virat

Get rich. Get smarter.

[virat @virat_11]

Day ended with 40% of stocks in red 🍒

[virat @virat_11]

@RahulRao_1992 Indian coal has ash content. So, 40% mass of coal will have no useful energy. Need to see if the ratios have taken that into account. Ash handling will be a major concern.

[virat @virat_11]

@shiladitya4u How to manage the stop loss to the stocks up by lets say more than 40 %

[Ritesh Jain @riteshmjn]

The Deal Everyone Won (And No One Did)

This was the rare war where everyone won—and that is precisely the problem.

By Vikas Sehgal
This is a scenario—a thought exercise. Not a prediction, but a structured way to think about how power, perception, and markets may evolve when all sides claim victory and no side truly loses.

It begins, as these things now do, on television. Donald Trump appears live—grinning, expansive, claiming total victory. In one pocket, metaphorically, sits Nicolás Maduro; in the other, the Ayatollah. The moment is surreal, theatrical, and entirely on brand. Fox News celebrates while CNN laments. Gas drops to $2 a gallon, and the GOP declares victory.

And, almost unbelievably, so does Iran.

In Tehran, the streets fill. The Ayatollah declares triumph—not just survival, but transformation. The Islamic Republic, he claims, has evolved into something more durable: a theocratic–hereditary order, stabilized under pressure and legitimized through endurance. Iran did not win on the battlefield; it won by not losing. In modern conflict, that is often enough.

Behind the spectacle lies the real story. A deal—never fully written and never formally acknowledged—has been made. Not a peace, but a redistribution of influence dressed up as victory.

Yemen is quietly settled. Saudi Arabia secures its core interests and exits with a long-delayed win. Lebanon tilts decisively into Israel’s strategic envelope, allowing Benjamin Netanyahu to claim success—no nuclear threat and a northern front effectively contained. Pakistan’s General Asim Munir also declares victory, as such outcomes tend to allow.

At the center sits the real arrangement. The Strait of Hormuz is no longer a battlefield but a managed system. Oman and the UAE act as intermediaries, Iran remains inside the framework, and the United States anchors the structure without fully owning it. It is stability without full control—a system held together rather than resolved.

Shipping flows resume and energy stabilizes. In the short term, escalation is contained, chokepoints function, and allies are reassured. The United States secures the flow through Hormuz and embeds itself deeper into the control of global trade routes.

But the deeper shift is more consequential. This was never just about Iran—it was about flow. With influence over Hormuz and continued dominance over Panama, the United States sits astride the arteries of global trade. Security becomes a service, stability becomes a product, and access is quietly priced. The system is not merely protected; it is monetized.

Power shifts from owning resources to controlling the routes through which they move. What emerges is not isolationism, but a doctrine of pathways. At a deeper level, this can be understood as an attempt to contain China—not through direct confrontation, but through control of the system China depends on.

In Ender’s Game, Earth pushes the enemy back and contains it within a bounded space. But reality is not fiction. China is not static; it has already demonstrated the capacity to absorb pressure, adapt, and plan across long horizons. Containment is not closure—it is positioning.

The United States may shape the system today, only to encounter the same challenge again under different timelines and conditions. America may have the watch, but China may have the time.

Yet this cuts both ways. China learns that endurance can force outcomes, but also that miscalculation at scale carries systemic risk. The lesson is not simply confidence; it is calibration.

Markets, too, celebrate. Oil prices fall sharply as war risk fades and flows normalize. Risk premia collapse and shipping stabilizes. For a moment, it appears as if the system has reset—energy is cheap, volatility subsides, and stability returns.

But only for a moment.

Because this was not a resolution. The system did not break; it revealed its terms.

Oil no longer trades purely on scarcity; it acquires a structural floor shaped by geopolitics and controlled routes. What replaces the war premium is a managed risk premium embedded in the system itself. Natural gas and LNG markets ease in the short term, but remain strategically tied to regional security frameworks and infrastructure control.

Gold tells the deeper story. It dips initially as immediate fear subsides, but then rises again—steadily and structurally. This rise is not driven by panic, but by policy. States begin to accumulate gold as a neutral reserve asset, a form of collateral that sits outside geopolitical alignment. It becomes, in effect, the balance sheet behind sovereignty.

Industrial metals such as copper and aluminum rally in the short term on renewed stability, but their longer-term trajectory is driven by infrastructure buildout, electrification, and the expansion of export capacity. Bulk commodities like iron ore and steel stabilize initially, but are increasingly tied to re-industrialization and strategic capacity building.

Critical minerals—lithium, rare earths—show limited immediate movement, but their long-term importance surges as nations seek direct control over mines and supply chains. Shipping and freight costs fall sharply in the short term, yet settle at a higher structural baseline as routes become controlled, secured, and priced. Energy and resource infrastructure, relatively unchanged in the immediate aftermath, emerges as a premium asset class, with states investing heavily in ports, pipelines, refining, and defense-linked production.

Across the world, nations draw the same conclusion: the U.S. security umbrella is no longer absolute. What follows is not fragmentation, but self-insurance at scale. States build reserves—not just of oil, but across commodities. They secure supply chains, acquire resource assets, and invest in logistical control.

Commodities are no longer simply traded. They are secured.

A more critical view—contested, but increasingly voiced—suggests that Europe is attempting to sustain a conflict without matching financial, military, or energy depth. Having reduced reliance on Russian energy, it finds itself more dependent on external supply and U.S. guarantees. It is not irrelevant, but it is increasingly reactive rather than decisive—present in cost, yet peripheral in outcome.

Russia, in this view, benefits not through decisive victory, but through shaping the field—stretching timelines, shifting priorities, and creating space in Ukraine. It is not a clean win, but it is a repositioning that reinforces a more transactional global order.

China observes. It does not rush forward; instead, it recalibrates. The lesson is not simply that power can be challenged, but that time can be used as an instrument of strategy. Pressure, applied patiently, can reshape outcomes.

On the surface, this still appears to be order. The United States stabilizes the system, Iran legitimizes itself, Israel secures its front, Gulf states regain stability, and markets recover.

Everyone wins.

And then come the quieter gains. Oman, long seen as a secondary energy player, emerges as a structural beneficiary—its position along Hormuz transforming it into a toll collector of stability, with relevance tied directly to global energy flows. Benjamin Netanyahu is recast from embattled to consequential, strengthening his legacy through territorial and strategic consolidation. General Asim Munir consolidates authority in the short term, strengthening his position within Pakistan’s power structure.

Russia, under Vladimir Putin, secures both immediate and longer-term gains through repositioning. Iran’s regime achieves a short-term victory through survival, while the country itself gains longer-term leverage. Donald Trump’s gains may be more historical—shaping narrative and legacy beyond the immediate moment. Xi Jinping, while tactically restrained in the short term, accrues longer-term strategic advantage through lessons absorbed and time preserved.

Others fare less well. Europe faces erosion in both the short and long term, its role constrained despite its stakes. Ukraine and Volodymyr Zelensky bear losses across both horizons. Turkey, under Erdogan, similarly finds itself weakened in both the immediate and longer-term balance. India’s trajectory under Modi remains less clear—positioned within the system, but not yet fully defined by it.

Almost everyone walks away with something.

Which is precisely the point.

Because the balance of wins masks the shift beneath.

This is not the end of American power, but a change in how—and how long—it is willing to be used. The United States can still control outcomes in the present, but it is increasingly selective in how it expends time, loss, and attention.

Power is no longer defined by control of territory alone. It is defined by endurance—and by control of the routes through which the world moves.

The United States sits atop the system, but it has revealed its thresholds. Adversaries do not need to defeat it; they need to understand it—and wait.

This is not collapse. It is rebalancing—quiet, uneven, and already underway. A world where dominance matters less and resilience matters more; where globalization continues but becomes gated; where commodities are secured, not just priced; and where routes matter as much as resources.

This is not resolution.

It is transition.

America controls the system. Its rivals, increasingly, control time.

(Vikas is investor with @PineTreeMacro )

[virat @virat_11]

@FarzaTV 🗝️

[Neel Chhabra @NeelChhabra]

https://t.co/FPf1pCUrK8

[Dr. Rahul Baxi @baxirahul]

In 1980 Singapore Airlines faced a major pilot strike. Here’s how PM Lee Kuan Yew dealt with it.

[virat @virat_11]

@Thea__Mia Aftershave

[virat @virat_11]

@NoahEpstein_ Vault

[virat @virat_11]

It’s just some humans are more volatile and some less on both the direction

[virat @virat_11]

Prioritise the advice/needs of those who truly have your best interests at heart.

[virat @virat_11]

@1health2Wealth The credit rating points issuer not cooperating

[virat @virat_11]

@creation247 Win

[virat @virat_11]

@NoContextHumans

[virat @virat_11]

@jackbutcher Forging

[virat @virat_11]

@ravihanda Your wife is smart

[virat @virat_11]

@Trump_History45 @adamscrabble Trump khan explain him franchise business

[virat @virat_11]

@paraschopra Spelling of difficult words in not too hard

[TheLiverDoc™ @theliverdoc]

The only thing worse than Homeopathy?

Scientists on the internet without any knowledge on clinical medical practice, selling supplements that they endorse, using misinformation masquerading as "solid peer reviewed science."

Check this video out, when Huberman bullshits everyone in just half a minute on the Joe Rogan Experience Podcast.

Before I go on, please remember this
The Bullshit Asymmetry Principle, also known as Brandolini’s Law, states that the amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than that needed to produce it. Which means, I have to put extra effort just to debunk the 36 seconds of that podcast.

First, a little about sleep disorders
Sleep disorders are of different types and due to different causes.
https://t.co/IRSteeDzt8
The diagnosis is simply not "I can't sleep" and so here, take this sleep cocktail. Many patients come with sleep disorders that are associated with other conditions.

For example, cirrhosis patients have sleep disorders that require management with ammonia lowering therapies and severe cases can only be reversed with a liver transplant. Patients with alcohol use disorders have sleep disorders that require management with de-addiction therapies along with sedatives. Sleep disorders in the ICU set up has different causes. People with mental health disorders have associated sleep disorders. Certain sleep disorders have no identifiable causes and are called "idiopathic."

Which means, coming on a podcast and blindly giving out a "sleep cocktail" to millions of viewers, who may be suffering from a sleep disorder which has an as yet unidentified cause, is one of the most foolish things one can do. And Huberman, not being an actual clinical doctor, makes that exact mistake.

Huberman claims (very generally and casually), melatonin helps you to go to sleep, but does not maintain sleep. But "solid peer reviewed" studies have much more to say about melatonin.

Melatonin improved sleep onset latency and total sleep time in children/adolescents with neurodevelopmental disorders. Melatonin also improved and sleep onset latency and total sleep time in adults with delayed sleep phase disorder.
https://t.co/X7OQChIUNg

Treatment with melatonin has positive effects on sleep quality in adults with respiratory diseases, metabolic disorders, primary sleep disorders, not with mental disorders, neurodegenerative diseases and other diseases.
https://t.co/SIFveS3cyj

This meta-analysis demonstrated that melatonin decreases sleep onset latency, increases total sleep time and improves overall sleep quality.
https://t.co/sFy8VeIVwe

Another large meta-analysis showed that melatonin dosing and timing matters: for circadian phase advancement, an earlier time and smaller dose, but for sleep quality/consolidation a larger and later dose seemed appropriate.
See here: https://t.co/bAwI1MSuAG

So melatonin does increase total sleep time, total sleep quality and reduces time to sleep and has beneficial effects in specific groups of patients.

Now the "solid peer reviewed studies" on the cocktail - which Huberman claims on three supplements - magnesium threonate, apigenin and L-theanine. Unfortunately, such "solid peer-reviewed papers" DO NOT EXIST. Lets see.

Magnesium supplements:
First of all, there is no conclusive evidence that magnesium, dietary or supplemented has any actual effect on sleep. Randomized clinical trials showed an uncertain association between magnesium supplementation and sleep disorders.
See here: https://t.co/0nvphgDzr4

Forget sleep, magnesium has absolutely no evidence for involvement even in mood disorders.
See here: https://t.co/mZBO4tKjX0

This review confirms that the quality of literature is substandard for physicians to make well-informed recommendations on usage of oral magnesium for older adults with insomnia.
See here: https://t.co/tSerSlxaiF

Apigenin (from Chamomille):
The possible sleep inducing effects of apigenin is still speculative. There are absolutely no solid peer reviewed studies or evidence for benefits of apigenin in sleep as Huberman claims.
See here: https://t.co/r6qqjfcZYc

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot trial showed that chamomille DID NOT have conclusive effects on sleep.
See here: https://t.co/szuPnC3aRY

Even better, a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials and quasi-randomized trials showed that there was very little evidence to show effect of chamomille on insomnia.
See here: https://t.co/3EX2UMjKVV

L-theanine supplements:
There is absolutely NO study or data to suggest that L-theanine is useful for sleep induction, improving sleep quality or increasing total sleep time. The only studies that are of "better quality" shows that L-theanine "maybe" useful in reducing anxiety/ stress levels due to caffeine at night.
See here https://t.co/WUCUpG5o3Z and here https://t.co/BfTX8Slv40

The only other "study" on L-theanine which was done on mice and not humans showed effects only on brain related biomarkers and were not applicable in the clinical sense to humans - https://t.co/idlPdVG2ls

And coming to SOLID EVIDENCE on the "Huberman cocktail" - there is absolutely nothing in published literature to confirm that it works and there is no convincing mode of action of this cocktail in humans.

A large systematic review and meta-analysis showed that Cognitive-Behavior Therapy for Insomnia was the best and not some random supplements proclaimed on a podcast by half-baked scientists who are full time supplement sellers.
See here:
https://t.co/7GYyUrW2tn

There are basic scientists, with no or half-baked clinical practice knowledge, trying to sell you a bunch of useless supplements that they endorse for a paid-commission, using "science-sounding" words without any practical, rational or logical meaning; and push untested and unregulated therapies that are NEVER recommended, approved or promoted by any active, medical, scientific clinical societies worldwide.

They are worse than pseudoscience peddlers.

Be aware of where you find your health information. There is pseudoscience, but then there is also another terrible type of misinformation: BAD SCIENCE.

[virat @virat_11]

@Saxenasaheb I was smoking a cigarette, a guy walked up to me and said ‘can I have a share of it’

I thought what a loser.

20 years later, I saw that guy become the CEO of Berkshire Hathaway.