“Can regulation work when a market changes faster than a case can be litigated? The Justice Department filed its antitrust case against Google in 2020. By the time Judge Amit Mehta issued his ruling in 2024, AI large-language models had already begun to change how people search for information online. As Judge Mehta put it, ‘the emergence of GenAI changed the course of this case.’ … In fast-moving technology sectors, markets often evolve while regulatory and legal processes are still underway, increasing the risk of ill-timed remedies.” (11/25/25)
“The Chinese don’t really believe in recursive self-improvement or superintelligence. If they did, they wouldn’t be so blasé about the possibility of America having AIs 1-2 years more advanced than theirs – if our models pass the superintelligence threshold while theirs are still approaching it, then their advantage in humanoids and drones no longer seems so impressive. What is the optimal counter-strategy for America? We’re still debating specifics, but a skeletal, obvious-things-only version might be to preserve our compute advantage as long as possible, protect our technological secrets from Chinese espionage, and put up as much of a fight as possible on the application layer.” (11/25/25)
“Monday’s dismissal of the indictments of former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James — two critics of President Donald Trump whom he targeted in his campaign of political retribution — is a victory, or at least a mini-victory, for the rule of law. … Comey might personally be out of the woods, but the rule of law is not. For him, the statute of limitations has expired on the two-count indictment against him on dubious charges of perjury and obstruction of justice in connection with his testimony before Congress. Bondi might try anyway; she has an argument that the government gets the benefit of a six-month statutory grace period to get another grand jury to indict him. But Currie’s ruling suggests that this provision doesn’t apply to an indictment brought by a fake U.S. attorney whose actual authority was no different from that of a random person off the street.” (11/25/25)
“We have a lot of problems in this country, as we always have. But, just for a minute, imagine we had a political class interested in addressing those problems in a way that benefited as many Americans as chose to avail themselves of the opportunity to improve their lot in life? That’s a wordy way of saying that the government should serve as a plow to clear the road ahead for everyone (of red tape, foreign and corporate interference, and anything else in the way) so everyone has a chance to make whatever they can, or would like, out of their lives. Instead of that plow, we have half the political establishment staring at the ground, shuffling their feet and, like a bad stage actor, unsure what to do with their hands. The other half is actively throwing as many obstacles as possible in that road …” (11/25/25)
Source: Ludwig von Mises Institute
by Wanjiru Njoya
“The court historians, who insist that they have the only ‘correct’ view of history, like to claim that theirs is the only true version of history because it is based on primary sources. But they fail to distinguish between what the primary sources state, and their own interpretation of the significance to be attached to those sources. Moreover, their selection of which historical sources are to be given paramount importance, and which may safely be ignored, is often selected to fit within their own preferred theory.” (11/25/25)
“The recent flurry of diplomatic activity surrounding Ukraine has revealed a stark transatlantic divide. While high level American and Ukrainian officials have been negotiating the U.S. peace plan in Geneva, European powers have been scrambling to influence a process from which they risk being sidelined. While Europe has to be eventually involved in a settlement of the biggest war on its territory after World War II, so far it’s been acting more like a spoiler than a constructive player.” (11/25/25)
Source: Karl Dickey’s Freedom Vanguard
by Karl Dickey
“Yesterday, I was shopping at the new Whole Foods near me, and I was looking for some Thanksgiving dinner ingredients in addition to some quality CBD products. The shelves were full, and everyone seemed to be in great spirits. But if the folks in Washington, D.C., have their way, this scene could be illegal by next year. While we were busy living our lives and focusing on the Epstein Files, Congress passed another Continuing Resolution (CR) to keep the government lights on. They avoided a shutdown, sure, for a couple of months (it all starts again in January). But at what cost? Only one man in the U.S. House, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY), stood up to expose the rot inside this 141-page disaster.” (11/25/25)
“An impressive new biography of Jessica Mitford emphasises her sceptical and anti-authoritarian personality. But this was only half of the picture.” (11/25/25)
“Because tariffs are a tax, they raise the price that consumers pay, increase the cost that sellers incur, or some combination of both. Point is: someone will pay the tax and those tax dollars will then flow into the federal government in the form of tariff revenue. … A quota is a legal restriction on the amount of a good that can be imported. Because it restricts the amount of a good that is allowed to enter a market, we can easily imagine a tariff and a quota having the same impact on the amount of a good that is imported. … Because tariffs and quotas ultimately have exactly the same effect on consumers and producers, there is good reason to believe that the two are economically equivalent, as Solicitor General Sauer argues. If that’s the case, why would any government use tariffs when they can instead use quotas?” (11/25/25)
“Next year, an estimated 5 million people will be priced out of health insurance in the United States. I am one of them. When I went to renew my family’s policy, I was shocked to discover my premium had gone up to $2,600 per month, a price my household of four simply cannot afford. For the first time in my adult life, I will be uninsured, joining the millions who have navigated this risky reality for years. It’s a bitter pill to swallow, especially when health insurance already makes access to healthcare costly with extremely unrealistic deductibles and high out-of-pocket costs. Yet, as a woman in my 40s with a family history of breast cancer, going without coverage is a gamble with my life. After some number-crunching, we concluded that we could afford to carry insurance for only 2 of the 4 of us.” (11/25/25)
