Now that you can make almost infinite words at pretty much zero cost, does that mean that the value of a word is now zero? Not good for professional writers, or strategists, or anyone who communicates the value of their work through words. Is it a resistance to this displacement, which is causing increasing backlash against AI writing? (‘Slop’)? Or is it perhaps a sense that a lot of what it is to be human is expressed in language, and
Anthropic has released a series of economic scenarios which lay out what alternative pathways for AI development might mean for the wider economy. They’re a good read, and have been widely covered in the press. Anthropic might be a multi-billion dollar company, but it certainly isn’t the first to produce such scenarios — let me tell you that Fathom was doing that four years ago! Despite the huge changes that have happened since our report, it’s interesting to see how
When I visited Canada in March 2025, the prevailing view was that the stance of the Trump administration would push Canada into a long, deep recession. Nothing of that sort has so far occurred: in fact, the economy is performing adequately. I recently wrote about the puzzle of the Canadian Loonie not moving in response to higher oil prices. Since then, oil prices have bumped around (they are now back up above $100pb) and the Loonie still hasn’t moved. I
The AI boom whose epicentre is the US economy has been driven by extraordinary valuations of the principal AI companies and by colossal fixed investment supporting their growth. The US economy has diverted its resources into the AI industry: what if it’s a bubble? What if it’s all predicated on the delivery of something (artificial general or super-intelligence, AGI or ASI) that will never arrive? If the bubble bursts, it will hurt the US but, as usual, it will probably
Let’s play. Those words, delivered to a small group of like-minded people you trust, are the surest way I know of finding a creative solution to some problem. But the mood that makes play possible is fragile: one difficult person, one sharp comment, and it vanishes like a soap bubble and you will struggle to recover it. So when we set out to invite a room of 100 people to play, it was with some trepidation. These were highly successful,
A few months have passed since we were last obsessing about tariffs, during which time there have been a couple of other items dominating the news. Those items (the conflict in Iran, the new British PM) are a bit stale, so it seems it’s time to have another go with tariffs. Perhaps this season will be more interesting? We’ll see, but the early signs are not encouraging. Canada, the country probably most vulnerable to US tariffs, looks like it’s going
In November 1967, Harold Wilson gave his famous ‘Pound in your pocket’ speech. As Prime Minister of the UK he had just cut sterling’s fixed exchange rate against the dollar by 14%, and now attempted to persuade the British public that this did not affect them. He claimed: “It does not mean that the pound here in Britain, in your pocket or purse or in your bank, has been devalued.” He soon rowed back from this obviously fatuous remark: that
On yet another scorching London morning Jane wakes up to the tinkling tunes of Berlioz on her DAB radio, designed in the UK, made in China. Unwilling to face the day quite yet, she burrows down into blue and white-striped sheets, purchased at IKEA, made in China. The temptation of an ice cold cup of green tea, grown and packaged in China, coaxes her out of bed and she pads out to the kitchen in bright pink UGG slippers and
It’s rare that a politician comes to power without being bound by some kind of manifesto. And yet, that’s exactly the position that the UK’s latest PM, Andy Burnham, finds himself in. Some may say that puts him in a bad position and that he lacks a mandate for change. For what it’s worth, I think that’s definitely true. But it also leaves him with a blank page from which to design policy. It’s been more than a decade since
John Maynard Keynes’ acerbic remark that “…in the long run, we’re all dead” resonates because it is true, [1] and because it rightly draws attention to the here and now rather than some uncertain and distant possible future. But it has encouraged some commentators to dismiss long-term considerations as altogether irrelevant. I’m ready to bet Keynes never intended that. Political cycles in democracies practically insist on ignoring the long-term: if a policy is net costly in the short term it will