ANNU ✨

Life long learner. Observer of markets...
Learn, grow & stay cautious-everyone in the market is to make money, not for CHARITY. Beware of FURUs
RTs≠Endorsements

[ANNU ✨ @learner_ant]

The Indian Stock market hasn't given any returns in more than a year. The equity market will be down for a very long period, maybe a decade or more. Now with the increase in #STT, trading is also finished. FIIs are not looking back. This will have an impact on the real economy.

[ANNU ✨ @learner_ant]

#Economy is #slowing.
#Layoffs in large numbers.
Capacity for #discretionary spending vanishing.
#Businesses are not able to afford inflated #rentals.
#BigBrands downsizing.
#Banks have no #deposits and #taxes area the highest ever.
How long #share market would keep #booming?

[Prof @TheProfInvestor]

I've been talking about $NBIS since $40. Then at $80. Then $120.

And now, with the stock down roughly 60% from its highs, I'm seeing comments like:

"Why would you buy that?"
"It's in a downtrend."
"The business is failing."

I think some people are missing something important about how I approach the market.

I'm both a swing trader AND a long-term investor.

And those are two very different strategies.

When I'm swing trading, I look for breakouts, pullbacks to the daily 21 EMA, or established support levels.I look for emerging leaders. I use tight stop losses and manage those trades accordingly. If the setup fails, I'm out.

But when I'm investing, I'm looking for something entirely different.

I WANT those 20%, 30%, even 40% corrections in companies I believe have long-term potential. That's when I start getting interested in accumulating shares.

Take $NBIS as an example.

I identified $135 as an important support level. If I were looking to start a long-term position, that's an area where I'd consider making my first purchase.

I'd much rather discuss buying near $135 than encourage people to chase it at $200, $230, or $250.

But here's what people need to understand.

$135 is a support level, NOT a guaranteed bottom.

My next major support is around $87.

That's another 35% downside from $135. A long-term investor needs to be mentally and financially prepared for that possibility before buying.

And that's exactly why I emphasize knowing your timeframe, understanding drawdowns, and planning ahead.

I own companies like $NVDA, $TSLA, $AVGO, $AMZN, $GOOGL, and $NBIS for the long term. But I also swing trade some of these same names when technical opportunities appear.

A stock can be a failed swing trade and still be an attractive long-term investment. There's nothing contradictory about that, provided the investment thesis remains intact.

I have one X account, and I share research for both traders and investors. Not every support level I discuss is meant for a short-term trade, and not every stock I buy is expected to bounce the next morning.

The biggest mistake is buying a stock as a trade, watching it fail, and suddenly calling yourself a long-term investor because you don't want to take the loss.

Know your timeframe. Know your risk. Have a plan.

Because if every stock went up the week after we bought it, we'd all be geniuses.

[SinaGPT @Sina_GPT]

this was an intelligence operation

Jensen did not comply with what someone wanted

Jensen was positioning himself as a competitor / antagonist to the major AI labs + focused on open-source

this is not “dude just had an affair and company fires him”

this is a clear operation

[NIK @ns123abc]

>Jensen Huang gets ousted from Nvidia literally 12 hours ago
>OpenAI and Anthropic immediately form an alliance to back congress to ban AI chip exports to china

This was a targeted takedown.

[Brivael Le Pogam @brivael]

Make no mistake. The Jensen Huang scandal isn't just a story about someone's private life.

It's a lever. And it's going to be used for one thing: taking control of AI.

I'm not saying the facts are made up. Jensen admitted the affairs, and the investigation should run its course. I'm saying: look at what's being built on top of it.

Look at the sequence.

Early November, Democrats win both chambers of Congress. Right after, they announce a flood of AI bills.

One congresswoman calls for a pause on advanced AI development and a ban on superintelligence, on day one. A bill introduced in the House would create a federal Department of AI with the power to decide which companies are allowed to build advanced models. A senator wants a federal AI Safety Board with mandatory standards. Others want mandatory testing before any model is released.

Translation: tomorrow, to release a model, you'll need permission.

And who was standing in the way? Jensen.

He fought export restrictions he saw as counterproductive. He fought the state-by-state patchwork of AI laws. His very first post on X was a letter signed by Nvidia on a single topic: why open models matter. Safety, innovation, sovereignty. The world needs both closed models and open models.

Nvidia is one of the most powerful companies on the planet publicly defending open weights.

And now, in Washington, analysts are saying it out loud: the scandal has broken Nvidia's ability to slow those bills down.

For those who want to lock everything up, the timing is perfect.

Why does this matter so much? Because open source is the only thing standing between AI and a tool of control.

If AI stays open, anyone can download a model, inspect it, modify it, run it on their own machine. A student in Lagos. A small business in Ohio. A dissident in Hong Kong. No one can switch it off. No one can decide for them what the machine is allowed to say.

Kill open source, and what's left?

A handful of closed models. Licensed. Tested, approved, monitored by a federal agency. And when an agency decides what an AI is allowed to say, it decides what billions of people will read, learn and think.

That's not a technology anymore. That's a Ministry of Truth with an API.

And don't believe for a second these rules will hurt the giants.

George Stigler, Nobel laureate in economics, showed it: regulation almost always ends up captured by the very players it claims to rein in. A multimillion-dollar license? The giants pay it without blinking. A ten-person open source lab can't. Bureaucrats write the rules, the biggest players write them alongside them, and everyone else disappears.

A caste of bureaucrats, backed by a few billionaires rich enough to buy their ticket in. That's what the closed world looks like.

Europe already went down this road. The result: models launch in the US and China, and reach Europe months later. If they reach it at all.

And while America gets ready to handcuff itself, China is shipping open-weight models one after another and giving them to the whole world.

My read: the Huang scandal will be the first pretext. Not the last. Every incident, every fear, every headline will be used to close one more door.

If AI stays open, it belongs to everyone.

If it closes, it belongs to whoever hands out the licenses.

And that day, it's game over.

[🇵🇸Mitch McEach🇵🇸 @Intifada4Life]

Jensen Huang is out because Israel’s goal is to privatize AI and use it to kill, imprison & sanction people on an individual level when the Digital ID/CBDC control grid is rolled out.

[El Mercurio Ahora o Nunca @elmercurioAON]

🇺🇸 Open Source es la verdadera razón por la que “sacaron” a Jensen 👇

Hay muchos indicios de que el post de julio de 2026 en el que Jensen Huang defendía los modelos abiertos de IA, lo metió en graves problemas.

En él, Huang argumentaba que la IA transformará industrias y países, que los modelos abiertos fortalecen la seguridad, aceleran la innovación y, sobre todo, permiten la soberanía, y que el mundo necesita tanto modelos cerrados como abiertos de frontera.

Quizás fue esa defensa de la apertura y la soberanía tecnológica y no los escándalos personales, la verdadera causa de su salida.

Por su puesto, esto implicaría que quienes controlan el poder prefieren mantener la IA concentrada y bajo llave, y que el impulso de Nvidia a los modelos abiertos chocaba con esos intereses.

[ANNU ✨ @learner_ant]

Jensen Huang had to resign because he didn't keep control of my enough equity. If he had enough shares, board would not think of removing him

[Richard Cooper @Rich_Cooper]

Let me get this right...

Jensen Huang co-founded NVIDIA in 1993, turned it into a trillion dollar tech company, but because he banged some strange along the way, the board throws him out of the company...

Enzo Ferrari, on the other hand had a series of very well documented affairs, and even had a bastard son, but remained CEO until he resigned at 79, only due to health issues.

Reminds me of family law in the west, destroy dad, then give all the power and kids to mom.

BTW, the new interim NVIDIA CEO is a woman.

[Chief Nerd @TheChiefNerd]

Hillary Clinton Blames the Trump Administration for the Jensen Huang Scandal

“If your government knows that an American citizen is a target of an espionage operation, and you have reason to believe he does not know that … then you owe it to him to tell him. They didn't tell him.”

[Boring_Business @BoringBiz_]

Lot of people forgetting that Melinda Gates was literally an employee at Microsoft before Bill Gates decided to marry her

Warren Buffett literally told the world he had two wives and absolutely no one cared. Elon has a dozen women who he got pregnant

This entire Jensen thing feels like a coordinated attempt to try and remove him as CEO. Definitely pissed off the wrong person somewhere along the way

[Kangmin Lee | 이강민 @kangminlee]

Jensen Huang cheating on his wife is reprehensible. But with a second alleged affair suddenly surfacing, something feels very off.

Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates had affairs, yet neither faced this kind of immediate coordinated pressure to be ousted as CEO. Tech billionaires having affairs or women problems is not new.

I feel as though someone is deliberately trying to destroy Jensen’s reputation and force him out of NVIDIA.

Am I the only one who suspects something more coordinated is happening here?

[ANNU ✨ @learner_ant]

Jensen Huang had to resign because he didn't keep control of my enough equity. If he had enough shares, board would not think of removing him completely.

[Gary Marcus @GaryMarcus]

Everyone defending Jensen is trying to make it about the sex.

It’s not about the sex.

It’s about how he enabled and even lobbied for Chinese AI, about how he subverted US policy, and how he carelessly left himself vulnerable to both blackmail and espionage.

And it’s about how he utterly blew off the problems inherent appearance of conflict of interest, to the peril of his company, his country, and his industry.

He also left Nvidia open to endless litigation and investigation (which is why they may be forced to fire him despite his immense talents).

The fact that he also slept with an employee is just icing on the cake, in a way that further emphasizes his poor judgment, and that would only make the shareholder lawsuits worse.

Firing him will be a huge blow, but keeping him on is no longer tenable, either.

[ANNU ✨ @learner_ant]

Jensen Huang had to resign because he didn't keep control of my enough shares. Had he has enough shares, board would not think of removing him completely.

[Rosa Parks Expert @RosaParksExpert]

Sam Altman - Has gay sex orgies and drinks baby blood and no one cares

Peter Thiel - Has a sex dungeon with young male children in his basement no one cares

Jensen Huang - Likes pussy and gets ousted from his company for it

It's all so twisted

[Rosa Parks Expert @RosaParksExpert]

Sam Altman - Has gay sex orgies and drinks baby blood and no one cares

Peter Thiel - Has a sex dungeon with young male children in his basement no one cares

Jensen Huang - Likes pussy and gets ousted from his company for it

It's all so twisted

[ANNU ✨ @learner_ant]

Jensen Huang had to resign because he didn't keep control of my enough equity. Had he has enough shares, board would not think of removing him completely.

[Mr. Sausage @MrSausageGet]

Making sense, now?

[The_Real_Fly @The_Real_Fly]

Favorite to replace Jensen at $NVDA

[Rabbi Jeff @RabbiJeffx]

Pete Hegseth wasn’t impeached because 11 Democrats decided not to show up.

It’s no coincidence that the ones that didn’t show up have been taken hundreds of thousands of dollars from AIPAC over the years.

[CA Vivek Khatri @CaVivekkhatri]

What ₹100 of vegetables cost:
October 2025 → October 2026

Onion: ₹100 → ₹216
Garlic: ₹100 → ₹161
Ginger: ₹100 → ₹148
Lemon: ₹100 → ₹147
Potato: ₹100 → ₹86

Headline inflation says 6.09%.
Your sabzi wala says something else.

Which one hit your monthly budget the most?

[dart @poordart]

Cant make it up

[ADAM @adamemedia]

Jensen Huang got removed from his position in disgrace for having consensual relations with an adult woman while all the pedophiIe r*pists on the Epstein list are still living their best lives…