I get my tshirts from cutsclothing.com - honestly it's the only brand that I found which fits me properly and I can just toss them in the washer/dryer without having to worry about them getting destroyed. Highly recommend.

See you soon, Prague!

Lmfao you should start a VC fund. You’ll cook a16z and Sequoia. They don’t have the nuts for this type of analysis

When investing in a bitcoin treasury CEO make sure to pay close attention to body language:

Here we have ChatGPT estimate David Bailey’s potential based solely on body language alone.

- Huge man spread

- Leaning far back

- Feet firmly planted

- Territorial

- Stoic

- Engaged

- Present

- Classic power posture

This is a man who is physically at ease but emotionally guarded.

His posture says, “You can ask me questions, but I don’t owe you energy.”

There’s a quiet dominance to the sprawl. He isn’t here to win you over. He’s here because he’s earned his seat.

Estimated Return Range based on body language:

Base Case (50th percentile):

8x –15x

Bull Case (90th percentile):

100x+

If his thesis is right and he executes (or attracts the team who can), the detachment and quiet confidence signal the kind of world-builder who changes the rules instead of playing the game. Bitcoin-style asymmetric upside.

If I had to assign a single expected return number based on a power-weighted average of outcomes:

~28x expected return

That’s factoring in:

• 10% chance of 100x+

• 40% chance of 10–20x

• 30% chance of 2–5x

• 20% chance of total failure

High volatility, high asymmetry. Definitely not a “safe” play, but could carry a whole fund if right.

In summary: Do not fade a man spreading his legs this wide.

Hahaha Saylor reposted my bitcoin commercial

Moving towards having our own devices is the priority. We've been in contact with numerous parties.

All we are saying is it would be nice to see certain groups like Samsung change their approach regardless.

Wanting to have our own devices doesn't mean that the campaign to have OEMs making a device we can use now is not still ongoing. If all the currently supported Pixels become end-of-life and all we have is devices we created, then all that has happened is we have moved the goalposts.

OEMs should be more open to allow users installing other operating systems and to support more hardware security features. They benefit from having us able to use their platform, just like we have reported numerous security vulnerabilities upstream to Google.

If a device manufacturer is making a device like this without us needing to pay them for a bespoke product, funding can go elsewhere which is good for us.

Our initial port to Android 16 has been completed and can be built for the emulator from our 16 branch. All of the device-independent #GrapheneOS code has been ported. There are some parts of the port which will be redone better and a lot of testing and fixing regressions to do.

Normally, we would have announced the availability experimental releases based on Android 16 already. Unfortunately, Android 16 dropped device/hardware support from the Android Open Source Project and we're going to need to put it together ourselves without being prepared for it.

We'll be starting from the Android 15 QPR2 device support code and stripping it down to a bare minimum. Pixel 9a is a special case and will be more work.

Our hardware-based USB-C port control feature will no longer work with this approach and we need to replace half of the code.

We received early notice of Android 16 removing the device support code from AOSP but were unable to confirm it or determine the details. We have existing automated tooling for this we can significantly extend to generate what we need. It will be difficult and a major regression.

Paying an ODM to make a Snapdragon device for us is increasingly appealing. We would have all the device support code we need, could build it with compiler-based hardening and would be able to harden a lot of the device's firmware. We could also make secure element applets.

We want to be building privacy and security features. We don't want to be wasting our efforts on adding device support and other basic functionality to AOSP. It appears the only way we're going to be able to do that is paying millions of dollars to an ODM to have a proper base.

As an example of what we would be able to do even with an entirely standard reference device, we could add hardware support for our duress PIN/password feature to the secure element so that successfully exploiting the OS could not bypass it. We could do a whole lot with firmware.

Pixels meeting our requirements is why many of them were and are being purchased. We've reported MANY vulnerabilities over the years which have been fixed for Android and Pixels. We've proposed hardware, firmware and many software level security enhancements they've adopted.

We would prefer not having to pay millions of dollars to have a phone produced for us. It's entirely doable but we would need to repeat it every few years. We'd rather work with an OEM with aligned goals and willing to provide first class GrapheneOS support to sell more devices.

Pixels have substantially benefited from meeting our requirements and having GrapheneOS available for them. We know there's a significant market for an OEM working with us to make a more secure device with hardware-based security features not available on Pixels or iPhones.

Traders are buying gold and selling bitcoin.

🙄

The neat thing about voting is that whether you’re a liberal art ho communist barista or a maga Q anon Marlboro trucker you both get war with iran.

Whenever I hear advice like this it’s always from someone who it has worked out well for.

Is that because it always works out well or because the people who it doesn’t work out well for don’t talk about it?

What’s your answer?

🤣

In another timeline Kamala and Greta are breaking up today. I like this one better.

In another timeline Kamala and Greta are breaking up today. I like this one better.