Olivia
Online
⛏️Joseph Burnitz ⛏️
@JosephBurnitz
Engineer | Data analytics | Hobbyist Investor | $NAK Enthusiast | All opinions are my own and not financial advise
Texas
Joined March 2025
94 Following
250 Followers
406 Posts
Pinned Tweet
@epaleezeldin Why is EPA burning taxpayer money defending the Pebble Mine veto in court when the attorney who drafted the original 404(c) petition told them, in writing, that the Recommended Determination would "trigger otherwise avoidable legal claims"?
Their reply: "Thanks for the feedback."
@SarahPalinUSA @TyewayorHighway @taketheseodds thoughts?
@ChiragAsarpota @coreyhainesco It says, "top model opus 4.7"; dunno about you, but I have the smarter models delegate to Sonnet for bulk work, and seek distilled advice from smart models. An 80/20 split with opus would be wild. I'm often at like 98/2
@ChiragAsarpota @coreyhainesco Input tokens are cachable, I know anthropic gives 90% discount on cached tokens. Opus 4.7 is $5/mil input token. This tracks.
I'm not sure the non-technical folks realize how deeply deflationary AI is. Speaking from personal experience, last year, AI made me 2-3x productive. Today, I manage a team of AI agents that does the work of 5-10 engineers.
Next year? I'm not going to be 20-50x, because the product vision doesn't exist. It cannot exist. I already spend a fair bit of my day working on things far outside my organization's charter, and next year I'm not taking the CEO's job.
This leaves 3 possible outcomes for my team: work less; get paid less; remove extraneous employees.
@adamtaggart Think about this: In the very near future(now for some orgs), for the first time in software/IT history, labor will not be the largest expense to an organization.
Take this to the limit: In a two year's time, when your local handyman realizes he can fire his accountant because he replaced them with a custom solution that does his bookkeeping and taxes for $5 of AI spend, it's game over.
@adamtaggart There's reckoning happening right now where workers use AI replace their daily output of years past. At the same time AI super users are 10x'ing their output. Executives are catching on and raising the bar on everyone.
@adamtaggart Check out some of the unemployment rates(albeit dated): https://t.co/rZrEyYj9Tm
Tldr; avoid art and computers. Do farming or education
@adamtaggart Thought you were playing PUBG for a moment 😂
Stopping #PebbleMine $NAK has never been about science. It’s politics. Special interests would rather we be forever reliant on China and other dangerous foreign regimes that develop & refine natural resources, while Alaska’s rich domestic deposits sit untapped. It’s been tragic. But it’s fixable! Trump can rescind Biden’s illogical & illegal veto of #Pebble and put America back to work:
@SarahPalinUSA ICYMI: https://t.co/8APoSeqkI2
@epaleezeldin Why is EPA burning taxpayer money defending the Pebble Mine veto in court when the attorney who drafted the original 404(c) petition told them, in writing, that the Recommended Determination would "trigger otherwise avoidable legal claims"?
Their reply: "Thanks for the feedback."
@SarahPalinUSA @TyewayorHighway @taketheseodds thoughts?
@epaleezeldin Why is EPA burning taxpayer money defending the Pebble Mine veto in court when the attorney who drafted the original 404(c) petition told them, in writing, that the Recommended Determination would "trigger otherwise avoidable legal claims"?
Their reply: "Thanks for the feedback."
@SarahPalinUSA @TyewayorHighway @taketheseodds thoughts?
@oneamericaman @epaleezeldin I'm not sure she even has to. The question is simple: did the EPA follow the law/rules when they made their determination? No. Their own people even knew.
The letter I was talking about during the space:
@epaleezeldin Why is EPA burning taxpayer money defending the Pebble Mine veto in court when the attorney who drafted the original 404(c) petition told them, in writing, that the Recommended Determination would "trigger otherwise avoidable legal claims"?
Their reply: "Thanks for the feedback."
@SarahPalinUSA @TyewayorHighway @taketheseodds thoughts?
$NAK Nation! Hope to see you all this Monday as Kris and I break down the latest (final) briefs filed in Pebble v. EPA.
Specifically, we'll be examining what we expected, were surprised by, and some of the misses.
⛏️ $NAK community, it’s time. ⛏️
@JosephBurnitz and I are hosting a Space next Monday at 6:30 PM PST.
We'll go through Northern Dynasty's latest filing that just dropped against the DOJ/EPA. We'll cover the main arguments they made, where the government's position looks weak, and what this likely means for the case going forward, including timelines and possible next steps.
It's an important update on the Pebble fight, so if you're interested in $NAK, feel free to join and bring your questions.
Hope to see you there.
#Pebblemine
https://t.co/RBCBV4xzGT
@BrianRadcl24237 @adamtaggart And DNI Gabbard basically said she didn't agree with the threat conclusion: https://t.co/GYOnbBCf1j
Donald Trump was overwhelmingly elected by the American people to be our President and Commander in Chief. As our Commander in Chief, he is responsible for determining what is and is not an imminent threat, and whether or not to take action he deems necessary to protect the safety and security of our troops, the American people and our country.
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence is responsible for helping coordinate and integrate all intelligence to provide the President and Commander in Chief with the best information available to inform his decisions.
After carefully reviewing all the information before him, President Trump concluded that the terrorist Islamist regime in Iran posed an imminent threat and he took action based on that conclusion.
@PlebeianCapLLC @Al555555501 @adamtaggart Exactly. When I saw, "crazed theocratic terrorist regime" I didn't know what country that was referring to
@JonkooTrades Specifically they [EPA] implied without proof that the miles of anadromous streams that would be most would affect the Bristol Bay Fishery. That fishery is over 99% sockeye based, while the administrative record documents zero sockeye in the affected streams.
@taketheseodds Em-dash is usually pretty telling too.
@adamtaggart Welcome to the copper bulls club Adam!
@leganadvisors @TKSconservative @realDonaldTrump @POTUS @JoeBiden How would jobs be impacted? I laid this out in a few posts: https://t.co/eThdGGcRTk
Another gaping hole I realized in EPA's argument--Kings(chinook) and Coho ain't Sockeye.
EPA defends its action by valuing the Bristol Bay commercial salmon fishery, "$2.0 billion" and "15,000 jobs." FD at EPA_AR_0082945. That value is overwhelmingly sockeye-driven. Bristol Bay produces "about half of the world's Sockeye salmon." per EPA_AR_0082943.
But the streams EPA is protecting at the mine site don't contain sockeye. PLP's sampling of the 8.5 miles proposed for fill found Coho and Chinook, roughly 370 juvenile Coho and 50 juvenile Chinook in NFK 1.190, and 344 juvenile Coho and 12 juvenile Chinook in NFK 1.200. FEIS at EPA_AR_0095026, EPA_AR_0092560. Zero sockeye. EPA's own brief concedes sockeye are found "immediately adjacent" and "immediately downstream" of the mine site, not in the streams being destroyed. Doc. 215 p 46.
EPA bridges this gap through indirect mechanisms: headwater streams supply nutrients, gravel, and flow to downstream sockeye habitat. FD at EPA_AR_0083078-79. Scientifically plausible, but the Army Corps evaluated the same mechanisms and concluded the mine "is not expected to affect overall productivity in the greater Koktuli River basin." FEIS, Ch. 4 at EPA_AR_0095966.
The cost-benefit problem is straightforward. EPA credits the full $2.0 billion fishery value as a benefit of its action without ever disaggregating how much of that value is attributable to the Coho and Chinook actually found at the mine site versus the sockeye connected only through indirect downstream effects the FEIS found insufficient. EPA has species-specific harvest data in the record (EPA_AR_0083049) but never uses it to apportion the benefit. Under Michigan v. EPA, 576 U.S. 743, 752 (2015), cost-benefit analysis requires "consideration of all the relevant factors", including which species are actually affected and what those species are actually worth.
The brief's strongest species-specific link is Chinook: the Nushagak district accounts for 75% of Bristol Bay's commercial Chinook catch, and the Koktuli River is often the largest Chinook producer in the Nushagak watershed. EPA_AR_0083017, 0083030. But EPA never quantifies the Chinook-specific commercial value or separates it from the sockeye-dominated total, despite having species-specific commercial harvest data available in the record. EPA_AR_0083049.
Funnily enough, coming out of an old case from the NRDC v. EPA, an agency is "free to emphasize or deemphasize particular factors" but must provide a reasoned basis for doing. NRDC v. EPA, 25 F.3d 1063, 1071 (D.C. Cir. 1994). Aggregating all species into a single undifferentiated value and attributing it to an action whose primary ecological evidence involves different species than those driving the value is not reasoned emphasis, it is (intentional?) obfuscation.
tldr; EPA put $2.0 billion on the benefits side of the ledger. The ecological evidence at the mine site supports a fraction of that figure. How large a fraction is unknowable because EPA never did the math. There is no scientific disagreement, it's a simple analytical failure that makes the cost-benefit weighing un-reviewable. Kill shot. 🎯
Last Seen Users on Sotwe
Trends for you
Most Popular Users
Elon Musk
@elonmusk
241.2M followers
Barack Obama
@barackobama
119.1M followers
Cristiano Ronaldo
@cristiano
112.8M followers
Donald J. Trump
@realdonaldtrump
111.8M followers
Narendra Modi
@narendramodi
107.1M followers
Rihanna
@rihanna
98.3M followers
NASA
@nasa
92.3M followers
Justin Bieber
@justinbieber
91.5M followers
KATY PERRY
@katyperry
89M followers
Taylor Swift
@taylorswift13
82.9M followers
Lady Gaga
@ladygaga
74.4M followers
Virat Kohli
@imvkohli
71.9M followers
Kim Kardashian
@kimkardashian
70.4M followers
YouTube
@youtube
68.8M followers
Neymar Jr
@neymarjr
64.8M followers
Bill Gates
@billgates
64.6M followers
The Ellen Show
@theellenshow
62.4M followers
Selena Gomez
@selenagomez
62.1M followers
CNN
@cnn
61.8M followers
X
@x
60.8M followers