Tom

@X is what @LinkedIn should have been. Love the @X for all the technical content I get every day!

@TheRoyalSerf Whore is the word you are looking for

Wokepussy meets magacock

@ymousanonanon @theficouple My point is, don’t diversify if you know what you’re doing. Essentially, that’s what the S&P already does, which is why it’s for the common man. If your six holdings are returning 100%, squeeze your investments you’ll almost always win, not just beat the S&P!

@tom7heaton @theficouple I agree with the first part and disagree with the second. It is an akin to a personal index fund and it’s personalized to me and my understanding of the market and it’s outperformed the index for the last three years so why would i choose the S&P instead

If you're under 40, please read this: Millions of guys in their 20's & 30's right now think they can pick stocks. They think they're the next Warren Buffett & they can beat the S&P 500. ..Please know 100% of them will fail miserably & wish they just index fund & chilled.

@trq212 Thanks for showering us with all the good info. Reading an article on X is equally hard, like tf you can’t zoom in out swipe properly. Now, who is working on solving context window problem possibly the biggest upgrade LLM’s need, i would leave my job to work on that!

@ymousanonanon @theficouple Well, you kind of have opened your own index, so you might as well choose S&P.

@theficouple My 10 largest stock holdings are above the S&P with the exception of Berkshire. Of my top 20 largest holdings only 4 are less than the S&P and two only marginally so. I have 6 holdings above 100% return while my S&P is sitting at 24%. You’re not wrong but you’re also not right

@theficouple This advice is for absolute losers! I am not an investment banker but I consistently beat S&P with basic research and patience.

@nikunj I can feed this to claude and now we have experience as well

Every time I see a tweet saying “I can vibe code this in a weekend” - I think of the slack notification system.. It takes time, persistence and effort to get the details right. Sure, a lot of simple workflows will get vibe coded away. And maybe you can put this in Claude Code and get the code right in one shot. But quality, depth and great systems will still have value and take time. You can’t vibe code lessons. Now and forever.

@alexkehr Is this real? How?

the american mind (me) cannot comprehend european airline flight prices can i just book all 190 seats for $3400 and have a private 737 flight?

@gaganbiyani How do i short both?

People have asked me how I feel about Udemy’s sale to Coursera. Honestly, I’m kinda pissed about it. I want to be clear - I’m grateful for the opportunity to start and benefit from Udemy’s success. It changed my life. But there’s another side to Udemy. A story of what could have been. After our Series B, founders owned less than 30% of the company. Our investors took over and installed their own CEO to run it. We all liked this new CEO and honestly, for years it looked like a brilliant move. The company kept growing and growing. They launched B2B and built a $500M ARR business. Eventually, the company IPO’ed for $3B. Yet all along there were clear cracks under the surface. Over Udemy’s history, there have been 7 CEO’s. The board replaced the second CEO with dud after dud. I’d often try to meet with the board or the new CEO, and was completely ignored. Eren had influence as Chairman of the Board but Oktay and I were so ignored they didn’t even invite us to the IPO. LOL WTF. There are like 50+ people invited to these things and nobody thought: “oh maybe we should invite the people who fucking invented the thing we’re all celebrating.” It shows how little respect they had for founders and for product innovation as a discipline. I think they wanted a CEO they could control, a buttoned-up suit instead of a brash founder/CEO that is risk-taking, visionary, but a bit of a pain. For awhile, it looked like it didn’t even matter who was CEO - the company was run by the incredibly talented team that reported to them anyways. Well, it worked until it didn’t. The company made no major product innovations for 15 years. Instead, they took the original idea (video-based courses) and sold it in every place imaginable. It got us to $800M run-rate. That’s no joke; that takes serious execution and a great team that hustled hard to win the market. But eventually the consumer business stopped growing. The B2B business has now flattened out as well. Meanwhile, Coursera was catching up. Original Coursera was a far worse product than Udemy, but it got a ton of press. Learning ivory tower bullshit from academics doesn’t get you a real education, but it does create prestige. They raised from better investors on better terms, and had better leadership. Udemy to this day has more revenue than Coursera, but Coursera won the court of investor opinion. They got higher multiples from both private and public markets. Coursera innovated heavily. They added corporate courses to their university catalog, built fully-online degree programs, and offered a B2B competitor that kept Udemy on its toes. Still, the Udemy B2B business (and team) out-performed and so the two companies were deadlocked. Coursera was better at B2C, Udemy at B2B. A merger was inevitable. But WHY IN GODS NAME did we sell to Coursera instead of the other way around? Why are the combined companies under $3B in market cap? Three reasons: First, edtech didn’t live up to its promise. While these two companies had solid revenue and cash positions, their growth slowed, and public markets balked. This meant compressed multiples and significantly lower valuations. Second, the companies stopped innovating. They are selling a product to businesses that their customers don’t love. They were category leaders, but they lead the category into mediocrity. They captured a significant share of learning and development (L&D) spending, but L&D as a whole actually lost budget within their organizations. That’s Udemy’s fault, and it doesn’t even realize it. That brings me to my final point: I personally believe Udemy traded upside opportunity for downside risk. Us founders were unproven and young. We made lots of mistakes, including fighting amongst ourselves. A good investor would have supported us through it because they believe founders drive the highest long-term returns. Instead, they brought in outside CEOs to replace us. I sometimes wonder if they recognize this error; everyone makes mistakes and maybe they learned from it. Either way - the consequences are real. By ignoring the founders, Udemy failed to innovate, which led to slowing growth which led to mediocre public market results. Furthermore, they don’t have a good evangelist and public markets don’t like a headless horse. I sold my Udemy stock awhile ago. I think the merger was critical for both companies’ survival. Now, though, the new combined entity needs to innovate again. On B2B, Coursera needs to help L&D become the heroes of the AI era so the entire market starts growing again. On B2C, they need to build the most educational AI product on the planet. (I’d focus on the former, since the latter is a lot harder and riskier). Coursera can still achieve our original vision and likely build a $10B+ company in the meantime. Even though I’ve got no stake in its future, I’m mission-driven and I REALLY hope they figure it out. The current education system sucks and the world deserves something better.

@_A_khalifa You kinda proved the point everyone is making!

The revenue of Dubai Mall is bigger than your entire country’s economy. Oof 😂

@FurkanGozukara A literal voldemort! My god we are blind

Absolute masterclass by an expert journalist on Sky News. She completely dismantles the Israeli Ambassador, forcing him to face the reality that his military is intentionally bombing innocent civilians, medics, and children. The Zionist narrative is completely collapsing.

@aquavoice Can i use your API to build a voice app? Prices?

Aqua Voice is now live for iOS. It's a premium voice keyboard for every app on your phone.

@beit_Hmikdash I don’t think messing with Pakistani guests would be a cake walk.

اگر مذاکرات تا ساعات آینده موفق نشوند، هیچ تضمینی برای رسیدن هواپیمای حامل تروریست های رژیم به تهران وجود ندارد.

@trq212 Pretty late now! I just filed yesterday

there's a turbotax connector in Claude Code now, so glad I procrastinated on taxes 😭

@MarioNawfal It is beautiful there!

🇵🇰🇺🇸JD Vance's motorcade rolled through Pakistan on its way to the Islamabad talks with Iran. Last U.S. VP to visit Pakistan was Biden in 2011. 15 years later they are back. Not for aid, or for drones. But to end a war.

@RapidResponse47 @HarmeetKDhillon What was that? It is so incoherent!

@himekasu_ Nice to meet you from states!

たくさんの人と話すことができて嬉しい🐥最近Twitter開いてなかったけど、翻訳のおかげだ。楽しい🥹話してくれる人ありがとう^_^色々な国の人と話したいな〜〜🎶👶

@_A_khalifa You should be thankful that you are breathing, count your blessings and have sex!

Let me be clear: The UAE WILL NEVER allow Iran Regime to control the Strait of Hormuz, build ballistic missiles or drones, or threaten the region’s security. This position is final & will not change. If the Islamabad meeting says otherwise it won’t succeed. Simple as that..!

@AdameMedia @scotthortonshow The fucker needs to go, totally compromised!

@amjadt25 That was funny af!

As long as the UAE is not in Islamabad, JD Vance and the Islamic regime in Iran will fail in Pakistan. The UAE does not, and will not, accept the Islamic regime in Iran controlling access to the Strait of Hormuz, nor possessing nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, drones, or any capabilities that threaten regional security. This regime must issue a formal apology to the UAE for its aggression, acknowledge its actions, provide full compensation for any harm caused to individuals and institutions, and guarantee non-repetition. Otherwise, what comes next will be devastating for this terrorist regime.