dogmayor

There are large and famous funds that have lasted despite all that you say. So it is very possible to achieve fame, have your positions known, and have people trade against you, and still not be forced into selling your entire public portfolio to satisfy a margin call.

This is why hedging and neurotic levels of risk-management are necessary. Running a highly levered and highly correlated portfolio is a disaster waiting to happen regardless of whether your overall thesis is correct or not.

Not the best endorsement given the current US gov

blah blah bubble

What gets me the most is he always has to say everything is imminent. Like dude just make your grandiose predictions and leave the timeline undefined. Ppl would still probably throw cash at him. But he can't help himself. It's pathological.

> Elon Musk's SpaceX and Tesla will initially invest $16.8 billion to build Terafab, an advanced AI semiconductor complex in Grimes County, Texas, as the companies race to secure the chip capacity that the billionaire has called essential to their future.

> The facility is intended at narrowing the gap between global chip supply and the more than 1 terawatt of computing power that SpaceX and Tesla expect to need in the coming years.

Am I crazy or is 1 terrawatt "in the coming years" absurd?

Shocking to see a highly levered and highly concentrated fund blow out /s

Take a look at Kosshi. I like it so far.

https://kosshi.app/

Do you mean RenTech? Not sure how you'd know they're heavily invested in anything given the notorious secrecy of the firm. Maybe their public funds have invested in AI, but their most recent 13F shows a 23% tech sector allocation, and their public funds are maybe only half of their total AUM.

Regardless, doubting the legitimacy of Quanta bc it's a Simons Foundation initiative is foolish.

Huge fanboy for sure

Oh no I got 5 emails I better write a post complaining about this massive inconvenience hmph

Figure I.1 is telling. It shows answer length is the strongest predictor of win rate. I suspect this is due to the flawed methodology of the study. Professors were instructed to be succinct ("Please be concise. We expect that each answer takes no more than 3 minutes to write down.") and likely erred on the short side. Also, professors may not have put great effort into their written answers, especially when already trying to be concise. This isn't the headline the authors think it is.

Desperate to keep their crypto companies afloat

Prediction markets and crypto will continue to ride the wave while this administration is in office. But I expect prediction markets will come to be thought of as slimy gambling dens ridden with fraud no different than crypto. The cancerous "greed is good/gamble on everything" attitude prevalent today in America will come crashing down at some point. When? Who knows. The sooner the better.

But for now, make sure you get in your bets er i mean predictions on this mega important market: "Elon Musk # tweets March 3 - March 10, 2026?"[1]

[1] https://polymarket.com/event/elon-musk-of-tweets-march-3-mar...

Important sentences immediately before the ones you quote.

> For our evaluation, we inserted names to signal race / gender while keeping the resume unchanged. Interestingly, the LLMs were not biased in the original evaluation setting, but became biased (up to 12% differences in interview rates) when we added realistic details like company names (Meta, Palantir, General Motors), locations, or culture descriptions from public careers pages.

Untrue. Insiders are incentivized to trade when they can buy at the lowest price. That could be at any point up to the event.

How soon does elon sue them for not choosing xai? He's gonna cry some nonsense about antitrust just like he did last year when apple partnered with openai for apple intelligence opt-in.

Good decision-making is critical to golf. If you're interested in furthering your development, I highly recommend Decade[1]. Great resource.

[1] https://decade.golf

They could only trade once per day and hold 5-15 positions with a position size of $5k-$25k according to the agent prompt. Limited to say the least.

Yeah the "everyone does it" crowd is ridiculous. Like there are degrees to this.

Most corrupt administration in American history by far. Sadly, not at all surprising. Many people are somehow ok with this cesspool and it is sickening.

Short-term deflation can be beneficial for some, but sustained deflation leads to a downward spiral that harms all. A lower cost of goods is great until it causes reduced aggregate investment and demand, which in turn can lead to wage reductions and layoffs. It's also harder to navigate out of a deflationary environment. Deflation isn't desirable in the long run.

This isn't a PI case and she couldn't "easily" get someone else for free. Maybe you're thinking she could get an attorney to take the case on a contingency basis, but that's not "free."

Law firms don't create their own repos of case law. They use a database like westlaw or lexis. LLMs "preparing briefs with sources" would be a disaster and wholly misunderstands what legal writing entails.

I think about this a lot when it comes to self-driving cars. Unless a manufacturer assumes liability, why would anyone purchase one and subject themselves to potential liability for something they by definition did not do? This issue will be a big sticking point for adoption.

> I also disagree about the "beholder words"; to me "it was surprisingly low" means "I am drawing your attention to the fact that the low value surprised me" rather than "you need to be surprised by the low value".

I agree with your interpretation, but here the issue is that "beholder words" don't give the reader the information necessary for them to make their own judgment. Readers are left thinking "ok, but how low is 'surprisingly low?'" Writers should tell the reader the exact number, saying "surprisingly" communicates nothing because it's relative.

They're not banning themselves. There's no market for them. A market will arise based on the market size, product characteristics, etc. Without anyone willing to make markets and trade strawberries, there's no futures market for them. All that to say, there's no need for a law banning something if there's no willing market for it. There was an onions futures market and that's why the law is specific to onions.

I'd agree with this. Kagan is the best overall, Roberts is up there when he wants to be and isn't forcing it, and yes Thomas writes fairly well but what he writes is abysmal.

Alito is hands down the worst writer and one of the worst to ever sit on the court. He's not the brightest but thinks he's a savant and writes with a smugness and conceit that drips off the page on top of being as disingenuous as they come. Reading anything he writes is torture.

Lol frozen concentrate

It has more to do with the nature of the product – can it be reasonably stored in bulk for length without eroding in quality. This goes for anything physically settled. Look at the agricultural products traded at the CME and you'll see there aren't any markets for perishable products like strawberries.

Levine is a uniquely good writer. And, as mentioned, his choice of subject matter (law + finance) is a major factor. Both are such broad fields that you can always find something interesting happening in one corner or another, and both are relevant to everyone no matter the field they're in personally.

As someone who has a similar background to Levine, I'm a big fan and can say it's uncommon to find someone like him who can write effectively and with levity.