Technology

AS LABOR COSTS TEND TOWARDS ZERO:

The A.I. Disruption Is Actually Here, and It’s Not Terrible (Paul Ford, 2/16/26, NY Times)

November was, for me and many others in tech, a great surprise. Before, A.I. coding tools were often useful, but halting and clumsy. Now, the bot can run for a full hour and make whole, designed websites and apps that may be flawed, but credible. I spent an entire session of therapy talking about it.

The tech industry is a global culture — an identity based on craft and skill. Software development has been a solid middle-class job for a long time. But that may be slipping away. What might the future look like if 100 million, or a billion, people can make any software they desire? Could this be a moment of unparalleled growth and opportunity as people gain access to tech industry power for themselves?

According to the market, the answer is no. Recently, software stocks — Monday.com, Salesforce, Adobe and many others — plummeted all at once; the Nasdaq 100 lost half a trillion dollars in two days. Legal software company stocks slumped recently because Anthropic released tools to automate some legal work. Financial services firms and real estate services — the market keeps devaluing them because traders expect there to be less need for humans at desks in an A.I.-automated future. Why will anyone need all that legacy software when A.I. can code anything up for you in two shakes of a robotic lamb’s tail?

Personally this all feels premature, but markets aren’t subtle thinkers. And I get it. When you watch a large language model slice through some horrible, expensive problem — like migrating data from an old platform to a modern one — you feel the earth shifting. I was the chief executive of a software services firm, which made me a professional software cost estimator. When I rebooted my messy personal website a few weeks ago, I realized: I would have paid $25,000 for someone else to do this. When a friend asked me to convert a large, thorny data set, I downloaded it, cleaned it up and made it pretty and easy to explore. In the past I would have charged $350,000.

The revolution is always ten years away… until you realize it already happened.

THE FUTURE ALREADY HAPPENED…AGAIN:

AI is the future of warfare and US is in the lead (Stephen Bryen, February 17, 2026, Asia Times)


Recently AI has played an important role in several conflicts: the Gaza war (Operation Gideon’s Chariots); US-Israel operations against Iran (Operation Rising Lion); the capture of Nicolas Maduro and his wife in Venezuela (Operation Absolute Resolve); operations to locate and stop “rogue” oil tankers; and the Ukraine war, where AI is playing a major role.

If the US and Israel take action against Iran in the coming days, planning and operations would likely be supported by AI.

AS EVERYONE KNEW BUT HIM AND THE LEFT:

Why Big Oil wants no part of Trump-seized Venezuela (Damian Tobin, February 19, 2026, Asia Times)


After the US captured Venezuela’s president at the start of 2026, Donald Trump promised to “unleash” the country’s oil supply. He wanted companies to invest US$100 billion to get hold of it.

Big Oil though, seems less than keen on that idea, appearing to consider Venezuela too expensive or risky.

TEST LESS:

99% of adults over 40 have shoulder “abnormalities” on an MRI, study finds (Beth Mole, Feb 17, 2026, Ars Technica)

In a study published in JAMA Internal Medicine this week, 99 percent of adults over 40 were found to have at least one abnormality in a rotator cuff on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The rotator cuff is the group of muscles and tendons in a shoulder joint that keeps the upper arm bone securely in the shoulder socket—and is often blamed for pain and other symptoms. The trouble is, the vast majority of people in the study had no shoulder problems.

In other words, it’s normal.

LEVELING UP OPEN INTELLIGENCE:

Building the truth machine (Andy Hall and Elliot, Feb 13, 2026, Free Systems)

The central problem is that the political and policy markets—those arguably most core to the social value proposition of prediction markets—are mostly ghost towns today. […]


For the vast majority of political contracts, there’s almost no one on the other side of the trade. One way to see this: the gap between what buyers are willing to pay and what sellers are asking—a standard measure of how active a market is—typically exceeds 20% of the midpoint price, and is often much higher than that. That’s enormous. In a healthy, liquid market, that gap is no more than a few percentage points at most.

Interestingly, it’s not the case that less liquid markets are necessarily less accurate at predicting outcomes. Sometimes markets stay illiquid precisely because they’re already accurate, and there’s no incentive for new money to enter. Even quite small prediction markets have historically shown strong predictive performance—Wolfers and Zitzewitz documented accurate forecasts from markets with as few as 20 to 60 participants. More recently, Clinton and Huang’s analysis of over 2,500 political contracts from the 2024 election found that PredictIt—the most restricted platform, with position limits of just $850 per contract—correctly predicted 93% of outcomes, compared with 78% for Kalshi and 67% for Polymarket. Markets with more trading activity were not more accurate, controlling for the types of events being traded.

But thin markets are certainly cheaper to manipulate, as I have argued recently. When liquidity is low, a single motivated actor can move prices without anyone around to push back—and in a world where CNN and CNBC are now broadcasting these prices to millions of viewers, that vulnerability matters more than ever.

THE FUTURE ALWAYS HAPPENS FASTER THAN YOU EXPECT:

Quantum computers will finally be useful: what’s behind the revolution (Davide Castelvecchi, 2/10/26, Nature)

The pace of progress in the field has picked up dramatically, especially in the past two years or so, along several fronts. Teams in academic laboratories, as well as companies ranging from small start-ups to large technology corporations, have drastically reduced the size of errors that notoriously fickle quantum devices tend to produce, by improving both the manufacturing of quantum devices and the techniques used to control them. Meanwhile, theorists better understand how to use quantum devices more efficiently.

“At this point, I am much more certain that quantum computation will be realized, and that the timeline is much shorter than people thought,” says Dorit Aharonov, a computer scientist at Hebrew University in Jerusalem. “We’ve entered a new era.”

SUCK IT UP, BUTTERCUP:

‘What I see in clinic is never a set of labels’: are we in danger of overdiagnosing mental illness? (Gavin Francis, 10 Feb 2026, The Guardian)

Research tells us that the human brain hasn’t changed much in the past 300,000 years, and mental suffering has surely been with us for as long as we have experienced mental life. We are all vessels for thoughts, feelings and desires that wash through our minds, influencing our mental state. Some patterns of feeling are recognisable across the millennia, but the labels we use to make sense of the mind and of mental health are always changing – which means there’s always scope to change them for the better.

The subject is important, because according to modern psychiatric definitions, the 21st century is seeing an epidemic of mental illness. The line between health and ill-health of the mind has never been more blurred. A survey in 2019 found that two-thirds of young people in the UK felt they have had a mental disorder. We are broadening the criteria for what counts as illness at the same time as lowering the thresholds for diagnosis. This is not a bad thing if it helps us feel better, but evidence is gathering that as a society it may be making us feel worse.

We have developed a tendency to categorise mild to moderate mental and emotional distress as a necessarily clinical problem rather than an integral part of being human – a tendency that is new in our own culture, and not widely shared with others. Psychiatrists who work across different cultures point out that, in many non-western societies, low mood, anxiety and delusional states are seen more as spiritual, relational or religious problems – not psychiatric ones. By making sense of states of mind through terms that are embedded in community and tradition, they may even have more success at incorporating our crises of mind into the stories of our lives.

Pretend illness beats personal responsibility.