pull down to refresh
168 sats \ 1 reply \ @freetx 9 Jul \ on: Are Some Whales Abandoning Self Custody? bitcoin
I would say the reasons why an OG would consider such things are:
-
Inheritance. I know there are native bitcoin solutions, but its just so much easier and straight-forward when dealing with normal stocks. There are basically 100 years of laws and infrastructure to support this.
-
BBD strategy. The mega-rich all use "Buy Borrow Die" strategy. That is you buy some asset when its very undervalued (ie. Amazon, MSFT, whatever)....and as it rises in price you borrow against it and live off the cash, never selling the original asset. Again, yes there are "bitcoin native" solutions but frankly they all kinda suck. The margin lending rates for stocks in much much lower than anything offered in bitcoin-land. I think even Robinhood offers something like 6% margin rates....which obviously means as long as 6% is less than the rate of appreciation of your asset, you can basically do this forever....
To have any de minimus exceptions are better than none though I guess
I don't understand why they didn't just use the existing "de minimus" exemption that IRS already uses for Forex.
If you travel abroad, and you "make money" on your forex (ie. price changes so that you profit between when you buy / sell), you are allowed a $200 per transaction allowance.
That means that as long as the profit was less than $200, there is no reporting required....and that is per transaction. So theoretically you could gain $199 in profit every day and not need to report.
This to me seems better than whats being offered. It would also seem easier to implement as I'm not even sure a new law is needed....simply get IRS to declare coverage of existing forex rule to "crypto"
where earlier text in a prompt loses significance - especially with reasoning on, where the reasoning picks up on some select things and then hyper-focuses sequentially
Pretty much the "teapot test" that autocorrect fails against.
The Teapot test gave a group of young kids 3 items: A ruler, a teapot, and a office desk and it asked the kids to draw a circle using only those items. The kids pretty much instantly realized that the bottom of the teapot was a circle so simply traced the circle (the office desk was intentionally chosen to be useless for the task).
Autocorrect however gets "fixated" on the ruler, this is because corpus of data that links "rulers => drawing" is multiple orders of magnitude higher than the other connections....thus is spends an inordinate amount of time trying to calculate how to draw a circle with a ruler....it eventually does succeed but obviously its doing it "the stupid way".
This in general highlights a bigger problem with AI going forward: As more and more AI generated data winds up online, then that means more and more AI data will wind up in training data....its a pretty big problem that sorta threatens the entire premise. I suppose careful curation of training data will be only solution.
During his DOGE coin pumping days....there was a leaked convo when Preston Psysh tried to push him on the idea of enabling bitcoin payment on Twitter....it clearly triggered Elon and he basically said he was going to leave the livestream if people were to keep suggesting bitcoin ideas.....
He clearly has drank a few gallons of the "bitcoin destroys the earth" koolaid.
But notice how all that talk has gone silent now that HN is obsessed with autocorrect++ startups that need more electricity than mining operations....they never "cared about the environment" it was simply a tech wave they missed and they were unhappy being poor.
huge pay packages — some as high as $100 million
Between data center cost (billions and billions of dollars) and these insane hiring cost, I have a hard time understanding how they are going to be profitable.
I guess its all OPM (other peoples money) so maybe he doesn't care.
My personal prediction is this: Just like all other tech, LLM's will eventually be "good enough" and the clamor for ever new models will cease. Further, with new quantization methods (now they are talking about 1-bit quant) its going to be possible to run models locally.
All this will conspire for their to be a race-to-the-bottom in cost, and the days of average react developers paying $200/month will be long-gone (that react dev will just use his "good enough" open source model on his 2028 home PC).
I've been buying some off amazon. But cant fully vouch for its quality. Seems a bit too pure and white.....previously I would also buy rendered pig fat from local store and it has more of a offwhite / grey color with tiny bits in it (looked more natural).
Having said that, I really like cooking french fries in beef tallow.
I'm not at all saying "this time is different..." - and I have do have healthy skepticism of how far the virtuous cycle can go.
However, I feel like they are missing something.
- Bitcoin price drops
- MNAV falls
- Yet if debt-load is still sane, they can still issue bonds
- Money from bonds goes into buy more Bitcoin
- MNAV rises
Point being, Strategy has a 18% debt-load. That means price of BTC would need to fall by 75% before their debt-load got to 1:1.
From a pure finance perspective, a company have 50% debt load to assets is considered a healthy company, so they should be able to continue to issue bonds (ie. convertables)
This article is no doubt because someone told the author "have fun staying poor".
That evening, as he walked into his one bedroom apartment and reluctantly flipped through the pile of credit card bills and student loan statements, he thought ".....I'll show you..."
That aligns nicely with populism. It supports the idea that troubles in people's lives are caused by malign forces and that certain special individuals can take those enemies on and win.
Unlike Marxism?
From a wider lens. When is it that "trouble in peoples lives" are not because of "malign forces"? Its something like a tautology. (If your house is destroyed by a hurricane isn't that also a 'malign force')
Agree with almost all points, however I question this:
bitcoin-treasury hype-cycle most likely will prove to be virtue signalling noise without much long-standing cultural impact
Forget for a moment the fiat involvement. Don't you think its important that public companies are starting to hold bitcoin as a treasury asset? If that becomes the norm, how is that not culturally significant?
He wasn’t promoting nihilism, he was warning us about what happens after we lose belief in higher values. He saw that once “God (Ubermensch) is dead,” people wouldn’t become free, they’d panic, run toward comfort, and invent new idols (safety, ideology, herd-think).
Uhh...did you even read my post? We are literally saying the same thing.
Most people still don’t get the message. That’s why the book hits so hard.
Correct. The characters in Zarathustra missed the point, as did the real-world public who the only thing they know about Nietzsche is that "he was a nihilist".
I think restoration can probably go pretty far as long as there are no deep gouges.
I would offer: (a) let me try to get it professionally restored and if that doesn't work (b) I'll buy you a new wheel.
Personally, I think the offer to replace all 4 wheels is very generous but unnecessary. I think the "new shiny wheel" will wear quickly enough to match the general relative look of the others.
A few other options:
-
Get new wheel + get other 3 restored so they match better.
-
Buy a "excellent" condition used wheel, maybe it will match better with existing wheels.
The entire saga of "Thus Spoke Zarathustha" is almost too comically perverse to properly explain....its really one of those "are we in a simulation" situations.
-
Nietzsche writes a book where the main character is trying to warn people about the effects of "God is dead".
-
In the novel, the warnings are that they need to embrace this news and engage in true self-discovery, and self-reliance. Mankind needs to boldly go out build their own future. If they don't, they will fall into clinging to false idols out of fear.
-
His major warning is that this "nihilism" will lead to increasingly fearful men who, because they've lost the promise of immortality, cling ever more desperately to "safety" and risk aversion. This desperate clamor towards safety-above-all will create a world that is unfit to live in.
-
The people in the book completely miss the message and clamor towards safety and risk aversion upon learning that "god is dead"
Then comes the mind-fuck:
- In real life if you ask the random person about Nietzsche they will say: "He was a nihilist man....." that is they think he was advocating nihilism instead of warning about it.
The whole situation cracks me up.....the people both inside and outside novel missed the point....
How would AI be able to "take unilateral action"?
I think the idea that AI is going to start to self-replicate and improve itself -- although promoted by the AI industry -- is fanciful. There is no "intent" there is no "mind".
When you sit watching the LLM input cursor blinking, its not secretly thinking something. Its not "waiting" or "planning"....its effectively "turned off" at that moment.
Again this is why I call it autocorrect++ which is to try to undo some of the damage sister-raping worldcoin scammers AI execs have done to the publics mind. The AI industry promotes these ridiculous scare tactics in order to make their creation seem "so important that its dangerous". But the only danger is attributing intent where there is none.
LLMs by themselves have no intelligence. Human minds had to first generate the patterns that the LLMs are trained against.....as far as the LLM is concerned these patterns could be order of raindrops dripping off a roof.....there is no "thinking" or "pondering".
My point is those objectionable thought patterns already exist in the world which is why LLMs are able to match against them.
What's it gonna be?
Would just choose to die. To those of us who believe the soul/"consciousness spirit" is immortal death isn't that terrible of a prospect.
However I can understand why many materialist tech-bros are so panicked about wanting develop autocorrect++ so it offers them some feeble glimpse of immortality.
Well, yes autocorrect++ is going to pattern match on what training data says....
This entire article could be titled: We don't understand how LLMs work
As I've said ad-nausem, the real problem (as kinda highlighted here in this article) is people keep attributing "intent" and to autocorrect++ and there is none. Its just dumb pattern matching....
Its always funny to me when climate change zealots talk about "carbon capture". Its like....wouldn't it be wonderful if nature already sorted this out?!?