$KHC worth exploring?
FCFE stabilized and can cover dividends around $2B, intrinsic value convergence in 2 years if company posts some 2% annual revenue growth with an 8% discount rate.
Net reinvestment capped at $270M in the next 5 years.
Model below:
In investing you have the concept of return on X. That means that more capital is bad if the return on capital is low/negative.
We need a concept like "return on LOC" in order to contrast the N(LOC) = Productivity signal.
If anyone knows how to fix the AI layering problem I am all ears:
Considers context towards stated goal, not as a system - you end up with no cleanup and piling up of functions.
Worse, it thinks that this is good practice but fn decoupling should be done on mature systems not when prototyping.
In contrast, AI is typically used on new developing ideas.
Problem is, that it works, so you are making progress, but it taxes your future.
If anyone knows how to fix the AI layering problem I am all ears:
Considers context towards stated goal, not as a system - you end up with no cleanup and piling up of functions.
@htmx_org Insta, WhatsApp, FB -> Meta
MS Teams -> ChatGPT
And there is Gemini, trained on Reddit, so the solution to systems design always comes down to divorcing your spouse.
Anyway, I'm still waiting for an AMZN frontier model trained on Twitch chat.
> AI can’t do any mathematics
> (makes some simple symbolic calculations)
> but can’t solve problems
> (solves IMO problems)
> but can’t prove any original results
> (improves some bounds in optimization problems)
> but can’t prove real preexisting conjectures
> (solves Erdös conjectures and other combinatorial long-standing problems)
> Combinatorics doesn’t count. Brute force etc.
> (solves Millennium prize)
> but the proofs are ugly and unintelligible
> (finds short, simple proofs)
In the future, expect “AI explainers”, “AI theory simplifiers”, “AI theory builders”, “AI theory appliers to real world”, etc. All of it, with a paper output >100x the current one.
It’s a vast world out there. At any horizon, there is more work than ever for creative human mathematicians. Just not most *current* mathematicians.
Don’t try to solve for the new equilibrium in a week, or to steer to one you like. There’s no equilibrium for now, and when it comes, it will find itself.