Mint: “There are opportunities that India can eye. With much of the industrialized world busy staving off a recession, our economy could be a haven of tranquillity, especially as the world tries to de-risk itself, even decouple entirely, from China. As this causes big investment shifts, India’s continued expansion could serve as a big draw. But we must not take ourselves, by virtue of being counted in the big-league of global economies, as a natural choice. Smaller Asian economies such as Vietnam, Indonesia and even Bangladesh are just as eagerly trying to woo investors in this China+1 trade—and with notable success. So, we’ll need to make aggressive efforts to pitch our economy. New Delhi has made significant moves by easing hurdles to business and it is also relying significantly on the production-linked incentive (PLI) scheme. These have helped, no doubt. But our efforts need to go farther to capitalize on an extraordinary opportunity of this scale. We need visibly greater engagement with stakeholders.”
Ted Chiang: “Think of ChatGPT as a blurry JPEG of all the text on the Web. It retains much of the information on the Web, in the same way that a JPEG retains much of the information of a higher-resolution image, but, if you’re looking for an exact sequence of bits, you won’t find it; all you will ever get is an approximation. But, because the approximation is presented in the form of grammatical text, which ChatGPT excels at creating, it’s usually acceptable. You’re still looking at a blurry JPEG, but the blurriness occurs in a way that doesn’t make the picture as a whole look less sharp…OpenAI’s chatbot offers paraphrases, whereas Google offers quotes. Which do we prefer?”
Nathan Oman: “Exchange has two key features. First, it is unanimous. Each party to a market exchange has at least the nominal power to veto the transaction. In contrast, political systems allow action in the face of dissent. In a political debate my goal might be to persuade, but politics provides a mechanism to triumph in the face of my interlocutor’s opposition. Democratic outcomes are always premised on the absence of unanimity, although differing decision procedures require greater of lesser levels of consensus. The wishes of at least some members of the polity can be ignored. Not so with exchange. Without the cooperation of my partner, no exchange is possible.” [via CafeHayek]
WSJ: “Interest in large language models, such as those developed by ChatGPT maker OpenAI, has put renewed focus on data management—placing more pressure on corporate technology chiefs to ensure their companies’ data is stored, filtered, and protected for use with AI. “Any company, no matter what industry they’re in, really needs to have good structure and governance around how they manage data,” said Rob Zelinka, chief information officer of financial technology firm Jack Henry. “Introducing large language models now, it’s even more imperative.” Adding to the urgency is the fact that companies who’ve already established a robust data infrastructure can more rapidly make use of large language models for custom business uses like managing contracts, providing customer service, and writing code. Racing to out-innovate their competitors, business technology leaders are facing greater demands to deliver on data frameworks that can help make generative AI applications a reality.”
Economist: “Employee loyalty can be great. Companies want workers who feel committed to them, who are prepared to go the extra mile and not join a rival at a moment’s notice. Workers want to believe in and belong at a firm, confident that it warrants chunks of their finite time on Earth. It is better all around, for job satisfaction and for performance, if employees stay put because they feel invested in their organisation than because they haven’t got a better offer. But loyalty in the workplace is a self-interested decision, not a moral one. It should be contingent on being treated well, not a habit that becomes harder to break. Stay where you are because you like it, not because to leave would be immoral.”
