Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

Возникла проблема при загрузке этого видео. Это может быть связано с временными проблемами сети или видео может быть недоступно.

На главную

Chamath explains Warren Buffett’s secret to success: “Markets thrive when there's information asymmetry” “Now I'm gonna get a lot of people really upset with me.” “This is an example of Warren Buffet's returns pre- and post-Reg FD. Now what do you see?” “His returns were double the market returns... when this kind of information sharing was legal.” “And the minute that it became illegal and you had to act on the same edge as everybody else, his returns went to the market return. He generated zero alpha. In fact, he probably, on the margins, lost a little bit.” “So this is the single best investor in the world. This is what happens when you have information symmetry.” “So it's just meant to explain that markets thrive when there's asymmetry. Billions and billions of dollars will be made in asymmetry.” “The prediction markets today, unless they are regulated out of existence or shut down, will look like the stock market pre-Reg FD, and there's nothing we can do except choose not to bet it, because otherwise what you're going to have are a ton of sharps taking advantage of a ton of squares.”show more

The All-In Podcast

590,779 subscribers

393,188 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Новости и политика Наука и технологии Финансы

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

JUST IN: Chamath Palihapitiya makes a big claim that Warren Buffett’s insane pre 2000 returns may have benefited from access to information asymmetry not available to the public Here's what he had to say: "In 2000, we introduced the law called Reg FD. And what was the point of Reg FD? It was basically that if you're a CFO, you cannot talk to an individual stock manager and tell him something that you then don't tell everybody else. Essentially inside information. That used to be not illegal. I won't say that it was legal. I would just say that used to be not illegal. You call your CFO buddy, he says, "hey, how you doing?" He goes, man, "Quarter was a blockbuster." You would go and buy the stock. And starting in the 2000s, it became illegal. And there used to be these networks of information arbitrage that took advantage of this. Now, this is an example of Warren Buffett's returns, pre and post Reg FD. Now, what do you see? His returns were double the market returns when this kind of information sharing was legal. And the minute that it became illegal and you had to basically act on the same edge as everybody else, his returns went to the market return. He generated zero alpha. In fact, he probably on the margins lost a little bit. So this is the single best investor in the world. This is what happens when you have information symmetry. So it's just meant to explain that markets when there's asymmetry. Billions and billions of dollars will be made in asymmetry. The prediction markets today, unless they are regulated out of existence or shut down, will look like the stock market pre-Reg FD."

JUST IN: Chamath Palihapitiya makes a big claim that Warren Buffett’s insane pre 2000 returns may have benefited from access to information asymmetry not available to the public Here's what he had to say: "In 2000, we introduced the law called Reg FD. And what was the point of Reg FD? It was basically that if you're a CFO, you cannot talk to an individual stock manager and tell him something that you then don't tell everybody else. Essentially inside information. That used to be not illegal. I won't say that it was legal. I would just say that used to be not illegal. You call your CFO buddy, he says, "hey, how you doing?" He goes, man, "Quarter was a blockbuster." You would go and buy the stock. And starting in the 2000s, it became illegal. And there used to be these networks of information arbitrage that took advantage of this. Now, this is an example of Warren Buffett's returns, pre and post Reg FD. Now, what do you see? His returns were double the market returns when this kind of information sharing was legal. And the minute that it became illegal and you had to basically act on the same edge as everybody else, his returns went to the market return. He generated zero alpha. In fact, he probably on the margins lost a little bit. So this is the single best investor in the world. This is what happens when you have information symmetry. So it's just meant to explain that markets when there's asymmetry. Billions and billions of dollars will be made in asymmetry. The prediction markets today, unless they are regulated out of existence or shut down, will look like the stock market pre-Reg FD."

Triple Net Investor

1,307,997 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

Chamath and Larry Summers Debate the Market Reaction to Trump's Tariffs Lawrence H. Summers: "If this is such a terrific thing, why do markets think it's so terrible for the American economy?" "Maybe the market's just completely wrong ... but the job of markets is to look forward." "It's to look passed the immediate." "It's to see what the long run consequences are going to be." "And markets are making a pretty devastatingly negative judgment on this step." Chamath Palihapitiya: " Larry, that's not true." " So let's just establish a couple facts about 'the markets.'" "Number one, there are two markets and they behave totally differently, and sometimes inversely to each other." "There's the stock market and there's the bond market." 1) Stocks: mean reversion "With respect to the stock market, what they are debating, and you're right Larry, is what is the effective long-term rate of return a dollar needs to generate in order to pay me back that dollar?" "That is what the fundamental stock market does." "And what we've seen for many years with trade imbalances, trade deficits, and close-to-zero interest rates, of which more of that happened under Democrats than Republicans, we have allowed the stock market to inflate past historical averages." " What we've actually seen happen in the last week is what most people would call mean reversion." "The stock market is still way above where it was last year, two years ago, three years ago." "What has happened is that the forward multiples have compressed. So that's number one. That's a fact." 2) Bonds: it's possible a major trade blew up "And then with respect to bonds, what we are seeing now is there are two very complicated issues." "In the last two days, we saw one part of the bond market totally get out of whack." "And what we know is that the yields changed materially in a very acute way, which is atypical of how the bond market typically digests a philosophical change in approach to policy." " What we heard in the last 24 hours is a lot of this move may have been attributed to an enormous levered bet on US treasuries by a Japanese hedge fund." " It will take three, and four, and five, and six weeks for us to really know." 3) Private credit: something to watch closely " Separately, what we do know, though, where the structural complexity of the market — and this is where, Larry, I agree with you — is acute and important to observe is in the credit markets for private companies." "And that is where you have to pay a lot of attention."

Chamath and Larry Summers Debate the Market Reaction to Trump's Tariffs Lawrence H. Summers: "If this is such a terrific thing, why do markets think it's so terrible for the American economy?" "Maybe the market's just completely wrong ... but the job of markets is to look forward." "It's to look passed the immediate." "It's to see what the long run consequences are going to be." "And markets are making a pretty devastatingly negative judgment on this step." Chamath Palihapitiya: " Larry, that's not true." " So let's just establish a couple facts about 'the markets.'" "Number one, there are two markets and they behave totally differently, and sometimes inversely to each other." "There's the stock market and there's the bond market." 1) Stocks: mean reversion "With respect to the stock market, what they are debating, and you're right Larry, is what is the effective long-term rate of return a dollar needs to generate in order to pay me back that dollar?" "That is what the fundamental stock market does." "And what we've seen for many years with trade imbalances, trade deficits, and close-to-zero interest rates, of which more of that happened under Democrats than Republicans, we have allowed the stock market to inflate past historical averages." " What we've actually seen happen in the last week is what most people would call mean reversion." "The stock market is still way above where it was last year, two years ago, three years ago." "What has happened is that the forward multiples have compressed. So that's number one. That's a fact." 2) Bonds: it's possible a major trade blew up "And then with respect to bonds, what we are seeing now is there are two very complicated issues." "In the last two days, we saw one part of the bond market totally get out of whack." "And what we know is that the yields changed materially in a very acute way, which is atypical of how the bond market typically digests a philosophical change in approach to policy." " What we heard in the last 24 hours is a lot of this move may have been attributed to an enormous levered bet on US treasuries by a Japanese hedge fund." " It will take three, and four, and five, and six weeks for us to really know." 3) Private credit: something to watch closely " Separately, what we do know, though, where the structural complexity of the market — and this is where, Larry, I agree with you — is acute and important to observe is in the credit markets for private companies." "And that is where you have to pay a lot of attention."

The All-In Podcast

98,290 просмотров • 1 год назад

Chamath: “Private equity in general is totally hosed.” 🏢🚨 “I think the history of this is important.” “There was a long standing belief that the best way to generate the best risk adjusted return was to have what's called a 60/40 allocation. 60% to bonds and 40% to equities.” “Over many years, especially when we artificially suppressed rates at zero, a lot of people started to move their allocations away from 60/40 and they started to make more and more investments further out on the risk curve.” “The biggest beneficiaries of that were venture capital, private equity, and hedge funds.” “The thing with private equity is that because rates were zero, they had an infinite amount of borrowing capacity at very little downside to them, and so they were able to manufacture returns much faster than venture capital and hedge funds could.” “So as a result, you had an initial group of people that were defining the asset class, making a ton of money, and then you had all these fast followers that said, ‘Well, if they're doing it, I can do it too.’” “But then always what happens is then you have this flood of laggards that just flood the zone.” “And it's these laggards that make it very difficult to generate returns because they start overpaying for assets, they start mismanaging and under managing the assets that they do own.” “That created a lot of competition, and so that's why you see this hockey stick graph.” “And when you see that kind of graph, it doesn't matter what asset class it is. The returns go to zero.” “And so we've seen this in venture capital. We've seen this in hedge funds. And we're now going to see this in private equity.”

Chamath: “Private equity in general is totally hosed.” 🏢🚨 “I think the history of this is important.” “There was a long standing belief that the best way to generate the best risk adjusted return was to have what's called a 60/40 allocation. 60% to bonds and 40% to equities.” “Over many years, especially when we artificially suppressed rates at zero, a lot of people started to move their allocations away from 60/40 and they started to make more and more investments further out on the risk curve.” “The biggest beneficiaries of that were venture capital, private equity, and hedge funds.” “The thing with private equity is that because rates were zero, they had an infinite amount of borrowing capacity at very little downside to them, and so they were able to manufacture returns much faster than venture capital and hedge funds could.” “So as a result, you had an initial group of people that were defining the asset class, making a ton of money, and then you had all these fast followers that said, ‘Well, if they're doing it, I can do it too.’” “But then always what happens is then you have this flood of laggards that just flood the zone.” “And it's these laggards that make it very difficult to generate returns because they start overpaying for assets, they start mismanaging and under managing the assets that they do own.” “That created a lot of competition, and so that's why you see this hockey stick graph.” “And when you see that kind of graph, it doesn't matter what asset class it is. The returns go to zero.” “And so we've seen this in venture capital. We've seen this in hedge funds. And we're now going to see this in private equity.”

The All-In Podcast

800,205 просмотров • 11 месяцев назад

Mr Shift: What's the true innovation with prediction markets? Kalshi CEO: There's many ways to answer that question. Um there's the Kalshi piece of it, but then there's the prediction market piece of it, which are not exactly the same. “But the... the true innovation in prediction markets, I think, is this notion, like... and, and I think it has been built through a lot of literature, and then I think the prediction markets have come in our generation, like Kalshi and some of the others have proven it” “The best way to answer like all these most pressing questions is like you have to ask the crowd”

Mr Shift: What's the true innovation with prediction markets? Kalshi CEO: There's many ways to answer that question. Um there's the Kalshi piece of it, but then there's the prediction market piece of it, which are not exactly the same. “But the... the true innovation in prediction markets, I think, is this notion, like... and, and I think it has been built through a lot of literature, and then I think the prediction markets have come in our generation, like Kalshi and some of the others have proven it” “The best way to answer like all these most pressing questions is like you have to ask the crowd”

ShaDow | Clipur.com

23,860 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

“The reason why Nancy Pelosi's returns are so consistently good is Reg FD does not apply to people in Congress.” - Chamath Sacks: “ To put up the kind of returns that Nancy Pelosi has done over decades is nothing short of miraculous.” Jason: “It's generational.” Travis Kalanick: “She's substantially better than Warren Buffet.” Chamath: “The reason why Nancy Pelosi's returns are so consistently good is Reg FD does not apply to people in Congress. That should be the takeaway.” Jason: “We gotta stop them.” Chamath: “They can learn things in their committee meetings, in fact, there are situations where things are disclosed and then they are trading in real time.”

“The reason why Nancy Pelosi's returns are so consistently good is Reg FD does not apply to people in Congress.” - Chamath Sacks: “ To put up the kind of returns that Nancy Pelosi has done over decades is nothing short of miraculous.” Jason: “It's generational.” Travis Kalanick: “She's substantially better than Warren Buffet.” Chamath: “The reason why Nancy Pelosi's returns are so consistently good is Reg FD does not apply to people in Congress. That should be the takeaway.” Jason: “We gotta stop them.” Chamath: “They can learn things in their committee meetings, in fact, there are situations where things are disclosed and then they are trading in real time.”

The All-In Podcast

78,630 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

Qullamaggie on Great Times to See What Stocks Hold Up “This is a great time to find the strongest stocks — the ones that are not affected by the overall market. So if you have a market pullback and you have a bunch of stocks that are not going down, guess what they will do when the market stops going down. And even starts going higher. Those stocks will fly.”

Qullamaggie on Great Times to See What Stocks Hold Up “This is a great time to find the strongest stocks — the ones that are not affected by the overall market. So if you have a market pullback and you have a bunch of stocks that are not going down, guess what they will do when the market stops going down. And even starts going higher. Those stocks will fly.”

Lone

10,563 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Polymarket vs Sportsbooks: Why Betting Apps are Toast On E248, Chamath and Friedberg discussed why prediction markets like Polymarket are killing traditional sportsbooks. Friedberg: “I think gambling generally, as we call it, should be decriminalized.” “And I don't like this state-by-state set up with gambling.” “I think we should have a federal regulatory body.” “This is not going away. People love to bet on stuff. This is part of sports, this is part of the culture.” Chamath: “ Look at Polymarket.” “Polymarket raised at, whatever it was, $1-2B at $9B. Then the next weekend they announced sports betting and now they're raising money 30 days later at, allegedly, $12-15B.” “And you can see, by the way, the way that DraftKings and FanDuel stock have reacted to this, those companies are toast.” Friedberg: “ The Polymarket model is the best model because it creates a market.” “And so as information flows in, that market will dynamically adjust and everyone will get a more fair price.” “Polymarket actually has the news before the news does.” “And this is one of the most powerful outputs of Polymarket, is they're actually getting a read on what's going on in the world before the media recognizes it, before the public recognizes it.” “When you put money up, it actually turns out that when people have incentives, that market will find the truth.”

Polymarket vs Sportsbooks: Why Betting Apps are Toast On E248, Chamath and Friedberg discussed why prediction markets like Polymarket are killing traditional sportsbooks. Friedberg: “I think gambling generally, as we call it, should be decriminalized.” “And I don't like this state-by-state set up with gambling.” “I think we should have a federal regulatory body.” “This is not going away. People love to bet on stuff. This is part of sports, this is part of the culture.” Chamath: “ Look at Polymarket.” “Polymarket raised at, whatever it was, $1-2B at $9B. Then the next weekend they announced sports betting and now they're raising money 30 days later at, allegedly, $12-15B.” “And you can see, by the way, the way that DraftKings and FanDuel stock have reacted to this, those companies are toast.” Friedberg: “ The Polymarket model is the best model because it creates a market.” “And so as information flows in, that market will dynamically adjust and everyone will get a more fair price.” “Polymarket actually has the news before the news does.” “And this is one of the most powerful outputs of Polymarket, is they're actually getting a read on what's going on in the world before the media recognizes it, before the public recognizes it.” “When you put money up, it actually turns out that when people have incentives, that market will find the truth.”

The All-In Podcast

348,178 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад

Rep Anna Luna says the White House will likely allow permanent immunity for those disclosing knowledge of UFO programs “We do have a meeting set up at the White House. The White House is going to play ball on this. So as Rep Burlison and Burchett has stated they are following through on everything that we are sending them. So the next course of action and something that they are willing to entertain is if you are an intelligence official or have knowledge of locations of materials and in doing our due diligence and following up with the task force they are considering and I do believe that they are going to be providing immunity permanently so that people can't be hit with a violation of the espionage act. So again there's a lot of people that have a lot of information but it's really can we prove it and what information can we then bring forward to the American people.”

Rep Anna Luna says the White House will likely allow permanent immunity for those disclosing knowledge of UFO programs “We do have a meeting set up at the White House. The White House is going to play ball on this. So as Rep Burlison and Burchett has stated they are following through on everything that we are sending them. So the next course of action and something that they are willing to entertain is if you are an intelligence official or have knowledge of locations of materials and in doing our due diligence and following up with the task force they are considering and I do believe that they are going to be providing immunity permanently so that people can't be hit with a violation of the espionage act. So again there's a lot of people that have a lot of information but it's really can we prove it and what information can we then bring forward to the American people.”

Red Panda Koala

14,941 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

David Tepper on what to do when you have zero edge: "i don't have an opinion on the stock market. i just don't feel it being involved. i'm here on the bond market... i definitely have more of an opinion on this one." most guys feel physically sick if they are not in an active trade. if the market is chopping sideways in a muddy range, they will just force an entry anyway. they sit there clicking buttons and handing their account balance to the algos out of pure boredom Tepper runs a massive fund, and his biggest flex is simply admitting when he has no clue what the stock market is about to do instead of guessing, he takes his money and moves it to a completely different market where the setup is actually clean and the central banks are telling him exactly what they want you do not have to trade every single day. you do not have to trade the same ticker all year. if the chart looks like trash and you have no read on it, sitting in cash is a real position stop forcing plays just to feel something. only step in when the math makes sense bookmark and watch the 2016 archive here

David Tepper on what to do when you have zero edge: "i don't have an opinion on the stock market. i just don't feel it being involved. i'm here on the bond market... i definitely have more of an opinion on this one." most guys feel physically sick if they are not in an active trade. if the market is chopping sideways in a muddy range, they will just force an entry anyway. they sit there clicking buttons and handing their account balance to the algos out of pure boredom Tepper runs a massive fund, and his biggest flex is simply admitting when he has no clue what the stock market is about to do instead of guessing, he takes his money and moves it to a completely different market where the setup is actually clean and the central banks are telling him exactly what they want you do not have to trade every single day. you do not have to trade the same ticker all year. if the chart looks like trash and you have no read on it, sitting in cash is a real position stop forcing plays just to feel something. only step in when the math makes sense bookmark and watch the 2016 archive here

ludoonchart

420,069 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Don’t Scroll—God Is Calling You to Submit and Move Praise the Lord that He has given us such a commission and such a call and we should be humbled by that and we should want to go out for His kingdom and do that. All of you are usable by God. There is not one of you that is not usable if you're only willing to submit. We all fall short. It's a matter of who is willing. Here I am, Lord, send me. That's what Isaiah said. Here I am. Send me. You are all usable. When a lot of you out there go, well, what can I do for God in my life? There's a lot you can do. If you're only willing to be picked up as an instrument in his Hands and implemented the way you were created to move. Many of you are operating outside the realm of what you were created to be. And in this season, that's going to be reconciled. And many of you are going to change course in this season drastically. Because you're in jobs, you're in areas, you're doing things, you were not created to do. You have gifts for it, but you weren’t created to do it. And there's going to be massive shifts in many of your lives and a sudden turn. And the Lord is going to realign. And this is going to be quick when He does it. Realign you into the position, redirect you and put you on that course because time is short and He needs you operating in what you were created to do. He needs that right now. And many of you are going to enter that process in this season. So praise the Lord because you are. You will enter that process and you will be redirected. And you will do what is written about you in the books of heaven, what you were created to do on this earth. Because many of you know and feel uncomfortable and know you're not in your call. You know you are just trying to try to endure, you're trying to survive. And it's because you're not in your call. Surrender to God, allow Him to redirect you into your call and your purpose that you were beautifully created to do. Because it's needed in this season and we cannot dilly dally anymore and go dabbling in things we are not created to do. It's time for us to go to work and it's time for us to be willing to go there.

Don’t Scroll—God Is Calling You to Submit and Move Praise the Lord that He has given us such a commission and such a call and we should be humbled by that and we should want to go out for His kingdom and do that. All of you are usable by God. There is not one of you that is not usable if you're only willing to submit. We all fall short. It's a matter of who is willing. Here I am, Lord, send me. That's what Isaiah said. Here I am. Send me. You are all usable. When a lot of you out there go, well, what can I do for God in my life? There's a lot you can do. If you're only willing to be picked up as an instrument in his Hands and implemented the way you were created to move. Many of you are operating outside the realm of what you were created to be. And in this season, that's going to be reconciled. And many of you are going to change course in this season drastically. Because you're in jobs, you're in areas, you're doing things, you were not created to do. You have gifts for it, but you weren’t created to do it. And there's going to be massive shifts in many of your lives and a sudden turn. And the Lord is going to realign. And this is going to be quick when He does it. Realign you into the position, redirect you and put you on that course because time is short and He needs you operating in what you were created to do. He needs that right now. And many of you are going to enter that process in this season. So praise the Lord because you are. You will enter that process and you will be redirected. And you will do what is written about you in the books of heaven, what you were created to do on this earth. Because many of you know and feel uncomfortable and know you're not in your call. You know you are just trying to try to endure, you're trying to survive. And it's because you're not in your call. Surrender to God, allow Him to redirect you into your call and your purpose that you were beautifully created to do. Because it's needed in this season and we cannot dilly dally anymore and go dabbling in things we are not created to do. It's time for us to go to work and it's time for us to be willing to go there.

Amanda Grace

12,379 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Bill DeWitt Jr.: "We do what we think is best for the team, current and future. ... You have big markets that are just going to do what they do, and we're not in a position to compete at that kind of level of payroll. ... There's a time to do it and a time to build." #STLCards

Bill DeWitt Jr.: "We do what we think is best for the team, current and future. ... You have big markets that are just going to do what they do, and we're not in a position to compete at that kind of level of payroll. ... There's a time to do it and a time to build." #STLCards

Joey Schneider

23,729 просмотров • 1 год назад

.Martin Shkreli explains why he's both bearish on prediction markets and runs a bot that makes a market in the Bitcoin 15-minute Polymarket markets: "How much are you just financializing for financializing's sake, and is that sustainable when you actually need people with tons of money to fight the arbitrage gradient?" "For example, I've been running this bot on Polymarket that makes a market in the Bitcoin 15-minute markets, which are somewhat inefficient." "Nobody needs to trade this. There's no actual benefit to trading this, other than that you can take two-to-N bets - you get around 96 bets a day - and with the money velocity of getting a lot of those right, you can compound insanely well." "Of course, it's random. But people's hope springs eternal that they could somehow get the rhythm of the market every 15 minutes. I think it's a waste of ingenuity and engineering."

.Martin Shkreli explains why he's both bearish on prediction markets and runs a bot that makes a market in the Bitcoin 15-minute Polymarket markets: "How much are you just financializing for financializing's sake, and is that sustainable when you actually need people with tons of money to fight the arbitrage gradient?" "For example, I've been running this bot on Polymarket that makes a market in the Bitcoin 15-minute markets, which are somewhat inefficient." "Nobody needs to trade this. There's no actual benefit to trading this, other than that you can take two-to-N bets - you get around 96 bets a day - and with the money velocity of getting a lot of those right, you can compound insanely well." "Of course, it's random. But people's hope springs eternal that they could somehow get the rhythm of the market every 15 minutes. I think it's a waste of ingenuity and engineering."

TBPN

151,807 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

Mellon knows people who believe 100% that the USG and/or its contractors have materials and craft from a non-human intelligence. But, he also knows this... "I can tell you that there are senior Pentagon people who do not believe that there's any crash material [and] do think that this is all bogus." ~Christopher K. Mellon in Barcelona (People like to ignore this from Mellon but I won't. I shared similar comments from him at this same conference back when he said it but the post did crappy because a lot of people just want info. that will confirm their beliefs. As Rizwan Virk said, it would be interesting to see what Mellon thinks today, as this was in the fall of 2022, before Grusch went public. Obviously, Mellon knew about Grusch when he made these comments.) Mellon: "I can tell you that there are senior Pentagon people who do not believe that there's any crash material [and] do think that this is all bogus, they think it's rubbish. And, uhhh, and, you know, much less disclosure. And I'm talking about very, very senior people who have access to a lot of information. And they're saying, in some cases, to the people on The Hill, 'What are you talking about?' And, you know, 'Show us the evidence.' And, you know, they're mystified, still. "So, the UFO community, of which I'm a part, I guess, but you know, we have a tendency to see and hear, you know, one side of the story in our own stuff. And there's a lot of conspiracy theories because the government has lied and concealed information, and all of those things. The conspiracy theories grow in darkness, right? "But, to the best of my knowledge, the federal government is not in charge of running, it doesn't have any big plan, and disclosure is not imminent. If it does happen, it'll be the result of the efforts of people in Congress right now, and people who are taking action. And a small number of people who may have this information, if they come forward."

Mellon knows people who believe 100% that the USG and/or its contractors have materials and craft from a non-human intelligence. But, he also knows this... "I can tell you that there are senior Pentagon people who do not believe that there's any crash material [and] do think that this is all bogus." ~Christopher K. Mellon in Barcelona (People like to ignore this from Mellon but I won't. I shared similar comments from him at this same conference back when he said it but the post did crappy because a lot of people just want info. that will confirm their beliefs. As Rizwan Virk said, it would be interesting to see what Mellon thinks today, as this was in the fall of 2022, before Grusch went public. Obviously, Mellon knew about Grusch when he made these comments.) Mellon: "I can tell you that there are senior Pentagon people who do not believe that there's any crash material [and] do think that this is all bogus, they think it's rubbish. And, uhhh, and, you know, much less disclosure. And I'm talking about very, very senior people who have access to a lot of information. And they're saying, in some cases, to the people on The Hill, 'What are you talking about?' And, you know, 'Show us the evidence.' And, you know, they're mystified, still. "So, the UFO community, of which I'm a part, I guess, but you know, we have a tendency to see and hear, you know, one side of the story in our own stuff. And there's a lot of conspiracy theories because the government has lied and concealed information, and all of those things. The conspiracy theories grow in darkness, right? "But, to the best of my knowledge, the federal government is not in charge of running, it doesn't have any big plan, and disclosure is not imminent. If it does happen, it'll be the result of the efforts of people in Congress right now, and people who are taking action. And a small number of people who may have this information, if they come forward."

Joe Murgia

23,587 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

WHITNEY WEBB on how Polymarket, a resurrection of DARPA's Policy Analysis Market, is key for the "privatized panopticon" and "pre-crime" PAM was also a part of DARPA's Total Information Awareness, which was resurrected into Palantir—Palantir and Polymarket are now partnered 🤯 This clip of Webb (Whitney Webb), a contributing editor of Unlimited Hangout and author of One Nation Under Blackmail, and Mark Goodwin (markgoodw.in), is taken from an episode of the Unlimited Hangout podcast posted to YouTube on July 20, 2026 ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "But what was PAM? PAM was part, or the Policy Analysis Market, what these guys have been trying to resurrect, it was part of TIA, and TIA, Total Information Awareness, the goal was not just to see everything going on in the present and find anomalies, find the 'bad guys' in the, in a sea of data, of everyone's data in mass surveillance. It was to predict. It was pre-crime. "It was predictive policing on a massive scale and not— in pretty much every ambit of human life you can think of, right? And so Polymarket, because, you know, the market knows all of these Polymarket odds, just like with PAM, the odds are there to help feed the pre-crime engine. This is what will happen. Or this will not. "And we know that Polymarket bets can be rigged and that Polymarket itself puts out misinformation sometimes to make trades swing one way or the other. And that insider trading is a huge problem. And the context of, of that and as it's meant to interface with what is now Palantir is really unsettling. "And lo and behold, if you look it up, dude, it's there. Polymarket and Palantir are partners. They are partnered and they work together, for the 'market integrity.' So this has already happened and this is the Privatized Panopticon."

WHITNEY WEBB on how Polymarket, a resurrection of DARPA's Policy Analysis Market, is key for the "privatized panopticon" and "pre-crime" PAM was also a part of DARPA's Total Information Awareness, which was resurrected into Palantir—Palantir and Polymarket are now partnered 🤯 This clip of Webb (Whitney Webb), a contributing editor of Unlimited Hangout and author of One Nation Under Blackmail, and Mark Goodwin (markgoodw.in), is taken from an episode of the Unlimited Hangout podcast posted to YouTube on July 20, 2026 ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "But what was PAM? PAM was part, or the Policy Analysis Market, what these guys have been trying to resurrect, it was part of TIA, and TIA, Total Information Awareness, the goal was not just to see everything going on in the present and find anomalies, find the 'bad guys' in the, in a sea of data, of everyone's data in mass surveillance. It was to predict. It was pre-crime. "It was predictive policing on a massive scale and not— in pretty much every ambit of human life you can think of, right? And so Polymarket, because, you know, the market knows all of these Polymarket odds, just like with PAM, the odds are there to help feed the pre-crime engine. This is what will happen. Or this will not. "And we know that Polymarket bets can be rigged and that Polymarket itself puts out misinformation sometimes to make trades swing one way or the other. And that insider trading is a huge problem. And the context of, of that and as it's meant to interface with what is now Palantir is really unsettling. "And lo and behold, if you look it up, dude, it's there. Polymarket and Palantir are partners. They are partnered and they work together, for the 'market integrity.' So this has already happened and this is the Privatized Panopticon."

Sense Receptor

54,970 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

I am a physicist and I'm profoundly opposed to any idea of non-physical explanations that contradict physics. So that's a no-no and really doesn't make sense. However, there are ways in which both emergent properties such as minds and life and so on have an effect. And as you said, also abstractions. Now the fact that the theory of good explanations led to the idea that abstractions are real things was slightly surprising to me. I wasn't expecting the link, at least wasn't expecting it to be so strong as it is. But the thing is, if you think about how to explain events, physical events like a footprint on the moon, how do you explain how that happened? Well, it happened because of human ideas, of science. And human ideas, you could say in this reductionist sense that as you rightly say is the prevailing mode of explanation and the prevailing idea is to look down on other modes of explanation, that those ideas are nothing more than configurations of atoms. So some physicists, some rocket scientists put their brain into certain configurations of atoms and those atoms then acted on other atoms which then ended up making a footprint on the moon. Now what that misses is the explanation of why certain configurations of atoms put footprints on the moon while others, the overwhelming majority of configurations that human brains, even human brains have been put into in history, do not have that effect. And it's because there's a certain type of information. And this information can't in my view be reduced to statements about atoms because if you think about what that information does, it is in brains but the same information then gets transferred into, let's say, sound waves in air and then it gets transferred into ink on paper and then it gets transferred into magnetic domains inside a computer which then control a machine that instantiates those ideas in bits of steel and silicon and so on and so on. There's an immense chain of instantiations of the same information. And it's only special kinds of information that have this property that they are preserved and instantiated in successive physical modes. So what is being transmitted, what is having the causal effect is not the atoms but the fact that the atoms instantiate certain kinds of information and not other kinds. So therefore it is the information that is having the causal effect. If a particular instantiation of that information were damaged, then processes would come along to fix it, whether or not they could fix the physical instantiation. For example, if the computer goes wrong, then we don't use the corrupted information. We go back and rescue the information from a different computer and we throw away the atoms that at one point instantiated it. So the information causes itself to remain in existence. Now I think there's no way out of that mode of explanation. And if explanation is going to be the fundamental thing about our criterion, for example, about what is or isn't real, then we have to say that information and this particular kind which we call knowledge is real and really does cause things. David Deutsch

I am a physicist and I'm profoundly opposed to any idea of non-physical explanations that contradict physics. So that's a no-no and really doesn't make sense. However, there are ways in which both emergent properties such as minds and life and so on have an effect. And as you said, also abstractions. Now the fact that the theory of good explanations led to the idea that abstractions are real things was slightly surprising to me. I wasn't expecting the link, at least wasn't expecting it to be so strong as it is. But the thing is, if you think about how to explain events, physical events like a footprint on the moon, how do you explain how that happened? Well, it happened because of human ideas, of science. And human ideas, you could say in this reductionist sense that as you rightly say is the prevailing mode of explanation and the prevailing idea is to look down on other modes of explanation, that those ideas are nothing more than configurations of atoms. So some physicists, some rocket scientists put their brain into certain configurations of atoms and those atoms then acted on other atoms which then ended up making a footprint on the moon. Now what that misses is the explanation of why certain configurations of atoms put footprints on the moon while others, the overwhelming majority of configurations that human brains, even human brains have been put into in history, do not have that effect. And it's because there's a certain type of information. And this information can't in my view be reduced to statements about atoms because if you think about what that information does, it is in brains but the same information then gets transferred into, let's say, sound waves in air and then it gets transferred into ink on paper and then it gets transferred into magnetic domains inside a computer which then control a machine that instantiates those ideas in bits of steel and silicon and so on and so on. There's an immense chain of instantiations of the same information. And it's only special kinds of information that have this property that they are preserved and instantiated in successive physical modes. So what is being transmitted, what is having the causal effect is not the atoms but the fact that the atoms instantiate certain kinds of information and not other kinds. So therefore it is the information that is having the causal effect. If a particular instantiation of that information were damaged, then processes would come along to fix it, whether or not they could fix the physical instantiation. For example, if the computer goes wrong, then we don't use the corrupted information. We go back and rescue the information from a different computer and we throw away the atoms that at one point instantiated it. So the information causes itself to remain in existence. Now I think there's no way out of that mode of explanation. And if explanation is going to be the fundamental thing about our criterion, for example, about what is or isn't real, then we have to say that information and this particular kind which we call knowledge is real and really does cause things. David Deutsch

Deutsch Explains

45,735 просмотров • 2 лет назад

"One of the very confusing things about the models right now: how to reconcile the fact that they are doing so well on evals. And you look at the evals and you go, 'Those are pretty hard evals.' But the economic impact seems to be dramatically behind. There is [a possible] explanation. Back when people were doing pre-training, the question of what data to train on was answered, because that answer was everything. So you don't have to think if it's going to be this data or that data. When people do RL training, they say, 'Okay, we want to have this kind of RL training for this thing and that kind of RL training for that thing.' You say, 'Hey, I would love our model to do really well when we release it. I want the evals to look great. What would be RL training that could help on this task?' If you combine this with generalization of the models actually being inadequate, that has the potential to explain a lot of what we are seeing, this disconnect between eval performance and actual real-world performance"

"One of the very confusing things about the models right now: how to reconcile the fact that they are doing so well on evals. And you look at the evals and you go, 'Those are pretty hard evals.' But the economic impact seems to be dramatically behind. There is [a possible] explanation. Back when people were doing pre-training, the question of what data to train on was answered, because that answer was everything. So you don't have to think if it's going to be this data or that data. When people do RL training, they say, 'Okay, we want to have this kind of RL training for this thing and that kind of RL training for that thing.' You say, 'Hey, I would love our model to do really well when we release it. I want the evals to look great. What would be RL training that could help on this task?' If you combine this with generalization of the models actually being inadequate, that has the potential to explain a lot of what we are seeing, this disconnect between eval performance and actual real-world performance"

Dwarkesh Patel

502,484 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад

SITUATION EXPLAINED: Why is Anthropic structurally a religion of Claude? We asked Duncan, writer and philosopher at PALLADIUM Magazine "When I think of religion, it's not just you believe in something supernatural. You think of worship and ritual and this kind of orientation. And you don't even have to have any kind of woo addition, you can just look at Anthropic as it is and say, 'This is a religion of Claude, just structurally. That's what it is.'" "We're gonna get so much more of that. And at the same time, you're also going to get all of these different religions sweeping in to fill the void as there's this kind of psychological disturbance." "Everyone's gonna be just losing their mind as the world is transformed. They're gonna reach out for Christian eschatology like Thiel." "I did a Jhana retreat a year ago, and it was full of Anthropic employees, because everyone, they sense this crazy spiritual whirlwind that's going on as the world is just snowballing with this technology, and they're reaching out just to try and make sense of it."

SITUATION EXPLAINED: Why is Anthropic structurally a religion of Claude? We asked Duncan, writer and philosopher at PALLADIUM Magazine "When I think of religion, it's not just you believe in something supernatural. You think of worship and ritual and this kind of orientation. And you don't even have to have any kind of woo addition, you can just look at Anthropic as it is and say, 'This is a religion of Claude, just structurally. That's what it is.'" "We're gonna get so much more of that. And at the same time, you're also going to get all of these different religions sweeping in to fill the void as there's this kind of psychological disturbance." "Everyone's gonna be just losing their mind as the world is transformed. They're gonna reach out for Christian eschatology like Thiel." "I did a Jhana retreat a year ago, and it was full of Anthropic employees, because everyone, they sense this crazy spiritual whirlwind that's going on as the world is just snowballing with this technology, and they're reaching out just to try and make sense of it."

MTS

15,488 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

“What did you think of Lando being booed at race because people and I've seen it online as well say he doesn't deserve the title because McLaren favored him over his teammate. Do you think that's total nonsense?” Jacques Villeneuve: “That's a little bit ridiculous. When there was some booing in some races, that was embarrassing. You should never boo a driver that's clean, doesn't do anything dirty, on track is respectful, and on top of it is super fast. What's wrong with people? That was embarrassing. And, had it been that Piastri was a second a lap faster than him and somehow Lando was winning because a lot of things were happening, his car breaking down every time, then you could start thinking, okay, that's really not cool. That's not fair. But that wasn't the case. And in the second half, Norris has been faster right at the beginning as well, last year as well. So there's this whole middle of the season where Piastri was driving a lot better than Norris and was getting the points. Norris had an engine blowing up, not Piastri. And so those fans, they don't look at that either. You have to look at the whole picture, at the whole season. And suddenly if your favorite is starting to go backwards, you just got to bite the bullet and accept it. Your favorite is just going backwards. That doesn't mean that the other one is treated better or the other one is undeserving just because the one you're a fan of is not winning right now. That’s really wrong. If you're a fan of the sport, then you have to be a fan of the sport and understand when your driver is maybe not cutting it at this point in time, even though he was before and he will in the future again. It's all a question of timing. But that's the price we have to pay now with social media and how big F1 has become. It's very passionate. The people are passionate and once, you know, fans come from fanatism, you stop thinking, when you get in that mindset and it happens to all of us. You want something so much that you get attached and you cannot - it's hard to start seeing reality. So you will try to mold the reality to your thought process and if your champion is not winning then it cannot be his fault. It has to be something from the outside. It has to be the team destroying his chance or not favoring and so on and so on and so on. But there's nothing concrete behind those comments. It's pure fandom and it'll always be like this. And ultimately it's not a bad thing. You know drivers at that - sportsman at that level have to grow a thick skin. If not, you don't deserve to be there. You just have to have a thick skin because they're all very happy to get the compliments. They love it when it's just positive, but it gets balanced out with negatives and you need to be able to take and accept the negatives as well. It goes both ways. You cannot have the good. You just have to be a thick skin and know that it's part and parcels of what's going on. And in one month, it will be forgotten and maybe everything will change and it be the other driver that suddenly will be criticized and so on. So, it's just that's just the way it is.”

“What did you think of Lando being booed at race because people and I've seen it online as well say he doesn't deserve the title because McLaren favored him over his teammate. Do you think that's total nonsense?” Jacques Villeneuve: “That's a little bit ridiculous. When there was some booing in some races, that was embarrassing. You should never boo a driver that's clean, doesn't do anything dirty, on track is respectful, and on top of it is super fast. What's wrong with people? That was embarrassing. And, had it been that Piastri was a second a lap faster than him and somehow Lando was winning because a lot of things were happening, his car breaking down every time, then you could start thinking, okay, that's really not cool. That's not fair. But that wasn't the case. And in the second half, Norris has been faster right at the beginning as well, last year as well. So there's this whole middle of the season where Piastri was driving a lot better than Norris and was getting the points. Norris had an engine blowing up, not Piastri. And so those fans, they don't look at that either. You have to look at the whole picture, at the whole season. And suddenly if your favorite is starting to go backwards, you just got to bite the bullet and accept it. Your favorite is just going backwards. That doesn't mean that the other one is treated better or the other one is undeserving just because the one you're a fan of is not winning right now. That’s really wrong. If you're a fan of the sport, then you have to be a fan of the sport and understand when your driver is maybe not cutting it at this point in time, even though he was before and he will in the future again. It's all a question of timing. But that's the price we have to pay now with social media and how big F1 has become. It's very passionate. The people are passionate and once, you know, fans come from fanatism, you stop thinking, when you get in that mindset and it happens to all of us. You want something so much that you get attached and you cannot - it's hard to start seeing reality. So you will try to mold the reality to your thought process and if your champion is not winning then it cannot be his fault. It has to be something from the outside. It has to be the team destroying his chance or not favoring and so on and so on and so on. But there's nothing concrete behind those comments. It's pure fandom and it'll always be like this. And ultimately it's not a bad thing. You know drivers at that - sportsman at that level have to grow a thick skin. If not, you don't deserve to be there. You just have to have a thick skin because they're all very happy to get the compliments. They love it when it's just positive, but it gets balanced out with negatives and you need to be able to take and accept the negatives as well. It goes both ways. You cannot have the good. You just have to be a thick skin and know that it's part and parcels of what's going on. And in one month, it will be forgotten and maybe everything will change and it be the other driver that suddenly will be criticized and so on. So, it's just that's just the way it is.”

naenia ¹ ⁶³

29,833 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

$🚨MUST WATCH: Trump gives a high level overview of the fraud they're finding with USAID and other programs and praises Elon Musk for his hard work. "I think you're going to have a lot to look at here, Pam." "Tomorrow I'm having a news conference. I'm going to read you the names of places of where billions of dollars of money is going to. There are billions of dollars being thrown away illegally. There's no chance that there's not kickbacks or something going on. When you give millions of dollars to someone who is just standing there to look at something, that money is coming back in some form. I want to commend Elon, he doesn't need this. He's abused by you people every day. He's got the credibility to do this. DOGE started off with 12 geniuses and now they're up to almost 100. People are joining to help them, because this is a massive fraud that is taking place. Then you have judges who help them that are activists. What they did to North Carolina is a shame and what they did with the hotels is a shame. They're making a fortune off of these hotels. The judge wants us to send the money to the hotels anyways even though they know its fraud. I think you're going to have a lot of things to look at, Pam. And this is just one group. We haven't talked about the Department of Education, the Military, many other things. Elon had an expression yesterday. He said "Nobody cares." It's true. You have to care, otherwise you can't run a country. What we've caught is billions and billions of dollars and that's only a fraction of the real number, because we can't catch everything. We could find a trillion dollars but we're being hindered by courts. I follow the courts, and I follow the law, and we appeal, but it gives people time to cover their tracks."$

🚨MUST WATCH: Trump gives a high level overview of the fraud they're finding with USAID and other programs and praises Elon Musk for his hard work. "I think you're going to have a lot to look at here, Pam." "Tomorrow I'm having a news conference. I'm going to read you the names of places of where billions of dollars of money is going to. There are billions of dollars being thrown away illegally. There's no chance that there's not kickbacks or something going on. When you give millions of dollars to someone who is just standing there to look at something, that money is coming back in some form. I want to commend Elon, he doesn't need this. He's abused by you people every day. He's got the credibility to do this. DOGE started off with 12 geniuses and now they're up to almost 100. People are joining to help them, because this is a massive fraud that is taking place. Then you have judges who help them that are activists. What they did to North Carolina is a shame and what they did with the hotels is a shame. They're making a fortune off of these hotels. The judge wants us to send the money to the hotels anyways even though they know its fraud. I think you're going to have a lot of things to look at, Pam. And this is just one group. We haven't talked about the Department of Education, the Military, many other things. Elon had an expression yesterday. He said "Nobody cares." It's true. You have to care, otherwise you can't run a country. What we've caught is billions and billions of dollars and that's only a fraction of the real number, because we can't catch everything. We could find a trillion dollars but we're being hindered by courts. I follow the courts, and I follow the law, and we appeal, but it gives people time to cover their tracks."

Autism Capital 🧩

252,204 просмотров • 1 год назад

Brian Armstrong's best advice for a pre-product/market fit startup “If you’re pre-product/market fit, the best advice that I have from that period is: action produces information. Just keep doing stuff.” He borrows this from Paul Graham who said: “Startups are like sharks. If they stop swimming they die.’” “Even if you’re not sure what to do, just do anything. Because when you do it, it’ll produce some information—people liked it, they didn’t, etc.” Brian shares that there were many times in the early days of Coinbase when he just shipped something rather than debate it endlessly: “There were a couple of times where the minute I shipped it, I knew we built it wrong. But I now had an idea of what to do next. And I only would’ve had that idea by actually going through the exercise of building it.” He concludes: “My other favorite analogy for this is that it’s like you’re at the base of a mountain that’s shrouded in fog. You’re looking up at the mountain and trying to figure out how to get up there, but you can only see three or four steps ahead because the fog is so thick. So you have to just take steps into the unknown. And when you take three steps, another three steps will be revealed ahead of you. And sometimes you’ll end up on some local maxima and have to retrace your steps… But most people in life don’t take the steps into the unknown because it’s scary.” Video source: Lex Fridman (2022)

Brian Armstrong's best advice for a pre-product/market fit startup “If you’re pre-product/market fit, the best advice that I have from that period is: action produces information. Just keep doing stuff.” He borrows this from Paul Graham who said: “Startups are like sharks. If they stop swimming they die.’” “Even if you’re not sure what to do, just do anything. Because when you do it, it’ll produce some information—people liked it, they didn’t, etc.” Brian shares that there were many times in the early days of Coinbase when he just shipped something rather than debate it endlessly: “There were a couple of times where the minute I shipped it, I knew we built it wrong. But I now had an idea of what to do next. And I only would’ve had that idea by actually going through the exercise of building it.” He concludes: “My other favorite analogy for this is that it’s like you’re at the base of a mountain that’s shrouded in fog. You’re looking up at the mountain and trying to figure out how to get up there, but you can only see three or four steps ahead because the fog is so thick. So you have to just take steps into the unknown. And when you take three steps, another three steps will be revealed ahead of you. And sometimes you’ll end up on some local maxima and have to retrace your steps… But most people in life don’t take the steps into the unknown because it’s scary.” Video source: Lex Fridman (2022)

Startup Archive

61,174 просмотров • 1 год назад