
Al Goldstein
2.2K posts

Al Goldstein
@goldstein2002
Lifelong entrepreneur, father and husband, Immigrant, co-founder and CEO @ Avant, Stoiclane, Forged in America podcast, https://t.co/9prLc1tPPY


Israel has been in the news for months because of Iran. The part that gets buried is that the same country fighting a war on multiple fronts, with a media narrative that constantly paints it as the villain, has quietly become one of only two places in the world where breakthrough technology actually gets built. Michael Eisenberg sits between both worlds. He is the founder of Aleph VC (almost $1B AUM), a perennial Midas List investor, a former Benchmark partner, a board director, and the author of 9 books (7 in Hebrew). He also advises the Israeli Prime Minister. We were scheduled to record. He showed up late and explained why: "I just came from the Prime Minister's office." This week's episode of Forged in America, the podcast I co-host with Ravin Gandhi where we sit down with operators, founders, and investors who built something real. Subscribe if you have not already. The beats: 00:11 Michael walking in: "I was late because I was with Netanyahu." That is the cold open. Watch the first 15 seconds. 04:48 The venture industry might be dying. VC was always a craft business built on trust, not an asset class. Big funds spraying and praying at the early stages to feed their late-stage funds are crowding out the tinkering innovation that built Amazon, eBay, and Palm. Michael thinks the music stops the way it did in 2000. 05:16 The sharpest line in the episode: "People have turned on Israel because they hate America." Whatever your read, hearing it from someone who lives in both worlds lands different. 06:44 The Vanishing Jew thesis. Michael wrote a book on why anti-Semitism rises when economies struggle. He flags 2008 as the watershed where the welfare state replaced bootstraps and turned a generation against the people who succeed. 15:23 The forgotten chapter of VC history. The Four Horsemen banks (Hambrecht and Quist, Alex Brown, Robertson Stephens, Montgomery Securities) took fledgling venture-backed companies public at $60-80M revenue. That muscle does not exist anymore. 20:40 The Iran missile war was won in software. The Iranians fired hundreds of thousands of missiles. The damage was manageable because of what Michael calls "the high tech wizardry of two great countries" working together on air defense, intelligence, and AI. 22:27 The sentence that brought him to Israel. He asked a rabbi if he should move to Tel Aviv to do something meaningful. The rabbi told him to forget the philosophy and "open a factory that will employ 10,000 people." 25:33 "Israel produces civilians with agency at scale." America has magnets of agency. Silicon Valley for tech, NYC for finance, Texas for energy. Israel built a country where agency is the default. National service, mandatory military service, responsibility at 15. 28:27 The optimistic scenario is not what you think. "It is not that the war ends. It is that the regime in Iran falls." Michael lays out the case that the Iranian regime is the gating factor for the entire region. 30:42 On Thomas Friedman, journalists, and skin in the game. "If no one knows shit, I prefer to hear the BS of people who have actually done something in the world versus the people who have done nothing." 33:09 On serving Netanyahu. Michael does not want to litigate Israeli domestic politics. He does say this: "I serve the Prime Minister of our country. I serve him proudly." 36:22 How Aleph started. The handshake deal with Benchmark, the promise to stay in Israel and create 10,000 jobs, and the original obligation to a rabbi 30 years earlier. 38:05 "The Sabbath is the greatest gift given to mankind." His advice for raising kids in 2026: kill the devices, sit around the table, invite the grandparents, let them banter. The antidote to the Me generation. If you want a clear-eyed read on how Israel became a tech superpower while fighting a war on multiple fronts, this is the episode. @mikeeisenberg @alephVC @ForgedUSAPod @netanyahu with @RavinGandhi1 and me

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Reported footage of U.S. HIMARS launchers firing toward Iran comes with a detail nobody can unsee: a Japanese Fumo plush perched nearby like a good luck charm. The crew clearly has a mascot😂






What changed in 1948? The Jews stopped being Palestinians. May 14, 1948. Ben-Gurion reads the Declaration of Independence. The next morning, the residents of the Yishuv wake up as Israelis. The label they'd carried for decades was simply vacated. The Palestine Post → Jerusalem Post (1950). Palestine Symphony Orchestra → Israel Philharmonic. Palestine Electric Company → Israel Electric Corporation. Anglo-Palestine Bank → Bank Leumi le-Israel. Palestine pound → Israeli lira. Jewish Agency for Palestine → just the Jewish Agency. "Palestinian" passports → Israeli ones. Within 24 months, "Palestinian" had been stripped off every Jewish institution that had worn it. Now the Arab side. Arabs did not rush to claim the empty label in 1948. They didn't claim it for another generation. In 1948, the Arabs who fled or remained still called themselves Arabs. The Arab League's war wasn't fought in the name of "Palestine" as a nation. It was fought to prevent partition and absorb the territory into existing Arab states. Transjordan took the West Bank and East Jerusalem and in 1950 simply annexed them; the residents became Jordanian citizens with Jordanian passports. Egypt took Gaza and ran it under military administration. No citizenship, no nation, no "Palestine." The one institutional use of "Palestinian" that survived 1948 was a refugee category: UNRWA, created December 1949, defined "Palestine refugees" as a humanitarian classification. Not a nationality. It kept the word alive in international bureaucratic language while the Arab world itself wasn't using it nationally. Then came the long appropriation. 1964. Nasser sponsors the founding of the PLO in Cairo. The original charter (Article 24) explicitly disclaims any sovereignty over the West Bank, Gaza, or the Himmah area. Read that again. The founding document of the Palestine Liberation Organization renounces claims to the West Bank and Gaza. Because in 1964, those were Arab lands belonging to Jordan and Egypt. The PLO's purpose was to liberate the part Israel held, not those parts. 1967. Israel takes the West Bank and Gaza in six days. Suddenly Jordan and Egypt no longer hold the territory, and the Arab residents there are no longer Jordanians or under Egyptian rule. The pan-Arab framework had just been humiliated on the battlefield. A new identity was needed. 1968. The PLO charter is rewritten. Article 24's disclaimer disappears. The West Bank and Gaza are now central to Palestinian national claims. The label has been fully transferred. Sequence: 1917–1948: "Palestinian" = Jewish institutions and self-identification; Arabs reject the term and call themselves Arabs / Southern Syrians. 1948: Jews drop the label and become Israelis. The word goes dormant on the Arab side, surviving mainly as a UN refugee category. 1948–1967: Arabs in the West Bank are Jordanians. Arabs in Gaza are stateless subjects of Egyptian military rule. "Palestinian" is not yet a national identity. 1964–1968: The PLO transitions the label into a national identity but only after 1967 makes pan-Arabism politically untenable. 1948 didn't create a Palestinian Arab nation. It vacated a Jewish label and left a 20-year identity gap that Arab nationalism took until 1968 to fill.



The Collapse of Deterrence Against Iran? Paradoxically, one of the most serious consequences of this campaign may be the erosion of deterrence vis-à-vis Iran, specifically, the loss of the implicit sword hanging over Tehran as it considers whether to move toward nuclear weapons capability. For years, one of the main factors restraining the Iranian leadership under Khamenei from openly advancing toward a bomb was the fear that doing so could trigger a large-scale military campaign aimed not merely at damaging Iran’s capabilities, but at threatening the regime itself. From Tehran’s perspective, however, Iran has now endured precisely such a confrontation and survived it. More importantly, the conflict exposed the significant limitations facing both Israel and the United States in any future campaign against Iran: the reluctance to commit ground forces, constraints on available munitions, and Israel’s deep operational and strategic dependence on the United States. At the same time, Iran may have concluded that its ability to threaten or disrupt the Strait of Hormuz, thereby inflicting severe damage on the global economy, gives it a level of coercive leverage that the West is ultimately unwilling to challenge decisively. It is important to acknowledge that Iran withstood an unprecedented military assault in terms of the scale of firepower directed against it, yet the regime remained intact and did not capitulate. That reality may lead Tehran to conclude that the deterrent credibility of both Israel and the United States has been fundamentally weakened. This perception could become even stronger after the U.S. elections and under future American administrations, many of which may be even less willing to enter into direct confrontation with Iran. From Tehran’s perspective, Iran’s resilience during the conflict may have shattered the aura of overwhelming Israeli-American deterrence. Paradoxically, deterrence may have been more effective when it remained ambiguous and untested. Once military power was actually employed, it may have demonstrated the limits, rather than the strength, of Western coercive capacity against Iran. This is a deeply consequential development. One indication is that Iran reportedly adopted tougher positions in post-war negotiations than it held before the conflict began. The loss of the deterrence card could ultimately convince the Iranian leadership that this is precisely the moment to move toward nuclear weapons capability, believing that neither Israel nor the United States possesses either the will or the ability to stop it. The core problem is that neither Israel nor the United States was prepared, or perhaps even capable, of going all the way in a confrontation with Iran. Instead, they appeared to rely on external variables, whether Kurdish unrest, internal regime instability, or hopes for political fragmentation inside Iran by supporting Ahmadinejad, as substitute mechanisms that could spare them the enormous manpower requirements and the prospect of a campaign stretching over months or even years. Once those assumptions collapsed, what remained was essentially an air campaign. While tactically impressive, its achievements may ultimately pale in comparison to the strategic damage caused by exposing the actual limits of Israeli and American power in Iranian eyes. From Tehran’s perspective, the war may have revealed not overwhelming Western dominance, but rather the boundaries of what Israel and the United States are truly willing and able to do militarily against Iran. That, in itself, may become one of the most damaging long-term consequences of the entire campaign. This should force both Israel and the United States back to the drawing board. They will need to reassess how deterrence against Iran can be rebuilt under the current circumstances. That will not be easy. Restoring deterrence after it has been tested , and, in Tehran’s eyes, exposed as limited, is far more difficult than maintaining an ambiguous threat that has never been put to the test. Most importantly, the conflict likely helped Iran better understand its adversaries through direct friction and real-world confrontatio. #IranWar #iran




People admitted to Ivies have the same average income whether they attended or went to a state school instead. It's just selection. Humans aren't that malleable.

Finally, a big name has the courage to tell it: we are nowhere near AGI. Demis Hassabis, CEO of Google DeepMind and Nobel laureate for AlphaFold, put it neat and clear: "Today's systems are nowhere near [AGI]. Doesn't matter how many Erdős problems you solve… I think it's far, far from what a true invention, or someone like Ramanujan, would have been able to do." This is the elephant in the room that many AI enthusiasts prefer not to see, or are actively trying to hide. Erdős problems are well defined, often combinatorial, on finite spaces. They are exactly the kind of problems on which current AI can achieve spectacular performance with a lot of compute and knowledge. A neural network can search a huge graph of possibilities. It can recombine existing knowledge at unprecedented scale. It can discover surprising solutions inside an already defined conceptual space. But true invention is something else. True invention is not only solving a problem. It is inventing new objects, new dimensions, new connections. It is inventing new problems. From resolving to inventing there is a discontinuity that we don't know how to bridge. We are making extraordinary tools. But we are nowhere close to AGI.







A single algorithmic firm quietly trades $50,000,000,000 every single day Hudson River Trading (HRT) controls 10% of the ENTIRE US stock market. They don’t draw trendlines. They use pure math like Hidden Markov Models to decode invisible regimes from noise If 10% of the market is controlled by pure math, what is your actual edge? Drop your thoughts in the comments Bookmark & watch HRT's Head of AI explain how their algorithms dominate the market below. Then read the quoted thread to see the exact math they use



The first 8,000 Meta layoffs hit Wednesday. What's happening to the people still employed and the anxiety of not knowing if you’re next is insane. SF Standard published an interview with an anonymous Meta employee ahead of the cuts. They used a voice actor. Meta started keystroke-logging staff. Inside the company right now: Internal leaderboards rank employees by how many AI tokens they burn. By minutes spent in the chatbot. Workers are openly admitting they ask the bot inane questions to pad their numbers, because being on the wrong end of the leaderboard is a risk signal. HR told the all-hands AI usage won't factor into layoffs. The leaderboard exists anyway. AI notes are auto-on in every video meeting. People manually disable them so they can talk candidly about who might be next. How you find out you're laid off: 7am email to your personal inbox. By the time you read it, your work accounts are already dead. So one Meta engineer wrote a script that scrapes internal profiles to see whose status flipped to deactivated. This employee runs a personal spreadsheet on top of it to track coworkers. An internal post suggested teams who successfully build their own AI replacement should get 5 years of comp and then be let go as a reward for replacing themselves. It got heavy upvotes. Zuckerberg's all-hands message, paraphrased: AI is moving fast, nobody knows what's coming, leadership is doing their best. This is the Hidden Layoff in operation. The headline number is 8,000. A whole different story is what's being done to those still employed. Surveilled. Ranked by AI usage. Asked to train their replacement. Told to suck it up. Employee's words: "Even if we haven't lost our jobs to AI yet, we're being commoditized in advance." We reported on the 6,000 additional new roles they cancelled earlier this week, along with the additional 8,000 layoffs planned later in 2026. That’s 22,000 roles either cancelled or cut for 2026. Now we have insight into how they’re deciding who comes next.










