Avis de comptoir en dessous. Pas taper. Mais besoin de le verbaliser putain.
On aura eu la voiture volante avant le vultech sur le différentiel.
Maintenant que j'ai votre attention.
Le Cun a posé une question simple "peroxyde d'hydrogène ?". 2 petits mots.
J'ai pas du tout compris comment peut on être un tel cv (au passage le certificat ssl est non valide), ingénieur logiciel, chercheur en intelligence artificielle, en mathématiques, proposer des cours aussi intéressant, et putain poser une question aussi incroyablement inculte et ensuite étaler à la file une thèse si persuadée...
Je doutais des critiques excessives de Musk a son égard. Finalement elles se sont avérées limpides...
Je pense pas n'avoir vu cette idée pour le moment mais selon moi Tesla Roadster n'est pas seulement un concept car terrestre amusant mais surtout une première étape dans la capacité de SpaceX à développer et produire un véhicule lunaire disposant de propulseurs à gaz chaud afin de rendre le transport entre deux points aux reliefs abrupts plus facile.
L'impulsion spécifique est nettement nettement plus élevée à volume égal de carburant, rendant possible l'industrialisation minière et l'exploration de nouveaux gisements, ainsi que le déplacement sur de plus grandes distances à la surface.
🤖 Made with AI
I should have said that your track record as CEO makes that you lack credibility in judging such events. Your experience of total failure doesn't make you an expert in judging Ledger's situation. And also... You are no white knight. I stand by that. We can talk next week as planned, I don't mind a strong conversation, I am available.
63 milliards pour 11 gw d'énergie 🤣🤣🤣
Replying to @slashbin_FR @CerfiaFR
Environ 11,1 GW, soit 11,1 milliards de watts de puissance installée (jusqu’à 47,8 TWh/an).
Slashbin retweeted
This is a big day for @nym. The Nym App will come proloaded on the next @Ledger device and pre-sale purchasers will receive a one year NYM subscription.
The will make the device as private as it gets when you are using the mixnet mode.
We are eager to see the first devices!
Great achievement by @_pgauthier @P3b7_ and all Ledger team
Watch @alexis_roussel at @Ledger Op3n 2026
Listen closely for the big announcement.....
⤵️
youtube.com/live/6_twUP3_GSI…
Slashbin retweeted
liz warren: we’re gonna stop the mayonnaise company from buying a hot sauce company
elon musk:
Slashbin retweeted
✅ INFLACIÓN DE SEPTIEMBRE:
🟡 2018: 6,5%
🟡 2019: 5,9%
🔵 2020: 2,8%
🔵 2021: 3,5%
🔵 2022: 6,2%
🔵 2023: 12,7%
🟣 2024: 3,5%
🟣 2025: 2,1%
🟣 2026: 1,9%
Javier Milei en primera vuelta. Abrazo.
Slashbin retweeted
Replying to @SenWarren
My grandfather built McCormick Spices from nothing after your ancestors tomahawked his wife and kids. I'll be damned if you take another scalp from my family fortune!
Slashbin retweeted
Bernie Sanders says the top 1% owns more than the bottom 93%, that fewer than a thousand billionaires got $2.2 trillion richer last year, and that it's "obscene."
It's the most seductive and most wrong economic argument of our time. Let me explain why.
First, wealth distribution follows a power law. Always. Everywhere. Books, music, startups, followers on X, goals in soccer. A small minority captures most of the value. That's not a bug of capitalism. It's the mathematical signature of every system where value gets created.
So the only question that matters isn't "how big is the rich's slice?" It's "is the cake growing, and is the slice of the poorest growing with it?"
And the answer is yes. In 1990, more than one human in three lived in extreme poverty. Today it's about one in ten. During exactly the period when billionaires multiplied.
Bernie shows you the slice. He never shows you the cake.
Second thing he won't tell you: past a certain level, wealth stops being consumption. It becomes capital allocation.
Elon Musk isn't sleeping on a pile of cash. He owns stakes in Tesla, SpaceX, xAI. Jeff Bezos owns Amazon stock. That "$2.2 trillion" isn't sitting in a checking account. It's factories, rockets, data centers, millions of jobs. Nobody can eat $100 billion. You can only decide where to invest it.
Once you understand that, the whole debate changes. The real question becomes: who allocates capital better?
The people who built Amazon, SpaceX and Nvidia? Or politicians?
A 5% wealth tax isn't "taking money from the rich." It's taking investment decisions away from people who proved they can create value and handing them to people who proved the opposite.
Because the fundamental difference between an entrepreneur and a politician is consequences.
The entrepreneur invests his own money. If he allocates badly, he loses everything. The market corrects him brutally, no appeal. That's why most startups die: the system kills bad decisions.
The politician invests other people's money. If he allocates badly, nothing happens. Worse, he gets a bigger budget to "fix the problem."
Milton Friedman put it better than anyone. There are four ways to spend money. Your money on yourself: you care about price and quality. Your money on others: you care about price. Others' money on yourself: you care about quality. Others' money on others: you care about nothing.
Government is the fourth box. By design.
Perfect example: California high-speed rail. Approved in 2008 for about $33 billion. Current estimated cost: over $100 billion. Passengers carried: zero. No entrepreneur would have survived that. The politicians who pushed it built careers on it.
And when allocation has no consequences, it eventually finds a buyer. A politician who controls billions without accountability becomes the most profitable target in the world for anyone who wants to steer that money.
The irony is that the left that rails against billionaires is itself funded by billionaires. George Soros is one of the biggest Democratic donors in history. The Gates Foundation shapes public health policy across the planet.
Politicians don't fight billionaires. They pick their own. The ones who fund the state over the ones who compete with it.
So if we actually want fewer poor people, we have to stop judging ideas by their intentions and start judging them by their results. And the results are brutally clear.
China, 1978: Deng Xiaoping opens the economy to markets. More than 800 million people escape extreme poverty. The largest retreat of misery in human history. Not through redistribution. Through the freedom to build.
India, 1991: liberalization. Same movie.
South Korea and North Korea: same people, same language, same starting point in 1953. One became one of the most advanced economies on earth. The other has famines.
Poland and Ukraine: comparable living standards in 1990. Today the average Pole is more than three times richer than the average Ukrainian.
Argentina: a year and a half of liberalization, and the poverty rate falls from over 50% to around 30%.
No country in history escaped poverty by punishing the people who build. Every single one did it by letting them build.
And if you want to see what Bernie's program looks like in real life, you don't have to imagine it. It exists. It's called France. We've been running it for 45 years.
Mass nationalizations in 1981. Two years later, Socialist president Mitterrand has to reverse course into austerity.
Retirement at 60. The 35-hour workweek.
A wealth tax for 35 years. Hundreds of wealthy households left every year for Belgium, Switzerland, London, taking their capital, their companies and their future taxes with them. Macron finally scrapped it in 2018.
Hollande's 75% tax: raised a few hundred million, drove talent out, abandoned after two years.
One of the highest tax burdens in the OECD. Public spending around 57% of GDP, a record in the developed world.
Last balanced budget: 1974. Public debt: over €3.4 trillion. Mass unemployment for four decades.
If taxing the rich and growing the state made people prosperous, France would be the richest country on the planet.
It isn't. GDP per capita in France is barely more than half of America's. It's lower than Mississippi, the poorest state in the US. Not a single global tech giant. Our best engineers build Silicon Valley instead. I've been going back and forth between Paris and San Francisco for years. I see it every week.
And California is about to replay the movie. Prop 40, on the ballot November 3rd, would take 5% of billionaires' net worth. Even Gavin Newsom, a Democratic governor, opposes it. The state's own nonpartisan budget analyst warns that income tax revenue could drop every year if the wealthy leave. Larry Page, Sergey Brin and Peter Thiel have reportedly already started moving their assets out.
You don't fight poverty by shrinking the top. You fight it by growing the cake.
Bernie wants a society where nobody has too much. I want a society where nobody has too little.
The first has been tried everywhere and produces equality in stagnation. The second lifted a billion people out of misery.
Choose.
The top 1% owns more wealth than the bottom 93%.
1 man owns more wealth than the bottom 53% of households.
Less than a thousand billionaires got $2.2 trillion richer in the last year.
Obscene.
Yes. We need a 5% billionaire wealth tax in California and throughout America.
Who is John Galt?
Les entrepreneurs sont des héros sans statue qui sont aujourd’hui harcelés par une administration malveillante qui les accable de taxes et de normes.
Les tâches administratives peuvent représenter 50% de leur temps de travail. C’est aberrant ! Nous allons baisser leurs impôts et simplifier leur quotidien.
On va parler investissement foireux. Je crois que c’est plus grave que ça.
10 500 personnes ont prêté leur argent à une usine qu’elles aimaient. Elles ont mis du cœur dans un verre résistant aux chocs. Le cœur, c’est beau. Mais le cœur n’a jamais ouvert un bilan.
Ce n’est pas un scandale financier. C'est tout petit. C’est un échec d’éducation..
On n'a jamais appris aux Français à épargner. On ne leur a presque jamais appris à comprendre. 8 petits % sur 7 ans, dans une industrie aussi fragile ? "C'est plus que le livret A". Mettre 1000 pour espérer gagner 80... et en un an pschiitt
Personne ne leur a appris à se poser des questions qui comptent : D'où viendra l'intérêt ? Quelle stratégie industrielle? Marge ? Qui ont ils délibérément ciblés en créant une SCOP ? Des cheveux gris en vélo cargo? Pourquoi j'ai envie de parier mes économies ? Est ce un raisonnement financier cohérent ? Le montant levé suffit il?
Je ne vais pas les accabler, c'est beaucoup, 1000 euros maximum par personne, pour certains. Mais le jeu n'en valait pas la chandelle et cela remémore le scandale des routes solaires chères à Ségolène Royal.
Aujourd’hui, n’importe qui peut demander à une IA de lui expliquer un bilan, un compte de résultat ou un rachat mis en perspective en cinq minutes. Le savoir n’a jamais été aussi accessible. L'ignorance est désormais un choix.
Arnaque à la française 👀
Duralex : les 7 millions d'euros récoltés auprès de particuliers ne seront pas remboursés
👉 À l’origine, il était évoqué un taux d'intérêt annuel de "8% bruts" pour une durée d'investissement de 7 ans…
Malheureusement, les 10.523 investisseurs vont perdre leur investissement 😓


























