Till Festenberg

you can outsource your thinking but you cannot outsource your understanding

Back in the 1960s there was a company called National Video. They made color television picture tubes, and were the first to produce a 23-inch rectangular color TV picture tube. It quickly became the industry standard, and every major TV set producer scrambled to get their hands on National Video’s picture tubes. They literally couldn’t make them fast enough. The stock went from a low of 15 in 1964 to a peak of 120 in October 1965. The final 70 points came in just the last few months. Eventually, though, the Motorola’s and Zenith’s of the world produced their own color TV picture tubes. They didn’t need National Video’s any longer. The stock went from 120 to a low of 40 in 1966, 15 in 1967, and then to zero in 1968 as the company went bankrupt. The poor thing couldn’t even make it to the Go-Go years. In those days, Mueller and Company produced tick volume charts. National Video’s chart depicted the stock going from Northwest to Southeast in a straight line while the tick volume line went straight up. The stock was a fundamental short. In those days, short sales could only be executed on an uptick. Which meant the whole world was always offered up an eighth. Oh, National Video’s ticker symbol? NVD.A. This story is true, but any resemblance to any other companies is purely coincidental.

@alt_Lok @skdh Unfortunately, we actually broadcasting. It's called METI and may turn out to be the stupidest idea humans ever had.

@skdh I am wondering... are we as a communication able civilization intentionally broadcasting anything into space? Or do we assume the faint TV signal we sometimes shoot into the void is enough to be received light-years away?

Astrophysicists have a new, and slightly terrifying, explanation for the Fermi paradox, or the question of why we have found no evidence of intelligent extraterrestrial life.

@lunar_wallfacer @skdh True. That's the actual logical conclusion. Not: "There are no alien civilizations." But "There are no alien civilizations that communicate". This METI nonsense is so depressing...

@skdh It can be assumed fairly reasonably that civilisations of the kind that persistently seek out other ones don't last very long given what a stupid thing to do that is. This is the answer to the Fermi Paradox, and it doesn't even occur to you as a possibility. Reflect on that.

@skdh For me, the main question is: "Why should they want to communicate at all?" Sharing your location might actually be a dumb idea, e.g., when you come home after a vacation to discover that criminal broke in after seeing your vacation pictures posted on social media.

@INArteCarloDoss Brrr. It's cold out there....

why is no one talking about the Chinese data released overnight?

@TakeTakeTakeApp Yes, please! Is PGN import possible there?

web sneak peek 🤫 coming soon reply to this post if you want early access

@upontheveldt @ilennin @GMIgorSmirnov How about Qd5?

Can you solve this tricky puzzle? White Mates In 2🤔

@JEGreen_US @upontheveldt @ilennin @GMIgorSmirnov What if then Be7?

@upontheveldt @ilennin @GMIgorSmirnov Qb7#

@TechCharts I always thought that the only reason it works is because so many are seeing and reacting to it.

20 years ago there was the crowd: "Technical analysis doesn't work" Now there is the crowd: "If everybody is seeing the same pattern it will not work" 😂

@nickgiva1 @dotkrueger There's an implicit assumption in that formula: that μ is positive and constant in time. But that's something one cannot know. In reality, μ may be time-dependent and may have flipped negative. If so, hodling might be a very bad idea.

At this point, one has to ask: is this CAGR you talk about in the room with us now? I know that if you go back far enough in time, you find it, but no one cares what happened a decade ago, because none of us have time machines: what have you done for me lately? Absolutely ZERO over 5 years and deeply negative (ruin levels) even in NOMINAL terms over 1. That is a long time to sit around waiting for CAGR. Simple math: if 5 years ago you had invested in BTC or in a TBill, you would be up more on the bill. Do any of you maxis acknowledge this? Do you not see how silly that makes all your arguments about inflation protection? And in meantime you posted 100s of times that inflation is 8%/year (it's not, but you say so...). So you are down >40% real over 5 years. And you say don't trade something with 60% vol which constantly mean reverts, so you can be back at zero after 5 years? How? Where is the logic? That all this shit is: a trading instrument. It's like saying that you should not drive a car: that's all it's good for. And nothing else.

Let's talk about Volatility drag. CAGR ≈ μ − ½σ² Bitcoin’s σ is huge. So if you: • trade in and out • use leverage • panic sell drawdowns You amplify volatility and destroy CAGR. Ironically, the best strategy for the most volatile asset is: Do nothing. Just hold. Volatility is the price of admission. If you survive it, you get the CAGR. If you fight it, you donate it.

Being enlightened—in the Buddhist sense of the word—is a sort of calamity, because you found out the ruse which you were playing on yourself: you found out that the universe is a system which creeps up on itself and says BOO! and then laughs at itself for jumping. In other words, it is a self-surprising arrangement so as to avoid the monotony and boredom of knowing everything in advance. So you and I have all conspired with ourselves to pretend that we’re not really God—but of course we are! That’s perfectly obvious! We’re all apertures through which the universe is looking at itself.

@david_smitstudi @MelMattison1 In stocks yes.But gold trades with a positive skew, so not for gold.

GVZ, gold volatility, is collapsing today. This presages a top... just like it did back in October... Might get a spike off of Fed tomorrow, but this week will be a short term top in PMs.

@Anthony_Bonato I have a cool method to determine the instantaneous slope of a curve! I take two points, x,y, on the x-axis, compute the slope of the line joining the corresponding points on the curve, and then let the distance between x and y go to 0. Can I please have this named after me too?

Another classic. The only thing scarier than Tai's Model for area under a curve being published in a journal is how often it was cited

@omshanti08 Welcome back, sir!

@dampedspring I think it's a fair point. Good scientific journals have rejection rates of more than 90% -- and the people submitting their papers there are all professionals.

While being one of those who warns about how hard trading is, at the same time I have seen it done well by a handful of people. I know luck and I know skill, discipline and persistence. That's why Nik is my business partner. Well said.

@thechessnerd Actually, I'm currently reading this one. Do you have more recommendations for books of similar quality? Thanks!

I own nearly 400 chess books. I know when I receive a banger on my lap. Today, it happened. Great addition to my library for several reasons: • Importance piece of chess literature • Great Examples for my students • Great for playing vs lower rated players

@jonbking Always choosing the bet with the higher expectation is not good advice (think of a high-expectation bet that contains the risk of ruin). Even for small bets using the expectation as main criterion is only rational if the bet can be repeated over and over again.

Most traders lose money because of the same mental trap that Daniel Kahneman won a Nobel Prize for uncovering. I'll break it down in this short video attached. I guarantee you've felt it before, too.

@natesolon So what do you recommend instead for learning - openings - end game theory - strategy? Genuine question! Thanks

When it comes to getting better at chess, books aren't very helpful. Here's what's weird. If I said, "When it comes to getting better at swimming, books aren't very helpful," no one would argue with me. But a bunch of you are about to argue with me on chess.