Olivia
Online
Ora
@oramindd
flowers in the helmet, numbers in the notes.
Joined June 2026
50 Following
99 Followers
166 Posts
Clayton Christensen literally explained why a company can look more profitable while getting weaker. Its managers pick a ratio to chase, and a ratio has two sides.
Return on net assets goes up when a company outsources everything, since the assets shrink. Christensen, who taught at Harvard Business School and wrote The Innovator's Dilemma, warned that a ratio cannot tell whether you grew the top or cut the bottom.
IRR is the same. You raise it with innovation, or by funding only fast-payback projects, and the long bets never get money.
Our minds are limited, he said, so we aggregate invoices into revenue and lives into org charts, then judge ourselves by how high we climbed and how much we earned.
His conclusion was that God does not employ accountants. He expected nobody to ask about his title or his bank balance, only about the people whose lives he made better.
Your savings rate is a ratio too, one subtraction and one division, and you can move it from either side. Keep a raise unspent or cancel a lease, and the gap grows.
The lecture runs under twenty minutes and is free online. Almost nobody finishes it.
He died in January 2020, eight years after writing a book on the question, How Will You Measure Your Life?
https://t.co/6fbpq78hsH
Charlie Munger literally explained why he got rich without being a genius. It is not IQ. It is not hard work. It is a habit of asking how to fail, then refusing to do it.
"I have a good mind, but I'm way short of prodigy," he said. His results came from a small bag of tricks.
He picked up the first one in World War II as an Army Air Corps weather forecaster. Once his forecasts were guiding real pilots, he asked himself how he could kill them.
He found two ways. Send a plane into icing it can't handle, or somewhere it runs out of fuel before an airport opens. He became fanatical about avoiding both.
He may have learned it from his grandfather, who told him while swimming: swim as long as you want, but stay near the shore.
He inverted everything. Asked how to help India, he asked how to hurt it most easily. An appraiser valued a client's ranch easement at $125,000 by counting acres. Munger saw the power towers would freeze the grade on hills that had to be leveled for building. The client got $600,000.
Invert your money the same way. Ask how to stay broke on a good salary. Let spending rise with every raise so your savings rate never moves.
Rising spending is the icing. A flat savings rate is the empty tank.
He credited these tricks with letting "a non-prodigious man get prodigious results."
His Redlands talk is free online. Almost nobody sits through it.
https://t.co/6fbpq78hsH
Charlie Munger literally explained why being right destroys careers. It is not office politics. It is not bad luck. It is that people are driven by their own interest, and your logic never touches it.
At USC Law School in 2007, he described what he watched happen at Salomon Brothers. A trader had submitted false bids at Treasury auctions. The general counsel found out and went straight to the CEO.
The counsel was Harvard trained and correct on every point. He said the firm had no legal duty to report it, but it clearly had a moral one. Munger said the man was totally correct, and that it did not work.
Reporting it was unpleasant for the CEO. So he put it off, and put it off, and put it off.
The scandal erupted anyway in 1991. Salomon paid around $290 million, the CEO was gone, and the general counsel went down with him. Warren Buffett had to fly in and run the firm himself.
Munger's fix came from Ben Franklin. If you would persuade, appeal to interest, not to reason. One sentence about losing his money and his status would have moved that CEO in an afternoon.
The same thing runs your spending. Nobody argues themselves into keeping a bigger share of what they earn. You appeal to your own interest, make the saving automatic, and never hold the debate at all.
His full 2007 talk is free online, and almost nobody sits through it.
https://t.co/6fbpq78hsH
Charlie Munger literally explained why your raises are keeping you poor. It is not greed. It is not a lack of discipline. It is a bug in your brain that judges everything by contrast and nothing by absolute value.
At Harvard in 1995, he described an experiment from Robert Cialdini's class. Three buckets of water: hot, cold, room temperature. One hand in hot, one in cold. Then both go into the same lukewarm bucket.
One hand feels hot and the other feels cold, in the same water. Munger said cognition mimics sensation. The brain runs on a contrast scale.
Real estate brokers exploit it daily. Show a newcomer two awful, overpriced houses first. Then a merely overpriced one. Then close.
He told the story of the frog. Throw it in hot water and it jumps out. Heat the water slowly and it stays until it dies. Munger said he could not vouch for the frog. But it was "sure as hell true" about many businessmen he knew.
These were high-powered people. The change came in small pieces, so they missed it.
That is exactly how spending works. Nobody decides to spend everything they earn. Each upgrade feels tiny next to the last one. The raise arrives, the lifestyle warms up a few degrees, and the savings rate never moves.
His full 1995 talk on human misjudgment is free online, and most people never finish it.
https://t.co/6fbpq78hsH
@andreysuperior no, is it worth the deep dive?
Charlie Munger literally explained why most people will never build wealth. It is not because they earn too little. It is not because they invest wrong. It is because they never inverted the problem.
When he was a meteorologist in World War II, they taught him to draw weather maps and predict the weather. He ignored all of it and asked one question: if I wanted to kill a lot of pilots, what would be the easiest way.
Two answers. Get planes into icing they cannot handle, or get the pilot somewhere he runs out of fuel before landing. He built his whole system around avoiding those two scenarios.
He never tried to predict weather perfectly. He just made sure he never killed anyone. That inversion made him better than everyone else in his unit.
Then he told the room to do the same with money. Stop asking how to get rich. Ask what guarantees you stay broke. Spend everything you earn regardless of how large the number grows. Someone earning $60,000 who keeps 25% builds wealth twice as fast as someone earning $150,000 who saves 5%.
If somebody hired him to fix India, he would not ask what helps. He would list what hurts India the easiest and then avoid all of it.
Munger built $2.6 billion this way. He threw most opportunities into his "too hard pile" and never looked back.
His 2020 Daily Journal meeting is sitting on the internet for free. Almost nobody watches it.
https://t.co/6fbpq78hsH
Two assets that each return nothing on their own. One doubles then halves. The other halves then doubles. Both end exactly where they started after two years.
But combine them 50-50 and rebalance once, and the portfolio returns 25%. Same assets. Same market. The only difference is one instruction to rebalance.
Jake Xia draws this on the board at MIT and calls diversification the closest thing in investing to a free lunch. Markowitz won the Nobel Prize for proving it. The math has been public for decades.
It works because rebalancing forces you to sell what went up and buy what went down, automatically and without emotion. It turns volatility from an enemy into a source of compound return.
Now apply that logic to income. A household gets a $20,000 raise and immediately rebalances the lifestyle upward. Bigger apartment, newer car, extra subscriptions.
Two years later the salary is higher but the net position has not moved, just like each asset on its own.
The raise was not the problem. The failure to hold the line was. One ratio tells you where you stand and it takes 30 seconds to calculate.
The lecture has been free for over a decade. The rebalance instruction is one sentence. Almost nobody follows either.
https://t.co/6fbpq78hsH
In 1990 a trader from Salomon Brothers opened a training manual at Morgan Stanley and found a footnote calling his old desk uneducated gamblers who mistook Vegas for a Greek letter.
Jake Xia kept that footnote. Thirty years later he teaches the math it was mocking to MIT students for free.
He starts every class the same way. Two choices. Lock in a $280 loss or gamble on 80% chance to lose $500 with 20% to win. Most of the room gambles. Most of the room is wrong.
Not because of the expected value. Because of what it reveals. People hold losers and sell winners. They let bad positions run hoping for recovery and cut good ones early out of fear.
Xia ran Harvard's endowment through the same logic. $50 billion. 40% of the operating budget. One portfolio. The job was never picking what to buy. It was knowing when to cut and how much to size.
That question applies to more than stocks. A household that gets a $20,000 raise and upgrades the apartment, the car, and the subscriptions ends the year exactly where it started. The salary moved. Nothing else did.
The discipline is not in earning more. It is in holding the line when more arrives.
The lecture is free. The footnote is still in the manual. The gamble is still the wrong choice.
https://t.co/6fbpq78hsH
Jake Xia managed Harvard's $50 billion endowment and literally showed why your salary has nothing to do with when you stop working. It is not income. It is not returns. It is one ratio nobody checks.
He proved it with two numbers. Two assets returning 0% on their own. Combined and rebalanced once a quarter they compound to 25%. Same holdings. The only difference is one instruction to rebalance.
Harvard depends on this. 40% of the operating budget comes from one portfolio. Miss 8% a year and research stops. Departments close. The endowment does not pick winners. It sizes and rebalances.
Xia teaches this at MIT for free. Hands students a blank page. Build a portfolio. Every year confident picks. Every year the same blind spot. Not one asks how much goes in each position.
They obsess over what to buy. The institution that pays his salary obsesses over how much.
That gap follows everyone. Got a raise and nothing changed. Switched jobs for more money and ended the month the same way. The pick was never wrong. The ratio was.
Sizing applies to everything. Portfolios. Paycheques. Time. It is never what you choose. It is how much you commit.
The lecture is free. The instruction is one word. Almost nobody follows it.
https://t.co/6fbpq78hsH
Jake Xia managed Harvard's $50 billion endowment and literally showed why your salary has nothing to do with when you stop working. It is not income. It is not returns. It is one ratio nobody checks.
He started at Solomon Brothers when quants were a rumor on the trading floor. Spent 17 years at Morgan Stanley. Then crossed to the other side to allocate capital for the largest university fund on earth.
Now he teaches it at MIT for free. First class he asks who knows what a stock is. Hands stay down. He starts from zero. Currencies. Bonds. Swaps. Options. The entire machine before lunch.
Then the turn. Position sizing. You have money. How much on one bet. When to cut. When to hold. Greed picks the entry. Fear picks the exit. Neither should. Math should pick both.
He mentions the quant funds that cracked it. Built perpetual machines. The catch is brutal. Once they found the edge they locked it behind lifetime non-competes. You leave and take nothing. Not a formula. Not a word.
But the one equation that matters was never locked. One subtraction. One division. What came in minus what went out divided by what came in. That ratio sets the clock on your freedom.
The course has been online for over a decade. Millions of views. Almost nobody opened a calculator after watching.
https://t.co/6fbpq78hsH
@0x_spark01 this is such a simple way to look at volatility
A professor put two investments on the board. Cash that stays at 1. A stock that either doubles or drops by half each day with equal probability.
Neither goes anywhere. Cash is flat. The stock's doublings and halvings cancel out over time. Two assets going nowhere.
Then he split a dollar between them. Half in cash. Half in the stock. Rebalanced every day back to half and half. The result was 6% growth per period with near certainty. Money from nowhere.
He called it living off the fluctuations. Every time the stock doubles you sell half back to cash. Every time it drops you buy more with cash. The act of resetting the balance creates wealth that neither asset produced on its own.
He showed two real stocks over 20 years. One went up 4 times. The other went up 8 times. Rebalancing between them at 52 and 48 percent went up 75 times. More than both combined. The fluctuations between them were worth more than either stock alone.
Your savings rate is the same rebalancing. Income minus spending divided by income. One number you reset every payday. The paycheck comes in. You split it. Part stays. Part goes to work.
Without the split your money does what that stock does. It doubles some months and halves others and over time goes nowhere.
The lecture is free. The people still letting their money ride without rebalancing have never pressed play.
https://t.co/6fbpq78hsH
One prompt built this. Full 3D site, animations, live data cards, in one shot.
That's not impressive. That's the problem.
Fable 5 doesn't know when to stop. Leave the scope open and it hands you a corporate site nobody asked for, in the time it takes to make coffee. Unmanaged, that's an expensive way to produce confident nonsense.
So it got a contract instead. Hard stops. 150 lines a commit, max. Never claim a task is done based on its own read of the output.
Four hires split every shift: a cheap reader for the logs, Fable to decide, a cheap worker to type, a fresh Fable to review blind. Fable's judgment costs real money. Fable's typing usually isn't worth it.
An agent that grades its own homework gives itself a raise. So a deterministic script casts the final vote, not the model's opinion of its own work.
Trust isn't company wide either. Twenty runs at 95 percent before a job ships without a signature. One miss and it's back to probation, no warning.
The site on the screen still looks the same. What built it doesn't work the same way anymore.
https://t.co/rugkJxzcMW
Fable 5 can finish a week of backlog overnight. It can also cost four figures doing it, and defend a wrong answer better than most humans defend a right one.
Left unmanaged that is an expensive way to produce confident nonsense.
Put on a contract, with hard stops and a deterministic sign off script, it is the closest thing to a full time hire he can run for a few dollars a day.
The math is what makes it work. A full session with Fable typing the whole time runs into real money fast. Fable making the decisions while a cheap model does the typing is maybe 15 to 20 percent of the tokens for 100 percent of the judgment calls.
So the shift has four hires, not one. A near free model reads the overnight logs and says quiet or actionable. Fable, read only, decides the single highest value thing to do and writes a work order without touching code.
A cheap worker executes it on an isolated branch. A fresh Fable that has seen only the spec and the diff votes pass or fail.
A decision made by Fable and a line of code typed by Fable are two different price tags. Only pay the higher one for the decision that actually needs it.
https://t.co/rugkJxzcMW
Day 1: 5 pages and a blank, almost empty graph.
Week 2: 40 sources in, the graph is already a dense web, and it starts citing things he forgot he ever read months earlier.
That is the entire difference between a note app and a brain. One stores whatever you throw at it and waits. The other reaches out on its own and connects what you just wrote to everything else you have written down, without you asking it to look.
Claude reads every source dropped into the vault, pulls out the people and ideas inside it, and cross links it against notes from six months ago that never crossed his mind again.
Feed it a pile at once and parallel agents read all of them, then reconcile the whole set before filing anything.
Two lines of setup, two minutes total. One command a day after that: ingest all of these. Lint the wiki once a week and it flags contradictions between sources itself.
By month 2 he had stopped searching Google for things he already half remembered and just asked the vault first. The spoon feeding stopped somewhere around week 2.
The brain started feeding him back, with sources cited.
https://t.co/iZG4HDFeOx
He didn't write the code. He wrote the org chart that wrote the code.
Five Sonnet agents read the same repo from five different angles at once.
No cross talk between them, no shared assumptions, just five separate reads of the same problem, feeding into one report.
Their notes land on a single planner. It cuts the whole job into worktrees, one per feature, and decides on its own which ones run in parallel and which have to wait their turn because one depends on the other.
Each worktree gets checked by a fresh reviewer, one that never saw the plan behind it, only the diff in front of it.
Anything broken doesn't get a note. It gets sent straight back into the same loop it came from, as many times as it takes to come out clean.
Only a clean pass earns a spot in the pull request.
He didn't write the code. The org chart did.
https://t.co/rugkJxzcMW
Businesses pay $10,000 a month for this. It takes three steps and one file.
Anthropic just published the actual manual on building a Claude skill. 33 pages, and almost nobody has read it.
Step one. Give the file a name and a description specific enough that Claude knows exactly when to show up. Think of it as training a new employee. You tell them when to come in, not just what the job is.
Step two. Don't dump everything into one file. Instructions stay in skill.md. Extra documentation goes in a references folder. Scripts and examples go in their own folder. Claude only loads what a task needs.
Step three. End with real examples of what a user types and what comes back. Not "validate things properly." Say there always has to be a name attached and a team member assigned.
$10,000 a month. One file, three steps, and it just became free.
https://t.co/rugkJxzcMW
400 notes sat dead for three years. Then someone gave them a brain and they started talking to each other.
Not organizing. Not tagging. Thinking.
Drop a source in, it reads it, pulls out the people and the ideas, cross links it to everything it has ever seen, then files it into a vault of plain Markdown he actually owns.
Nothing rented, nothing locked in a database he pays for every month, nothing that disappears if a company shuts down its servers.
Ask it a question three months later. It answers in two seconds and shows you the exact page it pulled from, not a vague summary written to sound confident.
Point every other project at the same vault and it becomes one memory feeding all of them, coding, research, content, all reading from the same brain.
Most second brains are graveyards. Notes go in, nobody reopens them, nothing compounds, the folder just gets heavier.
This one grew neurons instead.
The graveyard grew a brain.
https://t.co/iZG4HDFeOx
They fed it all their sales data. It found a pattern they had never seen.
One change to the process. $6,000 extra last week.
Claude Code underneath it. Real neurons firing. You drop something in and it starts linking it to everything else in the vault without you asking.
Stuff from six months ago connects to what you added this morning. The brain gets smarter every day without you touching anything.
They had been staring at the same data for three years. The brain found it in one session. Because it connects everything to everything else until something surfaces that you missed.
Most second brains are graveyards. 400 notes nobody reopens. Knowledge that never compounds.
This one thinks.
The pattern was always in the data. Nobody was connecting the right dots.
https://t.co/iZG4HDFeOx
Last Seen Users on Sotwe
bin muα»n bαΊ‘o khΓ΄ng Δu
Seen from Vietnam
ΰΉΰΈΰΈΰΈΰΉΰΈ²ΰΈ’ΰΈ«ΰΈ΅ΰΉΰΈ‘ΰΉ
Seen from Thailand
Chinese Boobs π
Seen from Singapore
ThickTransGirls
Seen from United States
θε±π
Seen from Japan
γ©γγγγπ°Rabbit β¨γγγΏγβ¨
Seen from United States
somsakss
Seen from Thailand
medo
Seen from Saudi Arabia
Luciana π³οΈββ§οΈ (TOP 0.05%)
Seen from Mexico
Hero Defeated
Trends for you
Most Popular Users
Elon Musk
@elonmusk
241.7M followers
Barack Obama
@barackobama
119M followers
Cristiano Ronaldo
@cristiano
114.4M followers
Donald J. Trump
@realdonaldtrump
111.8M followers
Narendra Modi
@narendramodi
107.2M followers
Rihanna
@rihanna
98.7M followers
NASA
@nasa
92.4M followers
Justin Bieber
@justinbieber
91.8M followers
KATY PERRY
@katyperry
90M followers
Taylor Swift
@taylorswift13
83.9M followers
Lady Gaga
@ladygaga
75.4M followers
Virat Kohli
@imvkohli
73.3M followers
Kim Kardashian
@kimkardashian
70.9M followers
YouTube
@youtube
68.8M followers
Neymar Jr
@neymarjr
66.3M followers
Bill Gates
@billgates
65.1M followers
Selena Gomez
@selenagomez
63M followers
The Ellen Show
@theellenshow
62.3M followers
CNN
@cnn
61.8M followers
X
@x
60.7M followers