Nathan C. Perry

25.3K posts

Nathan C. Perry banner
Nathan C. Perry

Nathan C. Perry

@NathanCPerry

SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS

Alexandria, VA Katılım Kasım 2011
1.4K Takip Edilen1.8K Takipçiler
Nathan C. Perry
Nathan C. Perry@NathanCPerry·
And underaged sex trafficking. FWIW, I think there is a meaningful minority of people who don’t care about “sexual assault”. Which is unfortunate. I think because people (mostly men but not limited to men) worry about he said, she said or a case where both parties consumed alcohol, they tend to not care unless it’s a case of a repeated pattern. (Think Bill Cosby or Harvey Weinstein.) But the vast, vast majority of people understand that children/kids can’t morally (not just legally) consent under any situation that isn’t one that would fall under a Romeo/Juliet law. It *rightfully* and *unambiguously* offends them in a *MORAL* sense. This is unique to the Epstein case vs many of the Me Too cases.
julie k. brown@jkbjournalist

And the “rules “ mean protecting those who commit sexual assault.

English
0
0
0
39
Tren Griffin
Tren Griffin@trengriffin·
There was/no AI ban at Microsoft. Switching from Claude code to GitHub Copilot (both with Opus 4.7 paid for by enterprise API usage) enables dogfooding of the GHCP harness so they get both scale and feedback. The payment to Anthropic doesn't change with the switch. It isn't a "cut."
English
3
0
10
436
Darren Sissons
Darren Sissons@KiwiPMI·
Not that I disagree but a few sources here on AI cost structures would be nice. Otherwise it’s just opinion. 👇👇👇
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
7
1
8
2.3K
Nathan C. Perry
Nathan C. Perry@NathanCPerry·
This isn’t some great prediction. It’s a nearly useless one by @andrewrsorkin. “I can’t say how soon after we will start to recover from said crash or how quickly. But I can assure you, fortunately, we will recover.” - @NathanCPerry
60 Minutes@60Minutes

“We will have a crash, I just can't tell you when, and I can't tell you how deep. But I can assure you, unfortunately, I wish I wasn't saying this, we will have a crash,” says Andrew Ross Sorkin, financial journalist and author of “1929.”

English
0
0
1
86
Nathan C. Perry
Nathan C. Perry@NathanCPerry·
And maybe we believe these stereotypes because we have, in fact, been there. Perhaps we have even lived there. And perhaps we have actually had conversations with the people who live there. Shocking I know.
Marco Foster@MarcoFoster_

Andrew Schulz on Thomas Massie losing: “For a long time I’ve hated when coastal elites shit on southern states and say they’re dumb. And then an election like this comes up and they fucking fall for it and it’s just like congrats man you guys lived up to every single stereotype”

English
0
0
0
102
Nathan C. Perry retweetledi
jercos
jercos@jercos·
Hi, I'm @jercos!
Català
54
46
332
61.7K
Nathan C. Perry retweetledi
Morgan J. Freeman
And just like that, it’s completely VANISHED from the media. A sitting congressman, Ted Lieu, said on the record the Epstein files are being blocked because they show Trump raped and threatened to kill children. Lets make this viral again 👇
English
512
26.6K
58.3K
560.8K
Nathan C. Perry
Nathan C. Perry@NathanCPerry·
While one may have been living and breathing finance for three decades, nobody has been living and breathing bitcoin for three decades. This is relevant because the question is does $MSTR blow up. If it doesn’t, the principal for the preferreds never get paid back. This is because the preferred equity has both debt and equity components. It looks like debt in a bankruptcy. It looks more like an equity with some debt characteristics if that doesn’t happen. (The dividends are best treated as debt except for arguably STRD because for STRD the dividends don’t compound if they aren’t paid though I think it’s smart to treat them as debt as well.) The piggy bank analogy is just silly on multiple levels and provides very little insight. 1) In the analogy, the brother doesn’t take the principle paid by his sister and buy BTC with it. 2) the brother isn’t selling a security with both debt and equity characteristics. 3) As far as we can tell based on the analogy the principle will have to be paid back even if the brother doesn’t end up in bankruptcy. All of this basically means we need a new way to think about STRC and how it drives or doesn’t drive value to MSTR common and therefore what the value of MSTR common actually is and will be in the future. You can’t throw old models at it and expect them to be insightful.
Glenn Cameron@GlennOnrampBTC

Just because you couldn’t write the above without AI, doesn’t mean no one can. I am a charted financial analyst and a chartered financial and modeling valuation analyst with 25 years of experience. Every word above was written by me, I don’t need AI, I have been living and breathing this stuff for almost 3 decades

English
0
0
0
163
Nathan C. Perry retweetledi
Mark Cuban
Mark Cuban@mcuban·
Let me give you an example of where there is no gov intervention, and the impact on brand drug pricing. When a brand manufacturer sells a drug to one of the big 3 drug distributors that control more than 90 pct of their market, those multi hundred billion dollar distributors DONT negotiate the lowest price they can get. They literally pay retail price. Then, in exchange for paying promptly, and providing some data, they get a discount of a whopping 5 pct. For a $600 drug, their net cost is $570 For obvious reasons, that distributor can’t sell to your local pharmacy for less than $570. So when you go to buy that drug, and have no insurance, or a deductible of more than $600, that’s why you pay the full $600. The question is “why would multi hundred billion dollar distributors only negotiate a 5% discount on brand drugs?” I asked this very question to several CEOs of brand drugs companies First you have to know that the pharma companies don’t keep that full $570. Because they pay rebates and fees to the big insurance company PBMs , they end up netting about 50% , or $300 in this example I asked them why they didn’t sell to the big distributors at a little more than their net price, which would allow them to make more money. And it would also allow the distributors to sell to pharmacies at say $350 (so the distributors make more money ), and the pharmacies could sell to the uninsured and those during their deductible phase for $375. Meaning more patients could benefit from their drugs. This doesn’t mean every patient could afford their meds, but it means that more could. Saving $225 is not nothing. The CEOs each told me that they would like to, but can’t. Why? Because the ins company PBMs have told them that if they did this , they would reduce their position on their formularies. Which could cost them billions of dollars across all their drugs. None of this is against the law. It’s become standard industry practice. Until we break up these conglomerates , it will only get worse.
English
98
92
542
235.8K
Nathan C. Perry
Nathan C. Perry@NathanCPerry·
@ryQuant @hillery_dan @BitcoinMicropig I think if people are seriously gonna look at treasury companies that aren’t MSTR now is the time to be looking at metaplanet more than $ASST. I still like ASST but price wise it’s less attractive to me than metaplanet right now.
English
0
0
2
183
Retail Ry 🏧🟧
Retail Ry 🏧🟧@ryQuant·
@hillery_dan “guaranteed” Oh how easily impressed we’ve become. Metaplanet went vertical had huge gains relative to MSTR last yr SWC had a 100x in like 2 months @BitcoinMicropig nailed it last yr $ASST goes up a little bit for a couple days, small moves. “guarantees” are fake.
GIF
English
6
2
18
1.5K