Erik

@TheStalwart Not really. It was a great game because they scored 9 goals from a combined xG of 4.5 - meaning that the finishing was of exceptionally good quality.

I thought it was a great game too. And I’m glad you have watched it. But it is kind of revealing that even serious fútbol fans like a high scoring game.

Trump: We don't need the Strait of Hormuz.

Today, you really cannot focus on climbing the corporate ladder, relying on a monthly salary, or even building a traditional cash-flow business. These are all dangerous. You need to be invested, deeply invested, in the assets that have the most to gain from a rapidly changing world and environment. It is unlikely that you will be able to outpace the current winners when it comes to AI, robotics. Simultaneously, we are navigating a massive restructuring of the geopolitical order. The era of easy globalization is ending. Central banks are trapped in a cycle where they must devalue currency to service debt. In this environment, holding cash or relying on fixed income is a guaranteed way to lose purchasing power. The financial currents are moving too fast. If you are not invested you are immediately behind. The only true hedge against this dual tsunami of AI deflation and monetary inflation is ownership. We are moving into an era where the divide will not be between the "rich and poor," but between those who own the infrastructure of the future and those who are just users of it. The vast majority of future wealth will accrue to the assets that benefit from these shifts: Do not labor to compete with the machine, own the machine. Put every last dollar in the machine. Or be left behind.

Wow polymarket bettors got that coin toss totally wrong. Nearly 50% of the money was on tails. It was heads. Not sure how “predictive” these markets really are

bitcoin went down 5% again for the fourth time this week and she just asked if i made dinner reservations for Valentine’s Day

4

“and then the GOLD -> BTC rotation will happen”

SPACEX PREPS BLOCKBUSTER IPO WITH WALL STREET BANKS SpaceX is lining up Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, and Morgan Stanley to lead what could be one of the largest IPOs ever. The rocket company is selling existing shares at a valuation around $800 billion and could raise tens of billions, potentially surpassing Saudi Aramco’s $29 billion record. Preparations come amid a wave of potential mega US listings, including AI firms OpenAI and Anthropic. Final bank roles have not been confirmed.

2026 is the year that we take back lost ground in terms of self-sovereignty and trustlessness. Some of what this practically means: Full nodes: thanks to ZK-EVM and BAL, it will once again become easier to locally run a node and verify the Ethereum chain on your own computer. Helios: actually verify the data you're receiving from RPCs instead of blindly trusting it. ORAM, PIR: ask for data from RPCs without revealing which data you're asking, so you can access dapps without your access patterns being sold off to dozens of third parties all around the world. Social recovery wallets and timelocks: wallets that don't make you lose all your money if you misplace your seedphrase, or if an online or offline attacker extracts your seedphrase, and *also* don't make all your money backdoored by Google. Privacy UX: make private payments from your wallet, with the same user experience as making public payments. Privacy censorship resistance: private payments with the ERC-4337 mempool, and soon native AA + FOCIL, without relying on the public broadcaster ecosystem. Application UIs: use more dapps from an onchain UI with IPFS, without relying on trusted servers that would lock you our of practical recovery of your assets if they went offline, and would give you a hijacked UI that steals your funds if they get hacked for even a millisecond. In many of these areas, over the last ten years we have seen serious backsliding in Ethereum. Nodes went from easy to run to hard to run. Dapps went from static pages to complicated behemoths that leak all your data to a dozen servers. Wallets went from routing everything through the RPC, which could be any node of your choice including on your own computer, to leaking your data to a dozen servers of their choice. Block building became more centralized, putting Ethereum transaction inclusion guarantees under the whims of a very small number of builders. In 2026, no longer. Every compromise of values that Ethereum has made up to this point - every moment where you might have been thinking, is it really worth diluting ourselves so much in the name of mainstream adoption - we are making that compromise no longer. It will be a long road. We will not get everything we want in the next Kohaku release, or the next hard fork, or the hard fork after that. But it will make Ethereum into an ecosystem that deserves not only its current place in the universe, but a much greater one. In the world computer, there is no centralized overlord. There is no single point of failure. There is only love. Milady.

Down in my bunker as radioactive ashes rain down on my city. I check my Polymarket "Yes" shares for "Atomic bomb detonation in 2026?" using the last remnants of internet. Worth $0. UMA resolved it as 'No' because it was technically a hydrogen bomb and not an atomic one.

This is what I worry Europe will get negatively polarized into: an ideology taking pride in a neat, sanitized online environment free of evil corporate and fascist pathogens. I hope European govs do not go this way, and instead take a Pirate Party approach of user empowerment. First, what's wrong with the tweet I'm quoting: The idea that there should be "no space" for something you dislike is fundamentally a totalitarian and anti-pluralistic impulse. It's incompatible with being in an environment that you do not fully control. This is especially true for categories that are subjective and controversial, because you end up trying to fully remove things you think are pathogens, when other people have good faith disagreements, and because you give yourself the maximalist goal of not even giving them breathing room, you create conflict and end up building the machinery of technocratic authoritarianism to impose your victory in the conflict. So sorry, if you want to be a free society, you have to bite the bullet that some people, somewhere, will be selling things that you consider dangerous and saying things you consider disinformation and vicious lies. What is the goal to shoot for? You want to create an environment where those things don't dominate. This is the problem with twitter today: not that it's a safe space where 1000 people talk to each other in a corner about how heritage americans are the master race and putin is good or whatever, but that that crap gets shoved in our face on a mass scale, and the algorithms actively favor it. The right metaphor is not castles and walls, but biological - think, why European forests don't have tropical lizards. Having incentives for social media platforms to have less of those things instead of more is fundamentally reasonable, @audreyt has talked about how Taiwan has done something similar. You also want to do this in a way where it's clear what the underlying principle is, so it's not a vehicle for imposing arbitrary and frequently changing expert-consensus agendas. You also want to empower users, rather than working against them. People want to see and buy good things instead of bad things. Often the problem is that competition is too difficult in the current market. I actually supported the USB-C standardization mandate; it created more interoperability and thus improved competition and convenience. I would support incentivizing social platforms to be more open, and to be more transparent (eg. my proposal to require algorithms to be continuously published with a 1-2 year delay, with zk-proofs to ensure that the algorithm being used in real time exactly equals the one that gets published later) Being able to better identify what messages are coming from what communities is also good, though I don't support the direction of banning anonymity of individual posters, rather I would want to see more macro-scale analytics, eg. seeing what communities are most strongly saying and amplifying content that semantically matches a particular idea; this can be done in privacy-preserving ways. There is a real opportunity to reaffirm freedom of speech in a unique and different way, that emphasizes pluralism and pushes against unbalanced attempts to manipulate the discourse by individual powerful actors. We want to do this, not go down the dark path of having something that claims to support fundamental rights but actually is not trusted by anyone to be anything other than the fundamental right to follow the footsteps of a few technocratic experts.

O.K., Christmas is over, now we can all go back to the wars of life. Focus, focus, focus-never accept defeat -push hard for total victory!

why are we still shilling this inane point. if i start a 500 million dollar hedge fund and spend 400 million of it on hookers and blow, then put the rest on 17 on the roulette wheel in vegas and would have won 1) i still violated fiduciary duty (1/2)

Do you want to be liked, or do you want to win?

If you go back and read about Tulip mania in 1637 you realize that the bubble was not in fact caused by irrational exuberance as historians have claimed, it was actually Wintermute

“When [the market] goes down, we love it because we’ll buy more. And if it goes up, it kills us to buy more.” -Buffett Good reminder that if you believe in $1M BTC, this is just another entry point.

At the end of the Coinbase earnings call today, Brian Armstrong pulled up the mention market and rattled off all the words that weren't said yet What a wild time to be alive

people were talking about how cobie is not a billionaire and he just went all in and decided to change that asap

if you're so smart then why are retarded people richer than you