Changing the direction of the flow of value one day at a time
SF
Joined January 2018
- Tweets1.3K
- Following3.5K
- Followers758
- Likes6.7K
Humans have the uncanny ability to imagine future concepts like the great sci-fi authors of the 20th century describing robots and space travel as well as Ai. All to find out they become real. Using this same thought process it isn’t that much of a leap to believe aliens exist👽
Andreesen is like Apple, rebranding to a non crypto specific purview isn’t new it’s been happening well over the last year or so but this much is clear. There are no more crypto specific funds anymore (Obviously a few slow pokes but the trend is clear)
The roadster livestream was just a real life version of playing the stunt level on Rush 2 which is also the best video game theme song
youtu.be/2THN1ualDTI?is=MkRY…
The engineering feats are second to none but I'm really not impressed with the design I prefer the old renderings from 10 years ago
it looks like a freaking lambo aventador from the front wtf???
xitter.cf/i/broadcasts/1yKAPwNgg…
Eli Reinhardt retweeted
President Trump calls Jensen mid-interview at the All-In Summit to say AI taking over the world is a hoax
Jensen: "Mr. President? I've got to tell you something. If it wasn't because of you calling, I would... I'm on stage with the besties."
Trump: "You see, the great thing about life is that Jensen can develop the most complex computer chip in the world that nobody can copy for 10 years, but he can't figure out how to put me on speaker."
"So, the AI, it's almost a conspiracy, and the happiest group is China, they're very happy."
"I'm telling you, it's all a hoax. The data centers are great and they make people wealthy and they make states wealthy and it's the oil of the next 20, 25 years. It's bigger than the Internet."
"The robots are not going to be taking over the world and that's not going to happen. The AI will not be taking over the rest of the world. The whole thing is a hoax."
"Now, with that, we have to be a little bit careful, but that doesn't mean we're going to stop an industry. So I'm with you all the way."
As someone who actually has Native American ancestry unlike the delusional people we have running this country that are so blinded by personal vendettas that they vote no on something that would actually enforce Presidents and politicians from profiting from promoting crypto
Eli Reinhardt retweeted
🚨 ELIZABETH WARREN GOT WHAT SHE WANTED.
She stopped the CLARITY Act.
And the irony? She claims she wants to stop Trump from profiting from crypto.
Instead, she helped preserve the exact system where there is NO clear crypto law limiting what anyone can do.
Congratulations. 👏
Eli Reinhardt retweeted
The only reason Clarity Act hasn’t passed yet is b/c crypto disrupts traditional banking model…
It’s really that simple.
We can talk ethics, BRCA, etc.
But it all boils down to crypto reducing need for banks as intermediaries & disrupting net interest income model.
And the politicians who are incentivized to support that model.
Eli Reinhardt retweeted
Let me make this very clear: Big Banks (think JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, etc.) are lobbying overtime to block Americans from getting higher yields on their savings—while trying to block any rewards or perks from being given to customers.
These banks, and others, pay rock-bottom rates on standard savings (often 0.01%–0.05% APY), even as the Fed pays them 4% or more. This massive spread fuels record profits, with almost none passed back to their customers / everyday depositors.
Today, the banks are desperately targeting crypto/stablecoins, where platforms plan to offer 4–5%+ yields or rewards. The ABA and other lobbyists are spending millions trying to ban or restrict those yields via bills like the Clarity Act, crying “fairness” and using words like "stability"—when it's really about protecting their low-rate monopoly and preventing deposit flight. This is anti-retail, anti-consumer, and straight-up anti-American.
Next time you see a big bank dropping billions on a shiny new Midtown Manhattan HQ, you know exactly where that money comes from: the non-existent interest rate they “pay” you!
Fortunately, the big banks are losing this fight as customers wake up to the games…
@worldlibertyfi
Eli Reinhardt retweeted
Surprise, surprise, the biggest critic of the CLARITY Act is CHASE bank who is afraid of losing its customers to low-interest stablecoins.
Bernie loves banks that are TOO BIG TO FAIL bc then they’re effectively big govt subsidiaries.
How long does it take a startup to implement this (like from day one) VS Microsoft (like 50 years). Today I learned that Microsoft finally threw in the towel with Oauth.
Eli Reinhardt retweeted
I resigned from Anthropic today. I spent the last three years doing pretraining research at both OpenAI and Anthropic. Neither company is acting responsibly. They are racing straight to self-improving superintelligence and gambling with our lives. More thoughts below.
Reminds me how all these scientists throw the baby out with the bathwater and how much data an astronomer can miss under his nose like @david_kipping does in this short. My prediction is that this won’t age well. youtube.com/shorts/nDcAo0cXl…
Thank you, Dr. Diamandis.
As I've said for a long time, it's about the data, not the conclusions. Evidence is just data contextualized around a hypothesis. Evidence is not a verdict--but as someone who has worked successfully in scientific research for decades, noticing "data off the curve" that invites curiosity and then exploring its meaning, the one thing I do know is when certain kinds of evidence are, actually, extraordinary.
But when some people (even scientists) say, "There is no evidence", that simply means they don't understand the meaning of the word either in a scientific or a judicial context.
Eli Reinhardt retweeted
Thank you, Dr. Diamandis.
As I've said for a long time, it's about the data, not the conclusions. Evidence is just data contextualized around a hypothesis. Evidence is not a verdict--but as someone who has worked successfully in scientific research for decades, noticing "data off the curve" that invites curiosity and then exploring its meaning, the one thing I do know is when certain kinds of evidence are, actually, extraordinary.
But when some people (even scientists) say, "There is no evidence", that simply means they don't understand the meaning of the word either in a scientific or a judicial context.
