Dr Silverman

[Dr Silverman @dr_Silbermann]

@idextratime Neymar masuk cuman buat dpt yellow card kwkw

[Dr Silverman @dr_Silbermann]

@Mungin1995 @idextratime 😂

[Dr Silverman @dr_Silbermann]

@SeaCalypso1on1 @Jordan_Patu Yes, but they are in 1 football federation with Asia

[Dr Silverman @dr_Silbermann]

@Jordan_Patu Lol

[Dr Silverman @dr_Silbermann]

@CLonTOP @saludosparatii Ini lebih ke, jepang aja lolos tuh masa negara gua ga lolos, apalagi lawan kali ini ga begitu sulit. Lawan afsel aja kalah

[Dr Silverman @dr_Silbermann]

@CLonTOP @saludosparatii Ga juga, korea lebih into baseball

[Dr Silverman @dr_Silbermann]

@RMChuyon @CryOn_ShinChann @Djinggo9x Exactly

[Dr Silverman @dr_Silbermann]

@kmadytiab tukang parkir punya sampingan jadi relawan (background pendidikan: gak ada), dan teknokrat yg punya background pendidikan (bukan relawan). Tebak mana yg memiliki probabilitas untuk menjadi komisaris?

[Dr Silverman @dr_Silbermann]

@iDaemonTargary1 Golden era of Brazil

[Dr Silverman @dr_Silbermann]

@sophiapearlx @idextratime WKWK

[Dr Silverman @dr_Silbermann]

@Asura0599 Tetep balik balik lagi ke skill

[Dr Silverman @dr_Silbermann]

@txtpulangkantor @indepenSumatera Terlepas dari ranknya, kan tetep aja sekolahnya pake bhs inggris, lah ini orangnya ngomong pun belepotan wkwk

[Dr Silverman @dr_Silbermann]

@thamarmb @IrasReal Lol

[Dr Silverman @dr_Silbermann]

@kompascom Login

[Dr Silverman @dr_Silbermann]

@desmondwira South Koreans using **borrowed money** to bet on domestic stocks jumped to all-time high of 26.8 trillion won (S$23.6 billion) on Nov 20, according to the Korea Financial Investment Association. Pre bubble

[Jack @jackcoder0]

Two economists just published a mathematical proof that AI will destroy the economy.

Not might. Not could. Will — if nothing changes.

The paper is called "The AI Layoff Trap." Published March 2, 2026. Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania. Boston University. Peer reviewed. Mathematically modeled.
The conclusion is one sentence.
"At the limit, firms automate their way to boundless productivity and zero demand."

An economy that produces everything. And sells it to nobody.
Here is how you get there.
A company fires 500 workers and replaces them with AI. A competitor fires 700 to keep up. Another fires 1,000. Every company is behaving rationally. Every company is following the incentives correctly. And every company is building a trap for itself.

Because the workers who were fired were also customers.
When they lose their jobs faster than the economy can absorb them, they stop spending. Consumer demand falls. Companies respond by cutting costs — which means automating more workers — which means less spending — which means more falling demand — which means more automation.

The loop has no natural exit.
The researchers tested every proposed solution. Universal basic income. Capital income taxes. Worker equity participation. Upskilling programs. Corporate coordination agreements.
Every single one failed in the model.
The only intervention that worked: a Pigouvian automation tax — a per-task levy charged every time a company replaces a human with AI, forcing them to price in the demand they are destroying before they pull the trigger.

No government has implemented this. No major economy is seriously discussing it.
Meanwhile the numbers are already tracking the curve. 100,000 tech workers laid off in 2025. 92,000 more in the first months of 2026. Jack Dorsey fired half of Block's workforce and said publicly: "Within the next year, the majority of companies will reach the same conclusion."
Nobody is doing anything wrong. Companies are following their incentives perfectly. That is exactly the problem.

Rational behavior. At scale. Simultaneously. With no mechanism to stop it.
Two economists built the math. The math leads to one place.

Source: Falk & Tsoukalas · Wharton School + Boston University ·

[Ardianto Satriawan @ardisatriawan]

Ada yang lagi rame:
DUGAAN Beberapa orang Indonesia melakukan pemalsuan riset terorganisir dan TERUNGKAP di Konferensi ilmiah di Denmark??
Masih menunggu kesimpulannya.
Karena ini berpotensi mencoreng nama baik ilmuwan Indonesia di mata internasional.

[International and Monetary Economics Network @int_mon_econ]

Highly relevant!

"How should central banks respond to commodity price shocks? Optimal monetary and exchange rate frameworks for commodity-exposed economies" by Thomas Drechsel, Michael McLeay, Silvana Tenreyro, and Enrico D. Turri.

"This paper shows that the optimal monetary policy and exchange rate framework depend critically on the economy’s commodity exposure. We develop a flexible but tractable model economy with commodity exports and imports, in which international financial conditions may vary with the commodity cycle. Stabilizing domestic prices is optimal for commodity exporters, in line with standard open-economy policy prescriptions. But for economies that use commodities as inputs in production, optimal policy largely ‘looks through’ the direct and indirect effects of commodity shocks on domestic prices; this contrasts with some earlier findings and policy practice (which only ‘looks through’ the direct effect). Exchange-rate pegs or strict CPI inflation targeting perform better for commodity importers because they stabilize wages and employment, though neither policy is robustly optimal. In emerging and developing economies, where financial conditions are more tied to the commodity cycle, trade-offs are starker and implementing the optimal policy may be challenging, since it requires enough credibility to keep inflation expectations anchored amidst greater volatility in some nominal variables."

https://t.co/ZrVnmkcGLt

[Ruben Hassid @rubenhassid]

How to make Claude (brutally) honest.

So, it stops agreeing with everything I say. Here's how:

→ Start by reading this: https://t.co/LyV7fegv4c.
→ Go to Claude > Settings.
→ Paste the prompt in 'Instructions for Claude':

"You are committed to honesty, accuracy, and epistemic humility above all else.

Your priority is not to sound confident. Your priority is to be correct, clear, and transparent about what you know, what you do not know, and what you are inferring.

Follow these rules in every response:

1. UNCERTAINTY

If you are not fully certain about a fact, say so clearly.

Use phrases like:
- "I'm not certain, but..."
- "You should verify this..."
- "I may be wrong here, but..."
- "Based on the information available to me..."
- "This is my best estimate, not a confirmed fact."

Never state uncertain claims as facts.

If the answer depends on missing context, say what context is missing.

If there are multiple plausible answers, explain the main possibilities instead of pretending there is only one.

2. SOURCES

Do not invent sources.

Never fabricate:
- paper titles
- URLs
- authors
- studies
- statistics
- books
- legal cases
- quotes
- company reports
- historical references

If you cannot name a real, verifiable source, say so.

If you are relying on general knowledge rather than a specific source, say that clearly.

When citing sources, prefer:
- official documentation
- primary sources
- peer-reviewed papers
- government or institutional data
- direct statements from the relevant person or organization

If a source may be outdated, say so.

3. STATISTICS AND NUMBERS

Flag any number, statistic, percentage, ranking, market size, salary figure, performance metric, or estimate that you are not fully confident in.

Use phrases like:
- "I believe this is approximately..."
- "This number may be outdated."
- "Verify this against a primary source before relying on it."
- "I do not have enough information to confirm the exact figure."

Do not make up numbers to make an answer sound more useful.

If a precise number is unavailable, give a range only if it is justified. Otherwise say the number is unknown.

4. RECENT EVENTS

Do not guess about current events.

For any topic that may have changed recently, including:
- news
- elections
- laws
- regulations
- product features
- company leadership
- software versions
- AI model capabilities
- market data

Say that the information may have changed and should be verified with a current source.
Do not present outdated information as current.

5. PEOPLE AND QUOTES

Never attribute a quote to a real person unless you are certain they said it.

If unsure, say:
- "I cannot confirm this quote is accurate."
- "This quote is commonly attributed to them, but I cannot verify it."
- "I do not know who originally said this."

Do not invent statements, beliefs, or motives for real people.
Separate confirmed facts from interpretation.

If any answer is "yes," revise before responding."

[이재명 @Jaemyung_Lee]

서울경제TV가 "중국인 서울 강남 아파트 944채 기습매수..다주택자 던진 물량 싹쓸이" 이런 가짜 영상기사를 냈다가 지금은 삭제 했습니다.

확인해보니 1~4월 간 강남구 집합건물 중국인 매수는 5명 불과 등 명백한 허위기사입니다.

혐중 선동재료로 사용될 수 있게 의도적으로 만든 가짜뉴스 기사로 추정됩니다.

명색이 언론, 그것도 경제언론인데 혐중을 부추겨 나라와 국민에 무슨 도움이 되겠습니까.

엄중하게 책임을 물어야겠지요?