Capitalogix

Camp Kotok: Back Again!

I was just in Maine at Camp Kotok, a private gathering of economists, fund managers, and other financial industry professionals. 

There was limited phone service or access to the Internet… so people had to talk with each other.  And unlike most of my schedule, almost everything happened outside.  Discussions, while vigorous, often take place while fishing or grilling. 

At a past Camp Kotok, I did this interview with Bob Eisenbeis, Cumberland Advisors' Vice Chairman & Chief Monetary Economist.  Check it out. 

 

Cumberland Advisors via YouTube

 

Camp Kotok is an interesting place. The event transformed from a simple retreat after 9/11 ... when many attendees experienced the WTC collapse and came together for some fellowship and to discuss their experiences.  From then on, attendance grew, and the gathering evolved. 

As a side note, before the gathering became known as Camp Kotok, it was referred to as the “Shadow Fed” (in part because of the people who attend).

Attendees are bound to “Chatham House Rules” (participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s), nor that of any other participant, may be revealed).  However, general thoughts, ideas, forecasts, and comments can be discussed and published.

On this trip, I talked with David Kotok about the event, what it means, and how it’s grown.

The intent of the participants (and the environment) helps create a platform for meaningful and productive conversations about the opportunities and obstacles facing America and the world. 

Every year, I come back with new ideas and fresh perspectives on things I forget to think about. 

AI was on everyone's mind.  The financial industry is changing quickly, and I’m confident that advanced technology will become an even bigger driver. 

In general, economically, the mood was cautiously optimistic to bullish. 

Remember, it is an election year!

Social Media Is Changing Everything ... 10+ Years Later

In 2009, I wrote an article highlighting the audacious amount of texts and data my then-16-year-old son was using compared to the rest of the family ... It's funny to look back on.

Here is an excerpt from that post. 

_______

My son won't use e-mail the way I did. So how will people communicate and collaborate in the next wave of communications?

 Here is a peek into the difference that is taking hold.  I was looking at recent phone use.  The numbers you are about to see are from the first 20 days of our current billing cycle.

• My wife, Jennifer, has used 21 text messages and 38 MB of data.
• I have used 120 text messages and 29 MB of data.
• My son, at college, used 420 text messages, and is on a WiFi campus so doesn't use 3G data.
• My son, in high school, used 5,798 text messages and 472 MB of data.

How can that be?  That level of emotional sluttiness makes porn seem downright wholesome. 

But, of course, that isn't how he sees it.  He is holding many conversations at once.  Some are social; some are about the logistics of who, what, when, where and why … some are even about homework.  Yet, most don't use full sentences, let alone paragraphs.  There is near instant gratification.  And, the next generation of business people will consider this normal.

Is social media a fad? Or is it the biggest shift since the Industrial Revolution?

_______

Fourteen years later, I send more text messages than my son, and we both use multiples of that amount of data a month. 

I also remember scoffing at my son having his phone on hand at meetings - that it was a distraction. And yet, here I am, phone on my desk at meetings. But, e-mail is just as important as it was in 2009. 

One of the things we miss in discussions about generations is that the trends of the younger generation are often adopted by the previous - even if they're not as tech literate. 

Technology changes cultures for better or worse ... but it's hard to look at the impact of social media and believe it hasn't been deleterious. 

The promise and peril of technology! 

"Is The Stock Market Going To Crash?!"

I usually don't concern myself with looking at stock charts anymore, but I still like paying attention to what people say about them ... 

Recently, I saw this image posted.

via r/StockMarket

So, will the market attract buyers … or sellers?

Personally, I expect volatility.  

Why?  

Because markets exist to trade, and it tends to generate those trades by 'shaking' the weak holders.  

A big move up here will trigger a lot of buying (and short-covering by weak bears).  

While a big move down will trigger a lot of selling (as Bulls fear the long-anticipated next leg down).

I also recognize that we're entering an election year. So there's still time for a correction before a sustained rally.

Here's the problem.  Even though I still enjoy the mental exercise of going through these scenarios, I recognize how little value they add.

You can look at any point in history and find articles and charts that tell you the world is ending, or that the fear is overblown and we're going to get to the other side, and there's a pot of gold waiting for you. 

It's easy to use charts to explain what happened. It is a lot harder to use charts to predict what is about to happen.

I still keep my ear to the ground because I like having a feeling for the sentiment around both experienced investors and your average Joe.  Conventional trading wisdom says that crowds are usually wrong at turning points.  That doesn't mean they are always wrong (still, it makes sense to notice when Smart Money clearly disagrees). 

Knowing these things doesn't make any difference in the decisions I make about trading ... because I let the computer make those decisions.  Nonetheless, it makes me feel better. 

So, is the stock market going to crash?  Who knows?  Anyone that pretends they know is full of it.  There are too many factors at play to decide whether the market is going to crash.

From my perspective, it doesn't make sense to try to predict something random.

On the other hand, if you don't know what your edge is ... you don't have one.

Algorithmic trading is about creating more ways to win. 

To be effective, algorithmic trading is about switching from lower expectancy positions to higher expectancy positions.

In general, here is how that works.

Understand that you can make trading decisions based on market patterns, trends, sentiment, statistics, behavioral economics, game theory, reversion to the mean, or countless other methods.  Further, realize that no technique works all the time ... but there is always a technique that works (even if that means getting out of the market). 

There is an advantage in tracking each of these to gain a perspective of perspectives (in order to identify an advantage or opportunity in real-time as it happens). For example, you could measure and calculate a blend of your confidence in an algorithm or technique and how it is performing.  This creates the opportunity to switch into and out of various techniques and markets as things change.

Having an edge in trading often comes down to information asymmetry. This means knowing more, faster, better, or different things than what others are using to make decisions.

Hope that helps.

Understanding Industrial Revolutions

Last week, I talked about the potential for room-temperature superconductors. 

In that discussion, I noted that we are now in the 4th Industrial Revolution, in part because of better and more connected chips (semiconductors).

I want to dive back into Industrial Revolutions because we're at an inflection point in AI and chips. 

A Look at Industrial Revolutions

The Industrial Revolution has two phases: one material, the other social; one concerning the making of things, the other concerning the making of men. - Charles A. Beard

There are several turning points in our history where the world changed forever.  Former paradigms and realities became relics of a bygone era. 

Tomorrow's workforce will require different skills and face different challenges than we do today.  You can consider this the Fourth Industrial Revolution.  Compare today's changes to our previous industrial revolutions. 

• First industrial revolution - Discovery of the steam engine and creation of factories
• Second industrial revolution - Introduction of the assembly line and mass production
• Third industrial revolution - The world wide web and computers connect the world, enabling the digital age. 

Each revolution shared multiple similarities.  They were disruptive.  They were centered on technological innovation.  They created concatenating socio-cultural impacts.

Since most of us remember the third revolution, let's spend some time on that. 

Here's a map of the entire "internet" in 1973. 

Reddit via @WorkerGnome.

Most of us didn't use the internet at this point, but you probably remember Web1 (static HTML pages, a 5-minute download to view a 3Mb picture, and of course ... waiting for a website to load over the dialup connection before you could read it).  It was still amazing!

Then, Web 2.0 came, and so did everything we now associate with the internet; Facebook, YouTube, ubiquitous porn sites, and Google.  But, with Web 2.0 also came user tracking and advertising, which meant that we became the "product."  Remember, you're not the customers of those platforms - advertisers are.  And if you're not the customer, you're the product.  And when you're not the customer, there's no reason for the platforms not to censor what you see, hear, or experience to control the narrative. 

Now we're seeing a focus on the Blockchain, and its reliant technologies, with Web3.

Where we are and where we are going

I believe that, if managed well, the Fourth Industrial Revolution can bring a new cultural renaissance, which will make us feel part of something much larger than ourselves: a true global civilization. I believe the changes that will sweep through society can provide a more inclusive, sustainable and harmonious society. But it will not come easily. – Klaus Schwab

With Web3, A.I., better chips, and more, we're at the apex of another inflection point.  As a result, the game is changing, as are the rules, the players, and what it means to win. 

At significant transition points, it is easy to see fear, resistance, and a push to keep things the same.  Yet, time marches on.  Much of the pain felt during these transitions occurs because people hesitate to adapt.  As a result, the wave crashes on them instead of them riding it to safety. 

Robots can do many things, but they've yet to match humanity's creativity and emotional insight.  As automation spreads to more jobs, the need for management, creativity, and decision-making won't go anywhere … data and analytics might augment them, but they won't disappear. 

Our uniqueness and flexibility rightly protect our usefulness.  AI and automation free us up to be our best selves and to explore new possibilities. 

All of these changes bring about a decentralization of power - and a new set of freedoms for people – including the ability to discover and adopt capabilities in less time and with less effort.  But, to bring it back to my skepticism again, there are a lot of roadblocks, interferences, and time between now and the consumer being in control again. 

We can shorten that distance, though.  This reminds me of a quote by Elon Musk: 

Stop being patient and start asking yourself, how do I accomplish my 10 year plan in 6 months? You will probably fail but you will be a lot further ahead than the person who simply accepted it was going to take 10 years."

One of an entrepreneur's most powerful capabilities is the ability to shorten time - and get more done than others thought possible. 

Onwards!

Why You Should Be Excited About Room-Temperature Superconductors

This past week, Korea released two papers claiming to have created a material (LK-99) that is superconductive at ambient temperatures. Before you get too excited, other scientists are still skeptical and cannot replicate their results fully. 

Hyun-Tak Kim—ScienceCast via TIME

Whether this ends up being the breakthrough (or not), there's reason to be excited about where this technology is going.

Semiconductors are the unsung heroes of the tech world, and they power everything from your smartphone to your car. A semiconductor, colloquially a "chip," is a substance that falls somewhere on the continuum between conductor and insulator. Manufacturers process silicon and other materials into semiconductors for all kinds of devices that rely on harnessing electricity for processing power. They're the underpinning of technology, and the 4th industrial revolution is built on the development of better and more connected chips.

That's just a semiconductor, though. What we're talking about now are superconductors. Superconductors have (you guessed it) very high electrical conductivity, allowing lossless or semi-lossless transfer. Up until now, superconductors were only possible at very specific temperatures. A common example of this technology is an MRI machine. 

In 2021, I posted an article on which technologies I thought would impact us most over the next 5-10 years.  

Before I get back to superconductors, here's what I wrote in 2021 about my top 5 technologies: 

1. Compute Power is going to increase, and the ability to brute force problems will create new possibilities. Quantum computing will become more important and likely available for commercial use. 
2. New and better AI platforms will transition AI from a tool for specialists to a commodity for everyday people - it won't just be Artificial Intelligence, it will be Amplified Intelligence (helping people make better decisions, take smarter actions, and continually measure and improve performance). 
3. Blockchain and authenticated provenance are going to become more important as the world becomes increasingly digital. Trust and transparency will be important as indelible logs are needed for finance, medical, armies, etc.
4. IoT will become more pervasive, enabling near digital omniscience as everything becomes a sensor that transmits data up the chain. 
5. Mass customization will become the norm instead of simple mass production as hardware, data, and AI continues to improve products, medicine, custom supplements, and just about everything else. 

 via - "What Technologies Are Going To Most Impact The Next 5-10 Years?" - August 2021

At that same time, the chip shortage massively affected the supply chain. My takeaway was that building and running intelligent AI systems takes a lot of computing power, and as more competitors enter the scene, the cost to play will increase, and so do the stakes of winning and losing. 

To a certain extent, the AI arms race has become a chip arms race. To nations, it is a cold-war-level existential threat.

Advancements in room-temperature superconductors would create a snowball of changes that would affect technology everywhere, and change the makeup of that chip arms race. 

Better conductivity means less heat dissipation, smaller wires, more efficient and faster movement, and smaller tools. That means your processors won't heat up, motors will be able to handle higher torque/weight, and it also becomes a step in making quantum processors a reality. More practically, it means better and longer-lasting batteries, significantly less waste, and a massive jump in robotics. It also means 50x-100x faster chips. 

You could argue it's the "holy grail" of material science. But, we haven't addressed the implications of those new technological possibilities. Electrical grids would be more efficient. Data centers would not only be cheaper but more efficient. And on the more sci-fi side of it, we could create superfast levitating trains which would travel with less friction. 

The chip arms race would still exist because human nature means we will always fight for the best technology and advantages. However, when new technologies are created, their predecessors get cheaper and more accessible. That means more people experimenting with better technology, which often leads to unexpected boons. 

Every technological advancement makes technology as a whole more accessible and prevalent. 

Whether this breakthrough ends up being scalable and sustainable is up for debate, but it's already a sign of progress. 

Onwards! 

E.M.I.G.L.I.O: The Electronic Mechanical Industrial Generated For Logical Infiltration and Observation Robot

I have an old toy robot in my office that my kids played with when they were little.  Its name is E.M.I.G.L.I.O.

Even though it is a toy, this Italian-made robot was interesting technology when it came out.  It was remote-controlled, the remote had a microphone that transformed my voice to sound like a robot, and it had a tray sturdy enough to deliver a video game (or some other surprise) for my kids when they visited the office.

 

Looking back, it's barely even technology, let alone a robot.  But that's because I'm evaluating it based on what's possible now.

I feel the same when I think about my previous company, IntellAgent Control, and what we considered A.I. in the 1990s.  We made a sales automation solution for teams before tools like Salesforce existed.  At the time, the decision logic we used was innovative.  The premise is still valid today, but the technology and implementation scream "relic of a time gone by."

As another aside ... when I searched for Emiglio (in order to write this article), I was astonished by the archive of old robots someone had put together. The site is like a specialized Wikipedia site for toy robots.  Each of the entries has high-quality photos of the robots and their packaging.  It also includes facts, marketing copy, ads, and patents. 

It is kind of cool ... Kind of like Emiglio.

It got me thinking about how much of history - and esoteric knowledge - only exists because a tiny community of people decided it needed to be cataloged or preserved.

Garbage In – Garbage Out.  Nothing In – Nothing Out.  What are we missing from the past because history is often written by the winner (or because no one volunteered to chronicle what happened)?

Even a site like Wikipedia has some serious content curation issues.  For example, the top 50 Wikipedia editors have each contributed more than 500,000 edits.  Think how much is missing.

Soon A.I. will decide what to write about what it decided happened, what to save and for how long, and what to say when asked about it.

Not only will the future be different ... even the past will be remembered differently.

Just a thought! 

Do You Think the U.S. Has Aliens?

I'll admit to being fascinated by the idea of aliens.  Growing up in the 60s and 70s, there was no shortage of science fiction fantasies imagining what a space-faring civilization would look like and, more importantly, what would we, the Earthlings, do when they made contact. 

Last year, there was a U.S. congressional hearing on Unidentified Flying Objects.  While there wasn't any proof of aliens, they did admit to phenomena they couldn't explain with their current information.

Now, we have multiple former military officials testifying in a House of Representatives meeting that the U.S. has recovered not only spacecraft but alien biological matter for decades.  While I do believe in the possibility of aliens, I remain skeptical.

There are many stories (or theories) about how we had encountered aliens before and just kept them secret.  For example, in 2020, a former senior Israeli military official proclaimed that Aliens from a Galactic Federation had contacted us - and that not only is our government aware of this, but they are working together. 

In contrast, I have found it more realistic and thought-provoking to consider theories about why we haven't seen aliens until now.

For example, the Fermi Paradox considers the apparent contradiction between the lack of evidence for extraterrestrial civilizations and the various high probability estimates for their existence. 

Let's simplify the issues and arguments in the Fermi Paradox.  There are billions of stars in the Milky Way galaxy (which is only one of many galaxies).  Each of these stars is similar to our Sun.  Consequently, there must be some probability of some of them having Earth-like planets.  Further, it isn't hard to conceive that some of those planets should be older than ours, and thus some fraction should be more technologically advanced than ours.  Even if you assume they're only looking at evolutions of our current technologies - interstellar travel isn't absurd.  Thus, based on the law of really large numbers (both in terms of the number of planets and the length of time we are talking about) ... it makes the silence all the more deafening and curious. 

If you are interested in the topic "Where are all the aliens?"  Stephen Webb (who is a particle physicist) tackles that in his book and in this TED Talk.   

 

via TED

In the TED talk, Stephen Webb covers a couple of key factors necessary for communicative space-faring life. 

1. Habitability and stability of their planet
2. Building blocks of life 
3. Technological advancement
4. Socialness/Communication technologies

But he also acknowledges the numerous confounding variables, including things like imperialism, war, bioterrorism, fear, moons' effect on climate, etc. 

Essentially, his thesis is that there are numerous roadblocks to intelligent life - and it's entirely possible we are the only planet that has gotten past those roadblocks - or that there might have been others in the past, or others may develop in the distant future. 

What do you think?

Here's another article I wrote on the subject, titled "Are We Alone In The Universe?"

Finally, here are some other links I liked on this topic.  There is some interesting stuff you don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand or enjoy. 

• 75 Reasons We Don't See Aliens 
• Wait But Why: The Fermi Paradox
• A New Theory on Why We Haven't Found Aliens Yet
• A List of Solutions to The Fermi Paradox
• Dissolving the Fermi Paradox, Future of Humanity Institute, Oxford University

To Infinity and Beyond!

A Brief Look At Quantum Computing

I am not an expert on quantum computing ... but I saw an impressive photo of Google's new quantum computer, and thought it was worth diving a bit deeper. 

Google's computer stands at the forefront of computing technologies. This extraordinary device boasts 70 qubits, a significant improvement over the previous 2019 model, which had 53 qubits. A qubit is the quantum world's answer to classical bits. Not to dive too deep, but as you increase the number of qubits in a model, the possible states a quantum computer can hold simultaneously grows exponentially (due to quantum entanglement,) allowing it to perform faster calculations.

So, while 70 qubits don't sound like that much, it calculates exponentially faster than normal computers. For some context, Google's team used a synthetic benchmark called random circuit sampling to test the system's speed, and the results showed that they could perform calculations in seconds that would take the world's most powerful supercomputer, Frontier, 47 years. 

Four years ago, Google announced that they'd reached quantum supremacy, a benchmark demonstrating that a programmable quantum device could solve a problem impossible for classical computers to solve within a practical timeframe. It took less than five years to successfully establish the technological feasibility of quantum computers. 

The progress made in quantum computing enhances our capacity to tackle complex problems that previously posed a challenge (or seemed impossible). The ripple effects will extend to other domains and industries (improving artificial intelligence, logistics, medicine, and almost anything you can imagine). As with the space race or AI, the benefits will not be limited to the realm in which they were created ... but will also have a significant impact on broader industries, the world, and our lives.

 

It's important to temper your expectations and recognize that quantum technology is still in its infancy. It comes with significant limitations, such as the need for extremely low temperatures and precise magnetic fields. Even if these specific conditions are satisfied, there will be stability issues. Additionally, the current cost to develop and operate this technology is quite high.

But, it's an exciting horizon for us to walk towards. 

Onwards!

The Surreal World of Deepfakes And Deep AI

Deep Learning excels in analyzing pictures & videos and creating facsimiles or combining styles.  People are using generative AI tools like ChatGPT or Midjourney increasingly frequently.  And there is an explosion of simple tools (like the Deep Dream Generator or DeepAI) that use Convolutional Neural Networks to combine your photo with an art style (if you want to do it on your phone, check out Prisma).   Here are some example photos.

via SubSubRoutine

The same foundation that allows us to create these cool art amalgamations also can create deepfakes.  A Deepfake is precisely what it sounds like ... they use "Deep Learning" to "Fake" a recording.  For example, a machine learning technique called a Generative Adversarial Network can be used to superimpose images onto a source video.  That is how they made this fun (and disturbing) Deepfake of Jennifer Lawrence and Steve Buscemi.

 

Another interesting technology can create AI-powered replicas of someone that don't just look and sound like them – they can respond like them too.  Examples of this are seen in tools like Replica Studios or Replika.  One of the artistic uses people have been exploring recently is getting unlikely characters to sing famous songs.  These chatbots have also been used by lonely men and women to create virtual paramours. 

The three basic uses of deep learning (described above) are being combined to create a lot of real mainstream applications ... and the potential to create convincing fakes.

Deepfakes can be fun and funny ... but they also create real concerns.  They're frequently used for more "nefarious" purposes (e.g., to create fake celebrity or revenge porn and to make important figures say things they never said).  You've likely seen videos of Trump or Biden created with this technology.   But it is easy to imagine someone faking evidence used at trial, trying to influence business transactions, or using this to support or slander causes in the media.

As fakes get better and easier to produce, they will likely be used more often. 

On a more functional note, you can use these technologies to create convincing replicas of yourself.  You could use that replica to record videos, send voicemails, or participate in virtual meetings for you. While I don't encourage you to use it without telling people you are, even just using the technology puts you a step ahead. 

Rewriting The Past, Present, and Future

"Fate has ordained that the men who went to the moon to explore in peace will stay on the moon to rest in peace." - Nixon's Apollo 11 Disaster Speech

In an ideal world, history would be objective; facts about what happened, unencumbered by the bias of society, or the victor, the narrator, etc.

I think it's apparent that history as we know it is subjective.  The narrative shifts to support the needs of the society that's reporting it.  History books are written by the victors. 

The Cold War is a great example where, during the war, immediately after the war, and today, the interpretation of the causes and events has all changed.  

But while that's one example, to a certain degree, we can see it everywhere.  We can even see it in the way events are reported today.  News stations color the story based on whether they're red or blue, and the internet is quick to jump on a bandwagon even if the information is hearsay. 

Now, what happens when you can literally rewrite history?

“Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped.“ - Orwell, 1984

That's one of the potential risks of generative AI and deepfake technology.  As it gets better, creating "supporting evidence" becomes easier for whatever narrative a government or other entity is trying to make real.

On July 20th, 1969, Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin landed safely on the moon.  They then returned to Earth safely as well. 

MIT recently created a deepfake of a speech Nixon's speechwriter William Safire wrote during the Apollo 11 mission in case of disaster.  The whole video is worth watching, but the speech starts around 4:20. 

 

MIT via In Event Of Moon Disaster

Media disinformation is more dangerous than ever.  Alternative narratives and histories can only be called that when they are discernible from the truth.  In addition, people often aren't looking for the "truth" – instead, they are prone to look for information that already fits their biases. 

As deepfakes get better, we'll also get better at detecting them.  But it's a cat-and-mouse game with no end in sight.  In Signaling Theory, it's the idea that signalers evolve to become better at manipulating receivers, while receivers evolve to become more resistant to manipulation.  We're seeing the same thing in trading with algorithms. 

In 1983, Stanislav Petrov saved the world. Petrov was the duty officer at the command center for a Russian nuclear early-warning system when the system reported that a missile had been launched from the U.S., followed by up to five more.  Petrov judged the reports to be a false alarm and didn't authorize retaliation (and a potential nuclear WWIII where countless would have died). 

But messaging is now getting more convincing.  It's harder to tell real from fake.  What happens when a world leader has a convincing enough deepfake with a convincing enough threat to another country?  Will people have the wherewithal to double-check?

Lots to think about. 

I'm excited about the possibilities of technology, and I believe they're predominantly good.  But, as always, in search of the good, we must acknowledge and be prepared for the bad.