=climate change
Wet=climate change
Dry=climate change
And "man", specifically American and Western European countries, has to be primarily responsible for climate change, rather than any natural phenomena that might explain it.
Because if man isn't responsible, then man can't fix it. And if man can't fix it, there's no reason to give research grants, or pay carbon credit indulgences to politicians and corporations to "fix" it.
When people believe in nothing, they believe in everything.
When people believe in everything, they understand nothing.
Rob Edwards retweeted
After four decades of the climate transition toward Net Zero, reliable, energy-dense hydrocarbon fuels still provide 81% of the world's primary energy.
Coal and gas power remain the essential backup when renewables fail. Heavy and often dangerous lithium batteries cannot match the energy density, range, and fast refueling under heavy load of the internal combustion engine—the very technology that liberated humanity from horse-drawn transport.
Yet despite this vast industrial effort, the energy produced by wind and solar is really only suited to keeping the lights on. It lacks the dense, high-temperature power essential for heavy manufacturing, ocean-going freight, aviation, or sustaining the global transport network.
It looks less like an energy evolution and more like a deliberate strategy to drive modern Western economies to their knees.
So-called 'renewable energy' is largely incompatible with existing power grids. Major institutions, such as BloombergNEF, estimate global grid expansion and reinforcement costs through 2050 will reach $21 trillion just to accommodate electrification and variable renewable generation.
Lumbering wind turbines and their slowly turning blades simply masquerade as clean, green power. They are not the answer. Great phalanxes of glistening solar panels now fill the vaults of nature, swallowing farmland and hillsides—yet their output fades the moment it rains, turns dark, or gathers dust.
With roughly 2.3 million turbine towers and 9 billion solar panels deployed worldwide, this colossal overbuild of metal structures is draining global mineral and mining resources.
The overwhelming majority of this hardware is manufactured in China, which controls up to 90% of global turbine, solar panel, and component supply chains. Yet Beijing has built its own industrial dominance on cheap coal power, continuing to construct new coal-fired plants at a pace of up to two per week.
The irony is stark: Western nations are systematically dismantling their own hydrocarbon wealth, sinking into economic turmoil while handing manufacturing hegemony to an adversary. Who is really winning?
For forty years, an agenda driven by false haste, urgency, and fear has been spearheaded by United Nations-led initiatives—pushing globalist oversight and unprecedented centralised control.
This has driven the staggeringly costly proliferation of weather-dependent infrastructure in a futile attempt to capture the low-density energy of sunlight and wind.
Rob Edwards retweeted
Every elementary schoolchild in California is taught that a boy can have a vagina and a girl can have a penis. Orwell's novel was not just about a repressive state apparatus, but what that repressive state apparatus did: it commanded those within its power to believe a falsehood that the state designated as virtuous.
So California doesn't have a Ministry of Love into which people disappear, that's true. But it does command you to ignore the evidence of your senses and believe a state approved dogma.
When we say that the transgender movement is Orwellian, we are not claiming that people who dispute state-enforced dogma are being disappeared into torture chambers. That is only one part of Orwell's dystopia that we haven't yet reached -- and that hopefully we never reach. (Which is one of the many reasons we resist the transgender movement.) We are noting that the state is teaching children to repeat a falsehood -- a lie -- as the only truth. We are noting that children are being disciplined for stating a truth and refusing to lie. We are noting that people have been sentenced to prison in Brazil for making an accurate reference to a person's sex, and that ruinous financial penalties have been imposed by courts in Australia and Canada for disputing transgender dogmas. We know what the movement seeks: the redefinition of sex classes to be inclusive of both sexes and the top-down re-engineering of language and law enforced by the state. We know this because the movement has exerted its power to this end wherever it obtains the power to do so.
To say that a movement that uses state power to punish people for stating truths and denying falsehoods should not be analogized to Orwell, who warned of exactly this, is to participate in Orwellian machinations yourself. ("But there is no system of Gulags to punish people who believe that man can't become a women!" Indeed there is not, and we want to keep in that way.) To say that state enforced re-engineering of language is "just how language works" is to be a liar on behalf of this movement, which is exactly what the movement does to everyone who supports it: it makes them a liar and an enemy of human freedom.
RT @PeterDClack: The story of our planet is written in the language of chemistry—a story transformed entirely by a biological revolution.…
Rob Edwards retweeted
This post looks like the start of a VERY sophisticated and well-funded PR operation to get support for Democrats to regulate AI into oblivion. Let me show you how it works:
1.) This guy, with minimal followers and no previous account activity, goes to the Wall Street Journal which publishes an exclusive with quotes from him on his resignation 18 minutes BEFORE this post goes up. Planning was clearly done in advance.
2.) Within hours, it has tens of thousands of reposts and the account has 100k+ followers. The post is punchy, quotable, it almost seems professionally written. The first three accounts to quote tweet it all do so within 15 minutes of the initial posting. Remember, this account had basically zero engagement beforehand, so an organic reach explanation seems unlikely.
According to Grok those accounts are @_NathanCalvin (General Counsel at Encode AI), @peterwildeford (Head of Policy at the AI Policy Network), and @DKokotajlo (Head of the AI Futures Project), all of which are up-and-coming AI-Doomer policy advocacy nonprofits.
The AI Futures Project website says it is funded “primarily” by the Survival and Flourishing Fund, which says on its own website that it has advised Jaan Tallinn, Skype creator and one of the leading investors in Anthropic, to grant over $2.5 million to the AI Futures Project since 2024.
Encode AI says on its website that it is ALSO funded by the Survival and Flourishing Fund, which in turn says that it told Anthropic investor Jaan Tallinn to grant $516,000 to Encode AI in 2025.
And wouldn’t you know it, the Survival and Flourishing Fund ALSO says it told Jaan Tallinn to grant $2 million to the AI Policy Institute, the 501(c)(3) affiliate of the AI Policy Network, as well.
What are the odds that the first three quote tweets of Coxon’s post would all be major AI-restriction policy advocates funded generously by the same donor, who also happens to be one of the leading investors in, and a board member of, Anthropic, the company Coxon was resigning from? And all within 15 minutes of posting (two within ten)?
3.) Jacob Coxon doesn’t have much of a resume, but we do know that, in 2022, he got a $20,159 scholarship for the “long term future scholarship program” from the Good Ventures Foundation, one of the philanthropic vehicles of Dustin Moskovitz, a notorious AI-doomer who has spent tens if not hundreds of millions on policy advocacy to strictly regulate AI, while also being an Anthropic Investor himself.
It also just so happens that the 14th person to quote Coxon’s post was @MaxNadeau_ (27 minutes after posting) who is the program officer for the Technical AI Safety team at Coefficient Giving, another of Moskovitz’s philanthropic spending vehicles. Max is not a frequent poster, his last posts before quoting Coxon were before Labor Day, but he was remarkably quick off the mark for this one.
4.) Basically every major Democrat politician and candidate has suddenly glommed on to this post, and conveniently, as the people cry out foe answers, Bernie Sanders already has a bill written to “ban super intelligence” and regulate AI into oblivion, and will be releasing later this week. The bill, among many other things, will create “a new cabinet-level federal agency to safeguard the public from the dangers of artificial intelligence” that will be “advised by an Artificial Intelligence Advisory Board comprised of experts on artificial intelligence.” Do you think, perhaps, Anthropic and its many investors who fund AI policy advocacy might have interest in getting to place a pet “expert” on the board of an entity that dictates what AI is and isn’t allowed to do? And isn’t it fortuitous that this whistleblower came forward with his oh-so scary stories so close in proximity to the release of the most radical piece of AI legislation ever introduced?
