Temfrna

How long does it take for fed rate decision to hit the goods market? We usually handwave around it, here's some estimates from empirical research.

@0xCodila Isn’t the common sense? Life advice? We need a phd to tell us that? Are ai protagonists not able to figure this out or actually prescience this law of nature?

Anthropic Engineer Andrej Karpathy: "The biggest mistake in AI right now - people are forcing agents to work instead of mastering the model first We made that mistake in 2016 at OpenAI - It cost us 5 years " what Karpathy actually means: step 1 → stop forcing your agent to do everything, understand the model underneath first step 2 → demos are easy - products take a decade. self-driving proved it - if you skip the foundation, everything breaks step 3 → the agent is not the product. the foundation is. build that - and agents emerge on their own "you building agents right now - you're at the forefront. not OpenAI. not DeepMind. you " watch - bookmark, then read article below ↓

@Math_files @grok is this really a common belief about her?

Harvard believes the next Einstein is already among us. Meet Sabrina Gonzalez Pasterski, a quiet theoretical physicist and one of the brightest minds of her generation. At 14, she built a real airplane. At 16, she flew it alone. When MIT rejected her, she sent them a video of the plane she built instead. Their reply: "Start next semester." She later graduated with a perfect GPA, was cited by Stephen Hawking, and turned down offers from Google, Facebook, and Jeff Bezos. Instead of chasing money and fame, she chose to focus on understanding the universe.

if you think codex and fable are smart then I feel sorry for you, you worked all your life with idiots. Yes they hold a lot of memory and are experts but when it comes reasoning that is non-standard or once you start moving into third order effects and come at things from an inverse angle ie look at facts and reason what must have been true for facts to be those facts, both get confused very fast. I am disappointed.

@atelicinvest That’s why you don’t have a job and will soon be homeless

The world's richest companies told you that they were going to blow all their money - literally thousand yards+ a year - into buying literally every every computing hardware that's out there out on the market, and you had 6 months+ to adjust to this with all the evidence pointing towards it and you missed it entirely because you grew up in a world where computing hardware was a dirty word. You're literally no better than Hoult's character in this movie. You know how to sound like you know what you're talking about but when an opportunity comes knocking at your door you couldn't think from first principles out of a wet paper bag and missed out on a generational run that even a small % allocation would have changed your career entirely. Now you're just left holding your dick in your hand hoping desperately for this to be a bubble and everything to come crashing down so you look like a hero once again just like 25 years ago

@PapaBonner @it_unprofession Salespeople are scammers?

@temfr13 @it_unprofession You're so right, OP should just let this guy scam him for millions of dollars.

I had a $400 Wagyu ribeye for lunch today. I didn't pay for it. An enterprise account executive from a tier 1 cybersecurity firm paid for it. He's been trying to sell me a cloud-native endpoint detection platform for 8 months. We don't need a cloud-native endpoint detection platform. We don't even have endpoints. Half of our workforce is using refurbished laptops from 2014 that are physically incapable of running his software. But I told him we're "evaluating" That phrase means absolutely nothing. But in B2B sales, it's the equivalent of ringing a dinner bell. He's bought me 8 lunches this year. He asks about our migration timeline. I stare out the window, sigh deeply, and whisper about decentralized integration bottlenecks. He furiously takes notes and orders another bottle of sparkling water. My total compensation package is $200K. But my caloric ROI is incalculable. Next week I have a pitch meeting with an AI analytics startup. I checked their Series B funding round before agreeing to the meeting. They have $40M in venture capital burning a hole in their pocket. I'm going to let them buy me omakase. Then I'm going to tell them our legacy infrastructure is experiencing packet loss and we can't deploy until 2029. Corporate America is just a vast ecosystem of free meals if you know how to string along desperate account managers.

@edstromandrew He talks like bitcoin os some mindless girl drifting on its own as an independent identity rather than being a product of market participants

Good morning. Updated view on #Bitcoin here. #Bitcoin is currently at $58k, which is the low (so far) for this ONGOING bear market. Once again, 100% of people who told you the bear market was over were wrong. I know some of you have "rebalanced" your follow list but it's never too late to start and maybe it's worth a second cull. The $58k gang are tough. But likely not tough enough to keep price above $58k. Last week I put that probability at 60%. I'm revising that upward to 70%. I'd love for the 30% scenario to play out, but obviously that's not my base case. Bitcoin has been retracing the last several bear markets in terms of timing (pretty much identical) and shape (similar, but with greater variance) and magnitude (less percentage pain each cycle but still a lot of pain). If you're listening to people telling you that Bitcoin is "hammering out a bottom", you should be careful. Yes, the price is likely within months of bottoming and yes most of the "price damage" has likely been done. But this Bitcoin price chart is not what any prior price bottom has looked like. Prior bottoms have found repeated support at a particular level (prior cycles tested and retested $0.3k, then $6k, then $30k) before breaking those levels to the downside and finding the capitulation bottom. Of course this time could be different, but it hasn't been so far. Put yourself in the shoes of the whales that literally ended the last bull market by dumping their coins in size. (80,000 coin Galaxy BearWhale still out there?) He's seen this movie several times now. He might want to buy back in. But why be the hero that supports the repeatedly-tested $58k level when he could get significantly lower prices and probably soon. Also, although Strategy is not the only buyer, it appears to be taking a summer break. Miami gets pretty hot this time of year. The new balance sheet management program opens up the possibility of selling BTC. I'm not saying they will. I'm just saying they're not (for now) a net accumulator. For anyone waiting for a "specific catalyst" or a "body to float to the surface", it's always fun to speculate who it is but you can't know in advance. Also, some financial bodies don't float to the surface immediately because they have concrete shoes given to them by the long arm of the U.S. Treasury. Pay close attention to @SecScottBessentand listen to / read analysis by @LeveredUSTs and @kanemcgukin. As I've observed many times now when price has been at/near $60k level, anyone who's UNDERallocated (which is specific to their situation) should be stacking at these levels. But anyone with leverage on the long side should be soiling their shorts AGAIN and then having ANOTHER long talk with their spouse or best friend or financial advisor. Nobody knows the future with certainty, as anyone who was paying too much attention to the bulltards last year can painfully attest. But so far this bear market has played out VERY similarly to prior ones and I will continue to exercise pattern-recognition until proven otherwise. Such pattern recognition has so far yielded enormous alpha compared with most of the personalities in this space. I have not yet revised my 10-year "success case" $400k target that I set in Why Buy Bitcoin 7 years ago. I probably will have to revise it downward at some point, but I remain long-term bullish for #Bitcoin. All the best to you.

@DavidSacks You’re confusing headcount growth with output

Narrative violation: A new study of 21,559 firms in the U.S. finds that “companies that adopt AI tend to grow faster following adoption”. “Firms making the largest AI investments grow employment by roughly 10% following adoption, while low-intensity adopters see no statistically significant change.” “Entry-level headcount rises 12% for high-intensity adopters.” “Gains emerge gradually and are broad across roles, including engineering, sales, administration, and customer service.” “The results counter predictions that AI adoption will lead to broad job loss.” The study is based on observed AI spending from Ramp card and bill pay data linked to Revelio Labs workforce records.

@DurdenBTC @saylor @grok what’s realized price here

it's not the tourists underwater this time.. it's the long-term holders. ~45% of $BTC LTH supply is now sitting in a loss, the same level reached at every cycle bottom in history & we're not even under realised price. if the strongest hands haven't sold yet (besides @saylor), who's left to?

@jposhaughnessy @grok what’s the second one about

Two thoughts from Michael Crichton “If you don't know history, then you don't know anything. You are a leaf that doesn't know it is part of a tree. ” “Men under stress are fools, and fool themselves.”

MSTR but back limit of 1 billion is rather small and arbitrary. Continuation of MSTR issuance but at 1 mnav (which is actually a fictional mnav) is too loosy goosy in definition since an exact basic mnav could have been given. A total repurchase of 1 billion dollars of MSTR is a mere 4 percent of current market capitalization which is not exploitative enough at current mnav discount. Also shareholder will keep getting hammered because an enterprise mnav near 1 is BPS dilutive. I would have wished to say well done but this falls short and will not get strategy out of its current quagmire and not increase shareholder confidence of deter short sellers. It’s an improvement but more needs to be done but problem with further latency is that capital structure and value creation deteriorate till you arrive at a bolder program that fully exploits market dislocations rather than teetering off at a fictional 1 mnav and limits to BTC purchase to 1 billion USD. @SimonDixonTwitt seems eloquent about this because it feels like using shareholder funds to acquire BTC and keep MSTR price depressed so that company becomes an attractive acquisition target. Why management would do this is beyond me.

TLDR: Saylor is selling Strategy's common $MSTR to prop up the preferred $STRC Until $BTC starts rallying this is more dilution ⚠️

MSTR but back limit of 1 billion is rather small and arbitrary. Continuation of MSTR issuance but at 1 mnav (which is actually a fictional mnav) is too loosy goosy in definition since an exact basic mnav could have been given. A total repurchase of 1 billion dollars of MSTR is a mere 4 percent of current market capitalization which is not exploitative enough at current mnav discount. Also shareholder will keep getting hammered because an enterprise mnav near 1 is BPS dilutive. I would have wished to say well done but this falls short and will not get strategy out of its current quagmire and not increase shareholder confidence of deter short sellers. It’s an improvement but more needs to be done but problem with further latency is that capital structure and value creation deteriorate till you arrive at a bolder program that fully exploits market dislocations rather than teetering off at a fictional 1 mnav and limits to BTC purchase to 1 billion USD. @SimonDixonTwitt seems eloquent about this because it feels like using shareholder funds to acquire BTC and keep MSTR price depressed so that company becomes an attractive acquisition target. Why management would do this is beyond me.

July 2025: we will opportunistically issue MSTR above 2.5x mNAV August 2025: we can tactically issue MSTR below 2.5x mNAV May 2026: the threshold for Bitcoin per share accretion when issuing MSTR is above 1.2x mNAV June 2026: we will be disciplined in issuing MSTR at or near 1x mNAV

MSTR but back limit of 1 billion is rather small and arbitrary. Continuation of MSTR issuance but at 1 mnav (which is actually a fictional mnav) is too loosy goosy in definition since an exact basic mnav could have been given. A total repurchase of 1 billion dollars of MSTR is a mere 4 percent of current market capitalization which is not exploitative enough at current mnav discount. Also shareholder will keep getting hammered because an enterprise mnav near 1 is BPS dilutive. I would have wished to say well done but this falls short and will not get strategy out of its current quagmire and not increase shareholder confidence of deter short sellers. It’s an improvement but more needs to be done but problem with further latency is that capital structure and value creation deteriorate till you arrive at a bolder program that fully exploits market dislocations rather than teetering off at a fictional 1 mnav and limits to BTC purchase to 1 billion USD. @SimonDixonTwitt seems eloquent about this because it feels like using shareholder funds to acquire BTC and keep MSTR price depressed so that company becomes an attractive acquisition target. Why management would do this is beyond me.

Today marks a significant evolution of @Strategy’s business model. We now have maximum optionality with buyback programs for $MSTR and $STRC, alongside a monetization program for $BTC. And as always, we remain committed to full transparency.

MSTR but back limit of 1 billion is rather small and arbitrary. Continuation of MSTR issuance but at 1 mnav (which is actually a fictional mnav) is too loosy goosy in definition since an exact basic mnav could have been given. A total repurchase of 1 billion dollars of MSTR is a mere 4 percent of current market capitalization which is not exploitative enough at current mnav discount. Also shareholder will keep getting hammered because an enterprise mnav near 1 is BPS dilutive. I would have wished to say well done but this falls short and will not get strategy out of its current quagmire and not increase shareholder confidence of deter short sellers. It’s an improvement but more needs to be done but problem with further latency is that capital structure and value creation deteriorate till you arrive at a bolder program that fully exploits market dislocations rather than teetering off at a fictional 1 mnav and limits to BTC purchase to 1 billion USD. @SimonDixonTwitt seems eloquent about this because it feels like using shareholder funds to acquire BTC and keep MSTR price depressed so that company becomes an attractive acquisition target. Why management would do this is beyond me.

MSTR but back limit of 1 billion is rather small and arbitrary. Continuation of MSTR issuance but at 1 mnav (which is actually a fictional mnav) is too loosy goosy in definition since an exact basic mnav could have been given. A total repurchase of 1 billion dollars of MSTR is a mere 4 percent of current market capitalization which is not exploitative enough at current mnav discount. Also shareholder will keep getting hammered because an enterprise mnav near 1 is BPS dilutive. I would have wished to say well done but this falls short and will not get strategy out of its current quagmire and not increase shareholder confidence of deter short sellers. It’s an improvement but more needs to be done but problem with further latency is that capital structure and value creation deteriorate till you arrive at a bolder program that fully exploits market dislocations rather than teetering off at a fictional 1 mnav and limits to BTC purchase to 1 billion USD. @SimonDixonTwitt seems eloquent about this because it feels like using shareholder funds to acquire BTC and keep MSTR price depressed so that company becomes an attractive acquisition target. Why management would do this is beyond me.

Strategy announces a Digital Credit Capital Framework designed to strengthen Digital Credit, enhance liquidity, preserve long-term Bitcoin exposure, and support long-term value creation. $MSTR $STRC strategy.com/press/strategy…

@3povC @pmarca lol. Hilarious

@temfr13 @pmarca You don't understand, if Marc was born in Gaza, he would've made it into paradise.

Imagine the level of nihilism required to believe that the rise of anything great is an accident.

@realcryptoboost @grok does the inverse work as well ie bitcoin price hits a certain spread above production cost and price tanks

Le coût de fabrication de Bitcoin est de 78 000 dollars. On le brade à 63 000. Les mineurs les plus fragiles crèvent. Ils éteignent les machines, ils vendent leurs derniers bitcoins pour survivre. 32 000 lâchés en un trimestre. Un record, pire qu'en 2022. C'est laid, c'est violent et c'est exactement ce que je veux voir. Parce que ce n'est pas un marché qui meurt. C'est un marché qui essore ses mains faibles. Et maintenant, parlons de ceux qui te promettent 40 000. Sous le coût de production, chaque mineur qui s'éteint retire du Bitcoin du marché. L'offre se tarit pile au moment où tout le monde panique. C'est mécanique. C'est ça qui forme un plancher. 2015, 2019, 2022…À chaque fois que le prix est passé sous le coût de production, c'était le fond. Pas le début de la chute. Moi je l'ai vu deux fois de mes yeux. Et deux fois, j'ai vu des gens que je connaissais vendre en bas, dégoûtés, en jurant qu'on ne les y reprendrait plus. Ils sont rerentrés bien plus haut, dans le vert, en regrettant. Pendant que certains attendent un 40 000 qui ne viendra pas, je ramasse du #Bitcoin moins cher que ce qu'il coûte à fabriquer. Regarde bien le graphique. La ligne du dessous, c'est le coût de production. Le prix l'a touchée quatre fois en dix ans, et quatre fois c'était le moment d'acheter, pas de fuir. Aujourd'hui on y est pour la cinquième fois. Dis-moi que cette fois c'est différent. J'attends.

@PodcastAlphaX @jvisserlabs That’s him. I am going the other way. That’s not enough data

Jordy Visser @jvisserlabs: "Google's not a player in this anymore." Visser is an AI-native power user who tracks his own model usage as a leading indicator. Two months ago Claude was 35% of his usage, ChatGPT 25%, Google 20%. Now ChatGPT and Claude are 90% combined and Gemini is near zero. The same week, two senior DeepMind scientists left for Anthropic. He would never short Google. But multiple compression is already underway, the same pattern that hit Meta and Microsoft. A business does not have to fail to destroy shareholder value. Why the AI race narrowed to two: podcastalpha.substack.com/p/jordy-visser… Source: Anthony Pompliano Podcast - youtube.com/watch?v=LkU3fh…

@3povC @pmarca Mate, he likes to pick on taleb out of jealousy and I hate his idiocy. He needs to behave better. Hasn’t done anything in his life, got lucky that Jim Clark made him money and not puts down people. Look at his profile - denigrating James huang. Irascible person!

@temfr13 @pmarca calm down sir, this is a social media platform

@pmarca did you?

Learn to ship.

@3povC @pmarca What a pompous fuck! just keeps reading books, no real life experience, lousy programmer and denigrates people!

@pmarca Anyone still using Netscape? No one is using Firefox anymore either. VC is flip coins without going bankrupt until one hits. It's all random. Be grateful the flip went your way.