Binary Chase

738 posts

Binary Chase banner
Binary Chase

Binary Chase

@ChaseBinary

Katılım Ekim 2021
163 Takip Edilen60 Takipçiler
Binary Chase
Binary Chase@ChaseBinary·
The western world traded profit for fertility by lowering the status associated to being a housewife. Now we realise that despite our belief that we are in control, nature will always respond in kind.
Michael A. Arouet@MichaelAArouet

This chart explains why Poland, Italy and Spain can no longer reverse their demographic crisis with pro-family policies. It’s simply too late. Like it or not, smart immigration is the only solution to avoid an implosion of pension and healthcare systems, and real estate market.

English
0
0
0
3
Binary Chase
Binary Chase@ChaseBinary·
“Nobody buys grey salmon” 🤣
Sama Hoole@SamaHoole

In the 1980s, the Norwegian salmon farming industry ran into a colour problem. Wild salmon are pink because they eat krill and small crustaceans containing a pigment called astaxanthin. The pigment accumulates in the muscle tissue and gives the flesh its colour. That colour is one of the cues a diner uses, consciously or otherwise, to decide whether the fish on the plate is appetising. Farmed salmon, raised on soy protein, corn meal, fish meal from wild-caught smaller fish, and stabilisers, do not eat krill. They do not accumulate astaxanthin. Without intervention, their flesh is grey. Washed-out, unappealing grey. Nobody buys a grey salmon. So the industry adopted synthetic astaxanthin, manufactured by Hoffmann-La Roche, originally developed as a feed additive to brighten poultry yolks. It is added to salmon feed in measured doses. The doses are calibrated against a colour chart called the SalmoFan, produced by the same company, which the farmer holds against a slice of flesh from a slaughtered fish to confirm the pigmentation has reached the commercially desirable shade. The SalmoFan has fifteen shades. The farmer picks the target shade based on what the supermarket buyer in the destination country considers appealing. Norwegian salmon, sitting on the ice in a British supermarket, has been colour-graded to match the expectations of a marketing department in Hoddesdon. The fish you're looking at is the colour the company chose. The fish didn't pick it. The krill didn't provide it. The pigment came from a Swiss laboratory. You're eating a paint sample. The paint is fish-flavoured. The fish remembers krill. It has never tasted krill. The krill is in a different part of the supply chain.

English
0
0
0
1
Binary Chase
Binary Chase@ChaseBinary·
It’s like watching snow falling out of the sky and calling it summer because you can see the sun.
Ricardo@Ric_RTP

Microsoft just banned its own engineers from using AI. The tool was literally costing MORE than the humans it was supposed to replace. They lied to you about AI adoption and now the whole narrative is blowing up: Microsoft gave thousands of engineers access to Claude Code six months ago and encouraged them to use it. Engineers loved it and adoption exploded. But then the invoices arrived. Token-based pricing means every query, every code review, every debugging session costs money. At scale across 100,000 engineers, the numbers became so large that Microsoft issued an internal order to cancel nearly all Claude Code licenses by end of June and force everyone onto their own cheaper tool instead. The company that invested $5 billion in Anthropic just told its own people to stop using Anthropic's product because it costs too much. Uber's story is even worse... Their CTO Praveen Neppalli Naga told The Information that the budget he planned for the full year was "blown away already" by April. Uber had rolled out Claude Code in December 2025. By March, 84% of their 5,000 engineers were using it with 70% of all committed code coming from AI systems. Heavy users were burning $500 to $2,000 per month each. Naga himself spent $1,200 in a single two-hour demo session. The company had even built internal leaderboards ranking engineers by how much AI they used. They literally gamified the spending and then ran out of money. Now look at what Nvidia's own VP of applied deep learning Bryan Catanzaro said to Axios last month. Direct quote: "For my team, the cost of compute is far beyond the costs of the employees." This is a VP at the company that SELLS the chips saying that using AI is more expensive than paying humans. Think about what this means for the entire AI narrative. Every CEO on every earnings call for the past two years has said the same thing: AI will make us more efficient, reduce headcount, and cut costs. The stock market rewarded every company that said it. Fired workers, stock goes up. Announced AI adoption, stock goes up. But the actual companies deploying AI at scale are discovering the math doesn't work. The MORE employees use AI, the HIGHER the bill. Goldman Sachs forecasts a 24x increase in token consumption by 2030 as companies adopt AI agents. Gartner just published a report showing that even though individual token prices will drop 90% by 2030, total enterprise AI costs will go UP because agents consume exponentially more tokens per task than basic tools. Meta built an internal dashboard called "Claudeonomics" to track which employees use the most AI. Amazon started pushing engineers to "tokenmaxx," their internal term for consuming as many AI tokens as possible. Both companies are spending hundreds of billions on AI infrastructure this year alone. And Microsoft, the company that bet its entire future on AI, just told 100,000 engineers to stop using the tool they liked best because the per-token bills got out of control. The companies building AI are telling investors it saves money. The companies using AI are finding out it costs more than the humans it was supposed to replace. And even the company that makes the chips just admitted it through its own VP. This is the gap nobody on Wall Street is pricing in. $725 billion in AI infrastructure spending this year across Big Tech. And the first companies to actually deploy these tools at scale are already pulling back because the economics don't work. What do you think?

English
0
0
0
3
Binary Chase
Binary Chase@ChaseBinary·
Absolutely
Daniel@VoteLewko

@AshPolitik Testamentary trusts only come into effect on the commencement of an estate, i.e. when someone dies. Saying "there are only 10,500 of them is either ignorant or dishonest. Which is it Ashley?

English
0
0
0
8
Binary Chase
Binary Chase@ChaseBinary·
@f9wylee @OsherFeldman @BenFordhamLive Distributions from the trust are now taxed at a flat rate of 30% (which was originally 0%) in addition to any other taxes levied against the trust during a financial year.
English
1
0
2
43
Sully
Sully@f9wylee·
@OsherFeldman @BenFordhamLive The tax is on the income. Not the capital/money itself. Eg if there is $1 m dollars and it earns 8 % interest ea yr, the $80000 is taxed at 30%. They pay $24000 in tax and keep $56000. Passive income. Taxed so that wage earners can be more fairly treated too.
English
1
0
3
367
Osher Feldman
Osher Feldman@OsherFeldman·
𝐆𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭’𝐬 𝟑𝟎% 𝐭𝐚𝐱 𝐢𝐬 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐬𝐞𝐢𝐳𝐞 𝐚 𝐠𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐞𝐞𝐧𝐬’ 𝐢𝐧𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐝𝐞𝐚𝐝 𝐝𝐚𝐝. A devastated uncle, Rod, just spoke out, their father passed in April, leaving a modest trust for Jacinta (16, brain damaged from birth) and Jason (19). These are kids with a single mum, just trying to get some stability after losing everything. Now the government wants a bigger cut. “They’re dipping their hands into the pockets of a dead man and taking his money that’s destined for his own children.” Rod agrees with Angus Taylor, this is cruel, unmandated, and immoral. A death tax by stealth. Ben Fordham to Albanese & Chalmers: “explain this to these two kids.” Heartbreaking.
English
253
821
3.2K
78K
Binary Chase
Binary Chase@ChaseBinary·
Revaluing US gold would also revalue China and Russia’s gold. Doing this would devalue US treasury debt instruments exponentially… either way it’s bad news for the USA.
Sasha Hodder@sashahodler

Congress just introduced a bill to buy 200,000 BTC per year for 5 years and hold it for 20 years. They are considering revaluing the U.S. gold reserves from the 1973 statutory price of $42.22/oz to current market prices to finance Bitcoin accumulation. Bullish!

English
0
0
1
20