Any investor or founder who blindly follows the pathway of scaling first and profiting later for every business is using a cookbook approach to business building, and runs the risk of making small failures into big ones.
Even if it turned out that they were drug smugglers, as claimed, and even if it turned out that they were bringing drugs to the United States, a dubious proposition, the penalty for smuggling drugs is not summary execution.
So the irony here is that when you look at that field, it seems like we've reached levels of intelligence that virtually no human can match because many of these security holes are about stringing combo moves together. You find one little vulnerability here that by itself might not be the worst thing in the world, but then you combine it with four others, and suddenly you have RCE, remote command execution. Humans who are able to do that are very rare.
I would make one big division in nuclear companies and it is people who believe that nuclear is essentially a hardware execution problem and people who believe that it's a design problem. Um Valor is solidly in the camp that we believe this is a hardware and execution problem.
And the type of risk that we are asking investors to take is um, we know the physics works. We know that there's infinite demand and how we go from here to there is technology execution. And guess what? Venture capital in the United States is the best at underwriting tech risk of anywhere in the world.
Thinking Forth by Leo Brodie. I used to have this habit where I learned various programming languages. To challenge my perspective, I chose languages from families and paradigms that were fundamentally different from what I already knew. Occasionally, I stumbled upon greatness. Thinking Forth presents programming as a creative process, and it delivers those lessons in an entertaining and pedagogical way. The book is particularly strong on software analysis and design, but it's the execution and technical writing that brought the book to my top five. This is the book for anyone writing about software — Leo's way is the way to do it.
The absolute bad outcome is that our young generation, their agency and human level motivation of learning and living is taken away by tools. So doom scrolling, passive watching of shorts, all this are not helping agency, human agency.
So AI has made everybody just as capable as everyone else, it equalized everyone in the world, as in everyone can make everything (software, music, images, art etc) now and everyone is equal, at least in the digital realm now
I do the research I do the plan I do the implementation I throw the docs out and the next time I need research I just do it from scratch because tokens are cheap and my time is expensive
It has to be controversial that you have to be a reasonable person should be able to disagree with it because otherwise you're probably just trying to compete on raw execution
Comparing this to The Fifth Season, it is striking how different two fantasy novels about worlds over-supplied with natural disasters, and the people with the psychic gifts to stop those disasters with their minds, can be in tone and execution. This is immensely fluffier, but it has no pretensions to be anything except candy, and succeeds as such.
if if I got to pick one if I get to pick one thing that you do as CEO, I'm going to pick that you're right. So even if you don't, you know, even if you don't operate the ship or the factory that well, I'd rather that you picked the right product, the right strategy than you were phenomenal at execution or inspiring people or managing because, you know, being in the right body of water matters more than the right boat.
the investor community writ large has slowly become aware of and believes it strongly in increasing returns and power laws. And so over time, if they all believe that, they're going to be more willing to invest on the come and take risk.
know your goal or suffer a death by a thousand compromises. Because what I had done my whole career and most of us do is compromise to get that next engineer, CTO, investor. You put a jerk on your board because you impressed with their firm name and the valuation and all your friends are going to be impressed and it's going to be so much easier. We make all these compromises and contort ourselves and eventually we wake up and it's company we don't want to work at.
I think everyone’s starting point for investing should be to know and be in the portfolio that is best to have, independent of any tactical views of the markets.
My model is that research requires a mix of skills. The day-to-day coding and execution is crucial. But there's also a set of harder-to-learn conceptual skills, collectively called research taste. These skills take a long time to gain because they have poor feedback loops, but they take very little time to use.
But it seems like you can understand it through passive observation, which is pretty surprising to me. And again, I think hints at something underlying about the nature of reality in my opinion, beyond just the cool videos that it generates.
He has been a confidant of Buffett and Munger, a co-author with Daniel Kahneman, an editor on two revised editions of Ben Graham’s masterpiece The Intelligent Investor, considered to be the best book on investing ever written.
Hit Man (US) 3.5 Highly entertaining due to its killer plot. So why not a higher rating? I was disappointed that Linklater did so little with the plot—much of the execution (not all) is fairly bland. Where’s the style? As a comedy, it’s only OK. As film noir, it’s nowhere near as intense as Body Heat. It’s sort of Soderbergh-lite. And yet more people will like this one than any other film on my list, because of the great plot.
The Thief Collector (US) 3.6 This documentary on a pair of art thieves is extremely enjoyable, despite a somewhat clumsy execution in places. Surprising revelations keep popping up throughout its 100-minute running time.
The most difficult analysis to do as an investor is that, is kind of figuring out how wide is the moat, how much at risk is the business to disruption? And we're in, I would say, the greatest period of disruptability in history.
So as long as you don't borrow against securities, you own really high quality businesses and it's not money that you need in the short term, then you can actually be thoughtful about it.
Lots of ML techniques in the post can help with data quality, but fundamentally human data collection involves attention to details and careful execution.
I may have I may be an investor. I have a track record of calling the market right in the last five times. People say, "Wow, he really knows what he's talking about." But there are lots of people who are trying to predict which way the market is going to go. And some of them are going to get it right by chance. And people assume it's because they know what they're what they're doing, and in fact they're just the lucky ones.
Sovereign debt markets (and many other markets as well) are subject to sudden stops in which investors either drop out or ask for large spreads even in the absence of large changes in fundamentals.
I no longer think there are any bad ideas. I I no longer think there are any qualified people starting tech companies that actually have bad ideas. I think all the ideas are good ideas. Um, I think it's just a I think it's just a question of timing and execution.
CodeTrack is a free .NET Performance Profiler and Execution Analyzer. It works on basically every version of .NET and will give you massive insight into how your code is running! The flamegraph view is fantastic.
Schiit SYS - A simple, 2-input passive preamp. No electronics. No power. No distortion. Just a 2-way switch and a potentiometer. SYS stands for "switch your,...er... schtuff."
A korrent is a belief a person has stated in their own words: one
sentence stating the claim, backed by a quote and a source, kept at
korrents.com.
Under a name here, the quoted block is what they actually said.
The korrent beneath it is the claim those words support, in
korrents' wording — tap it to see the record, its source, and who
else holds it.
Nobody here wrote their own korrents. They are compiled from public
statements, and a person can change their mind, which is recorded too.
About the English under a post
Some people here publish in a language other than English. Where they
do, this site shows a machine translation beneath the post, in
this typeface — the site's own, not theirs.
The post itself is never changed, moved or hidden: what is set in the
serif above is exactly what the person published, and it is what to
quote them on. A translation can be wrong in ways that matter,
especially about tone.
Only the post's own words are translated. A quoted post, a linked
article and a belief on korrents.com
are left in their original language.