- ttyprintk parentIn game theory, he’s grim trigger and it shows in multiple ways. I suppose we’ve never seen him forced to play a game in which he’s not allowed to change the rules.
- No, it has a feature where it connects to your brokerage in order to execute the trades. That’s rather involved for me.
Turns out I was wrong and it has been submitted: https://www.hackerneue.com/item?id=42682786
- I would say that they oversee the Pentagon and ensure that the military stays in civilian control. In the past, theories from war games percolate through the Joint Chiefs, who meet with SECDEF before presenting options to the President.
I was surprised Hegseth even desired a side channel that had the potential downside that he could accidentally text the coordinates of a carrier. Stuff like that gets Generals relieved immediately.
- The first three points:
https://www.foxnews.com/person/r/tanvi-ratna
It’s weird that Congress, the body constitutionally responsible for tariffs and their results, acts like they don’t know about it.
- > DOGE’s approach is much more of a “private equity play,” said Samuel Hammond, chief economist for the right-leaning tech policy think tank Foundation for American Innovation. “It’s sort of liquidation nation,” he said, referring to the way private equity firms strip companies down for parts. While he said DOGE isn’t “universally praised or condemned” among the conservative technologists he knows, he said more people in those circles are starting to “talk about the DOGE that could have been.”
- I’ve been thinking about your second point. Some speculation:
Assuming that Trump, Musk, and Putin each need something from one of each other. Assuming that the siloviki want to quietly rule Russia.
A mercenary uprising would be convenient cover for Putin to endure exile in, say, the Caribbean. Security by FSB, siloviki split up their rule across Russia, etc. Operating from Guyana, Putin could deprive ESA of access to the French Guiana spaceport, handing it over to Musk.
The entire Caribbean fell into 10% tariffs except for two: Guyana (38%) and Cuba (0%).
- I believe the forensic credit should go to James Surowecki:
https://xcancel.com/JamesSurowiecki/status/19075591892341969...
- Yet playing a mixed strategy means that—-to maintain unpredictability—-these deals to avoid venal retribution are not always offered. I predict less than 30% of the time; almost all his Pareto-optimal deals are very obscure. The biggest example is USMCA, which he wrote and negotiated. Yet, today he says it was signed by a fool. “The dumbest explanation is usually the correct one.”
- > Which is actually part of his strategy. You need fools that commit outrageous claims, threats and actions. Then he can play the good cop when it makes sense and just fire the fool. That is basically applied game theory on a meta- and psychological level.
Firings that support this: Flynn, McCabe, Esper, Bolton
Firings that support Trump’s Razor: Comey, Sessions, Tillerson, Nielsen, Krebs
“The dumbest explanation is often the correct one.” tells us that the increase in information from those moves is uselessly low for both him and us. Nevertheless, if Trump is able to influence the rules, the accumulation of side effects of high strategic value gives his advisers something to work with.