In this paper I propose a new way of measuring linguistic productivity that objectively assesses the ability of an affix to be used to coin new complex words and, unlike other popular measures, is not directly dependent upon token frequency. Specifically, I suggest that linguistic productivity may be viewed as the probability of an affix to combine with a random base. The advantages of this approach include the following. First, token frequency does not dominate the productivity measure but naturally influences the sampling of bases. Second, we are not just counting attested word types with an affix but rather simulating the construction of these types and then checking whether they are attested in the corpus. Third, a corpus-based approach and randomised design assure that true neologisms and words coined long ago have equal chances to be selected. The proposed algorithm is evaluated both on English and Russian data. The obtained results provide some valuable insights into the relation of linguistic productivity to the number of types and tokens. It looks like burgeoning linguistic productivity manifests itself in an increasing number of types. However, this process unfolds in two stages: first comes the increase in high-frequency items, and only then follows the increase in low-frequency items.

Jamie Dimon, chairman and chief executive of JPMorgan Chase, said in his 2021 letter to shareholders that waves of technological innovation are becoming faster and the science behind them increasingly complex as technology, such as artificial intelligence, is "embedded" in more products. He said: "In today's world, I cannot overemphasize the importance of implementing new technology." The bank announced in January this year that total expenses would increase by approximately $6bn, with $2.5bn mostly related to people, travel and entertainment reflecting higher inflation and increasing competition for labor. Dimon wrote: "This year, we announced that the expenses related to investments would increase from $11.5bn to $15bn. I am going to try to describe the "incremental investments" of $3.5bn, though I can't review them all (and for competitive reasons I wouldn't). But we hope a few examples will give you comfort in our decision-making process."