I did. It showed it anyway lol.
Probably with enough tries I could get it not to, but I have limited time/patience.
Tried to recreate some customized meme templates with AI, but it keeps showing my left ear even when I tell it not to. Pretty bearish on the AI overlord scenario coming anytime soon.
Anyway, how's your Saturday going?
No it doesn’t affect my fiscal dominance thesis.
But it does digitize the Eurodollar system and make dollars more globally available.
I’ve crossed 100k followers.
So, I want to give a heartfelt thanks to all the bots that made that possible. 😂
I muted a couple spam impersonators. I figured maybe some clients could incorporate that signal into their algorithms or something.
I don't mute anything of actual substance (even bad substance).
I watched the movie KPOP Demon Hunters. That critically-acclaimed and audience-loved hit new kids/teens movie streaming on Netflix.
The reason was two-fold. One was so that I know what the hell my niece is talking about next time I hang out with her. Two is so that I understand why certain things are succeeding as Disney/Pixar keeps floundering in failure.
While Disney/Pixar keeps making flops, Sony Animation has been rocking it with hits like Into the Spiderverse, Across the Spiderverse, and KPOP Demon Hunters. With a lower budget than what Disney/Pixar typically comes in with, Sony makes something that is higher quality and earns more money.
A few thoughts on why KPOP Demon Hunters was so successful:
-It's not the plot; the plot is pretty mid even among the field of kids/teens movies. Unique though.
-Funny/likable characters.
-Great animation.
-Music is way better than competitors. Catchy enough that they're succeeding as singles on their own.
-The writing is self-aware, but resists doing the constant quips that a Marvel movie does.
-The writers focus #1 on entertainment. There are positive themes in there, but unlike Disney/Pixar that recently forgot how to make an enjoyable film and focus so much on some theme, Sony actually makes fun films that also have themes like heroism/authenticity, etc.
-I was homeless as a child, grew up in a trailer park, then paid my way through university with student loans and part time work for an engineering degree.
-In my engineering career, I started as a design engineer of a facility and solo-leveled up to being the head engineer 7 years in. I just kept asking for additional work to help alleviate bottlenecks, started running the technical finances, and then when it came time to apply for newly-vacant senior jobs, I had the best experience for it because I was already doing most of it.
-In my finance career, which I did in parallel as a side gig, I just started writing online and then it blew up into a massive business, dwarfing my engineering management work and basically forcing me to leave and focus on it. Even the idea of starting a business was just me googling about it; nobody in my life suggested I do this or served as an in-person example that it's possible.
And yet, I would not for a second think I did this alone. I didn't change my own diapers as a kid. I didn't teach myself English or math. When I was half-deaf from severe ear infections and not learning to speak clearly, it was surgeons who fixed it. Parents gave me love and motivation, if little else. Teachers taught. Occasional articles I read convinced me to do things (start a blog, study bitcoin, etc) often so subtly and cumulatively that I can't point to which ones. It's not like I just manifested in the savannah and hunted for game as an infant and then leveled up to where I'm at now; there was an inherent support network along the way; giants with shoulders to stand on, often without making it obvious.
Currencies have their little local monopolies. Globally traded goods like commodities, gold, bitcoin, and that sort of stuff is mostly priced in the largest and most liquid global currency: USD.
Unless or until something grows large enough to flip it.
If it gets sufficiently euphoric, I'm going to eventually suggest he trims a bit or takes out his initial cost basis, since he'll be more comfortable (and able to get through a bear market) with some degree of diversification even if it lowers longer-run returns.
Little monies are always priced in big monies. Nothing surprising there.
Optionality is in a great place. Thanks to the work of many, there are great options for all those problems.
Can't make people use them. Can lead a horse to water but can't make it drink.
We’re in the part of the cycle where my father in law is very satisfied with the performance of his bitcoin and texts me about it.
I think the combo of both is important.
Meme-only arguments lack depth.
I view memes as signposts and long-form articles/discussions as useful deep dives. The memes help point to which longer things are worth taking the time to consume.
Unironically, the side that is more often correct in a given debate usually has way better memes. It's a decent (albeit not foolproof) heuristic. And it applies to humor more broadly, with memes basically being the haiku form of humor.
-When you find something funny, it's often because you subconsciously agree with it, at least partially. Sometimes you're trained that you *should* agree with a given side, but humor just cuts through it and reveals that really you kind of don't, and in some way forces you into an honest moment.
-Creating a meme requires condensing an argument into a short context. While outright lies are easy to make short (i.e. you can just say a false thing that requires the other side to take time to unpack), actual arguments are not so easy to make short, especially if they're also going to be funny. A meme that has any sort of point to it generally has an argument embedded within it, even if that argument takes the form of an observation or other simple thing. Outside of highly technical contexts, arguments/observations are generally easier to condense if they're true.
The side of a given debate that reliably can make short, funny arguments is typically on to something.
Based on the video, I always like to imagine he's some Jason Bourne level badass.
Notably, Egypt has recurring summertime electricity shortages, and despite being literally in the Sahara desert has been unsuccessfully trying to substantially increase its solar energy production.
Solar power and storage is often not the super-cheap sustainable panacea that theory-crafters make it out to be.
https://worldsustainabilitycollective.com/why-has-egypts-solar-policy-failed/
OPEC controls a minority of oil, but a sizable chunk, which collectively helps them keep the price higher than it otherwise would be if they didn’t coordinate.
In other words, OPEC theoretically incentivizes non-oil energy sources by increasing the cost of oil. It doesn’t hinder other energy sources.
Activities that increase soil quality and quantity are carbon capture practices.
I’m a soil maxi.
It’s expensive and nontrivial to do, though. In a far enough future we might have more of it (I did a deep dive on this for sci fi purposes).
There are multiple countries in the world; there are no global energy monopolies. Any sufficiently capitalized company can work on this and undercut others. China in particular is a very pragmatic jurisdiction when it comes to energy and their answer is usually “all of the above, at scale, and cheaply”. So if a company invents something cheap like that, China would be a massive customer. So would many others.
Price often condenses information and provides clarity.
For a while, solar/wind proponents have operated with two simultaneous but generally conflicting narratives.
-One narrative is that solar/wind are more environmentally friendly and should be subsidized. To the extent that they don't grow sufficiently fast, it's because we're not doing enough to artificially boost their adoption.
-The other narrative is continually remind how cheap solar/wind have become. Proponents will post charts/studies showing that solar/wind are cheaper than other types of energy, and that it "just makes sense now". In practice, a lot of caveats are often excluded.
The thing is, price usually cuts through confusion on these types of matters. Especially price over a significant amount of time and space, rather than just price in a snapshot of time and locality.
If solar/wind are indeed cheaper than other energy sources, why aren't they being built in place of others? Why isn't it a no-brainer for any megacorp to just install terawatts of them all over? For example, the percentage growth of solar power in India over the past 5-10 years is impressive, but in terms of raw numbers, way more coal power was brought online during that period than solar. The answer is often that they're *not actually* cheaper in an all-inclusive sense. And if they're not cheaper, why is that? The answer is often because they're more materially intensive, less durable, and not as environmentally friendly as many proponents argue, either. That cost (panels, turbines, batteries, maintenance, decommissioning, and replacement) is going somewhere, and usually quite materially.
That's not to say that solar/wind don't have uses (they do), but their usage is often hamfisted into places where they're not the most economic choice, and where they are not the most economic choice, it's often because they're not necessarily the most environmental choice either.
Price is often ignored or fudged in analysis, but it really does provide a powerful signal in aggregate that's worth paying attention to.
I have a new article about bitcoin treasury corporations, whether they're good or bad for Bitcoin as a network, and a note on the overall store-of-value vs medium-of-exchange debate:
Spam on the timechain is mostly a symptom of there still being limited monetary/settlement demand.
OP return size doesn't affect UTXO bloat, which was/is the biggest issue.
Node-level filtering doesn't realistically affect what gets put into the timechain for consensus transactions that someone is willing to pay for.
So I think those who are concerned about those issues and are bearish enough on monetary transactions (i.e. they don't think they'll price those other things out over the long run) should focus on consensus changes. Those likely won't get anywhere either, but it would be less performative.
Some things I did to improve my writing:
-Read novels within the genres that I like and want to write in.
-Read books and listen to lectures on writing.
-Have multiple novelists review and critique my writing with an emphasis on prose and pacing. I'm two rounds into this (each with a couple novelists) and will probably do four total, since I still have more work to do.
Now, eloquent prose will never be my strong suit. My goal was to get to a level where my prose is clear and concise and lets me express a story without getting in the way.
It might be shit.
Doing my best to make it not shit.
My fireside with Anthony Scaramucci and Peter Diamondis on bitcoin at the Abundance 360 Summit is now available here.
Notably, this was largely toward a non-bitcoin audience, a very tech-focused audience. Much of it will be basic for people here but it was tailored to that group.
That’s true, but I keep making it clear.
It’s a statement on US fiscal deficits.
Most of what he talks about is not what should happen but how things will happen based on prior decisions.
I have about 80% agreement with him and differ on the other 20%. But he’s the best macro analyst at describing these incoming trade and deficit issues for years and how to position.
Many people ask why.
The short answer is because nothing stops this train.
The longer answer is that 1) the rest of the world isn’t buying as many Treasuries anymore, 2) investors prefer cash to Treasuries, and 3) there are now balance of payments issues and so the United Stated has EM-like characteristics where stocks and bonds can struggle together due to capital outflows.
nostr:nevent1qqsyalrlpf2zggf7dqm3x42w9zw7u5nhv6jgxfyuclcr4mt3en0275qurnxr0
Currently listening while I work:
I remember back when Israel went into Gaza, and markets took a hit, bitcoin was down notably and many tradfi macro folks who I otherwise respect for good market analysis were like “Why is bitcoin down today? I thought it’s a safe haven, lol.”
Similarly, today when bitcoin is up amid market turmoil, the bitcoin bulls celebrate it.
I’d be cautious about all one-day moves. If you over-emphasize them, you risk looking like someone with a memory of a goldfish, or otherwise operating with selection bias.
However, a point I have made in the past, and will repeat today, is that there are different types of risk-off events. A risk-off event that hurts liquidity is likely to hurt bitcoin. A risk-off event that demands more liquidity, or that is unrelated to liquidity (eg tariffs attacking corporate margins), is more likely to benefit or at least kind of spare Bitcoin.
Focusing on Bitcoin as a risk on or risk off asset is first level thinking. People who understand it deeply and self custody it tend to view it as risk off period, for good reason. But not always in terms of price. In terms of price, whether it functions as a risk on/off asset varies based on what type of risk on/off catalyst it was.
This catalyst risks hitting margins, not liquidity, and thus so far the reaction makes sense. But it still pays to be careful not to celebrate one-day moves too much.
Cautiously bullish.
I find the nation state and corporate treasury adoption story pretty boring.
It’s not because I disagree with it. Once a liquid asset reaches this scale, it’s natural for larger entities to want to own it.
A lot of people actively *don’t want* those big entities to buy it, which I think is kind of delusional since it’s a permissionless asset. Those anti-treasurers don’t find it boring; it’s their new thing to argue against.
And yet at the same time I have little interest in talking about them buying it. Yes, I think more of them will over time.
So I just find the topic boring. Neither for or against. Would rather focus on other uses of bitcoin.
It’s actually crazy that I can just randomly pay/tip Calle, without knowing his real name or business identity, and yet still know it’s actually him due to a self-organizing social graph.
Ecash can make it even easier and more private. But the capability is already under-appreciated.
Pretty close. Almost like first person.
Some people say I should post more about bitcoin on Nostr.
But you already know about bitcoin, don’t you Neo?
Your real question is what you should do with it now.
People who talk about leaning in or being straight in random photos should focus on building something of value instead.
If you’re happy with your life, you don’t focus on who is straight up or leaning in during a given photo.
Instead, ask who can win in a debate or who can win in a fight. Not some random line.
His name is Mr. Badran.
He leans in out of love, but then will politely fuck up anyone in a debate or a fight.