For an AI to confabulate when summarizing a meeting is not unusual, but to issue a report on a meeting that never happened at all is mysterious.
Unless you are being trolled (you could check the email header to see if the email actually came from Zoom), some kind of ghost meeting must have got onto your calendar - a meeting that was scheduled and not fully cancelled, or the remnant of another meeting that wasn't fully closed - and then the AI assistant issued a summary of this imaginary meeting, based on an extrapolation of the content of actual meetings. That's the only explanation I can devise.
Regarding Western concerns about Russia's use of nuclear weapons.
A country that has chosen a strategy of nuclear blackmail cannot physically switch to a strategy of nuclear strike, since it does not have such a strategy.
The situation is much more dangerous when Western countries give in to nuclear blackmail and give Putin the opportunity to win with conventional weapons.
There is a possibility of using nuclear weapons, but it is very small. many times less likely to capture part of Europe with conventional weapons.
This must be kept in mind. (You ask why I think so? Believe me, I have answers. If a conversation starts on this topic).
Iran is much more dangerous, which is convinced that if a nuclear strike is carried out on Israel, no one in the world will take any action (well, maybe they will announce a couple more sanctions)
Therefore, I propose to pay more attention to conventional weapons against Russia and be more wary of Iran’s nuclear program.
I’m enjoying the daily podcast. One perplexing thing though: on the first four you two kept saying you were running over your 20 min time limit, but the Friday edition was the only one that actually hit 20 minutes. The others were quite a bit under 20 minutes. Are you starting your timer before you start recording, or are several minutes lost in the editing? Anyway, keep it up.
I believe there is precedent for returning seized assets after international conflict. I believe that Japan for example got back some of the assets the US seized after Pearl Harbor as part of the 1952 San Francisco Treaty. Now to be fair we are very far away from a San Francisco Treaty situation between the US and Russia and probably will never see it. In fact the the more I read about the Treaty of San Francisco the bare knuckled real politik that underlines it is something even the most hardened observer of the Arab world would find hard to behold(I think the moment a couple of weeks after the surrender of Japan when the US Navy upon arriving in Tokyo Bay realizes Tokyo Bay would make a really really good harbor/naval base for the US Navy(Way better and closer to the US mainland than the Philippines for example). After getting tired of reading too much about the Middle East I decided to try reading Herbert Bix's biography of Emperor Hirohito and boy Hirohito makes people like Nasser and Shah of Iran look like pygmies in his manipulation of historical events even after the absolute catastrophe of embarking on declaring War on the United States.
(A) By January 1, 2025 Ukraine will reclaim Crimea or
(B) By January 1, 2025 Russia will reclaim Odesa.
2. Last year President Biden insisted that Putin should be overthrown. Which is more likely?
(A) On January 1, 2025 President Zelensky will still be the President of Ukraine or
(B) On January 1, 2025 President Putin will still be the President of Russia.
3. Both Russia and the United States have Presidential elections coming up. Who is more likely to be re-elected?
(A) President Putin or
(B) President Biden
4. Which President currently has a higher favorability rating in his country?
(A) President Putin or
(B) President Biden
5. In 2024 which country will enjoy more robust economic growth?
(A) Germany or
(B) Russia
6. At the outset of the war, President Biden promised to strangle the Russian economy and cause the Ruble to collapse. Which is more likely?
(A) The Ruble will be stronger at the end of 2024 than it was in 2023 or
(B) The share of world trade conducted in dollars will be greater in 2024 than it was in 2023.
7. It has been reported that President Putin may have Parkinson’s Disease and cancer. President Biden is elderly. Which President is more likely to die of natural causes in 2024?
(A) President Putin or
(B) President Biden
8. Which nation has a higher debt to GDP ratio?
(A) Russia
(B) United States
9. In the next 12 months, the debt to GDP ratio is more likely to improve in which nation?
(A) Russia
(B) United States
(10) Both Russia and the United States have an active foreign policy nomenklatura. Foreign policy experts are more likely to bungle their nations into a military calamity in which country?
Fair enough Viktor (and Claire). It’s hard to make predictions, especially about the future. It’s fun though. Perhaps having fun isn’t your thing. Here’s a quiz about things that have already happened. See what you think.
Since the turn of the 21st century, which former empire has experienced a more calamitous collapse?
(A) Russia
(B) Great Britain
Which nation currently faces greater social upheaval?
(A) Russia
(B) France
Which nation experienced more robust economic growth in 2023?
(A) Russia
(B) Germany
In 2023 the G-7 announced a price limit on Russian oil. The policy has been:
(A) A major success
(B) A spectacular failure
In March, 2022, President Biden said “For God’s sake Putin cannot remain in power.” Almost exactly two years later,
(A) Putin is still the President of Russia
(B) Putin no longer remains in power
Over the course of the last 12 months, economic growth has been stronger in,
(A) Russia
(B) Germany
Farmers are spreading cow dung on government buildings in,
(A) Russia
(B) The Netherlands
The streets are filled with violent demonstrations targeting Jews in,
(A) London
(B) Budapest
India, the largest and most important non-aligned nation in the world is enforcing the trade embargo against Russia that the United States and the EU declared,
(A) True
(B) False
Ukraine lies in ruins with its economy in tatters and hundreds of thousands dead because Joe Biden and his fellow globalists wanted to cut Russia down to size by allowing Ukraine to join NATO
Regarding the last question, I also agree with Tom.
No one was going to or wanted to accept Ukraine into NATO. All the noise about NATO membership was created by Russian propaganda to justify aggression.
The only main reason for aggression is imperial ambitions and the solution of internal problems through external expansion.
And membership in the European Union does not threaten Russia in any way, but it does prevent it from being governed at its own discretion.
Regarding Russia and Great Britain. None of them experienced collapse in the 21st century. Recessions and rises without serious shocks for these countries.
But there is a significant difference. Great Britain has ceased to be an empire and this is already a fact. Great Britain chose conquest over alliances (like all former empires). Russia still remains an empire and is now once again experiencing the reincarnation of imperial ambitions. For Great Britain these actions have ended, for Russia they continue (resumption)
Last Q re ukraine/Nato, a definitive No. There is no plausible reading of events in 2014-22 where Nato membership is a material cause.
EU membership, that would be a different question.
Side note on London; demonstrations are tedious and can be intimidating, but they are overwhelmingly non-violent (have you read different?). And Tory politicians have disreputably been stirring the pot with silly stories about mob rule. I've walked right through one of the early demos with my 86-year old mother, who would recognise mob rule if she saw it... We didn't.
As for the demonstrations in London, they may not be violent but I’m quite sure that they’re more than unpleasant for British Jews. After all, thousands (and sometimes tens of thousands) of people declaring their fealty to a terrorist organization that yearns for the genocide of Jews might be a bit dispiriting to British Jews; don’t you think?
I don’t see that happening in Orban’s Hungary, do you?
The reason is clear. Your country has welcomed hundreds of thousands of Muslim immigrants from your former colonies and elsewhere. Viktor Orban refused to acquiesce to EU pressure to admit immigrants.
On Q1, I was confused by "former empire" - countries of the empire, or just the metropolitan centre? Quite a lot going on if the former; if the latter, GDP/head in UK still three times that of Russia, even if the vagaries of petro-rouble give you lots of interesting gradients, depending on when you choose to start the clock.
For Orbanism vs Liberalism we've been here before. Yes, mass demonstrations can be unpleasant. Yes, to some extent that's a consequence of a liberal society. Yes, specific antisemtic incidents are definitely on the rise. No, we don't need to and shouldn't tolerate threats, hate speech and promotion of terror - but show me the mass demonstrations of that? A few people have already been prosecuted for turning up with hang-glider decals, and others for Hamas flags. But they are still a tiny minority.
Would be interesting to read stories of British Jews considering relocating eastwards to be avoid this - I'm not aware of any, but I wouldn't rule it out?
Tom, it was called the British Empire because Great Britain did the colonizing. Don’t get me wrong; the nations colonized by Britain were lucky. In most cases the former British colonies are more prosperous and liberal today because of the lessons taught to them by their former British overlords. I include on this list, the United States. The United States should stand by Great Britain through thick and thin. After all, no one should abandon their mother when she reaches her dotage.
The Soviet Empire could just as easily been called the Russian Empire. It’s colonies were mostly neighboring states. These colonized nations were far less lucky than the British colonies because their imperial masters were monsters.
It is true that Great Britain was always far more prosperous than Russia. That won’t change anytime soon. But I think it is also true that your country has squandered its patrimony more than Russia has.
Let’s be honest; the United Kingdom is now a second rate nation that is no longer particularly relevant in world affairs. It’s bark is far bigger than it’s bite and even it’s bark is becoming harder to hear. While it’s economy is far bigger than Russia’s, it’s prospects for economic growth are dim. It’s great universities, especially Oxford and Cambridge, are not what they used to be. It’s industrial base is a shadow of its former self and it’s military power is moribund. Even its status as a center of finance is decaying.
My answer to question 1 is “all of the above.” Both Russia and the UK are unlikely to see greatness again.
If the United States Congress provides the $60 billion for Ukraine that President Biden requested, it will be enough for Ukraine to finally and decisively defeat Russia,
This won't be enough. Because Russia has rebuilt the economy to fight a long war and not only with Ukraine. Now Russia is being helped by Iran, China, and North Korea. The West missed the time and window of opportunity when it was possible to defeat Russia cheaply. Now the longer the West (America) hesitates to provide real help, the more expensive further assistance will be.
Claire has variously reported on, and Thomas Friedman of NYT is a key source for, the theory borne out by the hesitancy in weapons supplies, that although Biden doesn't want Ukraine to lose, he doesn't want Russia to lose either, for fear of chaotic breakdown...
Europe is beginning to understand that the war is going on in Europe.
But so far only some countries understand that the worst strategy is to help Ukraine in small doses. It is a very bad strategy to wait until Russia gets closer to Odessa and Kyiv.
It is necessary to fight back against Russia as early as possible and with as much help as possible.
When I say “necessary”, this does not mean that European countries should do something. This means that if this is not done, a new world war will fall on Europe, the consequences of which will affect everyone.
The motivation of the Russia-Iran axis is a clear desire to redivide the world and they will not stop unless they receive a rebuff that could deprive them of the opportunity to do this.
For an AI to confabulate when summarizing a meeting is not unusual, but to issue a report on a meeting that never happened at all is mysterious.
Unless you are being trolled (you could check the email header to see if the email actually came from Zoom), some kind of ghost meeting must have got onto your calendar - a meeting that was scheduled and not fully cancelled, or the remnant of another meeting that wasn't fully closed - and then the AI assistant issued a summary of this imaginary meeting, based on an extrapolation of the content of actual meetings. That's the only explanation I can devise.
Regarding Western concerns about Russia's use of nuclear weapons.
A country that has chosen a strategy of nuclear blackmail cannot physically switch to a strategy of nuclear strike, since it does not have such a strategy.
The situation is much more dangerous when Western countries give in to nuclear blackmail and give Putin the opportunity to win with conventional weapons.
There is a possibility of using nuclear weapons, but it is very small. many times less likely to capture part of Europe with conventional weapons.
This must be kept in mind. (You ask why I think so? Believe me, I have answers. If a conversation starts on this topic).
Iran is much more dangerous, which is convinced that if a nuclear strike is carried out on Israel, no one in the world will take any action (well, maybe they will announce a couple more sanctions)
Therefore, I propose to pay more attention to conventional weapons against Russia and be more wary of Iran’s nuclear program.
Love the short more frequent format. Name is good , too. Thank you John, thank you Claire
So glad!
I’m enjoying the daily podcast. One perplexing thing though: on the first four you two kept saying you were running over your 20 min time limit, but the Friday edition was the only one that actually hit 20 minutes. The others were quite a bit under 20 minutes. Are you starting your timer before you start recording, or are several minutes lost in the editing? Anyway, keep it up.
Both. We were starting the timer too soon, and losing some in the editing. We think we've got it figured out, now.
I believe there is precedent for returning seized assets after international conflict. I believe that Japan for example got back some of the assets the US seized after Pearl Harbor as part of the 1952 San Francisco Treaty. Now to be fair we are very far away from a San Francisco Treaty situation between the US and Russia and probably will never see it. In fact the the more I read about the Treaty of San Francisco the bare knuckled real politik that underlines it is something even the most hardened observer of the Arab world would find hard to behold(I think the moment a couple of weeks after the surrender of Japan when the US Navy upon arriving in Tokyo Bay realizes Tokyo Bay would make a really really good harbor/naval base for the US Navy(Way better and closer to the US mainland than the Philippines for example). After getting tired of reading too much about the Middle East I decided to try reading Herbert Bix's biography of Emperor Hirohito and boy Hirohito makes people like Nasser and Shah of Iran look like pygmies in his manipulation of historical events even after the absolute catastrophe of embarking on declaring War on the United States.
https://www.amazon.com/Hirohito-Making-Modern-Japan-Herbert-ebook/dp/B00128Z202?ref_=ast_author_mpb
Quiz time.
1. Which is more likely?
(A) By January 1, 2025 Ukraine will reclaim Crimea or
(B) By January 1, 2025 Russia will reclaim Odesa.
2. Last year President Biden insisted that Putin should be overthrown. Which is more likely?
(A) On January 1, 2025 President Zelensky will still be the President of Ukraine or
(B) On January 1, 2025 President Putin will still be the President of Russia.
3. Both Russia and the United States have Presidential elections coming up. Who is more likely to be re-elected?
(A) President Putin or
(B) President Biden
4. Which President currently has a higher favorability rating in his country?
(A) President Putin or
(B) President Biden
5. In 2024 which country will enjoy more robust economic growth?
(A) Germany or
(B) Russia
6. At the outset of the war, President Biden promised to strangle the Russian economy and cause the Ruble to collapse. Which is more likely?
(A) The Ruble will be stronger at the end of 2024 than it was in 2023 or
(B) The share of world trade conducted in dollars will be greater in 2024 than it was in 2023.
7. It has been reported that President Putin may have Parkinson’s Disease and cancer. President Biden is elderly. Which President is more likely to die of natural causes in 2024?
(A) President Putin or
(B) President Biden
8. Which nation has a higher debt to GDP ratio?
(A) Russia
(B) United States
9. In the next 12 months, the debt to GDP ratio is more likely to improve in which nation?
(A) Russia
(B) United States
(10) Both Russia and the United States have an active foreign policy nomenklatura. Foreign policy experts are more likely to bungle their nations into a military calamity in which country?
(A) Russia or
(B) United States
The questions are completely incorrect. It all depends on what the participating and supporting countries do in the next six months to a year.
Europe, Ukraine, Russia, USA, Iran, China, North Korea, a few more.
Too many variables in a short period of time. Only prophets and adventurers can take part in the quiz.
Fair enough Viktor (and Claire). It’s hard to make predictions, especially about the future. It’s fun though. Perhaps having fun isn’t your thing. Here’s a quiz about things that have already happened. See what you think.
Since the turn of the 21st century, which former empire has experienced a more calamitous collapse?
(A) Russia
(B) Great Britain
Which nation currently faces greater social upheaval?
(A) Russia
(B) France
Which nation experienced more robust economic growth in 2023?
(A) Russia
(B) Germany
In 2023 the G-7 announced a price limit on Russian oil. The policy has been:
(A) A major success
(B) A spectacular failure
In March, 2022, President Biden said “For God’s sake Putin cannot remain in power.” Almost exactly two years later,
(A) Putin is still the President of Russia
(B) Putin no longer remains in power
Over the course of the last 12 months, economic growth has been stronger in,
(A) Russia
(B) Germany
Farmers are spreading cow dung on government buildings in,
(A) Russia
(B) The Netherlands
The streets are filled with violent demonstrations targeting Jews in,
(A) London
(B) Budapest
India, the largest and most important non-aligned nation in the world is enforcing the trade embargo against Russia that the United States and the EU declared,
(A) True
(B) False
Ukraine lies in ruins with its economy in tatters and hundreds of thousands dead because Joe Biden and his fellow globalists wanted to cut Russia down to size by allowing Ukraine to join NATO
(A) True
(B) False
Regarding the last question, I also agree with Tom.
No one was going to or wanted to accept Ukraine into NATO. All the noise about NATO membership was created by Russian propaganda to justify aggression.
The only main reason for aggression is imperial ambitions and the solution of internal problems through external expansion.
And membership in the European Union does not threaten Russia in any way, but it does prevent it from being governed at its own discretion.
Regarding Russia and Great Britain. None of them experienced collapse in the 21st century. Recessions and rises without serious shocks for these countries.
But there is a significant difference. Great Britain has ceased to be an empire and this is already a fact. Great Britain chose conquest over alliances (like all former empires). Russia still remains an empire and is now once again experiencing the reincarnation of imperial ambitions. For Great Britain these actions have ended, for Russia they continue (resumption)
Last Q re ukraine/Nato, a definitive No. There is no plausible reading of events in 2014-22 where Nato membership is a material cause.
EU membership, that would be a different question.
Side note on London; demonstrations are tedious and can be intimidating, but they are overwhelmingly non-violent (have you read different?). And Tory politicians have disreputably been stirring the pot with silly stories about mob rule. I've walked right through one of the early demos with my 86-year old mother, who would recognise mob rule if she saw it... We didn't.
Tom, what’s your answer to question 1?
As for the demonstrations in London, they may not be violent but I’m quite sure that they’re more than unpleasant for British Jews. After all, thousands (and sometimes tens of thousands) of people declaring their fealty to a terrorist organization that yearns for the genocide of Jews might be a bit dispiriting to British Jews; don’t you think?
I don’t see that happening in Orban’s Hungary, do you?
The reason is clear. Your country has welcomed hundreds of thousands of Muslim immigrants from your former colonies and elsewhere. Viktor Orban refused to acquiesce to EU pressure to admit immigrants.
Which country got it right?
On Q1, I was confused by "former empire" - countries of the empire, or just the metropolitan centre? Quite a lot going on if the former; if the latter, GDP/head in UK still three times that of Russia, even if the vagaries of petro-rouble give you lots of interesting gradients, depending on when you choose to start the clock.
For Orbanism vs Liberalism we've been here before. Yes, mass demonstrations can be unpleasant. Yes, to some extent that's a consequence of a liberal society. Yes, specific antisemtic incidents are definitely on the rise. No, we don't need to and shouldn't tolerate threats, hate speech and promotion of terror - but show me the mass demonstrations of that? A few people have already been prosecuted for turning up with hang-glider decals, and others for Hamas flags. But they are still a tiny minority.
Would be interesting to read stories of British Jews considering relocating eastwards to be avoid this - I'm not aware of any, but I wouldn't rule it out?
Tom, it was called the British Empire because Great Britain did the colonizing. Don’t get me wrong; the nations colonized by Britain were lucky. In most cases the former British colonies are more prosperous and liberal today because of the lessons taught to them by their former British overlords. I include on this list, the United States. The United States should stand by Great Britain through thick and thin. After all, no one should abandon their mother when she reaches her dotage.
The Soviet Empire could just as easily been called the Russian Empire. It’s colonies were mostly neighboring states. These colonized nations were far less lucky than the British colonies because their imperial masters were monsters.
It is true that Great Britain was always far more prosperous than Russia. That won’t change anytime soon. But I think it is also true that your country has squandered its patrimony more than Russia has.
Let’s be honest; the United Kingdom is now a second rate nation that is no longer particularly relevant in world affairs. It’s bark is far bigger than it’s bite and even it’s bark is becoming harder to hear. While it’s economy is far bigger than Russia’s, it’s prospects for economic growth are dim. It’s great universities, especially Oxford and Cambridge, are not what they used to be. It’s industrial base is a shadow of its former self and it’s military power is moribund. Even its status as a center of finance is decaying.
My answer to question 1 is “all of the above.” Both Russia and the UK are unlikely to see greatness again.
Here’s a bonus question, Viktor
If the United States Congress provides the $60 billion for Ukraine that President Biden requested, it will be enough for Ukraine to finally and decisively defeat Russia,
(A) True
(B) False
This won't be enough. Because Russia has rebuilt the economy to fight a long war and not only with Ukraine. Now Russia is being helped by Iran, China, and North Korea. The West missed the time and window of opportunity when it was possible to defeat Russia cheaply. Now the longer the West (America) hesitates to provide real help, the more expensive further assistance will be.
Not sure, but a decisive defeat of Russia is the second last thing Biden wants
It's hard to say whether Biden wants it or not, but indecisiveness, inconsistency and incompetence are what we can see.
I’m not sure what you’re getting at.
Claire has variously reported on, and Thomas Friedman of NYT is a key source for, the theory borne out by the hesitancy in weapons supplies, that although Biden doesn't want Ukraine to lose, he doesn't want Russia to lose either, for fear of chaotic breakdown...
Europe is beginning to understand that the war is going on in Europe.
But so far only some countries understand that the worst strategy is to help Ukraine in small doses. It is a very bad strategy to wait until Russia gets closer to Odessa and Kyiv.
It is necessary to fight back against Russia as early as possible and with as much help as possible.
When I say “necessary”, this does not mean that European countries should do something. This means that if this is not done, a new world war will fall on Europe, the consequences of which will affect everyone.
The motivation of the Russia-Iran axis is a clear desire to redivide the world and they will not stop unless they receive a rebuff that could deprive them of the opportunity to do this.
Yes.
And yes, the title of the topic is excellent. But the most important thing is that you no longer have to worry about this.
Poland can talk about the other countries not taking things seriously when they stop blockading the border.
Poland?
Farmers the Ukrainian border crossings, at the moment.