Yoel

Fighting forward

[Nicky Smokes @nickysmokess]

Love him or hate him Trumps pardon resume goes crazy:

Lil Wayne
Kodak
NBA Young Boy
Flo Balogun

[Sam Altman @sama]

going to world cup games is always awesome, but watching the USA win in the USA during USA birthday week was just incredible

[Rafael A. Mangual @Rafa_Mangual]

Just a reminder that all of the things that make your life easier, healthier, and more pleasant (innovative new medications, streaming services, professional sports franchises, food delivery apps, internet service, the handheld mini-supercomputer you’re reading this on, the motor vehicle…) have been brought to you by capitalism. Not one is the result of socialism. ☺️

[Charlie Bilello @charliebilello]

Americans bet over $165 billion on sports last year, which is more than they spent on movies, books, concerts and sports tickets - combined.

[Hillel Neuer @HillelNeuer]

Diplomatic immunity of outgoing UNRWA commissioner-general Philippe Lazzarini ends on June 31st. On July 1st, we will be demanding his indictment for complicity in terrorism, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. Lazzarini cannot claim he didn't know. We have all the receipts.

[Naval @naval]

Crabs in the gravity well.

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

@tunguz I know it’s wrong, but I keep reading the name of the drug as Retardatide and thinking ok you lose a few iq points, but at least you’re thin

[Khaled Hassan @Khaledhzakariah]

I have a non-Jewish, Egyptian friend from a Muslim background.

After October 7th, he was repeatedly approached by Al Jazeera to go on their shows and comment on Gaza-related developments.

Because he's principled, he repeatedly refused, despite being asked to name a price.

Then I pointed out all the Israelis who go on Al Jazeera, some of whom go on there to criticise Israel during the war.

This was an eye-opening moment for him.

In politics, the overwhelming majority of people do what they do for personal interest, whether it's money, fame, or votes.

The miserable few of us who actually believe in something often end up fighting the good fight on our own.

[U.M. OSINT @ungemeve]

Ich hätte nie gedacht, dass ich so etwas einmal öffentlich äußere.
Ich kann gerade nicht mehr.
Ich reiße mich sehr zusammen, dies zu schreiben.

Eine Kommission zur Untersuchung des Massakers vom 07. Oktober 2023 im Hinblick auf den sexualisierten Terror – auch an den Geiseln – hat ihren Bericht veröffentlicht.

In einigen Kommentaren hatte ich schon dazu gelesen. Die meisten von ehemaligen Soldaten, die im OSINT- oder akademischen Bereich in der Richtung öffentlich auftreten. Alle waren erschüttert, selbst Soldaten, die „in der Scheiße“ waren.

Mein Wille war – und ist es noch – zumindest einen kurzen Überblick über das 300-seitige Dokument zu geben, für das über 10.000 Fotos und Video-Segmente und 1800 Stunden Videomaterial ausgewertet wurden. Welches die Palästinenser zumeist selber veröffentlicht haben.

Und das ist auch nicht irgendwie halt eine jüdische Kommission und Hasbara. Sie ist eine Non-Profit-Organisation und wird unterstützt durch die deutsche Botschaft Tel Aviv, Kanada, Microsoft, usw. Mit dabei sind u.a. eine französische Botschafterin für Menschenrechte, ein Professor und Gründer des UN-Gerichts für Sierra Leone, ein ehemaliger Kommissar für Menschenrechte der UN, ein ehemaliger Stabschef des Weißen Hauses, und und und.

Ich wollte zumindest erklären, was dieser Bericht ist, von wem er kommt und einige Zeugenaussagen zitieren. Denn, so grauenvoll wie das ist, halte ich es für meine und unsere Pflicht, sich dem auszusetzen.
Wenn wir nicht in der Lage sind das zu ertragen, wie können wir dann erhobenen Hauptes von den Opfern erwarten, dass sie es erdulden und sich fügen? Ohne ihnen das allzu menschliche zuzugestehen womöglich?

Die Opfer waren nicht nur Juden. Es waren auch Thailänder, Amerikaner, Argentinier, Franzosen, Briten… Und die Deutschen haben es in einer sozialpsychologisch bemerkenswerten Leistung vermocht zu verdrängen, dass auch 22 Deutsche getötet und 17 als Geiseln genommen wurden.

Es geht nicht alleine darum, diese Unmenschlichkeiten zu lesen. (Fotos sind nicht drin, ich kenne eh viele.) „Unmenschlichkeiten“ ist ein absolut treffendes Wort, dass jedoch durch zu häufigen Gebrauch seinen tatsächlichen Inhalt verloren hat.
Das kann ich ab. Ich bin MilBlogger, ich habe viele Stunden Videos erduldet, in denen Menschen von Drohnen getroffen, erschossen und von Minen zerrissen wurden. Und ich habe sehr viele Videos und Bilder des 10/7 gesehen. Mehr als jedem Menschen eigentlich lieb sein sollte.

Es geht darum, nicht in zu lange den Abgrund zu blicken, weil der Abgrund sonst in dich blickt.

Auch vorher schon habe ich öffentlich deutlich gemacht, dass ich keinerlei Empathie mehr für die Palästinenser empfinde. Oder nicht darüber nachdenke, wie sehr sie sich auf das eh nutzlose Völkerrecht berufen.
Denn mein Gedanke ist eigentlich sehr leicht, auch wenn er für viele schwer zu erfassen scheint:

Wir Europäer haben unsere Werte, auf denen das Völkerrecht unbestreitbar basiert, in langen Kriegen untereinander erstritten und mit Churchills Blut, Schweiß und Tränen teuer erkauft. Nicht so sehr basierend auf den christlichen Glauben – dessen Teil ich gar nicht abstreiten will – sondern auf die griechische Philosophie und die Aufklärung.
Es ist aber nur schwer nachvollziehbar, warum wir diese Werte auch auf diejenigen anwenden, sie sogar auf sie projizieren und ihnen die gleichen Werte unterstellen, die so offensichtlich einen Scheiß auf sie geben.

Nach nur wenigen Stunden der Arbeit an diesem Bericht kämpfe ich mit Dämonen.

Ich möchte auch weiterhin für eine Zweistaatenlösung sein können. Ich möchte auch weiterhin nicht von der passiven Empathielosigkeit in offene Aggression verfallen. Ich möchte auch weiterhin nicht den Hass als einfachste Lösung bevorzugen. Ich will nicht alles auf den Islam projizieren.

Doch mit jeder Seite, mit jeder Zeugenaussage und mit jedem Bericht eines Helfers, in der nüchternen, fast wissenschaftlichen Zusammenfassung und Forensik, fällt es zunehmend schwer. So unglaublich schwer, dass ich mich dabei erwischt habe, alleine im Büro laut Debatten zu führen. (Normalerweise eine gute Schreib-Technik um Argumentationen zu üben.)

In unserem europäischen Hirn sortieren wir die Hamas gerne als Terrororganisation ein, die losgelöst von der palästinensischen Bevölkerung agiert. Dieses Bild beginnt zu bröckeln in dem Moment, in dem wir uns klar machen müssen, dass mindestens die Gaza-Palästinenser sich ja in dieser Gesellschaft eingerichtet haben. In der sie mit Cousins verheiratet werden, ihren Kindern in UNRWA-Schulen der Hass auf Juden beigebracht wird und jeder Angestellte eines Krankenhauses oder einer Uni die Hamas als Arbeitgeber auf der Lohnabrechnung hat. Das geht weit über Nazi-Mitläufer hinaus.
Wie lange kann jemand in einem solchen System tatsächlich unschuldig sein?

Und mehr noch: Wie muss eine Gesellschaft gestrickt sein, in der es als Machtdemonstration gilt, wenn junge Männer im Kreis um eine Geisel stehen, ihre sexuelle Frustration und soziale Inkompetenz kompensieren und sie reihum vergewaltigen? Selbst wenn sie tot ist, noch den rotten Pimmel unter dem Gelächter der Umstehenden in die Rotze des Vorgängers stecken?
Wenn diese Formulierung Ihnen zu hart war, sind Sie nicht ansatzweise bereit für die Realitäten. Damit müssen Sie klarkommen, nicht ich. Sich bei mir über die Formulierungen zu beklagen ist das deutlichste Zeichen dafür, sich den Realitäten nicht stellen zu wollen.

„Die Männer zerrten eine Frau aus dem Fahrzeug... entfernten gewaltsam die Kleidung und vergewaltigten sie... Sie stachen wiederholt auf sie ein und töteten sie... und vergewaltigten sie weiter, nachdem sie tot war.“
Raz Cohen, Überlebender des Nova Festivals

Wir können ja noch nicht einmal deutlich darüber debattieren. Weil unsere Regularien und unser sozialer Konsens es unterbinden auszusprechen, was die Realität ist. Ich kann noch nicht einmal Fotos posten, weil ich befürchten muss, dass die Social Media Plattformen mich dafür blockieren. Ich kann teilweise nicht einmal Links zu Fotos anderer Plattformen posten.
Wir bekommen eine heile Welt aufgezwungen, während um die Ecke das passiert, was wir als „unmenschlich“ aus unserer Welt entfernen wollen. Und leisten damit denen Bärendienste, die diese Realität verschwinden lassen wollen, während sie sie vorher noch stolz veröffentlicht haben.

Mir braucht keiner mehr mit Völkerrecht und Empathie gegenüber den Palästinensern kommen. Ich erlaube mir den menschlichen Reflex zumindest soweit.
Aber ich will nicht in diesen Abgrund. Und das ist anstrengend. Ich hatte Wuttränen.

Und ich musste mir Luft machen.
Der Artikel wird kommen.
Ich habe nicht das Recht wegzusehen.

Aber jetzt gerade kann ich einfach nicht mehr.

https://t.co/0dnFJY0PeS

Anmerkung: In den Datenbanken mit Pressebildern gibt es nur sehr wenige Bilder des 10/7 aus Israel, da dort Persönlichkeitsrechte und Opferschutz geachtet werden. Weshalb ich auch für die meisten auf Social Media gesperrt würde. Aber dafür sehr viele aus dem Gazastreifen, schon am ersten Tag.
Aus meinem Archiv…
Foto 1: Getötete Zivilisten auf der Straße nach Sderot
Foto 2: Israelische Truppen versuchen Sderot wieder unter Kontrolle zu bringen
Foto 3: Palästinenser überqueren zum Morden und Vergewaltigen die eingerissene Grenze nach Israel

[Ghost Town 👻 @GhostTownYZY]

Mini Ye performing tonight 😭

[Peter Mallouk @PeterMallouk]

Great chart on bull and bear markets from Charles Schwab.

[Alex Hormozi @AlexHormozi]

5 things worth protecting:
1. Your sleep
2. Your circle
3. Your word
4. Your attention
5. Your calendar
Give any of these away cheap and you'll feel it.

[Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump]

I wish everyone, including the haters and losers, a very happy Easter!

[Bill Ackman @BillAckman]

I am reaching out to the @X community for advice with the likely risk of sharing TMI. I have been sufficiently upset about the whole matter that I have lost sleep thinking about it and I am hoping that this post will enable me to get this matter off my chest.

By way of background, I started a family office called TABLE about 15 years ago and hired a friend who had previously managed a family office, and years earlier, had been my personal accountant. She is someone that I trusted implicitly and consider to be a good person.

The office started small, but over the last decade, the number of personnel and the cost of the office grew massively. The growth was entirely on the operational side as the investment team has remained tiny. While my investment portfolio grew substantially, the investments I had made were almost entirely passive and TABLE simply needed to account for them and meet capital calls as they came in. While TABLE purchased additional software and other systems that were supposed to improve productivity, the team kept increasing in size at a rapid rate, and the expenses continued to grow even faster.

While I would periodically question the growing expenses and high staff turnover, I stayed uninvolved with the office other than a once-a-year meeting when I briefly reviewed the operations and the financials and determined bonus compensation for the President and the CFO. I spent no time with any of the other employees or the operations. The whole idea behind TABLE was that it would handle everything other than my day job so that I would have more time for my job and my family.

Over the last six years, expenses ballooned even further, employee turnover accelerated, and I became concerned that all was not well at TABLE. It was time for me to take a look at what was going on.

Nearly four years ago, I recruited my nephew who had recently graduated from Harvard and put him to work at Bremont, a British watchmaker, one of my only active personal investments to figure out the issues at the company and ultimately assist in executing a turnaround. He did a superb job.

When he returned from the UK late last year after a few years at Bremont, I asked him to help me figure out what was going on with TABLE. When I explained to TABLE’s president what he would be doing, she became incredibly defensive, which naturally made me more concerned.

My nephew went to work by first meeting with each employee to understand their roles at the company and to learn from them what ideas they had on how things could be improved. He got an earful.

Our first step in helping to turn around TABLE was a reduction in force including the president and about a third of the team, retaining excellent talent that had been desperate for new leadership.

Now here is where I need your advice.

All but one of the employees who were terminated acted professionally and were gracious on the way out (excluding the president who had a notice period in her contract, is currently still being paid, and with whom I have not yet had a discussion).

The highest compensated terminated employee other than the president, an in-house lawyer (let’s call her Ronda), told us that three months of severance was not enough and demanded two years’ severance despite having worked at the company for only two and one half years.

When I learned of Ronda's request for severance, I offered to speak with her to understand what she was thinking, but she refused to do so. A few days ago, we received a threatening letter from a Silicon Valley law firm.

In the letter, Ronda’s counsel suggests that her termination is part of longstanding issues of ‘harassment and gender discrimination’ – an interesting claim in light of the fact that Ronda was in charge of workplace compliance – and that her termination was due to:

“unlawful, retaliatory, and harmful conduct directed towards her. Both [Ronda] and I [Ronda’s lawyer] have spoken with you about [Ronda’s] view of what a reasonable resolution would include given the circumstances. Thus far, TABLE has refused to provide any substantive response. This letter provides the last opportunity to reach a satisfactory agreement. If we cannot do so, [Ronda] will seek all appropriate relief in a court of competent jurisdiction.”

The letter goes on to explain the basis for the “unsafe work environment” claim at TABLE:

“In early 2026, Pershing Square’s founder Bill Ackman installed his nephew in an unidentified role at TABLE, Ackman’s family office. [His nephew]—whose only work experience had been for TABLE where he was seconded abroad for the last four years to a UK watch company held by Ackman—began appearing at TABLE’s offices and conducting interviews of employees without a clear explanation of his role or the purposes of these interviews. During this period, he made a series of inappropriate and genderbased [sic] comments to multiple employees that created an unsafe work environment. Among other things, [his nephew] made remarks about female employees’ ages (“Tell me you are nowhere near 40”), physical appearance (“Your body does not look like you have kids”), as well as intrusive questions about family planning and sexual orientation (“Who carried your son? Who will carry your next child?”). These incidents were reported to senior leadership at TABLE and Pershing Square. Rather than being addressed appropriately, the response from senior management reflected, at best, willful blindness to the inappropriateness of [his nephew]’s remarks and, at worst, tacit endorsement.”

The above allegations about my nephew had previously been brought to my attention by TABLE’s president when they occurred. When I learned of them, I told the president that I would speak to him directly and encouraged her to arrange for him to get workplace sensitivity training. The president assured me that she would do so.

When I spoke to my nephew, he explained what he actually had said and how his actual remarks had been received, not at all as alleged in the legal letter from Ronda’s counsel. I have also spoken to others at the lunch table who confirmed his description of the facts. In any case, he meant no harm, was simply trying to build rapport with other employees, and no one, as far as I understand, was offended.

Ironically, Ronda claims in her legal letter that TABLE didn’t take HR compliance seriously, yet Ronda was in charge of HR compliance at TABLE and the person who gave my nephew his workplace sensitivity training after the alleged incidents. In any case, Ronda, as head of compliance, should have kept a record or raised an alarm if indeed there was pervasive harassment or other such problems at the company, and there is no evidence whatsoever that this is true.

So why does Ronda believe she can get me to pay her nearly $2 million, i.e., two years of severance, nearly one year of severance for each of her years at the company? Well, here is where some more background would be helpful.

Over the last two months, I have been consumed with a major family medical issue – one of my older daughters had a massive brain hemorrhage on February 5th and has since been making progress on her recovery – and I am in the midst of a major transaction for my company which I am executing from a hospital room office next to her . While the latter business matter is publicly known, the details of my daughter’s situation are only known to Ronda because of her role at our family office.

Now, let’s get back to the subject at hand.

Unfortunately, while New York and many other states have employment-at-will, there has emerged an industry of lawyers who make a living from bringing fake gender, race, LGBTQ and other discrimination employment claims in order to extract larger severance payments for terminated employees, and it needs to stop.

The fake claim system succeeds because it costs little to have a lawyer send a threatening letter and nearly all of the lawyers in this field work on contingency so there is no or minimal cash cost to bring a claim. And inevitably, nearly 100% of these claims are settled because the public relations and legal costs of defending them exceed the dollar cost of the settlement. The claims are nearly always settled with a confidentiality agreement where the employee who asserts the fake claims remains anonymous and as a result, there is no reputational cost to bringing false claims.

The consequences of this sleazy system (let’s call it ‘the System’) are the increased costs of doing business which is a tax on the economy and society. There are other more serious problems due to the System. Unfortunately, the existence of an industry of plaintiff firms and terminated employees willing to make these claims makes it riskier for companies to hire employees from a protected class, i.e., LGBTQ, seniors, women, people of color etc. because it is that much more reputationally damaging and expensive to be accused of racism, sexism, and/or intolerance for sexual diversity than for firing a white male as juries generally have less sympathy for white males.

The System therefore increases the risk of discrimination rather than reducing it, and the people bringing these fake claims are thereby causing enormous harm to the other members of these protected classes.

So what happened here?

Ronda was vastly overpaid and overqualified for the job that she did at TABLE. She was paid $1.05 million plus benefits last year for her work which was largely comprised of filling out subscription agreements and overseeing an outside law firm on closing passive investments in funds and in private and venture stage companies, some compliance work, and managing the office move from one office to another. She had a very good gig as she was highly paid, only had to go into the office three days a week, and could work from anywhere during the summer.

Once my nephew showed up and started to investigate what was going on, she likely concluded that there was a reasonable possibility she would be terminated, as her job was in the too-easy-and-to-good-to-be-true category. The problem was that she was not in a protected class due to her race, age or sexual identity so she had to construct the basis for a claim. While she is female and could in theory bring a gender-based discrimination claim, she reported to the president who is female and to whom she is very close, which makes it difficult for her to bring a harassment claim against her former boss.

When my nephew complimented a TABLE employee at lunch about how young she looked – in response to saying she was going to her 40-year-old sister’s birthday party, he said ‘she must be your older sister’ – Ronda immediately reported it to our external HR lawyer. She thereby began building her case.

The other problem for Ronda bringing a claim is that she was terminated alongside 30% of other TABLE employees as part of a restructuring so it is very difficult for her to say that she was targeted in her termination or was retaliated against. TABLE is now hiring an external fractional general counsel as that is all the company needs to process the relatively limited amount of legal work we do internally. In short, Ronda was eminently qualified and capable and did her job. She was just too much horsepower for what is largely an administrative legal role so she had to come up with something else to bring a claim.

Now Ronda knew I was a good target and it was a good time to bring a claim against me. She also knew that I was under a lot of pressure because on March 4th when Ronda was terminated, my daughter had not yet emerged from consciousness, she was not yet breathing on her own, and my daughter and we were fighting for her life. I was and remain deeply engaged in her recovery while at the same time I was working on finishing the closing for the private placement round for my upcoming IPO.

Ronda also knew that publicity about supposed gender discrimination and a “hostile and unsafe work environment” are not things that a CEO of a company about to go public wants to have released into the media. And she may have thought that the nearly $2 million she was asking for would be considered small in the context of the reputational damage a lawsuit could cause, regardless of the fact that two years of severance was an absurd amount for an employee who had only worked at TABLE for 30 months.

She also likely considered that I wouldn’t want to embarrass my nephew by dragging him into the klieg lights when her claims emerged publicly.

So, in summary, game theory would say that I would certainly settle this case, for why would I risk negative publicity at a time when I was preparing our company to go public and also risk embarrassing my nephew.

Notably, she hired a Silicon Valley law firm, rather than a typical NY employment firm. This struck me as interesting as her husband works for one of the most prominent Silicon Valley venture firms whose CEO, I am sure, has no tolerance for these kinds of fake claims that sadly many venture-backed companies also have to deal with. I mention this as I suspect her husband likely has been working with her on the strategy for squeezing me as, in addition to being a computer scientist, he is a game theorist. My only advice for him is to understand more about your opponent before you launch your first move.

All of the above said, gender, race, LGBTQ and other such discrimination is a real thing. Many people have been harmed and deserve compensation for this discrimination, and these companies and individuals should be punished for engaging in such behavior.

Which brings me to the advice I am seeking from the X community.

I am not planning to follow the typical path and settle this ‘claim.’ Rather, I am going to fight this nonsense to the end of the earth in the hope that it inspires other CEOs to do the same so we shut down this despicable behavior that is a large tax on society, employment, and the economy and contributes to workplace discrimination rather than reducing it.

Do you agree or disagree that this is the right approach?

[StripMallGuy @realEstateTrent]

One of the main reasons folks with high IQs don’t reach their full potential is an inability to trust they’ll figure it out without a clear plan

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

Banger 😂

[Alex Hormozi @AlexHormozi]

What's funny about taking life risk rather than financial risk is that if it doesn't go well, you're literally back in the same position that you started, except smarter.

When u think about it like that, you want to cash in as many life lotto tickets as you can, not as few.

[Bill Ackman @BillAckman]

Some of the highest quality businesses in the world are trading at extremely cheap prices. Ignore the MSM. One of the most one-sided wars in history that will end well for the U.S. and the world. And we have the potential for a large peace dividend.

One of the best times in a long time to buy quality.

Ignore the bears.

[Ben Shapiro @benshapiro]

If you can't see the difference between terrorists who behead babies, celebrate it, and hide behind their own children to avoid consequence, and soldiers who attempt to avoid civilian casualties, you are not "morally sophisticated." You are a fool, and a dangerous fool at that.

[Brett Caughran @FundamentEdge]

AI won't kill fundamental investing because more information doesn't kill alpha. We have decades of priors here (Excel, Bloomberg, alt data...all democratized analysis & information gathering, and didn't kill alpha). As measured by factor volatility, stocks are less efficient and more alpha-rich than ever (and empirically, the ability of multi-eight figure market neutral multi-managers to consistently grind out 10-15% returns in an idio-maximized way proves this point...15 years ago a $10bn hedge fund was considered to be impossibly large).

Innovations in investment process have shifted alpha pools, for sure, and systematic investors have arbitraged many old, reliable fundamental alpha pools. But as the players at the poker table have shifted, the constraints of those new players have created new alpha pools. Long duration fundamental investing has been gutted, and definitionally competing against a group of non-fundamental (quants, factor/thematic investors, indexers) and duration-constrained (multi's) investors should be a huge competitive advantage, long term (however frustrating in the near term). To wit, a 9-month thesis where I "look through" the next two prints is now considered a long-term thesis.

Rigorous investment process serves investment judgment, but the real alpha generation fits a power-law distribution and there is some ineffable "nose for money" that the great investors have, that cannot be trained necessarily. Investing is a very hard game, that cannot be distilled to a reinforcement learning sandbox (by the time it is, the regime will have shifted and new drivers move stocks). AI has no sense of materiality, no true discernment, and the lack of context of N of 1 situations (if you haven't noticed, we are living in an N of 1 world!). There is a irreducible element of humanness that is critical to success in fundamental investing, and that won't change.

What does this all mean? In my opinion, there is no better time to be starting a careers as an investor. My first year on the desk, I spent a lot of time doing grunt work: updating Nielsen files, updating models for my PM, creating same store sales master files, building question lists for CEO meetings, etc. This is grunt work. I can automate this all now, and get more quickly to the deep, value added parts of learning the investment process.

Will AI drive alpha? This is a debate people are having, which I find sort of silly. When used correctly, by the right investor, of course it will. Ask any great investor if they had another 4 hours of research time per day whether the quality of their research would improve? That's kind of a dumb question...of course it will. Compressing the mechanical part of your job to focus more on the artisanal part of the job is Step 1, and with agentic systems accelerating fast is now in the strike zone of possibility. This is before we start to layer in a broader monitoring net and use cases to go deeper and build more rigor, finding signals in unstructured data that were missed before, as well as turning your investment genius into a co-pilot pattern recognition system.

The future is very bright for fundamental investing, in my opinion.