Podcasts about panglossian

US equity markets were a little disturbed by a sharp decline in a consumer confidence survey—but these surveys are distorted by partisan politics. Depending on the cable news network one watches, the US is either an unpleasant version of Panem from “The Hunger Games” or a Panglossian paradise where all is for the best in this best of all possible worlds. Clear economic signals are hardly likely to come from economic surveys in such a situation.

Hindu Nationalism in South India: The Rise of Saffron in Kerala (Routledge, 2024) engages with a range of factors that shapes the trajectory of Hindu nationalism in Kerala, the southern state of India. Until recently, Kerala was considered a socio-political exception which had no room for Hindu nationalism. This book questions such Panglossian prognosis and shows the need to map the ideological and political growth of Hindu nationalism which has been downplayed in the academic discourse as temporary aberrations. The introduction to the book places Kerala in the context of South India. Arguing that Hindutva is a real force which needs to be contended within theoretical and empirical terms, the chapters in this book examine Hindu nationalism in Kerala in relation to themes such as history, caste, culture, post-truth, ideology, gender, politics, and the Indian national space. Considering the rise of Hindu nationalism in the recent years, this pioneering book will be of interest to a students and academics studying Politics, in particular Nationalism, Asian Politics and Religion and Politics and South Asian Studies. Professor Mannathukkaren's main research interests are focused on left/communist movements, development and democracy, modernity, the politics of popular culture (esp., the politics of mass cultural forms like the media, cinema and sport), and Marxist and postcolonial theories. The thrust of his research has been to develop a theoretical and empirical critique of postcolonial theory and postmodern thought. At the same time, he has argued for a dialogue with postmodern-inspired frameworks of knowledge and to creatively integrate them to overcome the serious deficiencies of many modernist understandings of human social reality (which have translated into arrogant and teleological assumptions). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Hindu Nationalism in South India: The Rise of Saffron in Kerala (Routledge, 2024) engages with a range of factors that shapes the trajectory of Hindu nationalism in Kerala, the southern state of India. Until recently, Kerala was considered a socio-political exception which had no room for Hindu nationalism. This book questions such Panglossian prognosis and shows the need to map the ideological and political growth of Hindu nationalism which has been downplayed in the academic discourse as temporary aberrations. The introduction to the book places Kerala in the context of South India. Arguing that Hindutva is a real force which needs to be contended within theoretical and empirical terms, the chapters in this book examine Hindu nationalism in Kerala in relation to themes such as history, caste, culture, post-truth, ideology, gender, politics, and the Indian national space. Considering the rise of Hindu nationalism in the recent years, this pioneering book will be of interest to a students and academics studying Politics, in particular Nationalism, Asian Politics and Religion and Politics and South Asian Studies. Professor Mannathukkaren's main research interests are focused on left/communist movements, development and democracy, modernity, the politics of popular culture (esp., the politics of mass cultural forms like the media, cinema and sport), and Marxist and postcolonial theories. The thrust of his research has been to develop a theoretical and empirical critique of postcolonial theory and postmodern thought. At the same time, he has argued for a dialogue with postmodern-inspired frameworks of knowledge and to creatively integrate them to overcome the serious deficiencies of many modernist understandings of human social reality (which have translated into arrogant and teleological assumptions). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

Hindu Nationalism in South India: The Rise of Saffron in Kerala (Routledge, 2024) engages with a range of factors that shapes the trajectory of Hindu nationalism in Kerala, the southern state of India. Until recently, Kerala was considered a socio-political exception which had no room for Hindu nationalism. This book questions such Panglossian prognosis and shows the need to map the ideological and political growth of Hindu nationalism which has been downplayed in the academic discourse as temporary aberrations. The introduction to the book places Kerala in the context of South India. Arguing that Hindutva is a real force which needs to be contended within theoretical and empirical terms, the chapters in this book examine Hindu nationalism in Kerala in relation to themes such as history, caste, culture, post-truth, ideology, gender, politics, and the Indian national space. Considering the rise of Hindu nationalism in the recent years, this pioneering book will be of interest to a students and academics studying Politics, in particular Nationalism, Asian Politics and Religion and Politics and South Asian Studies. Professor Mannathukkaren's main research interests are focused on left/communist movements, development and democracy, modernity, the politics of popular culture (esp., the politics of mass cultural forms like the media, cinema and sport), and Marxist and postcolonial theories. The thrust of his research has been to develop a theoretical and empirical critique of postcolonial theory and postmodern thought. At the same time, he has argued for a dialogue with postmodern-inspired frameworks of knowledge and to creatively integrate them to overcome the serious deficiencies of many modernist understandings of human social reality (which have translated into arrogant and teleological assumptions). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/south-asian-studies

Hindu Nationalism in South India: The Rise of Saffron in Kerala (Routledge, 2024) engages with a range of factors that shapes the trajectory of Hindu nationalism in Kerala, the southern state of India. Until recently, Kerala was considered a socio-political exception which had no room for Hindu nationalism. This book questions such Panglossian prognosis and shows the need to map the ideological and political growth of Hindu nationalism which has been downplayed in the academic discourse as temporary aberrations. The introduction to the book places Kerala in the context of South India. Arguing that Hindutva is a real force which needs to be contended within theoretical and empirical terms, the chapters in this book examine Hindu nationalism in Kerala in relation to themes such as history, caste, culture, post-truth, ideology, gender, politics, and the Indian national space. Considering the rise of Hindu nationalism in the recent years, this pioneering book will be of interest to a students and academics studying Politics, in particular Nationalism, Asian Politics and Religion and Politics and South Asian Studies. Professor Mannathukkaren's main research interests are focused on left/communist movements, development and democracy, modernity, the politics of popular culture (esp., the politics of mass cultural forms like the media, cinema and sport), and Marxist and postcolonial theories. The thrust of his research has been to develop a theoretical and empirical critique of postcolonial theory and postmodern thought. At the same time, he has argued for a dialogue with postmodern-inspired frameworks of knowledge and to creatively integrate them to overcome the serious deficiencies of many modernist understandings of human social reality (which have translated into arrogant and teleological assumptions). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/indian-religions

#73 In this episode Barry and Mike discuss “Panglossian Neoliberalism,”a term that Evgeny Morozov uses to describe the place of generative AI in thehands of venture capitalists.Can AI Break out of Panglossian Neoliberalism?The True Threat of Artificial Intelligencea sense oF rebellion podcast

In this segment, as promised, we will return to the seemingly zero-sum game being played out in the political arena, under the rubric of “Election Year Zen,” episode #3. As I pointed out in closing the second segment: This, too – “politics” is the Dharma. While the course of action that Buddha and the Ancestors of Zen undertook, within the constraints of their cultural context, may not have had obvious political motivations, the very act of establishing and maintaining Zen practice whether in the form of intentional communities such as a monastery, or less ambitiously, a neighborhood temple or even a hermitage the effect of doing so upon the local society, and by extension upon the powers-that-be of the era, must have had undeniable political ramifications. Variations on this theme are recorded throughout the history of Zen.In our life and times, as of the last UnMind posting we had just passed Super Tuesday in this year's campaign cycle, and now have witnessed the POTUS deliver the annual State of the Union (SOTU) address. Which has, willy-nilly, evolved into a “state-of-the-campaign” address, over the last several 4-year election cycles, as just another blip on the screen of the endless, unremitting campaign, earning its own alphabet-soup acronym S-O-T-U – abbreviation. But before we get into the implications for Zen and its relevance to our lives, let me restate a caveat that not only bears repetition, but apparently, and unfortunately, requires it. That is, that Zen, or Buddhism, is not intrinsically political. Or, as is usually stated, it is apolitical. As I characterize it, using my favorite prefix, Zen is un-political.Nonetheless, I am painfully aware that any message about politics, however well-intentioned, is in danger of being interpreted as political, even partisan, in nature. This is a modern catch-22 that has less to do with content than it has to do with context, owing to the highly partisan cultural and ideological divide that has infected the populace with a social and mental virus more virulent than COVID 19. I had forgotten that the virus had made its debut on my birthday, until I came across this reminder in the news feed:How quickly we forget. I would say “how quickly they forget,” but that would lend to the “us and them” divisiveness plaguing us today. It is just that kneejerk a reaction. I didn't read the promised “update on where things stand,” but we can assume that it claims some upsides, such as that the virus seems to have been relatively tamed, at long last. But one downside is that the political picture has, if anything, gotten worse. Both sides of the chasm that is the partisan campaign seem to be bullish on their chances, but could not be more different in their platforms, or lack thereof. Whichever team you are pulling for, you may be reading, or dreading or reading into the content of this segment, to conform to your political perspective. I ask you to take a moment to evaluate whether or not that is so. It is a subtle, subliminal, and insidious phenomenon. A curse.I sometimes wonder if my birth date is also more of a curse than a blessing. The tsunami and meltdown at Fukushima also occurred on March 11, earlier in 2011. If my birth is a kind of curse, it calls into question all of the Panglossian views of this existence as the best of all possible worlds. Maybe this is, in actuality, “Earth 2.” In the penultimate stanza of the Metta Sutta or “Loving Kindness Sutra” it says:Standing or walking; sitting or lying down; during all one's waking hourslet one cherish the thought that this way of living is the best in the worldEven this most benign paean to hope: “May all beings be happy”; would most likely be twisted to conform to a one-sided view of reality, if it became just another bumper-sticker in today's cavalier campaign.Moving right along: POTUS kicked off the SOTU with a reference to 1941, the year of my birth, citing FDR's New Deal, which, incidentally, kicked off the alphabet-soup metaphor for the multivarious departments Roosevelt created – the FBI, the CIA, and so on and on and on. He also mentioned Harry Truman, claiming the mantle of both past presidents, while highlighting the current threat to the very institutions of government, and the emphasis on defending democracy, that they and Ronald Reagan, the other party's past leading man, ostensibly championed. Which brings us to another point about nonpolitical outcomes of purportedly political decisions: the WWII bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan. Which, for those of us who have inherited the legacy and lineage of Zen from our Japanese predecessors, constitutes a koan of truly agonizing proportions. Just as we cannot condone the “collateral damage” inflicted upon innocent civilians and children in the case of Russia and Israel relentlessly bombing Ukraine and Gaza, respectively; we cannot justify the nuclear hell released upon the citizens of Japan by the self-same POTUS “Give-‘em-hell-Harry” that we admire for the accomplishments of his administration. We all share that karma. The atrocity was committed “in our name.” I was about five years old.Mass bombing of civilians is mass murder. It cannot be rationalized as an act of politics, but represents the collapse, the total bankruptcy, of the international political system. Resorting to brute force in conflicts that our so-called political leaders fail to settle politically means they should be relieved of duty. They are incompetent. This does not ignore the necessity of military defense, in proportional response to military aggression. But it does suggest that the tactics of nonviolent diplomacy need to arise earlier in the process of negotiating conflict, whether on an international, local, or personal scale. Buddhism's doctrine of the myth of self seems the place to start, in positing a Buddhist take on these destructive horror shows. And why the impulse to understand the “other,” and arrive at a mutually beneficial solution, does not arise earlier in the process, if ever.The recent repurposing of the American military forces to deliver much-needed humanitarian aid to Gaza may constitute a silver lining in the otherwise gloomy forecast. Let's engage in a common design-thinking exercise, the “What if?” scenario. What if the overwhelming power of the military could be used as a non-partisan policing function, forcing a cease-fire before the conflict reaches a set limit of civilian casualties, say 5,000? What if humanitarian aid stood ready-to-go near the hot spots of the world, inserted into the area early on, before the match lit the tinderbox? To those who would argue that the expense would be unbearable, I simply point to the much more massive cost of the bombing itself, not to mention the daunting scale and scope of the cleanup and rebuilding of the aftermath, which, of course, profits certain interest groups immensely. We have a saying in design circles, that there is never enough time and money to do it right the first time, but there is always time and money to do it over. What if we could flip that formula, on a global basis. The alternative seems to be “Earth 2.” Some seem resigned to its ultimate triumph over reason and compassion, called “Armageddon”; others seem fully devoted to making sure that the apocalypse comes to pass, fulfilling their favorite prophecy. Proving them, finally, “right.”It would be the ultimate irony, would it not, if the end of civilization, and the extinction of the human species, comes about not of necessity but from a failure of will, fueled by misinformation? That a small percentage of the population with their fingers on the buttons not only do nothing to prevent the final catastrophe, but actually help to bring it about, based on their religious beliefs? Which then turn out to be wrong! No rapture, no kingdom of God on earth ruled by a savior. Just the rubble of what was once a great potentiality, laid waste by ignorance. Not a dystopian future, but no future at all. The greatest category mistake and unintended consequence in history, accidentally bringing human history to an end. What if this planet of ours turns out to be Earth 2, after all? This is your, and my, karmic koan-du-jour. Answer quickly, or receive thirty blows of my stick! In the next series of segments, we will return to more prosaic, everyday explorations of Zen and design thinking, while keeping an eye on the ongoing campaign. In May, we will take another look at the developments to date, with a somewhat jaundiced eye to their relationship to the compassionate teachings. Meanwhile, study your ideology thoroughly in practice. * * * Elliston Roshi is guiding teacher of the Atlanta Soto Zen Center and abbot of the Silent Thunder Order. He is also a gallery-represented fine artist expressing his Zen through visual poetry, or “music to the eyes.”UnMind is a production of the Atlanta Soto Zen Center in Atlanta, Georgia and the Silent Thunder Order. You can support these teachings by PayPal to donate@STorder.org. Gassho.Producer: Shinjin Larry Little

#Ukraine: #Gaza: Kyiv POV: Gloomy..Panglossian.  Professor H.J. Mackinder, International Relations. #FriendsofHistoryDebatingSociety 1901 Ukraine

#Ukraine: Panglossian delusion. Anatol Lieven, Quincy Institute https://www.ft.com/content/ac5ee4a9-03cd-4e12-8496-ec9a951f95db 1927 Kyiv

TONIGHT: The show begins in Cenral Europe where the whispered doubts about Ukraine now include loudly remarking that Kyiv is panglossian. From Gaza to Buenos Aires. From Walmart's to the National Mall.  From Gaza to Ahmadabad India, scene of the Cricket World Championship between India and Australia. From Argentina to Brazil to trouble in Panama and Honduras. From the Year 2054 to a CRSPR remedy for the genetic-based Sickle Cell Disease. 1953 Queensland.

Matsyanyaaya: Not So Great Game Theory in AfghanistanBig fish eating small fish = Foreign Policy in action— Guest Post by Ameya NaikUS intelligence agencies considered it likely that the Taliban would retake control of all or most of Afghanistan following US withdrawal. Their estimate, however, was that this would take weeks or even months; the idea that Kabul would fall in a matter of days was considered a worst-case scenario. Now that the worst case has played out, analysts are scrambling to explain why. One narrative thus has it that ANA was so poorly-trained - and its leadership so corrupt - that once U.S. military contractors left the field, Afghan forces had neither the motivation nor the acumen to resist the Taliban advance. As President Biden himself put it "...we could not provide them... the will to fight."To test that claim, we can turn to Game Theory.Game Theory stylises any decision involving two or more players as a "game". Each player can receive some "payoff" (or outcome) from the game. Payoffs are "contingent", i.e. the payoff a player receives depends partly on their own decisions, partly on the decisions of the other player or players. One assumes players will act rationally, making choices that maximise their payoffs. Thus, if we know the payoffs each player can receive, we can predict their choices, and thereby also the outcome of the game.The most famous example of this is the Prisoner’s Dilemma: a game in which two people suspected of committing a crime are being questioned independently. If both deny committing any crime, the authorities will only be able to convict them of a minor offence (slightly bad outcome). However, if one of them bears witness against the other, the authority will let the snitch go free (best outcome) while convicting the other of a major offence (worst outcome). The textbook prediction is that both suspects will crack, and wind up with the worst combination of outcomes. However, the classical Prisoner's Dilemma is limited in one important way: it is a single-turn game. The players only make a choice once, at the same time, without knowledge of each others' choices - and then the game ends. A more realistic scenario is what is known as a repeated game. A repeated game has multiple turns: the same players interact, under the same rules, with knowledge of the choice made by the other players in the previous turn. Imagine that the suspects are schoolchildren and the authority is the Principal of the school. No one is going to jail; even if neither child knows what the other is saying to the Principal, they do know they will both interact on multiple occasions thereafter, both in class and outside it. Even with the same payoff structure, the outcome starts to look different: knowing that we have to meet the other person every day makes us far less likely to crack - or "defect", in game theory jargon - because they could punish our defection on the next turn. In a repeated game, players make decisions "in the shadow of the future".The political scientist Robert Axelrod modelled a repeated game in The Evolution of Cooperation. He demonstrates that the optimal strategy for such games is what he calls "Nice Tit-for-Tat".Start by complying (being nice to the other player)If they comply, continue complying (happily ever after)If they defect, punish them by defecting on your next turn.If they respond to your defection by complying, they have accepted the punishment, so go back to complying again.If they defect again, you should also defect again (Tit-for-Tat) - a downward spiral until and unless they switch to complying.A key insight from Axelrod's work is that this strategy only works if the total number of turns is unknown. Why? If the number of turns is known, we can try to pull a fast one - complying until the penultimate turn, but then defecting on the very last one (turn N), when there is no possibility of punishment thereafter.The other player is not a fool. They know we are likely to defect on the final turn, so they will take precautions: they will defect preemptively, on the penultimate turn (N-1). Since we know they will do this, we will defect on the turn before that (N-2). They know we will do this, so they will defect on the turn before that one (N-3) - and so on till the whole chain unravels.The deterrence of future punishment only works if the number of turns is unknown. We can think of this as an infinite game or at least an indefinite one.What does all this have to do with Afghanistan? When President Trump committed to pulling out U.S. troops by a specific date, and then when President Biden made clear he would uphold that commitment (even with a different date), they converted an infinite game into a finite one. An open-ended U.S. presence was a signal of potentially unending US involvement, complete with punishment for behaviour the US considered unacceptable - for instance, overthrowing the US-supported government in Kabul.Afghan leaders broadly shared the assessment of the U.S. intelligence agencies: the Afghan government could not survive if US support was withdrawn. (Whether this is objectively true is beside the point; it seems to have been the mental model of the Afghan provincial governors, military leaders, and in all likelihood Afghan soldiers themselves.) With withdrawal confirmed, why bother resisting - especially given the Taliban's inhuman tactics, including targeting family members of soldiers, and threatening reprisal killings once they take power?Once the average Afghan believed that a Taliban victory was inevitable, the finite game unravelled. Players chose to defect (surrender / retreat / literally defect to the Taliban) at every step, and the timeline towards the fall of Kabul accelerated dramatically.Biden is precisely wrong. The US was providing Afghan leaders and forces with the will to fight, not by training and equipping them, but by making the prospect of a Taliban victory impossible. Given U.S. domestic sentiment favoured withdrawal, a better question might have been: even without a U.S. military presence on the ground, could the US establish deterrence against the Taliban?India Policy Watch #1: NMP, Another Gamechanger? Insights on burning policy issues in India— RSJThe Union government this week announced a National Monetisation Pipeline (NMP) with the aim to unlock value in existing infrastructure projects. The idea is simple and draws from the pioneering “Asset Recycling Initiative” done in Australia between 2013-16. Select assets that are already generating revenues (like roads, railway stations, power plants), lease them out to private sector bidders for a defined period, transfer the revenue rights to them, take an upfront payment for the lease, work out some revenue share arrangement on an ongoing basis, and have a few checks and balances to ensure the private sector doesn’t gouge the consumers on pricing or runs the asset to the ground over the years. That’s it.  The government expects to raise ₹6 lakh crores in the next four years from this which it will use to fund greenfield infrastructure projects. To make sense of this number, the Union budget size this year was around ₹35 lakh crores. In the speech, the FM had reiterated the intent to spend ₹110 lakh crores over the next 4 years to create a National Infrastructure Pipeline. About 85% of that amount was to be raised through the traditional sources of capital (government borrowings) and the balance was to be taken up through innovative mechanisms. One such mechanism was the creation of a new Development Finance Institution (DFI) which would build a lending portfolio of ₹5 lakh crores in three years. The other mechanism is the NMP announced this week. So, what do I think of this? Let’s look at the reasons for doing this. Our economic engine was slowing down even before the pandemic. Things have gotten worse since. The government can manage to keep its base in thrall with its favourite social and cultural issues for a while but the hard economic realities will eventually bite. This is true even for this government regardless of their narrative building skills. We have a yawning infrastructure deficit in the country. It is a prerequisite for growth. Investment in infrastructure has a tremendous multiplier effect and it has the potential to generate new jobs.  The government has to take the lead in starting the Capex cycle. The private sector has burnt its fingers in the last decade and huge NPAs in the banking system are proof of it. The private sector, for all its vociferous support to all government initiatives, has barely contributed to the gross capital formation in the last decade. The interest rates globally are at an all-time low and there’s a capital glut everywhere. China is no longer a safe option with its crackdown on private capital. There’s no better time for India to raise capital. The government has limited fiscal space given the impact of the pandemic on its revenues. It is looking for ways to raise funds without widening the deficit further. India isn’t considered a great destination for launching greenfield projects. The state is capricious and the ease of doing business isn’t great. So, the best option is to offer brownfield projects for monetisation. They are less risky because they are already ‘live’ and, possibly under-utilised. The idea is to have the private sector come in with better quality resources and efficiencies to generate an incremental return over what these projects were already doing. The government receives its ‘fair share’ and the private sector ‘sweats’ the asset more efficiently to make its returns. Win-win for all. An outright sale of these assets is out of the question. It will be politically untenable even within the BJP. A long term lease might be as good as a sale considering many of these assets won’t have that kind of a lifetime. But lease sounds politically more palatable than sale in a country that’s reflexively socialist. It is difficult to argue with the rationale above. This is not one of those instances in public policy where everyone is clamouring let’s do something; this looks like something; so, let’s do this. The solution arrived at fits the problem statement. That is not a bad start when you look at the history of ‘gamechanger’ moves of this government.  But the usual arguments against it have been made in the past few days. Let me run through them: “We are handing over our core national assets to the private sector or foreigners.” This is quite bizarre. This is a lease and the state, like we have repeated many times over, holds unbelievable powers in India to change the rules of the game midway. In fact, this is one of the reasons why we might have few takers for this programme. The history of raising the foreigner or private sector bogey has done us no good over the years. But this never goes out of fashion. “This will lead to the monopoly of two industrial houses who are already entrenched in this ecosystem.” There is a real danger of this happening. It is likely that we won’t have too many bidders for these assets or the game is rigged to favour a few industrial houses. The nature of assets being monetised is such that monopolies are natural in them. You have only one 4 lane road to take between two cities, for instance. So, a couple of companies controlling many of these assets could mean exploitative pricing. My counter to this is a bit cynical. We have a problem with monopolies in many sectors regardless of NMP. This has to be countered through anti-trust laws, debates in parliament, litigation and public awareness. Scuppering NMP won’t change this truth. In fact, a well designed, transparent NMP auction process might allow better funded and more credible options to emerge. That should be the focus here. “This is well-intentioned but implementation will be key.” This is true for everything. Of course, we will need to have more specific details of the assets and their current revenue streams, we will need to provide clarity on how regulatory actions in future don’t impact the financial projections of these assets, we will need safeguards on maintenance and development of these assets when they are under lease and on future pricing of the consumers. The track record of this government isn’t great on implementation after making a big announcement. But that doesn’t mean there should be no attempt to do anything new. My hope is they learn from the past and put a plan that works.  “There should have been consultations and debates in parliament on this.” This is a necessary condition for any initiative of this kind. The private sector bidders are looking for stability in their revenue stream for a long duration (25 years or more). They will be reassured if they were to see a broader consensus across the political spectrum on this. The ability of the state governments led by those in opposition to throw legal or regulatory spanners in the works in the future shouldn’t be underestimated. The Union government would have made it easier for everyone by at least making an effort to have a discussion with the states and other political parties. But that ship has unfortunately sailed a long time back. This isn’t a government that believes in such niceties and any attempt to start now isn’t going to take it anywhere. This is the great tragedy of our current times. We cannot agree on a good idea in good faith. The Union government holds the can on this one. The pessimist in me expects this ‘big idea’ to follow the same course as other such ideas of this government in the past. Demonetisation, GST, Make In India, Aatmanirbhar Bharat etc. We will have sporadic successes and we will soon forget it and get started on another new thing. That will be a pity. Because we really need a multi-year Capex cycle to get going for our future.India Policy Watch #2: Shivshankar Menon on India And Asian Geopolitics Insights on burning policy issues in India— RSJWhat should be the primary objective of India’s foreign policy? I often ask this question to people who are well-read and have a view on world affairs and India’s place in it. The answers often disappoint me. This isn’t because they are wrong. I mean who can say what’s the right answer for such questions. It is because they don’t give an answer that I think is right. Heh! So, imagine my happiness in reading a book where the author and I are on the same page on this vital question. That the author happens to have been a Foreign Secretary and a National Security Advisor of India in the past makes this the newsletter equivalent of “chhota munh, badi baat” on my part.  Anyway, I had written a couple of weeks on The Long Game by Vijay Gokhale and I had mentioned in passing about Shivshankar Menon’s India And Asian Geopolitics: The Past, Present. Menon’s book is a broader analysis of India’s choices in a century where Asia will play a bigger role in the world with the inevitable rise of China. It is a deeply insightful and richly argued book. Menon is an old school liberal with a keen intellect, a comprehensive understanding of geopolitics and a believer in the values on which the modern Indian state was founded. I have taken a few extracts from his book where he discusses the central objective that should guide India’s policy towards the world.  To begin with – what should be the task of our foreign and security policy apparatus and how have we seen ourselves in the global order? Menon writes: “Since Indian independence, the primary function of Indian policy has been the great national task of transforming India into a prosperous, strong, and modern country. The task of the foreign and security policy apparatus is to identify, deter, and defeat threats to national security that could prevent that transformation and to create an enabling environment for India’s transformation. This will remain the nation’s purpose for a long time to come, so long as India has poor, illiterate people who live insecure lives threatened by disease and who cannot fulfil their potential. Why should many Indians live in what Juvenal called ‘a state of ambitious poverty’ which affects all Indian in so many ways? Until recently India has a vision of both its place in the world and of the order it preferred. That was of an order that was rule-based, democratic, and plural, that would assist in the transformation of India. To this end, India saw itself as a responsible stakeholder in the international system, was a willing contributor to international peacekeeping and to solidarity among developing countries, and was an active participant in the multilateral order. India was one of the greatest beneficiaries of globalisation decades.” Menon is no fan of our newfound desire to be a ‘’vishwaguru”. This isn’t because he doesn’t believe in our civilisational values. It is just that he is a realist. No ‘soft power’ of this nebulous kind is going to help us with our objectives. He argues: “For the last few years, however, India seems adrift in terms of a vision of India’s role and place in the world. There has been an obsession with India as “a leading power” and its standing in the international order. Spokespersons for the Modi government have spoken of statecraft as “a battle of civilisations, battle of cultures, basically the battle of minds.” They have also concentrated on India’s civilisational glory and spoke of regaining it, PM Modi has spoken since 2015 of India as a vishwaguru, or world teacher. The idea of vishwaguru probably plays well with Modi’s core Hindu constituency at home but is hardly a realistic goal when contemporary India is a net importer of knowledge, is not known for innovation, and must still do a great deal to spread primary education to its people and raise educational standards to acceptable levels in its institutions of learning. Nor is it clear how vishwaguru status would address the immediate problem of livelihood and security that the Indian people and nation face. Becoming a vishwaguru is hardly the answer to India’s security, economy, and development needs and what they require from the international system. In any case, the first Modi government saw precious little done to move India towards this nebulous goal, which may be just as well.  India is and has been an important player on the world stage with its own interest and will continue to be so. And yet, the purpose of our participation in the international community is not to see how many people we can outdo or push down. It is to uplift our own people and to improve their condition…” And lastly, Menon might be among the last of the dying breed of Nehruvian but he is objective about Nehru’s foreign policy lapses: “The narrative about India as a great power seems driven more by a desire for status and recognition than by the outcomes the quest for great-power status is likely to produce for the Indian people, society, state, the subcontinent, and the world. What is missing is a vision of India’s place in the international system and its goals, as Nehru was able to articulate in his time, even though he was not always entirely in touch with the realities of power and therefore saw some of his policies fail.” The book is a wonderful history of our foreign policy written with insight and passion. You might occasionally disagree with his views but, in the end, you are left in no doubt this is a book written by a man who feels deeply for India. India Policy Watch #3: Today’s EhrlichiansInsights on burning policy issues in India— Pranay KotashaneWe consistently write here on why the oft-repeated narrative that India’s population is the root cause of its ills, is problematic. This week, I came across an excerpt in Jason Crawford’s delightful MIT Tech Review article discussing this narrative. He writes:The 1968 book The Population Bomb, by Paul and Anne Ehrlich, opened with a call for surrender: “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate.” In 1970, Paul Ehrlich reinforced the defeatism, saying that in a few years “further efforts will be futile” and “you may as well look after yourself and your friends and enjoy what little time you have left.” Because they saw the situation as hopeless, the Ehrlichs supported a proposal to cut off aid to countries such as India that were seen as not doing enough to limit population growth.This book went on to be a hit in the 1970s. The population alarm it amplified eventually led to the Indira Gandhi government’s draconic sterilisation programmes and China’s one-child policy. Though Ehrlich’s alarmist prediction was falsified, the fear-mongering continues to resonate even today in our policy discourse. Today’s Ehrlichians argue, without batting an eyelid, that states having relatively higher population growth rates should be penalised financially and electorally. Financially, by making the Finance Commission transfers contingent on their population growth rates, just like Ehrlich argued for cutting off aid to India. And electorally, by stalling delimitation of constituencies. Now, there are perfectly good reasons for making Finance Commission grants contingent on the states’ governance record. Similarly, there is a debate to be held whether another round of electoral delimitation might be of any use when our parliamentarians are shackled by the anti-defection law. And yet, it’s the Ehrlichian argument that often gets deployed. At a philosophical level, by making “We, the people” itself a problem, it provides the Indian state with a ready excuse for its underperformance. At a factual level, it ignores that India’s population growth rates across states are on a decline. All states are at different points of the same journey. We should shun these Ehrlichian notions. They became irrelevant a long time ago. PS: It turns out that linking fiscal transfers to population control was also an Emergency creation. The National Population Policy of 1976, among other things, made 8% of the Union government’s assistance to state plans contingent on their performance in family planning. A Framework a Week: Public Policy SolutionismTools for thinking public policy— Pranay KotasthaneThis week, instead of a framework I have a desirable “frame of mind” for participating in Indian public policy discourse. The inspiration comes from the same essay by Jasan Crawford I quoted above. Titled Why I’m a Proud Solutionist, the essay says:“To embrace both the reality of problems and the possibility of overcoming them, we should be fundamentally neither optimists nor pessimists, but solutionists.”..The term “solutionism,” usually in the form of “technocratic solutionism,” has been used since the 1960s to mean the belief that every problem can be fixed with technology. This is wrong, and so “solutionism” has been a term of derision. But if we discard any assumptions about the form that solutions must take, we can reclaim it to mean simply the belief that problems are real, but solvable...Solutionists may seem like optimists because solutionism is fundamentally positive. It advocates vigorously advancing against problems, neither retreating nor surrendering. But it is as far from a Panglossian, “all is for the best” optimism as it is from a fatalistic, doomsday pessimism. It is a third way that avoids both complacency and defeatism, and we should wear the term with pride.”Wise words, these. Given the daunting challenges that India faces, it is easy to fall into the traps of visceral pessimism or unreal optimism. Or to end with sterile conclusions such as problems are complex, “we don’t have enough data”, or “there’s a long historical chain that explains our current problems”. Academics might deride solutionism for its attempt to solve something layered and complicated, libertarians might mistake this mindset for centralisation, and bureaucrats might hate it because some solutions go beyond incrementalism.Each of these criticisms has some merit but the public policy mindset must attempt to learn from them instead of discarding solutionism. Without this mindset, confronting tough trade-offs inherent in every policy alternative becomes impossible; every problem comes across as a wicked one. Moreover, it is easy to find PolicyWTFs — there is no shortage in the Indian context. But a solutionist frame of mind can help us reflect on policy successes instead of limiting ourselves to lampooning policy failures. Finally, a solutionist mindset makes for better stories. Given how stories are so central to human existence, it is important to give chance to the idea that even intractable problems — such as climate change — can be solved. It’s only this belief that can ward off cynicism. HomeWorkReading and listening recommendations on public policy matters[Paper] A well-written review of India’s population control policies by Gabe T Wang[Article] A Smithsonian piece by Charles Mann on the book that incited a worldwide fear of overpopulation[Article] John Lloyd in Quillete on a brand of anti-racism in the UK that’s endangering individual liberty. [Article] Andy Mukherjee writing in The Print on Asset Monetisation: What is the best asset monetisation plan? Modi govt can learn important lessons from Australia Get on the email list at publicpolicy.substack.com

Topics include the strange story of John Pierce, the Capitol Insurrection attorney representing 17 defendants who appears to be missing court dates because he is an anti-vaxer who is on a ventilator, the arrest of several violent offenders in the Capitol Insurrection, including #flaggaitercophater, a California Proud Boy identified by volunteer internet sleuths working to protect electoral democracy in the US from the threat of political violence, an analysis of a controversial Reuters article that relied on anonymous sources to suggest that the FBI has rejected the possibility that more high profile defendants involved in planning "stop the steal" protests would be charged in the Insurrection, a description of the latest developments in the investigation by the House Select Committee to investigate January sixth, and my critique of the failure of political science to adequately address the danger of authoritarian populism in the United States. https://www.lawfareblog.com/justice-department-shouldnt-open-pandoras-box-seditious-conspiracy https://www.emptywheel.net/2021/08/20/reuters-doesnt-mention-terrorism-when-discussing-the-january-6-investigation/

May all be happy —What kind of cruel joke is that?This is Samsara!* * *The second section of the Metta Sutta begins to articulate the meaning of loving kindness in terms of all beings, rather than just human beings, and the potential accomplishments in improved character and function that will flow from their putting into practice the list of seven admonitions in the first section. Isn’t it enough that all beings already exist — must they all be happy as well?If this poem were a song, this second stanza would comprise the refrain, or the bridge, between the other verses, as it does in my musical setting of this lovely, lilting lyric:May all beings be happyMay they be joyous and live in safetyAll living beings whether weak or strongIn high or middle or low realms of existenceSmall or great visible or invisibleNear or far born or to be bornMay all beings be happy“May all beings be happy” comprises the earnest, naively innocent, almost prayer-like refrain, capturing the overall hopefulness and optimism of this small sutra. It also may be the first instance on record of the definition of Buddhist community, or sangha, as all-inclusive, embracing all sentient beings. This is in keeping with the first of the Five Grave Precepts, to affirm life, and avoid killing.But we should be careful to note that Buddha was no Panglossian, best-of-all-possible-worlds, naive dreamer. By promoting the notion that all beings should be happy, he did not mean in some unrealistic, mythical way, or a world in which there is no sickness, aging and death, the cardinal marks of dukkha, or suffering, as it is loosely translated. Loosely, in that mere unsatisfactoriness on the human level does not begin to capture the import and implications of change on a universal level. It is this relentless, primordial change that fuels existence, and we suffer change in our lives, but there is no such existence without change, in spite of optimistic visions of a heavenly afterlife. In this, Buddhism is not pessimistic, nor overly optimistic, but simply realistic.So when Buddha holds out the hope that all beings be happy, it is with the understanding that they be happy with things the way they are, not suggesting that merely saying so will bring about a world without suffering.“May they be joyous and live in safety” seemingly belies this idea, however, notwithstanding that the original Pali might not precisely mean “safety” in the sense that we may interpret it. All beings, after all, will suffer aging, sickness and death. Most will be subject to a violent death at that, at the hands, claws and fangs, of their respective predators in the food chain. So safety, if that was Buddha’s intended meaning, must in some wise not be limited to protecting beings from the ravages of time and circumstance. In fact, safety must include dying, even being killed and eaten, and whatever comes after death, in some overview of reality. In one of the Jataka tales, which were said to relate stories of Buddha’s prior existences — always emphasizing some sort of moral — he offered his body up to be devoured by a starving tigress, in order that she be able to survive, and feed her undernourished cubs. Buddha must have felt safe in death, as well as in life. But there can be no safety from death.“All living beings, whether weak or strong” may differentiate those weaklings who are already suffering aging and sickness from those who are not, the strong, in the natural order of things, from the least capable of protecting themselves to the most invulnerable to predation. Some species may have no natural enemy in the form of a predator, and so are at the top of their respective food chains. With the exception of humankind, that is, who may hunt them down and kill them as a trophy, rather than as subsistence for survival.“In high or middle or low realms of existence,” together with the next two lines, reflect the inchoate biology of the times, further elucidated in the “Twelve Classes of Beings” section of the Surangama Sutra. What is meant by high, low and middle may be subject to some speculation, but I suspect that it would correlate roughly to the food chain, with strong and independent species such as elephants and the big cats at the top, livestock, domesticated animals, and other forms of wildlife in the middle, with rodents and insects at the lowest level then known to exist. It is doubtful that the spectrum of the living would include the bacteria and viruses known to us today, to our dismay, were known at the time of Buddha, though such creatures as tapeworms were, being mentioned in the Surangama.“Small or great, visible or invisible” is another summarizing statement of inclusion, from the smallest flea or mosquito to the largest pachyderm, so prominent in India. Whether invisible simply refers to those who are not obviously evident, but somehow hidden in their natural habitats and hideaways, or indicates a reference to a knowledge of life-forms so small as to be invisible, like mites on the fleas, or even an intuitive grasp of microscopic life, is another speculation perhaps resolvable by scholars of the scientific thinking and models of the time.“Near or far, born or to be born” may similarly indicate an intuitive grasp of the existence of other countries and even vast continents with their differing denizens of the animal kingdom, and some indication that the period of gestation, differing stages of live such as pupae and larvae, et cetera, are all covered in the warm embrace of this wish for universal happiness. That those yet to be born get a special mention suggests that the prior mention of those invisible to the naked eye do not include those still in the womb.“May all beings be happy” is repeated to close this verse, which suggests that it may have been repeated more than once in the original recitation, as was characteristic of most sutras in the oral tradition, before they were committed to writing. The repeat stanzas give everyone a chance to catch up, and to prepare for the next stanza, where the content is going to change. Memorizing these teachings so that you do not have to refer to the printed page gives an insight into this ancient method of propagating the Buddha’s wisdom. You could do worse than to try it for yourself.* * *Elliston Roshi is guiding teacher of the Atlanta Soto Zen Center and abbot of the Silent Thunder Order. He is also a gallery-represented fine artist expressing his Zen through visual poetry, or “music to the eyes.”UnMind is a production of the Atlanta Soto Zen Center in Atlanta, Georgia and the Silent Thunder Order. You can support these teachings by PayPal to donate@STorder.org. Gassho.Producer: Kyōsaku Jon Mitchell

Read the article or watch the video about this podcast. It's helpful to see the graphs.  I copied the article and graphs below, but use this link if the images don't pop up in your podcast player. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3k4CTL6fowA 8 Flaws in Bitcoin's Stock-to-Flow Model Will Doom It I love Bitcoin. Nothing would make me happier than to see one of Plan B's optimistic stock-to-flow (S2F/STF) models become an accurate predictor of Bitcoin's price. Up until now, there has been a non-spurious relationship between stock-to-flow and bitcoin's price. That's one reason it's such a compelling narrative. I hope I'm wrong, but, inevitably, BTC's stock-to-flow models will diverge dramatically from their predicted trendline. This article doesn't distinguish between the original S2F model and the latest S2FX model since they share a similar concept. FYI: I am writing this while the world is counting down the hours to bitcoin's third halving, which will occur on May 12, 2020. BTC costs nearly $9,000. What is the hypothesis of bitcoin's stock-to-flow model? Bitcoin, like gold, has a relatively large existing stock compared to the annual flow of new bitcoin mined. Gold, unlike most metals, sees its total stock increase relatively slowly compared to its existing stockpile. There are about 200,000 tons of gold (the stock) and we mine about 3,000 tons of new gold annually. In other words, gold's flow adds about 1-2.5% to its annual stock.  That results in a stock-to-flow ratio of roughly 65. That means that if halted gold mining today, it would take us to 65 years to consume the existing stock. I've seen lower and higher S2F estimates, so let's assume that 65 is close enough. Gold's stock to flow is much higher than any other metal, which partly explains why it's so valuable. Bitcoin is similar to gold in that it also has a high stock-to-flow ratio. The amount of newly mined bitcoins is tiny when compared to the existing stock of bitcoins. Therefore, the hypothesis is: as bitcoin's stock-to-flow rises, so will its price.  So far, that's exactly what has happened up until the 2020 Halving. Will the pattern continue? The stock-to-flow tale is such a compelling and powerful narrative that it's become a viral hit among bitcoin fans. I certainly bought into it enthusiastically.  Stock-to-flow models bitcoin's price predictions The original stock-to-flow model predicted that BTC will reach $55,000 in 2020. That means BTC needs to jump 7 times in value in the next 7 months. On April 27, 2020, Plan B presented his BTC S2F Cross Asset (S2FX) Model. The S2FX predicts that by 2024, BTC with be worth an eye-popping $288,000. This sounds too good to be true. This article explains why both stock-to-flow models will soon fail.  Since most people who are reading this don't know me, here are a few facts about me in case you're wondering, "Who the hell is this asshole?": I'm not a newbie. I first bought BTC when it was $250. (My brother bought 10 BTC when it was $1 each - and then got hacked and lost it all). I accurately predicted BTC's 80% price drop in 2018.  I nailed my 2019 prediction within $33.  I'm a Harvard MBA, so I like to analyze numbers.  8 problems with Plan B's stock-to-flow bitcoin models For those who don't like to read, you can watch the video:   The list goes from the least important problem to the most important problem.  Problem #8: Not everyone agrees on what is gold's stock-to-flow ratio Although most quants agree that gold's stock-to-flow ratio is in the 60s, a few believe it's much higher. For example, Philip Barton, a gold analyst, argues that gold's stock to flow is between 400 and 800! Admittedly, Barton is an outlier. The consensus is that gold's stock-to-flow ranges between 50 and 70. Still, it's worth noting that some believe there is far more stock out there than we realize. How could gold's stock-to-flow ratio be 800? The main reasoning is that when humans first started collecting gold, there was a lot of low-hanging fruit. Enormous gold nuggets were easy to grab in the streams and other sources. It's reasonable to assume that for billions of years, gold nuggets just sat in the streams since no animal valued them. When humans began collecting gold, the global gold stock must have soared exponentially. Its curve must have looked like the first decade of bitcoin's supply curve. That's why Barton and others believe that gold's stock-to-flow ratio is 10 times higher than what most people think it is. If that's true, then bitcoin's stock-to-flow model is somewhat inaccurate since it predicts that bitcoin will exceed gold's stock-to-flow ratio by 2025.     This problem is the least of all the problems with bitcoin's stock-to-flow narrative. It gets worse. Problem #7: Gold's stock-to-flow isn't fixed Plan B presents timelines that show bitcoin's ever-rising stock-to-flow ratio. In those charts, he depicts gold (and silver) as a single data point, as if their stock-to-flow ratios are constant.  For example, in Plan B's chart below, you'll see how bitcoin's stock-to-flow ratio has risen over 10 years. Meanwhile, on that chart, Plan B depicts gold stock-to-flow (SF) fixed at 62 and silver's SF 22.  Bitcoin's stock-to-flow model gives you the impression that gold's stock-to-flow is nearly constant. The reality is that gold's stock-to-flow ratio is constantly fluctuating. Here's a chart that shows that gold's average stock-to-flow is 66, but it's had a wide range over the last 120 years. Gold's stock-to-flow ratio has gone as low as 45 in 1940 and as high as 90 in 1920. Gold has bounced around those extremes. Problem #6: Gold's stock-to-flow does not drive its price Plan B observed that because bitcoin's mining flow gets cut in half every four years, bitcoin's stock-to-flow ratio leaps every 4 years. These halving events boost Bitcoin's stock-to-flow ratio dramatically. It's reasonable to assume that the contracting supply is fueling the BTC's dramatic price rise. Intuitively, the stock-to-flow model makes sense once you conduct a simple thought experiment. Imagine if the flow of gold suddenly slowed to a trickle. Instead of 3,000 tons of gold being mined annually, we only managed to dig 3 tons of gold each year.  What do you predict would happen to gold's price? It would skyrocket, right? That's because investors, national banks, jewelry makers, phone makers (0.034 grams of gold in each phone), and other industries that use gold would have to fight over a (nearly) fixed supply.    Still, if the stock to flow ratio were such a great price predictor, then we should see gold analysts use it all the time. But they don't. Gold bugs only cite gold's stock-to-flow to help explain why gold has monetary value. But they don't use it to predict gold's price.  That's because, as you can see from Voima's chart below, gold's stock-to-flow ratio is sometimes uncorrelated to gold's price. The above chart is a bit misleading because it only shows the nominal price of gold, which, prior to 1971, was fixed by the government. Below, is the real, inflation-adjusted price of gold. When you examine the red line, overlay the cyclical stock-to-flow line over it. You'll see no correlation.   For example, in the graph above, you can see that the STF hit a high of 95 around 1920. But below, you can see the inflation-adjusted price is rather low in the 1920s. You'll see the opposite when you compare the 1940 numbers. In short, gold's price is uncorrelated to its stock-to-flow ratio.  I haven't read a single gold expert argue that stock to flow drives the price of gold over the years.  However, according to the S2F model, the alleged driver of bitcoin's price rise is its ever-increasing stock-to-flow ratio. As bitcoin's stock-to-flow ratio goes up, bitcoin's price follows. That is the thesis. That implies that if bitcoin's stock-to-flow ever stabilizes, then its price should stabilize too. Gold's stock-to-flow and price history tells a different story. Over the last 120 years, gold's STF ratio has gone up and down in a relatively narrow range. However, gold's inflation-adjusted price has gone all over the place.  Problem #5: Some metals with extremely low stock-to-flow ratios are worth more than gold In the chart below, Plan B noted the stock-to-flow of other metals besides gold and silver: By one estimate, platinum has a measly stock-to-flow ratio of 1.1. This surprised me because, in Dungeons & Dragons, one platinum piece is worth 10 gold pieces (back when I played, the roleplaying game used a 5:1 ratio). In reality, it's not that big of a difference. Still, ounce-to-ounce, platinum usually costs more than gold. It's the same story with palladium. Palladium has a paltry stock-to-flow ratio of 0.4. But you wouldn't guess that after looking at its price versus gold and platinum.  Therefore, there's clearly a disconnect between stock-to-flow and price in the world of precious metals.  That's why metal quants and forecasters hardly mention stock-to-flow when making price predictions.   Some may say that palladium and platinum are commodities whereas gold's high stock-to-flow ratio puts it in a different category: a monetary metal. True, but it raises some concerns about how tightly we should link stock-to-flow to the price. Stock to flow is important, but it's not the main driver behind the price of metals. It's just one of many important factors. Problem #4: STF doesn't explain the prices of other cryptocurrencies Not only does stock-to-flow explain why palladium and platinum are often worth more than gold despite having tiny stock-to-flow ratios, but it also fails to explain the value of other cryptocurrencies. In the vast universe of shitcoins, there are some that have a stock-to-flow ratio that is much higher than bitcoin and gold. If not, we could invent one tomorrow. But that wouldn't make it valuable. Jan Nieuwenhuijs makes exactly that point in my interview with him (see it below). He says that we could create a cryptocurrency that halves every day instead of every four years. We could engineer one that has a stock-to-flow of 50,000. However, unless there's demand, that cryptocurrency would be worthless. Problem #3: STF assumes that bitcoin's demand continues to grow exponentially The Achilles heel of bitcoin's stock-to-flow model is that it only looks at supply.  Economics 101 teaches you that the price of anything is driven by supply and demand. If you only know the supply, you cannot predict the price.  Jan Nieuwenhuijs is a gold guru who is also a Dutchman like Plan B. Jan said it succinctly, "If there is no demand for something, the value is zero." In other words, Bitcoin's tightening supply is only half the story. Since its genesis, bitcoin has enjoyed a robust, growing demand. Indeed, bitcoin's demand has usually outstripped the supply, which explains why bitcoin's value has been rising despite its double-digit inflation rate throughout the 2010s.   The stock-to-flow model will be accurate provided that the demand continues to grow exponentially as it has for the last 10 years. However, as Facebook is discovering, there are fewer than 8 billion potential customers on this planet. Bitcoin will ultimately reach market saturation. But long before that, it will run into a much more serious barrier...  Problem #2: STF underestimates the powers that be The stock-to-flow model underestimates the challenge of maintaining the same exponential growth as your size increases.  When bitcoin went from a $1 million market cap to a $100 million market cap, the world hardly noticed or cared.  Going from a $100 billion market cap to a $10 trillion market cap is also 100x growth, but it is orders of magnitude more difficult to do. That's because if bitcoin has a $10 trillion market cap, it's no longer a fly in the room. It's an elephant in the room. That would make bitcoin's market equal to the 3,000-year-old gold market! In the What Bitcoin Did podcast, Plan B told the host Peter McCormack that bitcoin "is not a toy anymore." True. When it was a "toy" in the 2010s, the power players kept a wary eye on it, but they hoped it would stay small or disappear. If bitcoin manages to grow into the next phase transition, it will step on many toes that have sharp claws. Bitcoin will disrupt industries, but not without a fight. Bitcoin will survive but will suffer blackeyes and slower growth as a result.  In the next phase transition, bitcoin will begin to bump its elbows against many entrenched powers: regulators, governments, banks, tax authorities, Western Union, financial services, environmentalists, gold bugs, the FBI, the CIA, and grumpy old baby boomers. If bitcoin threatens them, they will do whatever it takes to stop bitcoin and preserve the status quo.  Bitcoin fans underestimate how powerful these entities are. Although these powerful organizations cannot destroy bitcoin, they will slow down bitcoin's adoption (i.e., the demand). They will erect troublesome roadblocks. They will impede (and perhaps stop) bitcoin's ability to continue rising to the next "phase transition." It's naive to underestimate these future challenges, but the stock-to-flow model ignores them. To be realistic, the stock-to-flow model ought to have some "deceleration factor" in the calculation. That's because each "phase transition" becomes progressively more difficult to achieve.  Problem #1: S2F defies physics  Some critics say that the stock-to-flow model will break in 2140, which is when we cannot mine new bitcoins. At that point, the S2F model predicts that the price of bitcoin will go to infinity.  Although that is a problem, bitcoin's stock-to-flow model is doomed to break at least 100 years before that date. Bitcoin's stock-to-flow model predicts exponential growth into the foreseeable future. Such sprightly growth is necessary for bitcoin to hit the $55,000 target in 2020 and its $288,000 target in 2024. Bitcoin has already been the best performing investment in the 2010s. For the stock-to-flow model to continue working, bitcoin will need to be the best performing asset in every single decade in this century. Pick any asset that has skyrocketed exponentially. It could be the stocks from technology companies, gold in the 1970s, or tulips a long time ago. Every single time, without fail, the asset's growth slows and never consistently regains its fierce rise. It might occasionally have other growth spurts, but a sustained, nonstop rise never happens. However, the stock-to-flow model predicts dramatic exponential growth for several decades. According to digitalikNet's S2F projection, in 2050, one bitcoin will be worth more than $1 trillion! Two things would have to happen for such a Panglossian scenario to occur: Bitcoin's price would have to double every year, on average, for the next 30 years. That's 30 doublings! No asset has ever come close to such a performance. Maybe pre-IPO Microsoft or Google or Walmart had such a rise for 10 years. But doublings become extremely difficult once an asset becomes large. We would need to invent nuclear fusion reactors and become a Type 1 Civilization. Bitcoin consumes vast amounts of energy. The higher the price goes, the more it consumes.  Unless Bitcoin solves its energy consumption problem, its growth will suffer. It doesn't matter if that environmental critique is correct or not. If the powers that be want to destroy bitcoin, they can use bitcoin's hungry energy consumption as an excuse to ban it or tax it prohibitively. "Stop bitcoin to stop global warming!" lobbyists will cry. Overcoming that challenge will slow bitcoin's growth. The current world economy is nearly $100 trillion. If one bitcoin were worth $1 trillion, then just 10 bitcoins would be equal to the 2020 global economy. In 2050, there will be about 20 million bitcoins. Therefore, in 2050, if the stock-to-flow prediction is correct, then the bitcoin's market cap would be $1 trillion x 20 million coins = 20 x 1018 If we make the rosy assumption that the world economy grows 10-fold between 2020 and 2050, then we will have a $1,000 trillion economy or a $1015 world economy. Therefore, the bitcoin market cap would be 1,000 times more than the total global economy - which is impossible. In short, the stock-to-flow model is doomed. The S2F price prediction may be right in a perfect storm I want S2F to be right. I would be thrilled to be wrong. Let's try to imagine a scenario where it proves to be prescient.  Bitcoin may follow the next two stock-to-flow predictions if demand stays at a feverish pitch. For that to happen, we'll need the global economy to collapse, the dollar to devalue, governments to confiscate people's wealth, and widespread pandemonium. Less than 1% of humans own bitcoin. And most who do, don't own much relative to their wealth.  If new buyers flood the market just as Bitcoin truly begins hardening its monetary policy, then that will create a perfect storm for bitcoin to continue its improbable rise. Hyperinflation will increase the nominal value of the dollar and we'll get into the trillions quite quickly.  That reminds of a few years ago when I held a fat stack of 100-billion-dollar bills. Lessons from the Rainbow Chart  Check out the whimsical, but surprisingly accurate, Bitcoin Rainbow Chart below.  I love what its creator said about the Rainbow Chart: "The color bands follow a logarithmic regression, but are otherwise completely arbitrary and without any scientific basis. In other words: It will only be correct until one day it isn’t anymore." The same can be said with the stock-to-flow model. Setting expectations about bitcoin's stock-to-flow model Plan B would probably say that I'm missing the point. In the What Bitcoin Did podcast, Plan B told the host Peter McCormack that he "accepts that models will break." Plan B also recited two proverbs: All models are wrong, but some are useful. I'd rather be roughly right than exactly wrong. Well said. Furthermore, Plan B set modest expectations. He said, "I'd be happy if it would only forecast the next halving or the next two halvings correctly. That would be very useful." True.  IMO #bitcoin 2020 halving will be like 2012 & 2016. As per S2F model I expect 10x price (order of magnitude, not precise) 1-2 yrs after the halving. Halving will be make-or-break for S2F model. I hope this halving will teach us more about underlying fundamentals & network effects pic.twitter.com/kiTdN0n3Lu — PlanB (@100trillionUSD) April 16, 2020   Plan B predicted that the "halving will be make-or-break" his stock-to-flow model. I hope it will make it, but unfortunately, I believe it will break it.  I predict that there's a 70% chance that bitcoin's stock-to-flow model will break in 2020 and a 95% chance that it will break by 2024. Each 4-year step (at the halving) gets progressively more difficult for the price to keep up. In 2025, if bitcoin isn't worth $1 million, S2F is dead. The last big jump of this decade predicts that one bitcoin will be worth $50 million by 2029. Only hyperinflation will get us there. So where will Bitcoin's price go? I commend Plan B for offering a model to help understand bitcoin's past and future. Whenever you criticize something, you ought to offer a solution. So I will. My prediction is even less scientific than the Rainbow Chart.  Beware of all price predictions, including mine although I've been accurate in my annual predictions (but I've only had two).  I am certain that Bitcoin will continue to rise and baffle its many critics. It will march toward a $10 trillion market cap. It just won't do it as fast as the stock-to-flow model predicts.   On December 31, 2019, I predicted that bitcoin would end above $10,000 in 2020 and that there's a 30% chance that it will close above $20,000. I also predicted that it will reach $100,000 in this decade. Such predictions make my friends chuckle and shake their heads. They say I'm naively optimistic about this "imaginary money and Ponzi scheme."  Meanwhile, stock-to-flow fans laugh at my predictions for being too conservative. They believe BTC will hit $100,000 by May 2021 and $50 million by 2029.  In between those two predictions is Tim Draper, who predicted that bitcoin will hit $250,000 in 2023. The main reason I'm more conservative than many bitcoin fans is that I expect entrenched powers to take off their gloves and pummel bitcoin. Bitcoin will survive, but its growth will take a hit.  Besides, a 14x return in a decade would be quite spectacular. Most assets would be happy with a 2-3x return in 10 years. Conclusion The stock-to-flow model has been a novel way of looking at bitcoin's early, meteoric years. However, it will soon break because it predicts nonstop doubling year after year. Our solar system prohibits nonstop doubling.  Let's be happy with a 14x return in the 2020s. That would result in a $100,000 BTC price in 2029. Still, I secretly hope I'm wrong and that the stock-to-flow model is right. Additional information Read all 3 of Plan B's articles. Become one of Plan B's 100,000+ followers on Twitter. Jan Nieuwenhuijs, a gold researcher and early bitcoin adopter, discussed bitcoin's stock-to-flow in my interview with him: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XErx5c-DxHk Thanks to the Gold Broker for several of these graphs. Also, I copied Rob Wolfram's daily S2F graph.  Here is a more quantitative critique of the stock-to-flow model. If you like this podcast/video, subscribe and share!  On social media, my username is always ftapon. Follow me on: http://facebook.com/ftapon http://twitter.com/ftapon http://youtube.com/user/ftapon http://pinterest.com/ftapon http://tumblr.com/ftapon My Patrons sponsored this show! Claim your monthly reward by becoming a patron at http://Patreon.com/FTapon Rewards start at just $2/month! If you prefer to do a one-time contribution, you can send it to my PayPal at FT@FrancisTapon.com If you prefer giving me Bitcoin, then please send BTC to my tip jar: 3EiSBC2bv2bYtYEXAKTkgqZohjF27DGjnV What do you think of the stock-to-flow model? Leave a comment below.

Panglossian "excessively optimistic.” in corona crazy.

RBI governor Shaktikanta Das  outlines that growth for RBI is a matter of highest priority. Given there are sectoral issues and external global headwinds , it is advisable to look ahead in terms of opportunities.  The point he makes that it isn't necessary to be overtly optimistic for the sake of optimism. Here he mentions the famous Panglossian countenance which translates into excessive optimism. But the million dollar question is , where there exists evidence of real slowdown how much of an impact will his statement make?

In this episode I cross swords with John Samples of the Cato Institute on Silicon Valley's efforts to disadvantage conservative speech and what to do about it. I accuse him of Panglossian libertarianism; he challenges me to identify any way in which bringing government into the dispute will make things better. I say government is already in it, citing TikTok's People's Republic of China-friendly “community standards” and Silicon Valley's obeisance to European standards on hate speech and terror incitement. Disagreeing on how deep the Valley's bias runs, we agree to put our money where our mouths are: I bet John $50 that Donald J. Trump will be suspended or banned from Twitter by the end of the year in which he leaves office. There's a lot of news in the Roundup. David Kris explains the background of the first CLOUD Act agreement that may be signed this year with the UK. Nate Jones and I ask, “What is the president's beef with CrowdStrike, anyway?” And find a certain amount of common ground on the answer. This Week in Counterattacks in the War on Terror: David and I recount the origins and ironies of Congress's willingness to end the NSA 215 phone surveillance program. We also take time to critique the New York Times's wide-eyed hook-line-and-sinker ingestion of an EFF attack on the FBI's use of National Security Letters. Edward Snowden's got a new book out, and the Justice Department wants to make sure he never collects his royalties. Nate explains. I'm just relieved that I will be able to read it without having to shoplift it. And it seems to be an episode for challenges, as I offer Snowden a chance to be interviewed on the podcast—anytime, anywhere, Ed! Matthew Heiman explains the latest NotPeya travail for FedEx: A shareholder suit alleging that the company failed to disclose how much damage the malware caused to its ongoing business.  Evan Abrams gives a hint about the contents of Treasury's 300-page opus incorporating Congress's overhaul of CFIUS into the CFR. I credit David for inspiring my piece questioning how long end-to-end commercial encryption is going to last, and we note that even the New York Times seems to be questioning whether Silicon Valley's latest enthusiasm is actually good for the world. Matthew tells us that China may have a new tool in the trade war—or at least to keep companies toeing the party line: The government is assigning social credit scores to businesses.  Finally, Matthew outlines France's OG take on international law and cyber conflict. France opens up some distance between its views and those of the United States, but everyone will get a chance to talk at even greater length on the topic, as the U.N. gears up two different bodies to engage in yet another round of cyber-norm-building.   Download the 280th Episode (mp3).  You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed! As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@steptoe.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of the firm.

Juliette Ferry-Danini est dans la dernière phase de sa thèse en philosophie de la médecine, sur le rôle de l'humanisme et de l'empathie. Vous pouvez également la retrouver sur YouTube et Twitter. YouTube : https://www.youtube.com/c/Elophee Twitter : @FerryDanini et @CuteThesis Site pro : https://jferrydanini.wordpress.com/ Les recommandations de Juliette : Monsieur Phi : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqA8H22FwgBVcF3GJpp0MQw/ Nexus VI : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-UThnwzBI5ApzVG4MY7VQ Facebook : https://www.facebook.com/Science4Allorg/ Twitter : https://twitter.com/science__4__all Tipeee : https://www.tipeee.com/science4all Mes goodies : https://shop.spreadshirt.fr/science4all Mes dates à venir : https://www.dropbox.com/s/t3abghdmh5964sx/Actu.txt?dl=0 La formule du savoir (mon livre) : https://laboutique.edpsciences.fr/produit/1035/9782759822614/La%20formule%20du%20savoir A Roadmap for the Value-Loading Problem https://arxiv.org/abs/1809.01036 Probablement? en audio : http://playlists.podmytube.com/UC0NCbj8CxzeCGIF6sODJ-7A/PLtzmb84AoqRQ0ikLb4yC4lKgjeDEIpE1i.xml Moi en podcast avec Mr Phi : Version YouTube : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCNHFiyWgsnaSOsMtSoV_Q1A Version Audio : http://feeds.feedburner.com/Axiome Sous-titres sur les autres vidéos : http://www.youtube.com/timedtext_cs_panel?tab=2&c=UC0NCbj8CxzeCGIF6sODJ-7A Si vous voulez rigoler, le devoir de L3 de Juliette sur la barbe de Gandalf (en exclusivité et avec les fautes d’orthographe comprises) : https://jferrydanini.files.wordpress.com/2019/03/gandalf-porte-il-une-barbe-fautes-comprises.pdf Si vous voulez un mal de crâne, le mémoire de M2 de Juliette : https://www.academia.edu/7719376/Pain_and_Intentionality_-_MA_Dissertation_english_version_ Article encyclopédique en anglais sur la douleur (philosophie de l’esprit contemporaine) : https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pain/ Article vulgarisé (par Juliette) en français sur la douleur : http://encyclo-philo.fr/douleur-gp/ Pour un aperçu de la philosophie de la biologie : https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/biology-philosophy/ Lewontin, “The units of selection”, 1970, Annual review of Ecology and Systematics, 1 :1-18. https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.es.01.110170.000245?journalCode=ecolsys.1 Juliette a mélangé Gould et Lewontin, elle pensait aussi à cet article, co-écrit avec Lewontin (1979) : S. J. Gould and R. C. Lewontin, “The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: a critique of the adaptationist programme,”, 1979, Proceedings of the Royal Society B, Biological sciences, 205, 1161. https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.1979.0086 Article d’encyclopédie sur le sujet : https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/selection-units/ Sur les fonctions : Un résumé historique du débat : http://petergodfreysmith.com/PGS-ModernHistFn.pdf Un article encyclopédie académique sur les fonctions : https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/teleology-biology/ Larry Wright, “Functions”, The Philosophical Review, Vol. 82, No. 2, 1973, pp. 139‑168 https://www.jstor.org/stable/2183766origin=crossref&seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents Robert Cummins, “Functional analysis,” The Journal of Philosophy, Volume 72, Issue 20, November 1975, , pp. 741-765. https://www.pdcnet.org/jphil/content/jphil_1975_0072_0020_0741_0765 Karen Neander, "Functions as Selected Effects: The Conceptual Analyst's Defense," Philosophy of Science 58, no. 2, 1991, pp. 168-184. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/289610 Sur la fiction : https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fictionalism/ Sur le fictionnalisme modal (David Lewis) https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fictionalism-modal/ Colin Radford and Michael Weston, “How Can We Be Moved by the Fate of Anna Karenina?”, 1975, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes Vol. 49, pp. 67-93 https://www.jstor.org/stable/4106870 Une réponse au paradoxe de Radford du point de vue de la psychologie : Cova and Teroni, “Is the paradox of fiction soluble in psychology?”, 2016, Philosophical Psychology, Volume 29. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09515089.2016.1164306 Sur l’empathie : “Against Empathy,” Prinz, The southern journal of philosophy, 2011, 49, 1, pp. 214-33 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.2041-6962.2011.00069.x (d’ailleurs j’aurais du dire que Prinz est un partisan du sentimentalisme en éthique) Against Empathy, Bloom, 2016, HarperCollins, New York. https://www.amazon.com/Against-Empathy-Case-Rational-Compassion/dp/0062339338 Juliette a un peu mélangé sur l’exemple de l’enfant (il n’y a pas question de greffe). Pour ceux qui voudraient retrouver la référence c’est page 86, il reprend l’expérience faite par C. Daniel Batson et al (1995). Medical Nihilism, Stegenga, 2018, Oxford University Press. https://www.amazon.com/Medical-Nihilism-Jacob-Stegenga/dp/0198747047

In our Season 2 premiere, we read Hot Mess by Jen Huszcza. Join Robert, Sharon, Liz, and Joe for this fun and clever comedy set in the waiting room of Hell.  If you would like us to read your play on the podcast, please send it to literary@panglossian.org for consideration. For more information about our stage shows, visit www.Panglossian.org.  Special thanks to THE SOUND TECHS WHO SHALL NOT BE NAMED

Declassification Dominoes. Rod Rosenstein on the Rack. Now claims he was only 'joking' about wearing a wire around POTUS. Did McCabe feed the NYT story, and has McCabe turned on Rosenstein? Rep. Goodlatte issues subpoenas for the McCabe Memos. Trump reports "two very good allies" have called to beg him NOT to declassify. George Papadopoulos goes on warpath against Meddling Brits & Aussies. Slams Alexander Downer from Down Under. Meanwhile, we offer our Panglossian interpretation of Trump's decision to mitigate the immediacy of his Declassification Directive. Inspector General Horowitz now involved. Neutralizing influence, but Trump holds the cards. Also, we listen to Devin Nunes outline what shall soon be revealed from the unredactions. Heavy stuff. How soon? Plus, President Trump holds another packed, high energy rally in Springfield, Missouri. Live excerpts from the Ozarks. Add it all up -- Democrats' Worst Nightmares coming to pass, headed unto Midterms. With Listener Calls & Music via The Beatles, Maroon 5 and Mike Ness. [Matt Dunn guest-hosting the Steffan Tubbs Show]See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

ESPN baseball analyst and ZiPS projections proprietor Dan Szymborski joins Steve to talk about the art of player projections, plus integration, an awkward moment at the doctor’s office, and World War II deflects Buddy Lewis from both the Hall of Fame and the game itself.TABLE OF CONTENTSA question of courage: Jackie Robinson, Vic Power, Elston Howard, Panglossian racism*What Buddy Lewis saw*Dan Szymborski: Projections of spring*“Deadly Accurate”*PECOTA PTSD*Advances in projection systems*Projecting Aaron Judge*The useable universe of ballplayers*The Pacific Coast League in the 1920s*Filling in Ted Williams’ war years using retro-projections*Projecting Rafael Palmeiro in 2018*Projecting older players*The Rule of Backup Catchers*Herm Winningham?*Are projection systems making the draft more rational?*“You can always tell an old usenet person”*Sabermetrics won*WAR*A statistician’s education*Inventing ZiPS*Holding projections accountable (and letting them off the hook)*Ryon Healy’s zero WAR projection*Projecting the 2018 Yankees bullpen*Projecting relievers*Projecting Shohei Otani*ZiPS vs. Law*Goodbyes.

Thanks to mobile phones, getting online is easier and cheaper than ever. In After Access: Inclusion, Development, and a More Mobile Internet (MIT Press, 2015), Jonathan Donner challenges the optimistic narrative that mobile phone will finally close the digital divide. How we log on, how long we stay, what we choose to do, what we can do – all are shaped by our environments, resources and digital literacies. After Access examines the implications of the shift to a more mobile, more available Internet throughout the developing world. Donner addresses these implications specifically for socioeconomic development and broad-based inclusion in a global society. He offers a note of caution about the Panglossian views of mobile phones arguing that access and effective use are not the same thing, and the digital world does not run on mobile handsets alone. Donner, a Senior Director of Research at Caribou Digital, a UK-based consultancy focused on building inclusive digital economies in the developing world. After Access draws on ethnographic and survey research in South Africa and India, as well as the burgeoning literature from the ICT4D (Internet and Communication Technologies for Development) and mobile communication communities. It introduces a conceptual framework for understanding effective use of the Internet by those whose “digital repertoires” contain exclusively mobile devices. In showing that there is no singular internet experience, Donner argues that both the potentialities and constraints of the shift to a more mobile Internet are important considerations for scholars and practitioners interested in internet use in the developing world. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Thanks to mobile phones, getting online is easier and cheaper than ever. In After Access: Inclusion, Development, and a More Mobile Internet (MIT Press, 2015), Jonathan Donner challenges the optimistic narrative that mobile phone will finally close the digital divide. How we log on, how long we stay, what we choose to do, what we can do – all are shaped by our environments, resources and digital literacies. After Access examines the implications of the shift to a more mobile, more available Internet throughout the developing world. Donner addresses these implications specifically for socioeconomic development and broad-based inclusion in a global society. He offers a note of caution about the Panglossian views of mobile phones arguing that access and effective use are not the same thing, and the digital world does not run on mobile handsets alone. Donner, a Senior Director of Research at Caribou Digital, a UK-based consultancy focused on building inclusive digital economies in the developing world. After Access draws on ethnographic and survey research in South Africa and India, as well as the burgeoning literature from the ICT4D (Internet and Communication Technologies for Development) and mobile communication communities. It introduces a conceptual framework for understanding effective use of the Internet by those whose “digital repertoires” contain exclusively mobile devices. In showing that there is no singular internet experience, Donner argues that both the potentialities and constraints of the shift to a more mobile Internet are important considerations for scholars and practitioners interested in internet use in the developing world. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Thanks to mobile phones, getting online is easier and cheaper than ever. In After Access: Inclusion, Development, and a More Mobile Internet (MIT Press, 2015), Jonathan Donner challenges the optimistic narrative that mobile phone will finally close the digital divide. How we log on, how long we stay, what we choose to do, what we can do – all are shaped by our environments, resources and digital literacies. After Access examines the implications of the shift to a more mobile, more available Internet throughout the developing world. Donner addresses these implications specifically for socioeconomic development and broad-based inclusion in a global society. He offers a note of caution about the Panglossian views of mobile phones arguing that access and effective use are not the same thing, and the digital world does not run on mobile handsets alone. Donner, a Senior Director of Research at Caribou Digital, a UK-based consultancy focused on building inclusive digital economies in the developing world. After Access draws on ethnographic and survey research in South Africa and India, as well as the burgeoning literature from the ICT4D (Internet and Communication Technologies for Development) and mobile communication communities. It introduces a conceptual framework for understanding effective use of the Internet by those whose “digital repertoires” contain exclusively mobile devices. In showing that there is no singular internet experience, Donner argues that both the potentialities and constraints of the shift to a more mobile Internet are important considerations for scholars and practitioners interested in internet use in the developing world. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Thanks to mobile phones, getting online is easier and cheaper than ever. In After Access: Inclusion, Development, and a More Mobile Internet (MIT Press, 2015), Jonathan Donner challenges the optimistic narrative that mobile phone will finally close the digital divide. How we log on, how long we stay, what we choose to do, what we can do – all are shaped by our environments, resources and digital literacies. After Access examines the implications of the shift to a more mobile, more available Internet throughout the developing world. Donner addresses these implications specifically for socioeconomic development and broad-based inclusion in a global society. He offers a note of caution about the Panglossian views of mobile phones arguing that access and effective use are not the same thing, and the digital world does not run on mobile handsets alone. Donner, a Senior Director of Research at Caribou Digital, a UK-based consultancy focused on building inclusive digital economies in the developing world. After Access draws on ethnographic and survey research in South Africa and India, as well as the burgeoning literature from the ICT4D (Internet and Communication Technologies for Development) and mobile communication communities. It introduces a conceptual framework for understanding effective use of the Internet by those whose “digital repertoires” contain exclusively mobile devices. In showing that there is no singular internet experience, Donner argues that both the potentialities and constraints of the shift to a more mobile Internet are important considerations for scholars and practitioners interested in internet use in the developing world. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices