Elon Musk thinks coding dies this year.
Not evolves. Dies.
By December, AI won’t need programming languages. It generates machine code directly. Binary optimized beyond anything human logic could produce. No translation. No compilation. Just pure execution.
Musk: “You don’t even bother doing coding.”
Code was never the point. It was friction. A tax we paid because machines didn’t speak human. AI just learned fluent human. The tax is gone.
Now plug that into Neuralink. No syntax. No keyboard. No screen.
Musk: “Imagination-to-software.”
Thought becomes executable. You imagine an outcome, the system architects and compiles it into reality instantly.
We’re not automating programming. We’re erasing it from existence.
The entire profession collapses into a thought. Decades of training reduced to irrelevance. The gap between idea and instantiation hits zero.
You don’t build anymore. You imagine, and it materializes.
Not incremental progress. Total phase shift. The way humans have created things for ten thousand years just became obsolete.
Welcome to a world where the limiting factor isn’t skill, resources, or time. It’s whether you can picture what you want clearly enough for a machine to birth it into existence.
Everyone knows crypto is “macro-driven” now.
But most are still confused about how it actually works, which macro variables matter, or why price reacts the way it does.
These are my brief insights towards crypto pricing in this cycle, and what macro factors would be a red flag for crypto in 2026 👇
To understand what’s driving crypto prices today, it helps to start with some history.
The early crypto cycles were driven by a very different kind of demand.
A lot of it came from black market and shadow economy actors, their surrounding ecosystems, and a group of OGs with a strong cypherpunk mindset.
That kind of capital didn’t care much about macro data or interest rates. The key questions back then were very practical:
> Can it be used?
> Can it be transferred?
> Can it move across borders?
Because of that, crypto had very weak correlation with the broader macro environment during those early years.
What’s changed in this cycle is pricing power (who is setting the marginal price) 👇
As regulated access expanded and institutional capital gradually entered the market, crypto started to be treated less like a fringe asset and more like something that fits into standard asset allocation frameworks.
That’s the point where crypto became highly sensitive to macro liquidity conditions, meaning changes in rates, money supply, and global liquidity started to directly affect pricing.
When you see Bitcoin described as liquidity-driven, sensitive to macro conditions, or tied to real interest rates, this is generally what people are pointing to.
So what does that actually mean in practice?
I think it comes down to two main forces.
The first is dollar liquidity conditions 👇
The market is no longer debating whether rate cuts will happen. The real focus is on the pace, slope, and depth of those cuts.
Over longer horizons, crypto has been highly sensitive to changes in money supply and real interest rates.
When liquidity increases but money itself loses purchasing power, capital naturally looks for scarce assets that can’t be printed at will.
This isn’t a hard rule, but it shows up repeatedly across cycles and helps explain why capital flows into crypto in certain phases.
In plain language: when money gets printed faster and holding cash feels worse, people start searching for things with fixed or hard to dilute supply.
Bitcoin is one of those things.
More bluntly, it’s not that people suddenly fall in love with Bitcoin. It’s that confidence in money itself starts to weaken.
The second force runs a bit deeper and has to do with how markets define and allocate to safe haven assets 👇
We’ve seen traditional precious metals like gold and silver get repriced multiple times across different phases.
That reflects persistent demand for protection against sovereign credit risk.
Even now, many investors still think of Bitcoin mainly as a risk on asset.
But as institutional participation increases, more long term capital is starting to treat it as a complementary store of value.
That shift is closely tied to Bitcoin’s decentralized nature and its supply structure, which is difficult to arbitrarily dilute.
Because of this, I don’t see Bitcoin as replacing traditional safe haven assets. I see it increasingly being used as an allocation option outside the sovereign credit system.
When uncertainty rises and stress in the financial system builds, this positioning tends to become more visible.
Looking ahead, there are a few potential macro factors that I’m monitoring closely ⚠️
> Political uncertainty around the US midterm election cycle.
> Valuation and sentiment risks in AI and broader tech.
> Policy uncertainty in Japan that could disrupt yen carry dynamics and tighten global liquidity.
> Ongoing geopolitical tensions.
> Repricing pressure in sovereign debt markets, especially at the long end of the yield curve.
> And slowing global growth with rising downside risks to earnings.
Any one of these on its own is manageable. But if a bunch of them start to overlap, they could quickly become a black swan and present great risk for global markets.
When you layer this macro backdrop on top of Bitcoin’s four-year cycle, the setup from late Q3 into year end looks structurally more challenging for crypto.
There’s an argument that the four-year cycle is “dead” because of ETFs, institutional participation, and changing market structure. I don’t fully buy that.
I do think the cycle has weakened. I do think it’s less clean and less dramatic than it used to be.
But I don’t think it has disappeared.
Market structure evolves, but human behavior, liquidity cycles, and positioning habits don’t vanish overnight.
The rhythm may be flatter, but the pattern is still there.
Historically, these late-cycle, high-uncertainty phases haven’t been comfortable.
But they’ve often been the periods where long-term opportunities are created.
In simple terms, if Bitcoin were to see a sharp drawdown around late Q3 2026, it wouldn’t surprise me.
That’s typically the phase where I’d be leaning into (furiously) buying, not stepping away or panic.
I’d view it less as a failure of the thesis and more as part of the cycle.
Historically, those moments tend to offer the most asymmetric long-term opportunities.
Insider trading is precisely what gives @Polymarket its greatest value. Without insider trading, there would be no price discovery, and without price discovery, prediction markets would lose their core "prediction" function.
High-quality information should be priced accordingly. In the past, it was simply monetized indirectly through other ways; now it's done more directly, and people just can't handle it.🤡
If you wanna stop losing money in crypto, the first thing you should do is STOP day trading.
Because RETAIL day trading is structurally a SCAM.
This is a long post but if you just give me 120 seconds of your time, I swear you'll thank me in a few years.
I’ve been trading since I was a teenager.
I’ve had wins that made me feel I’m Batman and losses that genuinely broke pieces of me I’m still putting back together.
I tried EVERY STRATEGY myself as retail could ever find.
I even day traded for a year thinking it would finally save me, and I failed so painfully it still stings every time I remember it.
> My PNL was so shit to the point that my grandma, who I HELPED set up an AUTO BUY on BTC for, made more money than me.
> Then I became a low-frequency swing trader who barely touches positions, who GETS THE F OUT and STOPS TRADING for a while after a winning move.
> ONLY THEN did my life get better and everything finally start to click.
I’m not a saint. I’m writing this to save the younger, dumb, naive, and painfully impulsive version of me.
First, as a RETAIL DAY TRADER, you’re trading high-frequency with zero real information advantage (no real order flow, no true liquidity map, no market maker positioning, no execution advantage, nothing).
> Do it a few times each quarter, you survive.
> Do it 10+ times a week?
> Even if you have the strongest “discipline” and “risk management” skills in the world, the math will still burry you alive.
Retails don’t fail because they (we) never win.
We fail because we NEVER STOP, and high frequency only has one final outcome.
RUIN.
> This is literally why I built a punishment system for myself if I exceed my quarterly trade limit.
> Every major loss I’ve ever taken happened after a big win where I kept going instead of stopping.
> And every major win I’ve ever taken (and actually kept the money for a long time) was because I caught a big move and then CHILLED.
> Pattern is so obvious it hurts.
Winning is NOT you suddenly made big money.
Winning is keeping that money and not fking losing it next year.
> I’m seeing 14 year olds on TikTok calling themselves day traders, drawing lines on TradingView, thinking they unlocked some daily executable system after buying a guru’s course or Discord.
> It sickens me because if they knew it was gambling I wouldn’t care. At least they’re aware of the game.
> But this day trading meta is bigger than the dropshipping wave in 2016 and 2017. And we all know how that ended.
> People underestimate the difficulty of trading and massively overestimate their ability.
> The issue isn’t just the math. Yes the more you trade and the less you stop the harder consistent profitability becomes.
> But the real problem is younger retail traders GENUINELY believe that with “discipline” and “risk management” they are not gambling at all. They think day trading is a "skill" you can execute like a daily routine.
This isn’t just crypto day trading. The same logic applies to US equities and basically every market.
High frequency only works inside institutions.
> Take US equities for example.
> Do you know what institution traders don’t even look at? Candlestick charts and TradingView.
> They’re on Bloomberg terminals with data retail will never see.
Well, you of course knows this. BUT the 14 to 18 year olds don’t know that. They think their indicators are what all traders use.
And that’s the real danger.
> If you know you’re gambling, at least a part of you knows when to walk away.
> But once you believe it’s a “system”, you never stop.
> You keep clicking until the market empties you completely.
It really is just like a casino in disguise.
> When you walk into Vegas or Macau, you know EXACTLY what you’re stepping into.
> You see the lights, the tables, the dealers, the noise. Your brain knows this is gambling.
> But day trading today is a casino disguised as a COFFEE SHOP.
> New traders walk in thinking they’re here to “learn a skill”, not realizing they just sat down at a table designed to drain them slowly.
So they don’t stop.
That’s the whole tragedy.
Not the losing.
The fact that they genuinely believe they’re not gambling, which makes them keep going until there’s nothing left to lose.
> And those retail traders (like me) you see who look like they’re “winning”… honestly most of them just caught a big move.
> They had luck at the right moment, plus enough discipline beaten into them by previous losses that they finally learned how to stop after a win.
And even then, this tiny group is less than one percent of all retail.
It’s not hard to make money in trading.
It’s just unbelievably hard to keep it.