Bloomberg Opinion

The White House’s math on the budget bill requires nothing short of an economic miracle. Read the column: https://lnkd.in/eaSbPGCc

One of my favorite data releases is out this month: the U.S. Census Bureau's annual Characteristics of New Housing. I used it to explore the boom in US apartment construction that appears to have peaked last year. It was the biggest year for apartment construction since 1986, and the biggest ever for construction of apartments in big (30 or more unit) buildings. Not so big: the apartments. The median size was 1,006 square feet, the lowest on record (although the record on that only goes back to 1999), with one-bedrooms making up 46% of the total, an all-time high. My latest column, available with a gift link that should be good for the next week, explores whether this flood of small apartments in big buildings is a response to demand or the less-than-optimal product of zoning rules and building codes. https://lnkd.in/ezw2e6BF

A district court judge ruled against three authors who said Anthropic's use of their books (and more than 7 million written by other people) was a breach of copyright. Training large language models with this material was "fair use," Judge Alsup ruled. One argument against Anthropic -- that AI could generate copycat material based on the learnings from the human-authored work -- was thrown out on the grounds that it was "no different" than a child learning the same things and writing her own book. The law, plainly, is broken. An excerpt from today's Bloomberg Opinion column (with a gift link to the full piece below): ** A child might read 10 books a year if we’re lucky. The creation of the books she reads is supported by a parent or school buying them for her. If she decides to write, it’s one of life’s miracles — a chance for her imagination to flow onto the page. Despite being just a child, or perhaps because of it, her writing will be fresh and unique, laden, between the lines or otherwise, with lived experience. The home she grew up in, the friends she’s met, the dreams she has — all will influence how she interprets the contents of the books she has read, determining how she chooses to pass on that knowledge. Her writing will contain contradictions, flaws and humanity. Most important for this debate, her “competing work” is additive. She will contribute. The machine downloads 7 million books and learns nothing — for it cannot learn, at least not in any true sense of the word. It does not contribute; it copies. Sure, it may synthesize information in ways that may surprise us, but it does so only thanks to the hard and uncompensated work of others. It can have no lived, or new, experiences. For sure, a competent new knowledge tool may have been created, but AI doesn’t so much generate new value as it does transfer it — from one place, the original source, to another: itself. That’s not in and of itself a problem; many technologies do this. But this value transfer should command a fee to the originator if the copyright law’s stated goal of advancing original works of authorship is to be met for generations to come. ** #ai #anthropic #fairuse https://lnkd.in/eAT-_DWy

Historians will judge the massive US strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities by trying to answer two questions, which ultimately become inseparable. Was the intervention wise? And was it legitimate? It’s far too early to assess the wisdom of Operation Midnight Hammer — that is, whether it will make the world safer. Stunning as its execution was, the mission’s objective was to end Iran’s ability to make nukes. But even though President Donald Trump keeps boasting that the attacks “obliterated” the Iranian targets, leaks of early intelligence from the Pentagon suggest that the bombing only set the nuclear program back by a few months. If Tehran now hurries to make atomic bombs in secret — and if other countries in the region then build their own nukes for self-protection — the tactical triumph of Midnight Hammer will turn into a strategic disaster. That ambiguity focuses attention on the strike’s legitimacy, in both domestic and international law. Trump implicitly acknowledged that tension with two contrasting statements he made within a few hours. It may not be “be politically correct,” he Truthed just after the attack, but “why wouldn’t there be a Regime change???” This is the language of power in international affairs, unchecked by legitimacy. In a more official medium, he then dutifully declared that “I am providing this report as part of my efforts to keep the Congress fully informed, consistent with the War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-148).” His attack order was legal, he tried to argue, because it was not only “limited in scope and purpose” but also “taken to advance vital United States national interests.” This is the language of lawyers in pursuit of legitimacy. The only international body that could have legitimated Trump’s (or Israel’s) campaign against Iran is the United Nations Security Council, but it did not do so. In fact, the UN Secretary General criticized Midnight Hammer as a “perilous turn,” and several members of the council, all too predictably including China and Russia, condemned the US strikes. The only domestic organ that could have legitimated the strike is Congress, but it wasn’t even given the chance. (As of this writing, the administration had not even briefed Congress.) A number of senators and representatives — even including the odd Republican — are now calling Trump’s strikes unconstitutional.... (Read the whole column with this gift link) Bloomberg Opinion https://bit.ly/3G6w7fF

China kept a low profile during the Iran-Israel conflict - my thoughts on why below, and you can read more here from my column Bloomberg Opinion https://lnkd.in/efn7Hr7s

Mamdani's critics say we'll see a wealth exodus from New York City to Palm Beach if he wins. That logic is twisted, and I explain why in Bloomberg Opinion. https://lnkd.in/eVDrUXG6

“Mass deportation” remains the administration’s unapologetic goal. It’s unpopular, unrealistic and has an obvious alternative. Read today’s editorial: https://lnkd.in/edPgf-Y7

Rooftop solar has suffered two grievous blows in the past few years and appears poised for a coup de grace from Congressional Republicans. On top of higher interest rates and the roll-back of state net metering incentives, federal tax credits look set to be curtailed or eviscerated, depending on last minute changes to the GOP’s tax bill. US rooftop solar has developed in a peculiar, and expensive, way relative to other countries. In part, that’s because it has been shaped by cumbersome incentives and cheap money. The loss of those forces a rethink. Last year, almost half of new rooftop solar customers also took a battery. Therein lies the potential for a reinvention of rooftop solar. Not as a means to get off-grid, but to help that grid as it struggles to meet new demands from datacenters, EVs and the broader project of electrification. Read about it here at Bloomberg Opinion https://lnkd.in/eVaipdU5

In the last few years, we've lived through a pandemic, a land war in Europe, multiple trade wars, and more “once-in-a-generation” events than we used to see in a lifetime. Almost all had one thing in common: massive government involvement. And yet, most CEOs still treat politics as someone else’s job. For decades, American business leaders could afford to ignore politics. They outsourced it to lobbyists, focused on quarterly results, and assumed Washington would stay out of their way. That era is over. The Trump tariffs made that clear. His views on trade were no secret—he’s been demanding high tariffs since 1987. Yet companies reacted with shock when he imposed them. Ford shut down a factory after China retaliated with rare earth export bans. They should’ve seen it coming. Apple did. Apple began ramping up iPhone production in India when it foresaw that relations between the US and China could get much worse. The real problem? Our system isn’t training leaders for this world. Of the top 10 U.S. business schools, only two require MBAs to study politics. Fewer than 2% of Fortune 500 CEOs have political science degrees. Almost none have experience in government. But in a world where national security trumps free trade, and economic policy shifts overnight, political fluency is no longer optional. Boards need to start evaluating CEOs on their understanding of geopolitics. Business schools must teach it. And leaders must learn—fast. Because the biggest risks in business today don’t come from balance sheets. They come from ballot boxes. To read my full article on Bloomberg Opinion visit: https://lnkd.in/ezWFHZ2D Or subscribe to my newsletter for more fresh insights on business and innovation each week: https://lnkd.in/e3gv-wiK

With economic uncertainty reaching feverish highs, the Fed has been put in a very tough spot. And the White House isn't helping. Read today’s editorial: https://lnkd.in/e3dpUh3P