I have a friend who is 40 and damn near a billionaire.
A few years ago, I asked him for advice on investing... and here's what he told me:
1. Most of wins in life land on the edge of controversy.
2. Be careful what you read, it becomes the way you think.
3. Anger is useful in physical fights but a killer of logic.
4. Having a strong opinion is a mark of intellect but having the ability to change it is THE mark of true intelligence.
5. Share your MVPs - every time you produce a product or idea, more come back ten-fold.
6. Anytime something is common practice, check if it’s common sense.
7. Strong beliefs paired with little knowledge is a dangerous spot to operate.
8. Your skin regenerates itself every 72 days completely. Your ideas need an equal level of velocity and regeneration. Challenge the old ideas and let them be reborn into something better.
9. Shortcuts and get-rich-quick schemes will get you lost.
10. Read widely, voraciously and continuously.
AI is coming for architects
upload site images
Runable 2.0 AI agent analyses the land, designs floor plan & elevation drawings with accurate dimensions, and renders 4 accurate house views
step by step tutorial + prompts:
AI ending interior design
Nano banana 2 now can turn sketch floor plan into 4K 3D rendering with accurate dimension, take photos for each room, and 1-click furniture change
used to cost $100k and months.. now cents and mins
step by step tutorial on OpenArt:
Peter Steinberger is joining OpenAI to drive the next generation of personal agents. He is a genius with a lot of amazing ideas about the future of very smart agents interacting with each other to do very useful things for people. We expect this will quickly become core to our product offerings.
OpenClaw will live in a foundation as an open source project that OpenAI will continue to support. The future is going to be extremely multi-agent and it's important to us to support open source as part of that.
2026 SPACE ECONOMY WATCHLIST
A SpaceX IPO in 2026 would put the entire $1.8T space economy under the brightest spotlight it has ever had because once the anchor of the sector goes public every layer of the ecosystem gets pulled into the narrative.
Here’s the ecosystem:
• Moon Builders | $LUNR
• Space Metals Foundries | $USAR, $ATI
• Space Data Miners | $SPIR, $BKSY, $PL
• Earth-to-Orbit Network | $T, $TMUS, $VZ
• Space Hardware Guild | $HON, $LHX, $RDW
• Space Internet Providers | $VSAT, $IRDM, $SATS
• Eyes & Ears of Orbit | $BWXT, $TDY, $ST, $AME
• Space Engines | $RKLB, $FLY, SpaceX, Blue Origin
• Orbital Real Estate Developers | $ASTS, $PL, $NOC, $BA, Starlink
• Defense Space Commanders | $NOC, $LMT, $BA, $LHX, $PLTR
AI could wipe out half of all entry-level white-collar jobs and spike unemployment to 10% to 20% in the next one to five years, predicts Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei. https://t.co/K53oCApIeF
Founder I know just sold his startup for close to $5M.
Raised $3.6M seed 4 years ago.
After liquidation preferences:
He walked away with $140K.
That's $35K/year.
Google L3 (entry level): $249K/year.
- He would have made 7x more at Google.
- With weekends.
- With sleep.
But the headline says '$5M exit.'
Nobody mentions the math.
This is why I stay profitable.
That founder made $35K/year for 4 years.
Here's the part nobody mentions:
84% of his peers who raised seed in 2022 STILL haven't raised Series A.
They're not even getting to the liquidation preference conversation.
The VC game is rigged, my take: https://t.co/IloKnPClmC
Here's what I would do if I was a young person trying to break into VC:
Write.
Short writeups, on Twitter. Not generic market philosophical thinkpieces, because those will be assumed to be AI slop or regurgitated research. No one will read it unless you're brilliant, which you're probably not.
Original research, on a specific company or sub-sector. If you want to write about robotics, even that is too broad. Narrow it down. Humanoid robotics, or healthcare robotics, military robotics, etc. Get really granular. So granular most people won't care. If it's something you could get by Googling, it's not narrow enough.
You will not be able to find to do "original research" easily. This is not something you can do from a university library. You will have to go talk to people who work at these companies. Journalists who cover these companies. Pay for private industry-specific research / newsletters. Follow all of the employees/anons who are tweeting gossip. Integrate a picture that someone reading TechCrunch doesn't see.
Then write about this sector and leading + new startups and tag / DM every investor at every major firm who covers your space (you can find them because they've invested in one of the companies in the sector). If they express interest, offer coffee meetings with everyone you can. Some will take you up on it.
Do this enough times, you'll develop a reputation and get offered a job in venture. Don't need to go to business school, don't need to have a great angel portfolio or any of the above.
"Get good deal flow" is wonderful if you have access to it, but most people just can't do this. If you're already surrounded by Stanford undergrads, you probably don't need advice to break into VC. But the above strategy--in principle anyone can do. Just need to have abnormal levels of agency and a willingness to basically do the job of a junior VC without anyone telling you to.
(While you're doing this, best thing to do in the meantime is to also work at a company in the sector you're chasing after. But not always possible depending on your background. Thankfully, VC does not require any particular background. Lots of weirdos in VC, myself included.)
I guarantee you, everyone wants to hire someone who can do the above. But very few candidates have this degree of agency.
VC is not a "tracked" career. Hiring is arbitrary, firms are generally small and do not scale, and there is no standard path. This is good for you if you're willing to be weird. The thing that VCs have in common is that they are passionate about startups and understanding new industries. If you show that you already have that, a path will open for you.
I’m getting the sense that many of you are not built for this life. If you are concerned by small 10-30% drawdowns in stocks that can run up 500-1000% in a year, you don’t understand the assignment. Stick to index funds and DCA. Hire an adviser. Pay 1%. Retire by 65. This is you.
I think:
- $PLTR is not buy-worthy
- $IONQ is not buy-worthy
- $OKLO is not buy-worthy
- $RGTI is not buy-worthy
- $OPEN is not buy-worthy
- $BYND is not buy-worthy
- $TSLA is not buy-worthy
- $HOOD is not buy-worthy
Why?
All of these stocks share one thing in common:
Their valuations are extreme, and their risk–reward profiles are heavily skewed.
While I do think some of them could perform well long-term, they’re currently priced for perfection. And if you tell me that’s fine because they’ll 10x their revenue over the next decade, that’s not a sufficient argument.
No one knows what the next decade will bring. A new competitor could emerge, technology could shift, or growth could slow down.
Agree?
$SLNH
Michael deliberately spreading misinformation. Last time I heard that was illegal! Be careful out there.
Below is my reply which he hid. (You can view it from the hidden replies)
His post is full of misinformation.
First, they have 75M outstanding shares per latest SEC filling. That's more than 300M market cap at today's close.
Second, on October 3, 2025, they filed for 4x dilution plan pending approval for November 7, 2025. That's 75M shares to 375M shares!
Third, they don't have 1 GW built or under construction. They have 75MW built, and 131 MW under construction. Also, the 131MW being built is strictly for BTC cohosting. The rest is 'under development' which could be under different stages like curtail assessment, ppa, ERCOT/ISO planning, feasibility studies.
Fourth, they dont have a partnership with Hewlett Packard. Soluna decided to exit the agreement early on.