Is there any research on whether vertically integrated companies tend to perform better in general? The article points out that diversified supply chains may not be as resilient as expected, plus it stands to reason that a vertically integrated firm would benefit from detailed information about its supply chain. I know that Tesla and BYD has had success with that strategy.
This sounds a lot like <that whose name cannot be said>, "neoliberalism," strengthening rule of law, regulation according to cost benefit analysis public deficits = Σ(expenditures with NPV>0)
"Large language models and other AI tools have made miraculous leaps in their ability to process text data—ranging from news articles to the content of a company’s Slack—into quantitative forms and integrating it into predictive models of risk. "
And that's good if only you can be sure the LLM doesn't then hallucinate an answer. Since hallucination is a fundamental feature of LLM AIs that's an issue.
Other forms of text processing/correlation/machine learning etc. are undoubtedly useful for this sort of thing but tossing an organizations emails and slack messages into an LLM seems to me to be dicing with disaster. Sure it'll be fine 99% of the time (or even 99.9%) but that one time when it isn't could be catastrophic, which is not something you want for a solution that is supposed to detect potential disasters and route around them.
True, and add in the effect of politicians "hallucinating" while legislating and things can get dicey fast. There are a lot of moving parts that could easily fail in this vertically integrated system. Why do I get an image of the Terminator movie with humans at war with the 'bots' only this time the war will be economic rather than 'hand to chip' (bots have no hands) military warfare? By maliciously snarling up the global supply system, humans would starve to death in a remarkably short time span fighting with each other in some 'Mad Max' dystopia. An AI overlord with its tentacles in every aspect of the human supply chain lifeline is a huge leap of faith and trust. What could possibly go wrong?
This suggests to me that corporations should require their sub-contractors to map out:
1) The location of their factories
2) The name of their sub-contractors
3) Require both of the above for all of those who make the necessary parts.
4) Require their sub-contractors do the same.
If this became standard business practice, businesses would have a much better idea where fragility in their supply chain exists. In other words, map it all out like is a giant Bill of Material.
Every company already signs legal contracts with their sub-contractors. Those contracts are full of all kinds of obligations that require each of the parties to uphold in return for a working relationship with the other. This is just adding on a few extra requirements that benefit both parties.
And China is FAR more regimented than what I am proposing. Absolutely nothing is compelled. It is a voluntary contract.
Really, so private corporations are going to voluntarily compile sensitive data for an omnipotent “government” entity with vast regulatory power over them… My long experience is nothing happens unless compelled. There is an Arab proverb about letting the camel’s nose get under the tent you might want to ponder.
Reread the original article. It calls for centralized monitoring and control of international supply chains by the "government."
I am not sure of your point. Of course private corporations have legal contracts with suppliers, but as the main article states, the globalized supply network is diverse, interconnected, and fragile. In the West, logistics control is a fragile patchwork lacking coordination and centralization. China has taken a different stance:
"China has successfully re-invested its export earnings from offshored manufacturing to create the world’s dominant capabilities in maritime commercial logistics infrastructure, giving China a durable platform to pursue, through economic channels, and political and strategic goals that nations previously achieved by military conquest.
This multiplies the power beyond simply delivery containers, or making products in China that are shipped in containers. China runs the only global maritime delivery network that is assured of connection to China factories in the event of military conflict or a standoff with the U.S."
I never said that I agree with the article saying that the government should do monitor global supply chains. I offered a potential alternative, and for some bizarre reason, you keep disagreeing with me because of something that I did NOT write.
If you are not sure of my point, then why on earth do you keep disagreeing with me. Just keep rereading until it finally sinks in.
With regard to congestion pricing, you might want to look at how air traffic controllers handle declarations of “minimum fuel” and “emergency fuel”. No money changes hands, but mistakes could result in significant pain. Often, bad weather can lead to numerous aircraft declaring emergencies at the same time.
Securing supply chains in the face of unknown threats like union strikes, ukraine, Taiwan, Houthis, ??? should also mention the most valuable thing you can do in the face of unknown threats: gathering slack and options. The more options we have, the more things we can try when one thing no longer works. We see Germany had more options than they thought (gas -> light oil, gas -> electricity), so if we intentionally collect options ahead of time, we can be much better prepared.
I am missing something here... What is this benevolent "government" mentioned as the panacea to all the confusion. Didn't I also read the example of Brexit (a government brain fart) sending shock waves though the UK supply lines. How does private enterprise submit to the Draconian hand of whatever "government" bureau - something like the Federal Reserve I am assuming? How do we keep the politicians from politicizing this powerful trade entity and wreaking havoc on opponents?
As I read this call for centralized economic control, I realize that I have seen this before. It is almost a perfect description of China's controlled economic hierarchy which works better on paper than in the chaos of decentralized globalization which is the current state of the world economy. China has a very efficient system if everyone operates just as they do. A system based on rationality can only work if everyone agrees to be reasonable. Spoiler alert: we're not there yet.
Is there any research on whether vertically integrated companies tend to perform better in general? The article points out that diversified supply chains may not be as resilient as expected, plus it stands to reason that a vertically integrated firm would benefit from detailed information about its supply chain. I know that Tesla and BYD has had success with that strategy.
This sounds a lot like <that whose name cannot be said>, "neoliberalism," strengthening rule of law, regulation according to cost benefit analysis public deficits = Σ(expenditures with NPV>0)
"Large language models and other AI tools have made miraculous leaps in their ability to process text data—ranging from news articles to the content of a company’s Slack—into quantitative forms and integrating it into predictive models of risk. "
And that's good if only you can be sure the LLM doesn't then hallucinate an answer. Since hallucination is a fundamental feature of LLM AIs that's an issue.
Other forms of text processing/correlation/machine learning etc. are undoubtedly useful for this sort of thing but tossing an organizations emails and slack messages into an LLM seems to me to be dicing with disaster. Sure it'll be fine 99% of the time (or even 99.9%) but that one time when it isn't could be catastrophic, which is not something you want for a solution that is supposed to detect potential disasters and route around them.
This is another example of LLM Considered Harmful IMHO (https://ombreolivier.substack.com/p/llm-considered-harmful?r=7yrqz )
True, and add in the effect of politicians "hallucinating" while legislating and things can get dicey fast. There are a lot of moving parts that could easily fail in this vertically integrated system. Why do I get an image of the Terminator movie with humans at war with the 'bots' only this time the war will be economic rather than 'hand to chip' (bots have no hands) military warfare? By maliciously snarling up the global supply system, humans would starve to death in a remarkably short time span fighting with each other in some 'Mad Max' dystopia. An AI overlord with its tentacles in every aspect of the human supply chain lifeline is a huge leap of faith and trust. What could possibly go wrong?
Definitely reading this more than once
This suggests to me that corporations should require their sub-contractors to map out:
1) The location of their factories
2) The name of their sub-contractors
3) Require both of the above for all of those who make the necessary parts.
4) Require their sub-contractors do the same.
If this became standard business practice, businesses would have a much better idea where fragility in their supply chain exists. In other words, map it all out like is a giant Bill of Material.
Yeah sure... corporations are private enterprises utilizing private subcontractors. Not even China has this level of control and regimentation.
I disagree.
Every company already signs legal contracts with their sub-contractors. Those contracts are full of all kinds of obligations that require each of the parties to uphold in return for a working relationship with the other. This is just adding on a few extra requirements that benefit both parties.
And China is FAR more regimented than what I am proposing. Absolutely nothing is compelled. It is a voluntary contract.
Really, so private corporations are going to voluntarily compile sensitive data for an omnipotent “government” entity with vast regulatory power over them… My long experience is nothing happens unless compelled. There is an Arab proverb about letting the camel’s nose get under the tent you might want to ponder.
No. Reread my original comment. I never even mentioned the government.
This is all about corporations better understanding their own supply chain.
Reread the original article. It calls for centralized monitoring and control of international supply chains by the "government."
I am not sure of your point. Of course private corporations have legal contracts with suppliers, but as the main article states, the globalized supply network is diverse, interconnected, and fragile. In the West, logistics control is a fragile patchwork lacking coordination and centralization. China has taken a different stance:
"China has successfully re-invested its export earnings from offshored manufacturing to create the world’s dominant capabilities in maritime commercial logistics infrastructure, giving China a durable platform to pursue, through economic channels, and political and strategic goals that nations previously achieved by military conquest.
This multiplies the power beyond simply delivery containers, or making products in China that are shipped in containers. China runs the only global maritime delivery network that is assured of connection to China factories in the event of military conflict or a standoff with the U.S."
https://thediplomat.com/2024/02/shipping-ports-and-chinas-new-maritime-empire/
Oh, please.
I never said that I agree with the article saying that the government should do monitor global supply chains. I offered a potential alternative, and for some bizarre reason, you keep disagreeing with me because of something that I did NOT write.
If you are not sure of my point, then why on earth do you keep disagreeing with me. Just keep rereading until it finally sinks in.
Good bye.
With regard to congestion pricing, you might want to look at how air traffic controllers handle declarations of “minimum fuel” and “emergency fuel”. No money changes hands, but mistakes could result in significant pain. Often, bad weather can lead to numerous aircraft declaring emergencies at the same time.
Securing supply chains in the face of unknown threats like union strikes, ukraine, Taiwan, Houthis, ??? should also mention the most valuable thing you can do in the face of unknown threats: gathering slack and options. The more options we have, the more things we can try when one thing no longer works. We see Germany had more options than they thought (gas -> light oil, gas -> electricity), so if we intentionally collect options ahead of time, we can be much better prepared.
Remember when Trump warned Germany about it's dependence on Russian energy? Meanwhile Noah still calling him a Russian asset https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nu57D9YcIk0#bottom-sheet
I am missing something here... What is this benevolent "government" mentioned as the panacea to all the confusion. Didn't I also read the example of Brexit (a government brain fart) sending shock waves though the UK supply lines. How does private enterprise submit to the Draconian hand of whatever "government" bureau - something like the Federal Reserve I am assuming? How do we keep the politicians from politicizing this powerful trade entity and wreaking havoc on opponents?
As I read this call for centralized economic control, I realize that I have seen this before. It is almost a perfect description of China's controlled economic hierarchy which works better on paper than in the chaos of decentralized globalization which is the current state of the world economy. China has a very efficient system if everyone operates just as they do. A system based on rationality can only work if everyone agrees to be reasonable. Spoiler alert: we're not there yet.
Free Trade?