Loading summary
Transcript69 lines
- [00:00]
A
Leopold Ashbrenner's situational awareness seeks to raise capital after AI route and then Nick, if you can go over to the next tab here we have a thread from the Kobiesi letter about some of the major volatility, the significant amount of volatility that's been seen in the the South Korean equity market just over the past 40 days. So it's gone down almost 50% erasing $2 trillion in market market cap. And so these two stories are linked because Leopold was managing a hedge fund where he former OpenAI employee left 2024, started a hedge fund and was allocating capital in size, I think what $20 billion or so fund to the AI space. And then also on the South Korea side a lot of their equity markets first of all is very concentrated. Brian and I were talking about I think it was up to 60%. Two companies in the made up to 60 of the market cap was made up by two companies and they're very tech forward. As people know chips, semiconductors, AI etc that trade is very similar. And so let's tie these two themes in together. Who would like to go first on the first topic of today's signal and noise episode?
- [01:09]
B
I'll take the quick, quick hit. I think this is a lot of signal. I think the signal comes from two sides. One is you just can't play these markets, you'll get blown up, there's too much volatility and you may be directionally or thematically right, but it doesn't. And the other side of it, this is like entrepreneurship, investment management, those are generally old men's games. When you look at success rates and you just get better with age, with pattern recognition, temperament, et cetera, et cetera. The kid was 21, 22 years old when he started 24. He blew himself up. Leverage kills. I think the other side of the signal though is he was absolutely right as well. The core of situational capital was this dude along with others were inside of the Frontier Labs. They recognized his whole thesis of the fund was that ASI artificial superintelligence would be live by 2030. And so he just made bets across every field that it would touch all the way from semiconductors Frontier Model Labs, his girlfriend's actually I believe the chief of staff of at Anthropics. He probably has some nice inside information. Other aspects of the stack including he was a large investor in a lot of the public miners that were pivoting to AI so he was crushing it. But again, four year old is going to naturally use leverage Naturally not know how to manage risk. And so, yeah, of course he blew himself out and then Ken Griffin probably was behind it or a part of it, and now they own a large part of his portfolio.
- [02:34]
C
Yeah, the Ken Griffin component is hilarious to me. Earlier this week he was proclaiming that, you know, Citadel thought that there was going to be a rate hike this week. That sort of exacerbated the volatility in a lot of the stocks that situational awareness was allocated to. And then he comes in and scoops the bag. But generally, I agree with your sentiment, Michael. I think this is a massive signal, mainly because it's like, you know, one, it's a sign of where AI stocks in the market is right now in terms of, you know, he himself was forex leveraged. You could look at the capex spend and all the debt that these companies are taking out as its own form of leverage. So the whole complex is highly levered to, you know, ASI coming to fruition. And to your point, he's right. But the bigger takeaway is like this is kind of a tale as old as time in terms of wonder boy, boy genius. The further context on the fund started at 1.5 billion and he grew it to I think at the peak, like 24 billion. So 2000% returns. He was up 300% year to date through the end of May. And yeah, it's a story about money management, portfolio management and youth. Effectively, you could be totally right about your, your underlying theses on all these names and sort of the trajectory of the space, but managing money is a, is a different game, a different story. And so a lot of signal to be gained about just the current moment of markets, but also like historically like this tracks. This is a, a tale as old as time.
- [04:04]
D
Yeah, I would completely agree. I think that Leopold and situal situational awareness getting blown up just shows that you can be directionally right on a trend and still positioned wrong. And so what I mean by that is we see every single bitcoin bull cycle that there are folks who get super excited about where bitcoin's going and they're directionally right that the price is going up, but then they either get greedy and try to get extra yields on their bitcoin on Celsius or go with leverage and ultimately that, you know, in 99.9% of the time, they end up with less bitcoin overall. I think there's something similar here where he was directionally right on the trends of where I was going, but by getting overly Greedy, you know, he ended up with having to sell the firm. I think that, you know, it's just significantly better to, if you even have a thesis just to DCA into any type of position that you have as well as DCA out and not take on leverage because the qqq is only 10 down from its all time high. And the fact that he got liquidated is a lesson in, you know, capital management.
- [05:20]
A
Yeah, I mean it's an interesting sequence of events. Brian, you touched on most of it and then just to round things out. So Citadel did acquire his entire portfolio today, you mentioned kind of.
- [05:29]
B
Is it the entire. I thought it was just a public portfolio.
- [05:32]
D
On the public.
- [05:33]
C
Probably just the public because he has
- [05:35]
B
anthropic sitting in there. In the private.
- [05:37]
A
It's the public. Yeah, the, the public companies. And so after the acquisition, a lot of these names that were acquired as part of the portfolio are up close to like 30 on the day. So it's a. Yeah, you got the youth versus the, the old guys who know how to manage risk and maybe they know how to potentially manipulate markets as well.
- [05:54]
B
One other quick thing that ties into your conversation that you brought up yesterday on last trade is like he could have just bought gold and chilled and like been up like, like. Or gold and bitcoin because I think what was the start like or four years ago, he'd be in a nice spot.
- [06:07]
A
Well, that's why I think this is noise, because first of all, he can't manage risk. Obviously he, he is incredibly ahead of where everyone on this show and where most people are in terms of understanding these technologies and knowing where they're going to go. But it doesn't make you a great trader just because you have that background. Right. And so managing risk is a totally different game. And this is just a testament to, well, if you're up 300% year to date, maybe you kind of reallocate portfolio or at least protect your downside. He didn't do that and now has essentially, you know, lost all control of the fund, at least on the public equity side. And I would say, yeah, the, the noise is the fact that all these people have participated in the fund, probably don't have. I mean they're obviously high net worths and institutional investors. I don't know the exact cap table, but these are people that are also just chasing a trend here. And ultimately I would tie it back to the fact if you have better form of money, you saving it, you don't necessarily need to be chasing the latest and greatest hype on the equity markets. And so that's ultimately what I would like to get back to over a long time horizon is people don't need to become professional investors.
- [07:10]
B
And mainly because I think the core aspect of all this is the game. To his credit, the game's rigged. Like the game's just fundamentally rigged. I mean Ken Griffin, we could look at Citadel and Robin Hood. Like you just get stopped out of positions because the wind blows a different way. There's not necessarily, I mean maybe this, it's saying what you're saying from the beginning about you can be direction right and get blown up. But it's like it doesn't even necessarily have to be the free market that's blowing you up.
- [07:35]
C
True. Yeah. I mean the other component here is like if you were just an individual investor and you were sort of like tracking his 13F filings and you were just going long and dcaing like you said Jackson to some of these names, you're still fine. You didn't blow yourself up. And if the thesis holds on some of these names, you can withstand a temporary downturn. So it speaks to portfolio construction aspect, but also the opaque nature of a hedge fund. Right. Like no one knew what his leverage necessarily was at any given time. And if you're just looking at like long only positions, then like probably would have been fine holding through this, this volatility.
- [08:16]
A
All right, let's get into the next topic here we have everyone's favorite, if you are in the bitcoin and digital asset space, favorite Senator, Senator Elizabeth Warren. We're talking about the agreement between the left and the right. I think this is the only thing that politicians can agree on. So Warren says here, Donald Trump is right about this. Eliminate the debt limit. Its only real function is to threaten an economic crisis. I'm ready to work with both Democratic and Republic Republican senators to immediately scrap the debt ceiling and protect the economy. We're protecting the economy, guys. That, that's, that's exactly what we're doing here. And so I guess I would say this is a signal to the extent of my first point. There is very little at this time in US Politics with how divisive it is where Democrats and Republicans, Republicans can agree on something, but the one thing that they do agree on is let's continue to spend money, let's continue to pad our pockets, let's continue to devalue the dollar and let's continue to make the rest of the people poorer, whether or not they believe or know that they're doing that. That is functionally what they're doing. As you spend more money, you're diluting everyone else's purchasing power. So again, this is comes down to incentives. These people want to continue to stay in power. They want to continue. There is also no political will to reduce the spending of the government. There's just no. Politicians are going to run on that and say, we're going to take away your entitlements, we're going to take away your programs. And so this is just kind of the natural function. I think ultimately this would be potentially a good thing to accelerate. Where we're I think inevitably going is if you start to get rid of some of these facades of. Oh, we have a debt limit. Well, it's been increased I think like 60 or 70 times over the past 50 years. I forget the exact number. So it's really there for show and nothing more. So maybe if you start to just go fully in onto the debasement and the devaluation and the debt of this, this issue, then maybe people start to come to a conclusion that this really is a facade. It really is monopoly money.
- [10:13]
C
Yeah, I mean you kind of described why this is noise. Like I know you said it was signal at the jump, but like there's the debt. The debt ceiling has always been like, it's not a thing. If you just continually ignore and raise the thing, then it's not an actual ceiling. So to me this is total noise. Like there's never been a debt ceiling in any real practical way. I guess it's fair of her to be like, let's stop pretending there is one. If that's kind of her point here. That's not necessarily how she's articulating it though. She's of framing it as, you know, there is this ceiling that we're battling with, so we should just get rid of it. But it's like the actual argument is like it's never existed. So why are we even pretending there is one?
- [10:56]
B
Yeah, I mean, I can't help but just think of it as a just widescale humiliation ritual. You know, real function is to threaten the economic crisis. And she starts with, you know, the juxtaposition between Warren and Trump and Donald Trump is right, like first word, their alignment. It just reminds me of the Fed speak. Like we all know there's no debt ceiling. So
- [11:22]
D
yeah, very noisy. This is far from what the original founding fathers wanted for the country. And I think that we'll, they'll just continue to go down this path further and further and probably Faster and faster. And so yeah, complete noise.
- [11:39]
B
The one, the one notable thing with all of this is it just adds to the like notion of how ephemeral the debt is. And it's part of why I don't like talking about it. And like we, we've had a lot of pods and we talk about like the debt, the GDP and like growing and never getting paid and never being paid back. But I feel like anybody that has any semblance of understanding or hearing about the debt or the debt ceiling know it's all just like a fugazi and so they just continue to not worry about it. When in reality there are real liabilities owed and there's real like problems with who's going to pay that debt, how is it going to be managed in the future? So it's just like this thing that you add to it, you add to the noise which just puts more and more people in a state of just like what, what does it matter?
- [12:25]
A
Look, I would say like the tell here though if you, if you read the, if you emphasize this one part of her post, its only real function is to threaten an economic crisis. This is like an omission whether it's intentional or not, that if we don't continue to create more and more debt, this entire credit economy just collapses. Right? And so that is the actual, this, that is the actual crisis is the fact that there needs to be this ever extending debt ceiling because it's all just kind of a fugazi economy and then markets implode and credit, everything, you know, just goes belly up. So that's the most important part to me.
- [13:02]
D
But at the same time the other side is also an economic crisis of continuing to increase the debt ceiling and that housing is so much more expensive than it was any over any time period. Same with food, inflation, etc. So you're damned if you do and damned if you don't.
- [13:20]
A
Right? It's more of an acute crisis. Right. If you don't, if you don't continue to extend the debt versus if you do, then you're just continuing to make people poor. Liam, I liked your point. Then we can pivot onto the next topic was far from the founding fathers. I can't help but imagine Elizabeth Warren has not been on a bender in a very long time. And so if we were going to get back to the ideals of the founding father, we'd have to course correct there in terms of alcohol consumption. So let's move over to the next topic here. Bouchy. Has anyone heard of this guy before, everyone's been talking about him. I actually, you know, remember when they gaslit people. He was sexy.
- [14:00]
B
Do you remember that?
- [14:01]
A
Kind of.
- [14:02]
B
He was like on the View or something. They were like, this guy's like, the coolest thing.
- [14:06]
A
You know, maybe he did put that in the Journal, though. People are calling him. I'm sure. I'm sure there's some stuff in the Journal about that. But, yeah, let's talk about Fauci. Michael, I actually don't even know the full story or what has been covered this week because contrary to your belief, I was. I actually do work, but that's beside the point. We could have a private conversation about that. Brian, why don't you kick things off?
- [14:28]
B
It's not that you don't work. It's what you work on, is it of the highest priorities is the main issue.
- [14:34]
C
All right, let me tee it up. Let me tee it up. So yesterday there was a hearing before the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, chaired by Rand Paul, who had actually subpoenaed Fauci to appear. And so during the hearing, Fauci basically declined to answer anything. He pled the fifth to all of the questions from Paul and other senators. The backdrop of this is that days earlier, Rand Paul had released a thousand pages of Fauci's private diary entries covering December 2019 through 2022, accusing him of covering up Covid's origins. Paul posted the documents over the weekend, pulled them Monday evening, then reposted them on Tuesday with redactions. And basically, there's a lot of admissions in there that. Of what we kind of already knew, that one Fauci contributed to gain of function, research, and in all likelihood, where Covid originated in a lab. And he actively tried to cover that up. He also actively lied about basically, the death rate, or whatever it's called in terms of COVID and it's spreading and killing people. And so, you know, there's a lot here. But the. If you have the tweet pulled up that I shared, like, the signal to me around this is what Hans is saying here, where this sort of event, this hearing, the whole Fauci ordeal is kind of a microcosm of like, a broader information crisis, as he calls it, where people in this country believe totally different realities about certain events, particularly around Covid and this Fauci story, where, you know, people are saying, like, you know, poor Foushee, like, he's getting grilled on Capitol Hill because, you know, he was just trying to do the right thing. Like, people believe totally different things about not only the origins of COVID but, like, the character and integrity of this guy. And it's. It's a scary situation in the sense that, like, I don't know how you come back from this in terms of, like, the massive sort of chasm between what people believe to be real. And he also points here to, like, you know, information sources, right, are at the crux of this where, like, you know, a lot of people aren't on Twitter because they hate Elon, and so they don't actually ingest the same information that other people do. And they watch mainstream news and are fed propaganda for years about this particular story. And so it's a scary situation. And, yeah, the clip he's retweeting is like some TMZ guy being, like, just basically, like, feeling bad for Fauci after this hearing.
- [17:01]
B
Yeah, it's a good recap. You said the key thing there about ingest or ingesting. Just like your, you know, natural food diet is important, the information diet is just as important. I remember over 10 years ago, before having any children, always thinking, knowing school, knowing status or place in the world, realizing the only thing that would matter from a kid's perspective was, and this is true for everyone, but specifically kids, is, like, how to find information and then ultimately how to discern it was true. And this was pre AI. This is just like on Google, because the amount of craziness already there, this is part of the show and part of all the things we're talking about is just the notion of the barriers of information and distribution have broken down. But the legacy constructs of cnn, Fox are the easiest, like, you know, to contrast against that most people still, or at least over a certain age, get that information. And there's just fissures in different parts of the world, and specifically the United States, when it comes to even Fauci, where he sits. And all these things aren't even. Even if you saw them or heard them, you wouldn't believe them. And then there's others that have always understood that. And I think it breaks down into, like, why this show is important, why we do it, but also ultimately, just thinking about capital and how you manage money, all these things we talk about Fed gaslighting and the inflation rate and debt ceiling. Like, this is a legacy world propagating, you know, nonsense. And there's incentives at play. And in this future world, it's all going to be, including today, not just the future, how you find information and then ultimately, how do you triangulate on what's the truth and what's not.
- [18:38]
D
I think that's well said. I think that going back to how people have really are in the separate bubbles, I think that's only going to really accelerate with the, you know, further dispersion of AI. Obviously there will be some people who go solely to frontier models and there are a handful of them. And ultimately it's tough to see a world in which there isn't at least some sort of narrative coming from the government at some point in time to push X, Y or Z thing. It may not be something like Covid in the future, but I think that is a very real possibility. And so I do think it's very important to, you know, make sure that people have their own open models and can train and use data as they prefer. I do think that the other point is just this is a little bit of noise because it's like they're not going to do anything about it. There's ultimately no real plan to change how, you know, the health care system works. Any sort of funding and there's going to be no responsibility that's happens from this, which is unfortunately just how we kind of see our government continuing to operate.
- [19:56]
A
Yeah, I would say this is a huge amount of noise because this could have been another story with like some hearing for someone else. That on the, you know, on the other side of the information diet doesn't really like, I feel like all the hype around this or all the discussion around this was just people saying, oh, Fauci got owned, he just fled the fifth for however, like 100 times or how many times it was. It's like, yeah, I mean, this is just a testament to how broken things are. Whether it's politics, it's money, it's information, it's only going to get worse. But it is just incredible how divergent those narratives and those bubbles are. I actually remember in early 2020 myself, before kind of going down a number of different rabbit holes, actually seeing Fauci for the first time, I was like, oh, this guy seems well intentioned. Right? Like for me, very, very early on, like Feb, maybe February or March. And then it took maybe another month or so for me to start digging in and be like, okay, well, this seems a little bit strange, but you can imagine that most people never really spend any time to go beyond that. And so you have this now worldview where like one side vehemently hates this guy and anything negative press about it, everyone jumps on it. And then there's another side of People who think that this guy like saved, saved us from something much worse.
- [21:10]
B
There's an important, really important part here of tying it back to the money and it's specifically the understanding of money. Because Doc to myself, like pre bitcoin, this was 15, 16, 17, working at Google, you start to go down the sentiment that believes around beyond me. What is it? Beyond meat. Which is the fake meat. Yeah, beyond meat and like Teslas and all this stuff. And then once you go back and understand what money is from first principles and proof of work and how it doesn't grow on trees and you go down the. Whether it was like you can be gold mining, you have to come to the rational consequences of how these things from first principles derive. And then everything starts to become a lot clearer and then you can remove a lot of the biases. And I can't help but think about the treasury company stuff because there was no shortage of people that listened to the pod and they got annoyed by one thing. So it's like all the signal is there, but then the DAT stuff was where the noise came and bias is inherent to it. But you can actually fix that bias if you actually recognize from first principles what is money, how does it derive? Because then everything else starts to go from it. And so I think a lot of people just benefit to understanding deeply. There's different angles of understanding, you know, money, but I think this is another component that just helps remove some of the natural bias to like want to put your head in the sand with these things.
- [22:24]
A
Yeah, for sure. All right, let's get over to the next topic here. All right, so what do we have here?
- [22:31]
B
I actually like on an airplane, I don't know if people are going to hear it.
- [22:35]
A
Oh no. Are you hearing that? Is it, is it being picked up? All right, who wants to te this one off?
- [22:41]
B
Liam, probably. Or Liam, you got this?
- [22:44]
D
Sure. Nick, can you scroll up just a little bit? It looks like.
- [22:47]
B
Nick.
- [22:50]
D
Yeah, it. The tweet that's pulled up on the screen is just today. I've already seen whisper flow, granola and whoop all reverse engineered and open sourced with a fully free version. Very interesting to see what's happening. The question is if normies will pick up on this. I think they will. And how companies will react and pivot to still make money. So I'm happy to go first on this. I think that there directionally is a lot of signal here, but it's very early. I think that everybody on this call and probably a lot of people listening have tried to Create some of their own tools which have probably taken a little bit more time than they would have anticipated either. Probably not so just to create but to maintain over time. And there is a lot of value of just buying something out of the box, especially if it's a small amount just to save your peace of mind and especially just given the opportunity cost that you can have. Where I think that this really changes is a lot. You can see where things are today, but in a future state there's going to be just the ability for agents to maintain improve open source over time. And whenever you need a tool they can just go on GitHub or any sort of search platform and search by number of stars or whatever and download it themselves. The the tough part is really discoverability with all of this as well as maintaining the tools.
- [24:13]
B
Yeah, I think this is a lot of signal. I think software is absolutely cooked and I think it's a barbell. I think on one side of the barbell will be sophisticated in enterprises that will realize a why am I paying for this non bespoke tool when I can make something that's more tied into my firm and then tie it into other things and pot that data. So you can look at granola as an example, like why wouldn't you have granola tie into your CRM directly versus having to house the data in different places and then you could probably layer in other things and you won't necessarily have it to the advantage for granola or for HubSpot as an example to do it. And then the common rebuttal would be like well another firm won't do it or they won't want to. And then that's where I think as you go down that barbell, you're just going to have in new enterprises come and build those tools, reduce the cost, collapse them, add more value because the game theory is tied to them. Just like adding more value, lower cost and then pulling those enterprises from a discoverability perspective. And I just think like legacy firms are going to be completely like whacked. And I think we probably don't even see it yet in the public equities. Even though we've seen some hits with some of the sas like the figmas of the world.
- [25:23]
C
Yeah, that's well said. I think we've seen little glimpses of it in sort of the software equity space over the past call it 12 to 24 months. But I would agree that it's still early in this, in this progression. But I do think there's a lot of signal in here in the sense that I think people, both individuals, enterprises and like market participants are coming to grips with, you know, the nature of open source technologies as a whole, how they compound on each other, how they can interoperate and, and with the advent of agents, how it really opens the door to this sort of Cambrian explosion of efficiencies and the natural sort of second order impact of this and signal for more of a bitcoin audience is like if open source is having this moment and becomes known as something that is advantaged for various reasons, it stems from that, that like open source, decentralized money would also have value. So I think there's a, a thread to pull on there. But overall I would say this is a huge signal both in terms of traditional markets, but also sort of the open source technology front as a whole.
- [26:34]
A
I think this is signal. I do think it's a very early signal though, right, because in this post here it says the question is if normies will pick up on this. I mean that is a big question. And I think we tend to forget if we're on this feed, whether it's AI, bitcoin, just anything on the frontier, you could say, like health, business, business building, entrepreneurship, etc. We tend to see a pretty significant lag in terms of any uptake of some of these ideas or themes or products, businesses that are being built for the general public. So I think it is signal, but I do think it may take some time to play out. But the counter to that would be that things move very quickly these days. I think this is a microcosm of a much bigger story, which Michael, I think you kind of alluded to. But you know, this is not only a software story, it is an AI story as well. And the thing I keep coming back to at this point is just, well, you have these, you have AI, which is threatening software companies. Because Liam, to your point, we've built stuff internally, we maintain it. I mean there's pros and cons to it. But I'd say on the margins there's going to end up being more pros in terms of reducing costs, owning the data, making it bespoke, adding new product features, whatever ends up making us better and more efficient at building the business. And then the bigger picture here as well as, well, it's not only about software and AI, it's also about AI and AI because then all these companies and nation states are competing at the, at the largest level and then it just becomes a competition of who can undercut costs the most who can produce the quickest, where is the most value going to accrue? And so I think it's going to put a pressure on a ton of things, you know, in the technology space. I don't know if that ends up meaning, like we have a more decentralized future where there are all these types of tools, open source is proliferating, or if things end up more centralized. And I think it really depends on the consumer. And at the end of the day, the normies, because that's the largest end market.
- [28:25]
B
Yeah, maybe I'll respond to that. And then unless you guys have something to pivot to the rapid fire, because it ties into it. Does that work?
- [28:34]
D
Yeah.
- [28:35]
B
One is, I think we'll naturally have. It'll be on a spectrum more decentralized, but there'll still be centralization. We talked about a fractal. You just end up with more dispersion of all these things in sovereignty. But the thing that I can't help but keep coming back to and it ties into what we've talked about before. And like when bitcoin was really going to take off and go into the hundreds, if not millions of dollars, the whole world would look fundamentally different. And you can really feel how that's going to happen because whether it's. We see this, just yesterday somebody was telling me about the fraud charges they had on their car. They don't know how they did it. We see fraud coming in to buy bitcoin. We see the, the way we can't use our phones, talk about the Internet and the amount of slop. Like, I think people really have to get comfortable being uncomfortable and realizing that the world that used to exist doesn't exist. But let's just go a little bit more tangible. The Internet, that the first order of it is not how it's going to persist in the future. And a lot of these technologies, including how software services like Salesforce aggregated and what they look like all the way to how money is ultimately going to be used and then the security profiles on it. And so the, the, the tangible piece to look at, it's kind of innocent. But Greg Eisenberg, I think, oh, I got to go. But Jackson had shared with me, I think he's a good version of if you just want your mind to start to get calibrated or lubricated to start thinking about things outside the box, that's a good podcast to, to go and just follow into any of the pods because you just start to think about this new world and it's still early, but it's the worst it's ever going to be today, which is scary because it's the worst today and it's only going to get stronger, it's only going to get faster and all these things are only going to accelerate.
- [30:20]
A
Yeah, sounds good. Lightning round. What do we.
- [30:24]
B
That was my lighting round. That was my lighting round.
- [30:26]
A
That was okay, that was it. All right. Thank you. Thank you for that. Brian. What do you got?
- [30:32]
C
I'm gonna do a shameless plug for my lightning round signal. If you are unfamiliar with the onramp terminal, check it out. A ton of signal on there. Hundreds if not thousands of data sets. Charts started as really a bitcoin focused data terminal, but it is in the midst of expanding outside of just bitcoin. There's a lot of macro data in there around traditional markets as well. And the real value here is that you can get full access to this by creating an on ramp account free tier. You get access to the on ramp terminal and you can have fully downloadable data. This is basically value of a data terminal that you know would otherwise cost you a pretty hefty monthly subscription. You can get it all for free included within on ramp finance tier account. There's also API access there so you can plug it into your favorite model and start creating charts for yourself there as well.
- [31:29]
B
Is this signal or noise? Real quick, before we go next.
- [31:32]
C
Massive signal.
- [31:34]
B
You see this?
- [31:34]
C
Oh, wait. Oh, I don't. I don't see what you have up.
- [31:37]
A
What do you have?
- [31:40]
B
Secretary Bessant says Senate now needs to vote on this landmark legislation. I believe Satoshi once said it best. If you don't believe me or don't get it, I don't have time. Time to try to convince you. I still think it gets done just for, just for record, how many.
- [31:53]
C
What like seven days
- [31:56]
B
recess, maybe seven hours, seven minutes. It gets done.
- [32:01]
D
I'll go next. I will say the signal of the week that I saw was on the David center podcast. The guy from 37 Signals, he. I liked listening to him. He does things very differently about how he builds his business. The way that he approaches life of, you know, being able to have fun while still going into and working very hard. And then the not need to or the need not to tinker and improve things that are working all the time. You know, there's I think a lot of need out there, especially with AI where there is the ability to throw things at the wall and create a lot more complexity. But there's a lot of beauty and minimalism too. So I'd check that out.
- [32:47]
A
All right, cool. My mind is real quick, maybe unorthodox, I don't know. But I want to give a shout out to Matt Ball on our team. He. He released something cool. Speaking of open source software, Abendrot, the free open source Mac app for your circadian rhythm. Check it out. I. I think we don't want to delegate your health to the state. You don't want to Trust people like Dr. Fouch. You got to take control. You have to have sovereignty over your body and your mind. This is something I'm going to check out. Maybe later today. Your light environment is very important. Michael and Brian like to make fun of me because I go to bed earlier. There's a reason why I do it. Wake up earlier, there's a science, Gentlemen. And so that's my signal of the week. Check out Matt Ball.
- [33:26]
C
Trust the science.
- [33:28]
A
Latest app here.
- [33:28]
B
The problem, it doesn't reflect productivity or efficiency. So that's why we make fun of it. Not because you go to bed early.
- [33:34]
C
As a great man, trust the science.
- [33:39]
A
There's a lot of time during that.
- [33:40]
C
How dare you question the science?
- [33:43]
A
All right, thanks, gentlemen. We'll be back next week. Thank you all for tuning in.
- [33:46]
D
Have fun.
- [33:47]
B
Liam, come back safe and sound.
- [33:49]
C
See you guys.