I have read approximately 3,000 10-Ks in my life. I have read my wife’s emotional state correctly maybe 11 times. This is troubling because the skills should transfer. Both require you to look past the headline. Both require you to read the footnotes. Both require you to notice what was said last quarter that is not being said this quarter.
I can spot a goodwill impairment from 40 pages away. I cannot spot that my wife has been quietly furious since Tuesday. In a 10-K I notice when management changes the word “challenging” to “dynamic” and I correctly interpret this as a warning. In my marriage my wife changed the word “fine” to “fine.” and I did not notice the period. The period was the entire disclosure.
I missed it. I read a footnote last week in a packaging company’s annual report that disclosed a related-party transaction worth $400,000 and I caught it in 90 seconds. My wife told me three times this month that she was tired and I interpreted this as “tired” when in fact it was a Level 3 disclosure requiring immediate management response. I have a system for 10-Ks. I read the MD&A first, then the risk factors, then the cash flow statement, then the notes. I have no system for my wife. She is a company that does not file. She reports continuously and without warning and the format changes every quarter. Her risk factors are not enumerated.
Her MD&A is delivered through sighs of varying length and I have not yet developed the ear. Last week she said “do whatever you want” and I did whatever I wanted and it turns out the correct interpretation of “do whatever you want” was “do not do that specific thing” and I have no idea how I was supposed to know that, and yet, looking back, the signals were all there. The signals are always there. I have been trained to find signals. I find them in companies I will never meet. I miss them in the person I have lived with for nine years. My wife has started saying things like “you would notice this if I were a stock” and she is correct. She is correct. If she had a ticker I would have already built a 6,000-word model on her. I would know her seasonality.
I would know her capex cycle. I would know which quarters historically run hot. Instead I treat her like a private company and I am surprised every time the auditors arrive. I am going to bed now. She said good night in a tone. I do not know what the tone meant. I will find out in the morning. Or I will not. The 10-K of my marriage is filed in real time and I am, as always, three quarters behind.
I hate to break it to you but if your AI model costs 10x more than the Chinese one and produces worse outputs, you don't have a model, you have a problem.
All the funnier given that Fable was banned by the US government for being supposedly "too capable"
You can't make it up 😅
TRUMP DEFENDS ‘REGIME CHANGE’ CLAIM IN IRAN: ‘KHAMENEI JR. IS DIFFERENT FROM THE FATHER’
TRUMP: IRAN HAS NEW LEADERSHIP, ‘THEY’RE DIFFERENT PEOPLE’
TRUMP PUSHES BACK ON CRITICS OF IRAN ‘REGIME CHANGE’ NARRATIVE
I ran GLM 5.2 with OpenCode harness against Claude Opus this week deployed locally.
Bottom line: It is a real frontier coding model and insanely good for the price (free). Open source model + open source harness + local serving on my own chips is an amazing value proposition.
Some Notes:
1. Tool calling is very good — spun up nested subagents on its own, multiple levels deep
2. Very good at research and planning including long range plans
3. It built a cell based terminal renderer at near Opus quality. I still lean Claude, but most people couldn't tell the outputs apart
4. Opus wins on oneshotting and reading my intent without me explicitly telling it
5. GLM 5.2 is more than enough intelligence for most F500 work IMO
6. GLM 5.2 is good enough to hill climb RL with and to drive further AI development / next generation GLM model. Progress will be much faster for their RL from here.
7. Running my own endpoint = permanent fast mode
8. It wastes thinking tokens writing code in the reasoning block
At this point I would consider GLM 5.2 a true frontier coding model. Getting to this point in coding quality was the hardest part IMO. They will progress quickly from here in RL.
SpaceX's market cap crossed above $3 trillion today in after hours trading.
That's higher than the market cap of Amazon ($2.65 trillion) & Microsoft ($2.97 trillion).
Microsoft Sales: $318 billion
Microsoft Net Income: $125 billion
Amazon Sales: $743 billion
Amazon Net Income: $91 billion
SpaceX Sales: $19 billion
SpaceX Net Income: -$9 billion
This is wild. Poland, with 37 million people, has fewer crimes than just Berlin, with not even 4 million.
Germany used to be such a respectable country. How did this happen?
Here is my take, which is consistent with the Goehring & Rozencwajg letter in the repost?
----
Every crisis—1997, 2008, 2020—starts with the same institutional script: treating a structural problem as a temporary liquidity glitch. Wall Street is hardwired to assume that everything will safely revert to a mean, fearing the phrase "this time is different." It takes months of frustration to realize the rules of the game have changed.
Today, I fear we are repeating this exact behavioral trap.
Believing the closure of the Strait of Hormuz is a brief, 60-day hurdle, governments and oil companies are aggressively draining inventories to bridge the gap. They are treating a potential permanent, structural deficit in the world’s crude supply as a short-term liquidity problem.
Burning the lifeboats to build a temporary bridge only works if a resolution is guaranteed. By artificially delaying gradual demand destruction today, we ensure it hits all at once tomorrow should inventories slam into operational minimums.
Why is the market so blind to this? Because over the last five years, macro investors have developed deep scar tissue from listening to "experts":
* Q2 2020: Virologists scared investors into selling at the pandemic market bottom.
* April 2020: Commodity bears screamed that oil was irrelevant right as it hit its historic generational low.
* H2 2022: Economists panicked investors into dumping equities at the peak of 9% inflation.
* Q2 2023: Banking analysts screamed sell at the market bottom following Silicon Valley Bank's failure.
* April 2025, Policy Analysts scared investors about tariffs and Liberation Day to sell the low of the year.
The market learned that when the experts scream trouble, buying the dip makes money, and hedging for disaster loses it.
But ignoring the energy sector today, investors might be confusing past false alarms with a looming physical reality ... tanks really are running dry, and prospects for the Strait to "normalize" are nonexistent.
The One Where Arsenal Got Beat! Friends icon David Schwimmer joins David Beckham at star-studded Champions League final as Gunners lose to Paris Saint-Germain https://t.co/v4o1vYJDFh
took less than a day, $HYPE ATHs now at $67, $62-64 area at prior highs should be support on any pullbacks but might not be gifted a clean retest
still believe we are in early innings of the narrative forming around a protocol that enables 24/7 trading of all assets, most profitable startup globally if looking strictly at revenue per employee
• Trump ending Iran War
• traditional markets still up only
• strongest crypto coins finally making new all time highs for first time in over a year
• altcoins seeing sustained spot bid for first time in awhile & CT bullposting again
bros we might just be back 🥹