upvote
My theory is that the establishment sees the oncoming economic crisis and is desperately trying to plan for managing the fallout. They don’t like Flock or its backers, but they feel they have no choice. Same as why Palantir is gradually being rehabilitated in the mainstream press.

You’ll also notice that Anduril is quickly being accepted now that we’re expending munitions faster than our replacement rate.

reply
> trying to plan for managing the fallout

Put in a less polite way, they're preparing for the metaphorical pitchforks and torches held by mobs of the common people which might manifest themselves in a more kinetic format.

reply
Yes. My hope is that the rare earths shortage, memory shortage, and current focus on munitions will delay the era of drone-based policing until after the crisis.
reply
I suspect the crisis isn't a short term economic shock but a long term decline from resource decline, possible water/food shortages amplified by climate blow back. Something that will not end in your lifetime or the next generations.

Military's, intelligence agencies and actuaries have been warning about this for decades now and their language is getting very direct on this and the time lines nowadays.

If you have ever been caught in a rip while swimming, there is a moment when you suddenly getting a sucking sensation as you transition from stable waters into an outward flow. I am starting to think we are in that transitional phase on global stability, that the 2030's are not going to be a comfortable time for many.

They are ensuring that potential disruptors can be reigned in if needed. To try and stop things from being even more unpredictable, for better or worse. Buckle up.

You don't build long term surveillance systems and billionaires don't build bunkers for what they think of as a temporary tough situation.

reply
Fair, perhaps I should have said until after the crisis passes its most acute phase. I expect the eventual energy and climate system shock to result in mass unrest and many excess deaths. Meanwhile wars are almost guaranteed, which will further stretch resources. If we make it out of the initial crisis without a strategic nuclear war, we may settle into a period of extended decline that’s relatively stable, though very unpleasant.
reply
I once read about a programming language designed for modelling dynamic numerical systems. The example given was world demographics. It was written in the 1980s or 90s. The output showed quality of life peaking in the 2010s, population peaking in the 2020s or 2030s, and then quality of life and population plummeting.
reply
Could you please link those warnings? I’m interested in institutional forecasts of such challenges in the upcoming decades.
reply
No problem at all, thanks for asking! Two from this year both from the UK.

I really wish I had kept all the others from the US, Europe, Aus/NZ etc. It is a very common theme but they are largely kept quiet and only typically (partially) released through freedom of information requests.

This one from Actuaries UK was one that set off alarm bells. As they advise the insurance industry, they are structured to be politically neutral. The key takeaway is the impacts of 3c temperature rise by 2050 on page 9. The reason this is an issue, we are currently on target to hit that with us likely to pass 2c mid next decade with the rate of warming increasing.

https://actuaries.org.uk/media/r3cporjb/planetary-solvency-c...

This one from the UK government is all about addressing national security regarding this issue. Typically they are advising that they secure their food supplies and hardened up boarders in the next 5 years. Funnily enough Brexit may have given them the power to enforce this much more than they would have otherwise had. But that just means they have built a unique flavor of oppression.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nature-security-a...

I have said it for years now about a lot of countries. They will welcome immigrants with open arms, those arms being machine guns, rockets and drones.

reply
I recommend the Energy Skeptic blog, they often provide sources and links to papers: https://energyskeptic.com/

They also pass my personal test of not advocating for dumb feel-good ideas. Recently they published a well-sourced article on why the US rail system isn’t a good candidate for electrification.

reply
Another great one, at least the earlier stuff was 'Do the Math' by Tom Murphy.

https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/

Was all about just doing the math on energy transitions. He wasn't anti renewable technology but did want to point out how scale is a problem that few understand.

My favorite number of his is, that at 3% growth year over year, we would need all the energy of the Milky way galaxy by the year 13,000. As the galaxy is 100,000 light years across, this would defy physics itself.

reply
Seconded, that’s a good one too. I also recommend Jem Bendell as a palate cleanser, his work is fluffier but it’s all about finding ways to thrive during decline rather than succumbing to doom and gloom.
reply
You are giving them way, way, way too much credit. They are not planning for a future economic crisis.
reply
Pro-Flock bots come out in droves in the replies to any Xitter post that’s even mildly negative towards them too. It’s not the least bit subtle.
reply
Drew Harwell, Douglas MacMillan, and Aaron Schaffer from the Washington Post also wrote a shameful article on this topic on August 4th (the title changed, along with an image of a woman who was harassed to something else). No counterpoint. Total submarine article.
reply
Noticed the same with some media publishing anti-work-from-home articles recently.

"We need the plebs to want to mock people who work from home, to reduce the reticence in coming back to work in the office"

"We need our commercial property values to go back up"

Edited to add:

"Our managers need to _feel_ as if they're actually managing people"

reply
The entire back-to-normal narrative was and still is a total mindfuck:

https://www.thegauntlet.news/p/how-the-press-manufactured-co...

The threat from COVID (and more importantly, long COVID) never went away, but they sure convinced the average person that it did.

Today you can see an N95 in the wild once in awhile, so some people are paying attention, but they are less than 1%. Many others are suffering brain damage, unexplained heart issues, taxed immune systems, etc and have no idea why (nor does their doctor).

reply
Eesh, those are some sobering numbers.
reply
And now that the world's had a look at long COVID - it seems like COVID isn't the only virus that causes it, and a big part of aging is caused by the cumulative damage from viral infections.
reply
It's 2026, the conspiracy theory that business people wanted RTO for office space value has been debunked 100 times. Such a silly, nonsense idea.
reply
That'd be a lot easier to believe if you provided a source, which you should do if you care enough to comment in the first place, I think?

A cursory google suggests that the return-to-office movement is primarily driven by management's desire for voluntary turnover, avoiding the bad press of mass layoffs. But certainly doesn't show that it's 'been debunked 100 times'.

In my own experience, it's been 50/50 a desire for voluntary turnover, and also a control tactic. Employees are easier to strong-arm when they're immersed in the idea that company culture actually matters.

reply
You think that the size of investment firms that own something like, a good sized chunk of midtown Manhattan class A and B commercial real estate aren't capable of deploying social and tradtional-media influence tools to push an agenda to repopulate their office space? That would be a very inaccurate assessment of how large and motivated they are.
reply
If you are willing to believe a nonsense conspiracy like that then there is no way we could have a productive conversation.
reply
You actually don't think that the world's largest REITs hire lobbyists at the municipal, state and federal levels? That's an extremely naive and uninformed position.
reply
Didn't mean to imply that was the only reason, so I've added another reason to my comment.

I haven't come across much of the debunking of the commercial property issue. I would say it's undeniably factor, but we can argue about the scale.

A total of $800 billion—in real terms—of value is at stake by 2030, and, on average, the total value of office space is expected to decline by 26 percent from 2019 to 2030.

https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/real-estate/our-insights...

reply
You think XYZ Company is going to listen to some consultant telling them in a press release that they should go back into the office because some REIT needs more money in it? Why would the CEO of a tech company care at all what the value of their leased office building is? Do you understand how leases and real estate works?
reply
I understand there's significant motivation behind the potential of losing $800 billion in value.

I think those kinds of numbers can have more fundamental implications.

reply
Follow the money. That also shows which media sources you should never trust
reply