Don't get burned on malicious memecoins
Use Check Safety in our Trenches panel before buying. 1 click probes for:
- Backdoors / token theft ���
- Sweep scams 🔴
- Can't-sell tokens 🔴
- Sell tax 🟡
A red flag removes the token for all users. Yellow flag adds a warning.
As exploits evolve, our checks will too
"With Wayfinder, we can create systems that automate trading entirely, where I don't even have to be at my desk"
"If I don't have to think about the trade, I'd prefer not to think about the trade"
I figured this would eventually happen, but not as quickly as it seems to be happening and, for this, Paul Krugman should get credit. For years mainstream economists were unable to understand how trade and globalization work because they were locked into trade models that implicitly assumed that trade was balanced (except, occasionally, over short time periods) and that capital flowed towards its most productive use. That is why their understanding of trade had no relevance to the actual world of trade that emerged in the 1970s and 1980s.
But this couldn't last. As the problem of unbalanced trade became more obvious , and as policymakers were increasingly forced to ignore the advice of their economists and respond to real problems, mainstream economists would eventually begin to recognize how, in an unevenly globalized world, countries that aggressively intervene in their domestic economies and externalize the costs through trade surpluses are also effectively intervening in the domestic economies of countries that supposedly remain committed to "free trade".
Most economists still don't understand trade. But with Krugman now acknowledging that tariffs and other forms of trade intervention can be expansionary under some conditions and contractionary under others (as Ragnar Nurkse explained as long ago as in his 1944 book), I suspect that younger economists will develop a completely different understanding of trade, and one that is perhaps a little more realistic.
what happens to trading if AI keeps getting better?
Dwarkesh Patel asked Jane Street's head of technology the obvious question: if we get AGI, can't it just replace what you do?
his answer: "trading feels to me like AGI-complete."
"all of the different problems of the world end up influencing what you're doing in a trading context. trading involves figuring out what things are worth. which means making predictions about the future. and lots of different things flow into that."
in other words, to fully automate trading you'd need to fully automate understanding the entire world. every geopolitical event, every supply chain shift, every behavioral pattern, every regulatory change, it all feeds into price.
and even at a firm running tens of thousands of GPUs with sub-100-nanosecond execution: "many of your most profitable days happen when weird stuff happens and nobody knows what's going on. doing that well involves human judgment. we think humans work better than models through phase transitions."
his conclusion: "i have never been more desperate to hire more engineers and traders than i am today. everything people are doing is more valuable than it was."
so what does this mean for the rest of us?
if the most automated trading firm on earth is saying humans matter more not less. the implication is that AI doesn't shrink the opportunity in trading. it raises the bar for what each person can do. the traders who learn to use these tools will pull further ahead. the ones who don't will fall further behind.
Introducing Windsurf 2.0.
Manage all your agents from one place and delegate work to the cloud with Devin - so your agents keep shipping even after you close your laptop.
BREAKING: GOLD COLLAPSES AS ARAB GULF STATES SELL THEIR ASSETS TO RAISE MONEY
Put differently, in this time of crisis, they are selling their gold in favor of US dollars.