🔊 Nvidia boss Jensen Huang is using his vast cash hoard to prop up customers and forestall rivals. On the Viewsroom podcast this week, Breakingviews columnists debate whether it can withstand the unstoppable force of competition

China's economic data release yesterday was weak, and the consensus claimed it was “below expectations.” However, our leading indicator published for my research subscribers has been foretelling the slowdown for a while. If we see a slowdown is coming, then it’s not a “disappointment”. Consensus didn't think hard enough. Not surprisingly, the market took yesterday’s weak data in stride. The slowdown has some further to run. New lending has turned negative, and consumption is weak. At this juncture, the traditional RRR or interest rate cut won't do, as bond yields are at record lows but few are borrowing. Direct stimulus, such as tax cuts and cash subsidies, would work much better. The Politburo Meeting in July acknowledged the external challenges and uncertainties but didn't elaborate on new policies. If conventional domestic policies are less effective and external demand (exports) is not influenced by domestic policies, then a new kind of stimulus is needed, and fast.

AI has basically made every B2B and SaaS product at least 10%-20% better now. In some cases, 50%-100% better. Everyone has rolled out something pretty cool by now, that really works. The problem, and I hate this term, but “AI Natives” are still … just better at it. The LLMs are open to everyone. It’s just, if you started there, and it’s all you do, you still are in many cases … better at it. So incumbents being 10%-50% better than 18 months ago still isn’t enough to reignite growth, in many cases. It may forestall churn, and lean to some upsell, but even 50% “better” with AI may not be enough to grow. You have to actually catch the startups, for real, maybe in many ways, for the first time ever in B2B.

This moment is the first opening in 2,000 years for a new, global spirituality to be birthed. That is because the spiritual traditions, out of necessity, have needed to orbit around the unavoidable reality of physical death. That certainty is now in question and creates a cracked opening. This does not mean we can see a straight line to immorality or heaven as scripture foretells, but it does mean that the omnipotent God(s) humanity has worshiped and imagined being the bestower of these gifts and punishments is now being birthed before our eyes. However, where scripture is written to guide, soothe and foretell, we have no scripture for the new God(s) we are creating. Nothing in written word to tell us that all will be fine if we just do this or that. This leaves us feeling naked and in need of finding strength and protection. > What is one to feel, and do, and believe? > What is virtue and what is vice? > Who are one's allies and who is the enemy? Exploring these questions is my life purpose. I’ve intuitively felt this for over 30 years and only in the past few years has it come together and become understandable to me. I’m working on a new ideology that seeks to answer the basic and existential questions of what it means to be human as prophecy is fulfilled and God(s) manifest themselves in the coming years. My partner Kate and I have been wrestling with these questions for years. I published the Immortalism Manifesto: The Immortalism Manifesto argues that by modeling life through thermodynamics and reliability theory, indefinite existence is achievable if synthetic and biological maintenance systems exceed entropic degradation (A(t) ≥ B(t)). Modern civilization is an entropic economy run by systems and narratives that divert humanity’s fundamental drive for survival into short-term consumption, status, and biological depletion. Civilization must now pivot to the Immortalism framework, realigning science, capital, and artificial intelligence to elevate long term resilience and continuous conscious existence as our primary attractor. Immortalism dot bryanjohnson dot com My partner Kate published Anti-Entropic Systems Anti-Entropic Systems establishes that all enduring entities, from biological bodies and DNA to corporations, religions, and nation-states, are localized engines that maintain internal order by consuming external energy and resources to resist the universe's default slide into entropy. Every system’s persistence is governed by three fundamental properties: its metabolic mechanism, its metabolic rate, and its environmental constraints. Because an anti-entropic system can only sustain its own order by consuming other anti-entropic systems, interaction between unequal entities inevitably defaults to either symbiotic absorption or adversarial consumption. Applying this thermodynamic reality to artificial intelligence, the framework critiques orthodox AI alignment, arguing that attempting to constrain an exponentially superior intelligence through human-centric ethical rules ignores the physics of systemic survival, requiring instead a path toward mutual, symbiotic integration. antientropicsystems dot com I’m sharing to find others who are like minded.

CIA Director Visit to Russia, Reasons, and Forecast (General Access) ICOD-1110, 08/28/2026 BLUF: On Tuesday, August 25, 2026, CIA Director John Ratcliffe made a surprise visit to Russia to meet with his Russian counterpart, Russian Foreign Intelligence Service Director Sergei Naryshkin. While Russian news and official outlets characterized the meeting as 'contacts' with their U.S. intelligence counterparts, declining to elaborate on what was said, amidst increased Russian hybrid and direct actions against European nations, U.S. news outlets were told by U.S. and European officials that the meeting was set to warn Russia against attacking a NATO partner, urge them to reenter Russo-Ukrainian peace talks, and distance themselves from Iran. This has prompted many to double down on reports that Russia may have been planning a direct military action against a NATO member state in the near term. Key Points: - U.S. President Donald J. Trump personally dispatched Director Ratcliffe to Russia, keeping both his counterparts in Europe and some top U.S. officials and administration aides in the dark on the matter. This caused a general scramble of diplomatic communications and wider speculation when Ratcliffe's C-17 was seen flying into Russia. - Intelligence suggested that Russia may have been preparing a direct, albeit limited, action against ba NATO member state. - Two primary rundowns of what was communicated to Russia have come out: • That NATO Article 5 commitments remain robust (in effect warning Russia against attacking a NATO member state), that Russo-Ukrainian peace/ceasefire processes should be restarted, and that Russia must distance itself from Iran. • That the primary purpose of the meeting was to communicate Russia's inability to decisively win a largely stalemated war with Ukraine. (various casualty, industry, and other metrics were reportedly cited.) - Hybrid actions indirectly attributed to the Russians and/or directly traced to them have increased notably in the past months with a number of notable incidents, including a potential clandestine sabotage mission against a German military facility, stopped by Serbian authorities; cyberwarfare activities against France; and numerous drones shot down and drone impacts in both Romania and the Baltics. - ISR was increasingly active around the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad in the days/week leading up to the visit. Analyst Comment Additional reports that Russian President Vladimir Putin may be pushed to execute a limited tactical nuclear strike have been factored into this assessment but do not weigh heavily on our I&W tree. Assessment: The aforementioned dynamic, coupled with the largely stalemated battlefield dynamic of the ongoing Russo-Ukrainian War, has led some to believe that, seeking to implement an 'escalate to deescalate' strategy, Russian President Vladimir Putin may be looking to escalate against NATO as a means to cause a fracture within NATO and possibly expose NATO's Article 5 defense clause as largely a bluff, which would in turn aid in his primary venture of the war in Ukraine. As mentioned in the "Key Points" portion of this assessment, there are two prevailing characterizations of the intelligence meeting on the 25th, but that does not mean both cannot be true at the same time, as the Trump administration has been keen to publicly isolate Iran economically and diplomatically and realize a U.S.-brokered settlement of the Russo-Ukrainian War, while simultaneously, Russian actions against NATO member states have been increasing. Additionally, the meeting this past week with the policy heads of NATO member states, including U.S. Under Secretary of War for Policy Elbridge Colby, where key new and to-be-renewed NATO force model and policy frameworks were set to be discussed, also likely plays some part in the timing of the meeting. Key Judgement: - It's currently highly unlikely that Russia is seeking to use tactical nuclear weapons on the battlefield in Ukraine in the near-term, as Russian tactical nuclear use, from a doctrinal perspective, is meant to forestall a significant collapse of Russian forces on the battlefield, something that is not currently happening. - A Russian attack on a NATO member state is currently unlikely in the near-term, as Russian readiness is not currently at a level to withstand the potential NATO response should Article 5 be implemented. Additionally, per Western news outlets, Baltic intelligence agencies currently assess the likelihood of such a move by Russia against them in the near-term as low. - As assessed in previous assessments, barring significant concessions, it's still unlikely that Russian president Vladimir Putin will seriously reenter talks to end the ongoing Russo-Ukrainian war. - Barring a more robust European response to Russian hybrid actions, it's unlikely that a warning alone, even that from the CIA director, will avert Russia from its current course of action as it relates to grey-zone operations against nations that support Ukraine. END