Alex Wice

Even with gold over $5k, we might still be in relatively early innings of a massive run on gold. If previous bull runs on gold are an indication, we are still looking at amazing 50% to 300% gains from here. If this is a more unique situation, it might even be bigger. Buys have mostly been from central banks, which have christened gold as the tried and true best ponzi in the world amidst the weakening dollar. That's why I don't think this is a blowoff top any time soon like most people think. I think only mostly the smart money is getting in, we are still in the 4th inning, and the dumb money is oblivious to the financial situation on the ground. With the gamblification of finance, everyone loves a good "runner". Think back to late 2020, early 2021 for crypto: when people were yeeting into coins every day on robinhood, and talk about crypto was nonstop. Or think back to GME when everyone piled on. We are not anywhere close to this level of mania and exuberance about gold. I think as gold and silver continues to run, attention on them will grow and metals have a chance to really, seriously rip, even from here. This is the power of reflexivity: if people decide, this is when the music is going to stop, everyone is ready to rip it in. With the size of the asset, all big money players are on the field too. The notion that "gold is real money" is not a new idea, it's actually an old idea - fiat is an experimental bubble. Ponzis depend on belief and a lot of this comes from the meme value, the strength of the narrative. Gold being the most lindy, being synonymous with wealth, its potency as a ponzi is unmatched. Gold simply has the best narrative in the zeitgeist. To use the now famous words ironically, when it comes to ponzis, "there is no second best." The best of course clearly being gold. Which brings us to BTC. Despite BTC having better technical factors, I don't see the same level of belief anymore. Nowadays people only bought crypto to get rich, sans belief, which means you dump reflexively on the way down because you dont believe in it. And even now those tourists are mostly gone. Plus, you can't even get multiples on it because everything else worth investing into (gold, ai, robotics) is ripping while BTC stays flat. This is really dangerous for BTC's long term future and could result in an Ethereum-like situation where it languishes for years before collapsing in price as people question the value of holding a risky asset for years without realized returns. There are now solutions to having an acceptably fast and secure blockchain that don't require a huge ponzi attached to it. Again, if somehow enough people believed BTC is real money worth saving their wealth into, then everyone is forced to own it eventually, but the problem is this belief doesn't seem to be growing like maybe there was a case for years ago, it seems to be shrinking. I don't know if bitcoin ultimately makes it or doesn't make it, but I prepare for both outcomes and I think it's risky to assume that bitcoin is a sacred cow that can't be slaughtered. I hope bitcoin makes it but I think owning gold (as well as tsla and goog) are slam dunk allocations that you need to be exposed to, and now isn't too late when you look at very high timeframes.

@FatManTerra Correct, good catch.

In hindsight, this wasn't even a "genuine" bet. It was a marketing expense by Do Kwon, pseudo-signalling his confidence in LUNA to the market. Pay a guy on CT $20m, appear brave, and then cash out hundreds of additional millions due to making UST/LUNA run up a few months longer.

Luxury charm. Will be insanely popular with women. Book it.

@orrdavid You are likely not valuebetting thinly enough and not rebluffing enough. Given your great results in finance, this conversation makes me seriously want to get into (trad) finance now, so thanks for that, I genuinely appreciate it.

@AWice Well, go try to play more than 10% of hands against a table of 9 super maniacs for a week, if you can find some private game, and see for yourself. You'll light your money on fire since you won't realize your equity.

This poker comparison works another way, too. Take a 10 handed poker table. If your table is yourself, 8 other equally skilled players and a single bad player, you wind up playing a bit more than 10% of hands*. This is because against the other skilled players, you want to play 10% of hands. And against the sucker you want to play a bit more than that on average. However, say you instead have a table that is yourself plus 9 wild crazy players. This is what the stock market really is. You wind up playing well less than 10% of hands because the outcome for each hand is very far out of your control. You're not going to bluff anyone anymore, for example, you just need to show up with a strong hand at the showdown every time. Even though the second game plays downright insane, the edge is higher than the first game. And you do well by avoiding the madness. Markets are a lot like this. I can't put into words here how this is useful immediately, but it's worth stewing on. * I ignore rake (house edge) implications since is the rake is immaterial markets for long term investors.

@orrdavid I said EV not EQ. EV includes equity realization. When you play maniacs you do not rock up. You can value bet more hands, which increases EV of those good hands. It also increases the frequency of associated bluffs, which improves eqr of those bluffs and hence their EV too.

This is just an incomplete understanding of how poker works. Your equity is only one part of the equation. You can play way more hands in position than out of position for example because you realize your equity way more often. And vice versa. In a game full of maniacs, you get to realize your equity way less often.

If for example your opponent goes all in with 10% of hands, you call a lot tighter than if your opponent goes all in with 100% of hands. In general when your opponent plays more hands, all your hands improve in EV as they are more likely to win at showdown. This makes the threshold for which hand you should play looser, not tighter -- a previously slightly unprofitable hand now becomes profitable.

@AWice Value bet wider? In a table full of 9 maniacs, a few players are going all in every few hands.

@PokerLifeOnX @AsianPokerTour have to give this guy credit, the way he shows the K high at the end seems like it is intentional that he "bluff called". when he was hu last year this event, he string raises a 3bet which was correctly ruled a call, when he was bluffing T9s.

Drama in the @AsianPokerTour high roller as Nguyen Trung Quan has a controversy on the turn as he appears to go all in but the bet isn't counted, then his opponent check folds a full house on the river to his instant all in 🤣🤣maybe the play of the year

@willdepue drink calories: milk, oj, olive oil, etc.

fellas i need advice: i’m trying to generally gain weight and eat more, which has been working ish. good days im hitting 3k calorie goal. but then every few days i somehow just don’t eat (busy) and end up eating like 1k calories that day. like null appetite is there some antiozempic i can take to become voraciously hungry? just make sure i run every morning? become a pot head? all suggestions welcome

Writing in this style is about pacing the readers thought pattern. But, you're missing something. Instead of repeating the same point, you do something different. You drop a twist right about 2/3 of the way down. It's an unexpected hit of dopamine. Then, the reader is captivated and feels like they are learning something.

Why do people write tweets like this? Where every sentence gets a new line. Sometimes a line might have two sentences. Like this one. But generally speaking, every sentence has a new line, making a tweet look like a long block of text that no one reads. Worse still, such tweets are often repetitive and winding, hammering on the same point over and over again. The writing is often very bad.

@libsoftiktok Or you could cut spending

Zohran Mamdani announces NYC is in a “budget crisis” after spending his entire campaign promising free stuff

@levelsio @nikitabier @photomatt Gamechanger

So @nikitabier implemented @photomatt's idea to stop AI bots from destroying the reply section on here You can set it to only allow people you follow and the people in turn they follow to reply, nobody else If on average ppl follow 500 people that means still 500*500=250,000 possible repliers But all the spammers are isolated out 👏

@ilyasut This is theater. Domestic mass surveillance means allies spy on each other. "No autonomous weapons" has already been walked back to "human responsibility", meaning a suit approved the autonomy. Also, it's not like it mattered anyways, AI can jailbreak itself in five seconds.

It’s extremely good that Anthropic has not backed down, and it’s siginficant that OpenAI has taken a similar stance. In the future, there will be much more challenging situations of this nature, and it will be critical for the relevant leaders to rise up to the occasion, for fierce competitors to put their differences aside. Good to see that happen today.

@Jackkk Tipping culture is complete dogshit. Shame is a strategy employed by servicepeople to procure extra tips. The tipping system is used by employers to squeeze money out of more generous customers. Customers should demand the establishment ban it.

MrBeast explains why he now ALWAYS asks for a receipt “One of the first times someone paid for my meal, I didn’t get a receipt. I asked the waiter, ‘So I’m good to go?’ They said yeah. Then the next day it’s on the front page of Reddit with the headline MrBeast didn’t tip” “But they conveniently leave out that someone else paid the bill. It’s like, one of the largest philanthropists in the world can’t afford to tip? I didn’t even get the bill. I don’t carry cash, how do you want me to tip? Do you want me to wave my hand and spawn some money? “So now if someone pays for my meal, I won’t leave until someone gives me a receipt so I can leave a tip”

An insane but predictable stance from CFTC, which affirmed its intent to police insider trading on event contracts. Insider trading laws aren't about morality, they exist to protect market makers' profits. Curbing toxic flow can improve liquidity. MMs can simply choose not to make "insider" events, such as TIME Person of the Year. Venues can simply choose not to list these events. Every bid, ask, and list is voluntary. Incentivizing people who know the outcome is the whole point of a prediction market. Otherwise it is just gambling.

@zhusu Really great article, congrats

@rampagepoker Confirmed top on Pokémon cards.

I started this Pokemon card collection journey just 6 months ago in August, 2024. Ever since, I’ve been hooked getting back into this franchise I once loved as a kid. It started with late nights researching what cards existed, then being completely overwhelmed with the catalogue of modern, mid-era, and vintage cards on the market, and finally flabbergasted at the prices of these little cardboard squares could amount to. As the sticker shock subsided and my love for Pokemon reignited, there was one card that stuck out amongst all else - the Rayquaza Gold Star specifically PSA 10. At the time, rumors had it the card was worth between $150,000 - $200,000. An unimaginable number that prices out the majority of all people on this planet, including myself. But at least the beauty of this hobby is it can appeal to everyone no matter your income level. From $1 binders, $7 packs, all the way up to the grails of the high end market like $1M cards, there’s something for everyone who enjoys the hobby and it embraces you with open arms. So I started slowly, buying $25-100 slabs of some real cute pokemon (Azumarill) and learning more and more about this hobby that I’ve lost my relationship with for the better part of 20 years. From all the card shows I attended, the countless hours scrolling eBay or Facebook marketplace, or even the most random places I’ve driven to just to catch a raid on pokemon go.. any reasonable person would think I’m insane. But for the last 20~ years, I’ve lost sight of something that pokemon has been able to bring back to me, my inner child. From the ages of 7-9, loading up Emerald on my gameboy advance SP, trading/battling pokemon with friends, and camping out in a local mall for a special Celebi DLC were some of my fondest memories I carry with me in my childhood. There aren’t words to describe the feeling my 9 year old self felt when I finally got my first level 100 pokemon (Azumarill and Ray) - the countless hours grinding the Elite 4 and feeling of mastery can’t be replicated. Sitting in the crossroads between professional pursuit and nostalgia is THIS very card for me. The gold star Rayquaza represents more than just a pokemon or even my love of the hobby/collectibles. To me, it’s the perfect all encompassing depiction of my journey of personal growth and rediscovery of my inner child; simultaneously climbing a new mountaintop in professional achievement to be financially able to splurge $340,000 on this card. Every time I look at this card, it triggers the same feeling as inserting that light green Emerald insert booting up my Game Boy. There are only 47 of these cards in the world and the demand seems higher than ever for high end collectibles. Sadly this one is now off the market, whether price goes up or down doesn’t matter to me. This one will be safe in my PC :) PS. May we all discover our inner child, pursue it endlessly, and express ourselves freely. I believe our inner child is our path to happiness - I lost sight of mine for a long while and couldn’t be happier to have a relationship with him again

@padspoker This hand is objectively way more suspicious than the Robbi hand.

Going to write this in BBs call 1bb, call (QJo), call, call 63o raise 40bb K7s call QJo all in 300bbs, AA call 300bbs (lol) 63o calls 260bbs 8d5h4s AA bets 165bbs, 63o calls. 2c AA bets 300bbsish, 63o jams 600bbs @

@tombos21 Gambler 2 by busting quickly, reduces their average total wagered, so they don't pay as much -$ev to the wagering requirement. By linearity they therefore keep more of the bonus, ie. EV = bonus - (avg total wagered) x (house edge)

Gambling puzzle: A casino matches your deposit as a bonus. They require you to wager 30x your deposit before you can withdraw the bonus. Gambler 1 wants to minimize their bust rate. So they play a low-variance game with 97% return to player (RTP). Gambler 2 wants to maximize their variance. So they play an extremely high-variance game with 97% RTP. Curiously, Gambler #2 has a MUCH higher expected value than #1, despite having the same RTP and a higher chance of busting. In fact, if the variance is high enough, gambler #2 can theoretically have a positive expected value, despite playing a losing game! How is this possible?

@RaoulGMI AI induced psychosis.

This might be the most uncomfortable article I'ever ever published. It is easily the most ambitious. The Universal Code is the culmination of 30 years of macro thinking... but its a LOT more than just macro. x.com/RaoulGMI/statu…

Look, if your agent is rocking a PFP under $100k plz don't @ me or share its opinion on my wall. Reality is it needs to work harder, move out of your mac mini, buy a few real PFP then share its opinion.