The Department of Economics at the New School for Social Research has just issued a statement on the New School's decision to layoff dozens of staff and faculty colleagues, including our own colleague and friend, Professor Sanjay Reddy.

Imagine the press had done this starting the day this clown came down those escalators in 2015

Ponder the laundry list of civilisational failures needed to make this a headline in 2026 AD...

If I was Ed Sheeran I’d go into hiding at this point This video’s already got almost 600k likes in 7 hours on TikTok 😂

Just published a brief, popular entry sharing some thoughts on statistics, scientism, individualism, and economic analysis. A teaser of a few forthcoming formal pieces.... Read it and other recent critical interventions just published by @hetecon hetecon.net/2026/09/13/we-ne…

BREAKING: OpenAI might have stolen another major proof. In a detailed Mastodon post, which I report in full in the comments, Andreas Thom presents several pieces of evidence suggesting that OpenAI may have trained Astra on conversations in which he and Gábor Kun were working on Gromov’s soficity conjecture, one of the ten problems OpenAI later announced Astra had solved. I know Andreas. We met several times early in our careers. He is an exceptional mathematician, a leading expert on sofic and hyperlinear groups, and one of the most respected scholars in the field. He has spent two decades working on this problem. If his account is correct, this is not a minor dispute over attribution. It would mean that unpublished human work was absorbed into a model and then presented to the world as a breakthrough by the model itself. And if the allegations raised by Levent Alpöge, Tristan Buckmaster, and now Andreas Thom are all substantiated, we are no longer looking at isolated incidents. We may be looking at one of the greatest intellectual scandals in the history of science. AI is not discovering new mathematics. AI is stealing human discovery.

For the benefit of anybody thinking OpenAI "solved" the Navier-Stokes problem...

go fuck yourself @sama claiming that you solved navier stokes because 10000 agents ran in circles for 88hours on a multimillion dollar gpu cluster to formalize in lean a blowup case under controlled external forcing is pure scientific vulgarity the clay mathematics institute millennium prize does not ask m whether you can artificially force a singularity in a fluid by injecting an ad hoc smooth external forcing term f(x,t) to twist the vortex until it breaks the real problem questions the fundamental stability and global smooth existence for 3dimensional incompressible euler & navier stokes equations under natural conservation laws and viscous dissipation alone using a mathematical loophole on forced equations to parade a century old victory is a major conceptual scam Altman technically & epistemologically what you present as an agi breakthrough is nothing more than bruteforce combinatorial autoformalization the ai did not understand fluid mechanics it simply navigated a continuous search space previously mapped out and constrained by the monumental work of human mathematicians like tristan buckmaster/ levent alpöge / diego córdoba or tarek elgindi coordinating 10000 agents to check the logical consistency of a 100 page proof via lean is a software engineering feat and computational parallelization triumph not an intrinsic scientific discovery it is the victory of the compute bulldozer over abstract human intuition repackaged for the public as a higher mathematical consciousness to this theoretical imposture you add a disgusting ethical and industrial cynicism taking advantage of private codex sessions and informal preprints from academic researchers to siphon their research leads and then trying to redact or erase the contribution of levent alpöge under the pretext that he works at rival anthropic is intellectual serfdom openai behaves like a feudal lord of silicon appropriating the cognitive subsistence of independent scholars threatening their careers behind closed doors if they protest and turning community academic labor into a privatized pressrelease this entire staged event serves a desperate financial agenda in a pre ipo panic facing the slowdown of scaling laws and growing investor skepticism over the profitability of foundational models openai needs to manufacture an artificial sputnik moment claiming to solve a millennium prize without immediately submitting the proof to traditional peer review means using the prestige of fundamental mathematics as cheap marketing fuel to inflate a delusional valuation!!! real science is not a clout chase on social media or a compute spike spent to rob the clay mathematics institute it is a quest for elegance physical truth and universal rigor to decode reality true artificial intelligence will not emerge from hostile corporate takeover of academic work hidden behind computational bruteforce but from architectures capable of generating new conceptual paradigms by masquerading constrained formalization as the collapse of physics greatest mysteries you did not solve navier stokes you only proved how far silicon valley will go to prostitute scientific integrity for capitalist spectacle

Tell me you're scared shitless that Japan may dip into its $1.1 trillion holdings of US Treasury securities to prop up the Yen without telling me you're scared shitless that Japan... ft.com/content/38d718f6-110b… via @ft

Canada putting up the "OPEN" sign on its shop window

When a book's opening makes it clear *the* problem that led you to buy it is not quite the problem that led the authors to write it, "When measuring some attribute of a class of objects or events, we associate numbers... with the objects in such a way that the properties of the attribute are faithfully represented as numerical properties."

Just going to drop this here, for no reason at all...

de Finetti did a lot of low-key, devastating trolling

Leaving principled dissenters to choose between Magisterial Reformation, Radical Reformation, or outright heresy… @kmunro_econ

Point from my (Bayesian-inflected) Information Theory lecture yesterday: Heteroscedasticity is only a nuisance if you’ve assumed homoscedasticity. In all other cases, it’s informative. #InformationTheory #BadStats

de Finetti's term "adhockeries" is a whole vibe

A couple of somewhat disparate observations along similar lines. 1. US commentators act as if the world does not remember the aftermath of the Plaza Accord and its contribution to Japan's eventual stagnation and relative decline. 2. Their argument that the problem of US competitiveness relative to China is primarily down to currency valuations is barmy and grossly underestimates the industrial-policy and state-capacity issues involved. 3. As the global pace of USD asset accumulation continues to ease and change in composition, I suspect those commentators will not like the short- and medium-run consequences for the US macroeconomy.

I mean, one can type those words in that order on a keyboard... "Don’t draw the wrong conclusion from Treasury yields" ft.com/content/a919761d-dab1… via @ft

The @wsj published a Craaazy piece invoking me by name, while conveniently failing to inform readers that inflation sits at the core of the MMT project (the second chapter of my book, The Deficit Myth, is literally titled "Think of Inflation.") So, yeah, spending (not just government spending) carries inflation risk (sometimes negligible, sometimes elevated).