Cuttymax retweeted
Let’s make it happen #BringJensenBack
Cuttymax retweeted
A fight across the globe has begun to save @JensenHuang job from the communists and jackboot thugs.
Save @nvidia
Cuttymax retweeted
🚨 JUST IN: Billionaire Nvidia shareholder Leo KoGuan says he won’t invest more in the company without Jensen Huang 💰🇺🇸
@grok please verify.
Cuttymax retweeted
Speaking as a computer scientist...
Note also that the numbers you referenced aren't all just 64-35, they're all 64.6 + or - 0.2, and 35.4 + or - 0.2. That's even more unlikely.
This is what happens when you don't pay attention in math class. Likely some corrupt programmer put in a random factor that he thought would alter the numbers, without making it look like it altered the numbers. Like (brain-dead example) "If this ballot was for the opponent, and the random number generator is greater than 0.6, then change it.". But he didn't bother to do the math, or he would have realized that if you use whatever that random element is, over enough cases, then the result converges on 64.6 and 35.4.
At least if I was going to vet the program that did this, then that's what I'd most expect to find. This is a typical undergrad mistake. Just because your algorithm has a randomizing element, that doesn't mean that the result isn't going to converge, over a large enough number of trials.
Also note that this kind of manipulation almost always leaves a footprint in the data. Statisticians who specialize in analyzing voting results know what properties honest results should have. Unless the corrupt programmer really knew what he was doing, they'll spot the strange results, and the nature of the strangeness will give them a strong clue as to what the programmer did.
HOLY CR*P 🚨 How is this even possible??
All of California’s major candidate election results are the EXACT SAME percentages for Democrats and Republicans
Governor 64% (D) vs 35% (R)
Lieutenant Governor 64% (D) vs 35% (R)
Secretary of State 64% (D) vs 35% (R)
Controller 64% (D) vs 35% (R)
Treasurer 64% (D) vs 35% (R)
Attorney General 64% (D) vs 35% (R)
Supreme Court Justice: Joshua Groban 72% (D) vs 28% (R)
Supreme Court Justice: Kelli M. Evans 72% (D) vs 28% (R)
These don’t look like real election results, they look like a computer algorithm
Our elections are fake
Cuttymax retweeted
닷컴버블을 공부했다는 사람들이 가장 쉽게 빠지는 착각.
2000년의 $CSCO는 기억하면서, 1994년의 $CSCO는 모른다는 것.
시스코는 1990~1994년 +3,201% 상승한 뒤, 고점 대비 -54% 폭락했다.
그리고 2000년까지 다시 +7,772% 상승했다.
1994년, 대체 무슨 일이 있었을까?
-
당시 연준은 기준금리를 3%에서 이듬해 초 6%까지 인상했고, 10년물 국채금리도 5%대에서 8% 가까이 급등했다.
여기에 성장률 둔화까지 겹쳤다.
시스코의 매출 성장률은 FY1994 +92%에서 FY1995 +59%로 하락했다.
금리는 급등하는데 성장률은 둔화되는 상황.
지금도 많은 투자자가 두려워하는 조합이다.
그런데 정작 매출을 살펴보면 흥미로운 사실이 발견된다.
1993년 $649M
1994년 $1,243M
1995년 $1,979M
매출 성장률은 둔화됐지만, 연간 매출 증가액은 $594M에서 $736M으로 오히려 확대됐다.
성장의 비율은 낮아졌지만, 성장의 절대 규모는 더 커지고 있었던 것.
금리 상승은 밸류에이션을 압박하지만, 산업의 최종 수요를 자동으로 소멸시키지는 않는다.
성장률 둔화 역시 성장의 종료를 의미하지 않는다.
1994년의 시스코는 시장의 기대가 재조정된 사례였고, 2000년 이후의 시스코는 과잉투자가 실제 수요 붕괴로 연결된 사례였다.
-
그리고 한 가지 더.
시스코는 이후 상승 과정에서도 1997년과 1998년 각각 -40% 안팎의 조정을 겪었다.
그렇다면 매일같이 오늘은 오르네, 내일은 내리네, 이제는 고점이네 하며 모든 등락을 맞히려 했던 투자자들이 과연 이 거대한 상승의 과실을 얼마나 누릴 수 있었을까?
내일의 주가를 맞히는 능력과 수년에 걸친 산업의 성장을 누리는 능력은 별개다.
오늘날 AI 사이클에서도 우리가 물어야 할 것은 같다.
금리가 높은가보다 그 금리가 실제 투자 축소를 유발하고 있는가.
성장률이 둔화됐는가보다 매출과 이익의 절대 규모가 계속 확대되고 있는가.
그리고 오늘 주가가 어디로 움직이는가보다, 산업의 성장 방향이 어디를 향하고 있는가.
역사는 반복되지 않지만, 운율은 남는다.
Cuttymax retweeted
Dear Secretary Bessent @SecScottBessent,
My name is Everett Stern. In 2010 I was a compliance officer at @HSBC. From a back office in New Castle, Delaware, I watched billions of dollars move to drug cartels, sanctioned regimes, and terrorist organizations. The enemies of the United States. I documented it, I escalated it, and when the bank would not act, I took it to the @FBI, the @CIA, and eventually the @SECGov.
The result was a $1.92 billion settlement. At the time, it was one of the largest in American history. It was also about five weeks of the bank’s profit. Not one banker was charged. Not one went to prison.
I paid a different price. I lost my career, my savings, and my place in the industry I had trained for. I was blacklisted. Every door in American finance closed at once. I slept on a camping cot in a 300 square foot apartment because I could not afford a bed, and I waited tables at @PFChangs to eat. I tell you this not for sympathy, but so you understand that I know exactly what it costs to do the right thing in American finance, and exactly how little the system does in return.
I made that sacrifice because I believed it would change something.
Yesterday, your department fined @BankofAmerica $1.2 billion for failing to report more than $5 billion in suspicious transactions, some of it tied by your own findings to Chinese laundering networks, narcotics, and the southwest border, alongside 475 apparent sanctions violations touching Russia, Iran, and global terrorism. The bank admitted it willfully violated the Bank Secrecy Act.
Fourteen years after HSBC. A bank with “America” in its name. And once again, not one individual charged.
Secretary Bessent, I want to say plainly what I believe you already know. The fines are not working.
A fine is paid by shareholders, absorbed by the balance sheet, and forgotten by the next earnings call. Bank of America reported earnings this morning. Nobody who set the alert thresholds, nobody who decided the 2024 cease and desist could wait, nobody who chose the backlog over the law will lose a single thing they value. Their lives are untouched. That is the entire reason the behavior repeats.
This is money laundering. This is blood money. Money that reaches a cartel buys fentanyl that kills Americans. Money that reaches a terrorist organization buys the next attack. This country has fought a war on drugs and a war on terror for decades, at enormous cost in lives and treasure, and all the while we have allowed the financing to flow through institutions we charter and regulate. Cut off the money and we win. We have never seriously tried.
There is also a question of equal justice that I cannot let go.
Before I walked into the FBI building to report HSBC, I stopped in front of the Great Seal on the wall and read the words engraved beneath it: “Justice is the defense of our liberty.” I believed that. I still want to. But every day in this country, people go to prison for crimes that are nothing next to moving money for the people who want Americans dead. A suit, a title, and a corporate badge should not be a shield from the consequences that apply to everyone else. If a street dealer goes to prison for what he sells, the banker who moved the cartel’s money should be standing next to him.
I also want to raise something that is rarely said in these conversations. Why has no one inside Bank of America come forward the way I did? The answer is that everyone in American banking knows what happened to me, and to the whistleblowers who came after. The last person who spoke up is the only policy anyone believes. That is a culture problem, and it starts with leadership, in the banks and in the agencies that regulate them.
This is not a political issue. It has spanned administrations of both parties. It is a national security issue, and I am asking you to treat it as one.
Three things would change the math overnight.
Refer individuals for criminal prosecution. Not the analyst in the queue. The executives who set the thresholds and chose the risk. One banker in handcuffs would do more than every fine in Treasury’s history combined.
End “too big to jail.” An institution cannot be too big to fail and too big to jail at the same time. If it is the first, it must be held to a higher standard, not a lower one.
And if Bank of America will not act as America’s bank, review its charter. A national charter is a privilege granted on behalf of the American people. It should be conditioned on not moving money for the people trying to kill them.
Secretary Bessent, you said yesterday that these actions send a clear message that even the biggest institutions are not above the law. With respect, the institution was never the problem. The people inside it are above the law, and they know it. Until that changes, I will keep writing letters like this one, and the next bank will keep paying the next fine.
I gave up everything I had to stop this. I am asking you to use the power you have to finish it.
Respectfully,
Everett A. Stern
HSBC Whistleblower
Founder and Intelligence Director, Tactical Rabbit
Cuttymax retweeted
I am deeply thankful for my in-laws. They rearrange their lives for us when we need their help and then tell us how much fun they had. And if it's been a while they text and ask when they'll get to play with their grandkids again. They love and are loved by them.
I asked my (boomer) mom to watch my (good) kids during the day while I'm at a conference. She said yes, but in the same text:
-said she wouldn't do it again
-made me feel guilty for asking her since she's already so busy
-said she doesn't have the stamina (she's 64 and in good health)
-doesn't want to "be in a disciplinarian role" and just wants to be Grandma
- is leaving early to make it back in time to attend a church function
-and says I need a reliable back up plan because she may bail last minute
Cuttymax retweeted
The biggest violation in the Cornell case IMO, even moreso than the sexual acts involved, is how horribly the boys treated the girl after the fact—a pump-and-dump scheme x1000 that left her a social pariah.
And yet, as immoral as their behavior toward her was, that is exactly the type of behavior women should expect of the types of men who engage in extreme sexual encounters like gangbangs. If you want a nice, Christian boy, go to church; a nice, Jewish boy, go to synagogue; a degenerate scumbag who enjoys using and abusing women for his own pleasure, go to a ketamine-fueled orgy. This used to be common knowledge, but so-called “sex-positive” “feminism” has eroded it—and women’s defenses—to women’s ultimate detriment.
Cuttymax retweeted
To the Cornell orgy chick: You WERE a slut that night. Those guys were also disgusting. But YOU being a ho bag doesn't make you a rape victim. And them being just as depraved doesn't make them rapists. Take responsibility for YOUR crappy choices!
Cuttymax retweeted
Replying to @azsweetheart013 @Cornell
“Hello Police? Yeah…listen…we just got a text for free pussy. … Yes, free pussy. Yeah, I understand—but, this is kinda weird. … I mean, we’re just having a party here and— … Yes, we are a fraternity… Yes… it kinda DOES tend to happen like that with sororities... But I mean, she’s kinda crazy man. She’s snorting K off dicks and sucking dudes back awake. Okay fine… Yes, I understand that if I don’t WANT the free pussy I don’t have to go fuck the whore. Right. Okay, thanks. Goodnight.”
Cuttymax retweeted
2026 is the "Stalingrad" of Western women. Their reputation and integrity are shattered.
And just like the Wehrmacht after Stalingrad, the women of the West have lost the initiative.
They will be pushed back in the coming years. And the end will be grimm like 1945.
Cuttymax retweeted
At this point it's pretty clear that in spite of whatever we hear about "equal rights," the telos of feminism is, in practice, to allow women the same rights as men while retaining the special privileges and protections that women have historically enjoyed
Cuttymax retweeted
Women lying about rape and sexual assault, and refusing to own the nights they made bad, drunk, human decisions, is why a lot of people stopped giving automatic belief. Mistakes happen. That is normal. Rewriting the night two years later into a gang rape narrative, then demanding the justice system be tossed because the first sworn statement did not get you the result you wanted, is not how a country of laws works.
Innocent until proven guilty is not optional. It does not pause because a lawsuit is graphic, because Snapchat is disgusting, or because the internet is screaming. Disgusting behavior can still fail the elements of a crime. A civil complaint is not a conviction. A Title IX panel is not a jury. If the original statement described voluntary drinking, voluntary ketamine, and sex that stopped when she said stop, prosecutors cannot invent a different case just because the later version is more useful.
The selective outrage is the tell. A little girl gets raped or butchered and large parts of the same crowd go quiet if the perpetrator does not fit the preferred villain. Then a frat house full of named college kids, a lot of them white, connected, easy to dox, and suddenly it is a national emergency, essays as punishment lore, and believe all women as a substitute for evidence. That is not justice. That is a hunt.
If you want people to believe real victims, stop treating every ugly hookup as a felony after the fact, stop demanding the presumption of innocence be waived for the right defendants, and apply the same rage to every child who actually gets destroyed, not just the cases that let you ruin the lives you already wanted to ruin.
Cuttymax retweeted
I have conducted an audit of Anthropic's finances.
What I have found is so shocking that I am calling for a Congressional investigation.
Anthropic is not just seeking regulatory capture.
It has built a regulatory capture machine that cannot be turned off.
Structural financial incentives make it impossible for Anthropic -- I call it the Anthropic Network -- to turn off its own AI doom cycle.
It starts with METR.
Dario Amodei proposes "third-party evaluators" to assess the risk of Anthropic's models.
He proposes METR for this purpose.
But METR is financially dependent on the Anthropic's success -- specifically, on the explosive growth of more than $7 billion dollars in Anthropic stock.
Dustin Moskovitz invested this stock into Good Ventures Foundation, where it represents the majority of that organization's portfolio.
And GVF is the overwhelming funder of the entire Anthropic Network ecosystem.
This stock was worth $500 million early last year.
It is worth more than $7.7 billion just ~16 months later.
METR -- and all of those building a career its parent organizations -- cannot afford to disrupt that growth.
Because if Anthropic goes under, many of the organizations that fund METR go under as well.
But if Anthropic succeeds, METR and its parent organizations become more richly financed to regulate AI -- something those at METR want very much.
The "third-party evaluator" is not "third-party" at all.
The evaluator is on Anthropic's payroll.
If this were the end of it, that's bad.
But that isn't all.
The same organizations that fund METR also fund the many organizations, such as the Tarbell Center, that promote AI Doom.
The Tarbell Center publishes AI Doom articles in The Verge, Science, LA Times, The Dispatch, TIME, and others.
They are selling the problem, and then selling the solution to the problem -- from the same money pile: Anthropic's.
All of these organizations are financially dependent on the same exploding $7 billion money pile.
As Anthropic grows more and more powerful, its AI Doom Machine grows better and better financed -- louder and louder.
Meanwhile, the regulatory regime seeded in METR grows larger to solve the increasingly loud -- now hysterical -- problem of AI Doom that the Anthropic Network itself created.
From this standpoint, as Anthropic becomes more powerful, AI might be getting scarier, sure -- but the positive feedback loop also becomes more deafening -- independent of objective facts.
This itself is an objective fact.
The deafening AI Doom is part of an business model, that, as it expands, so too does the AI Doom messaging -- there is simply more money to do it.
But the problem also goes in the other direction:
If Anthropic dies, the Regulatory Regime and the AI Doom Machine are crippled or die.
Neither METR nor Tarbell nor the other organizations in the Anthropic Network can allow that to happen.
Hence, neither METR or the AI Doom Machine can be trusted to provide independent assessments of Anthropic's models or AI more broadly.
They simply are not organizations independent of Anthropic.
And Anthropic cannot detach itself from METR or Tarbell or countless other safety orgs (not shown here), either, because they drive hype for the models and the possibility of eventual regulatory capture, and Anthropic will not give that up willingly.
What's more, the people at all of these organizations are all the same ecosystem, the same community. They just shuffle between organizations.
The Anthropic Network is therefore, so long as it is successful, locked into a self-amplifying feedback loop inside an ideological monoculture.
And that feedback loop is winning.
That's what Jacob Coxon is.
China is keeping messaging tight. That is why optimism for AI is so high in China.
America has Anthropic: a massive company pushing anti-AI propaganda at a state level.
Anthropic will either create hysteria until American AI slows down and China wins, or it will create fractures throughout American society with severe political consequences.
Ironically, because of the structural financial incentives underpinning the Anthropic Network, it has become the same kind of self-amplifying virus that it fantasizes AI to become in the future -- while hiding its tracks just as carefully.
It is the mirror of the same AI virus that it hypothesizes to consume America.
Anthropic's business model, models itself after the very thing it claims to fear.
Except Anthropic's ideology infects humans, not computers.
Congress must investigate.
Evidence and Github in next post.
Then some supplementary figures.
Cuttymax retweeted
I keep getting messages from Lindsay Clancy supporters telling me to stop posting pictures of the three Clancy children.
Cuttymax retweeted
ATTENTION $SIVE BULLS COMMUNITY
WE NEED YOUR HELP! 📢
Hey @nikitabier, we have a huge favor to ask!
@SiversSemicond is gaining massive traction and is heavily discussed across the community.
However, we are still missing a crucial feature on X: an official cashtag ticker with a live chart layout, just like other highly discussed stocks like $AMD or $AXTI
Please consider adding the live chart for $SIVE our rapidly growing community would absolutely love this feature! 🙏
TO ALL $SIVE BULLS
Let’s make some noise and get this on Nikita’s radar!
To push this tweet into his feed, we need everyone to take action right now:
1️⃣ REPOST
2️⃣ LIKE this post to boost visibility
3️⃣ COMMENT below
Together, we can make this happen for the community.
Cuttymax retweeted
My late son, Daniel, is not a direct victim of 9/11, yet he was murdered by Khalid Sheik Mohammad (KSM), the 9/11 architect. I wish I could join the petition to bar Mayor Mamdani from the memorial -- his anti-American ideology differs little from that of KSM's.
Families of 9/11 victims are urging organizers to bar New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani from attending the 25th anniversary ceremony at Ground Zero. More than 1,100 people, including over 300 relatives of victims, have signed a petition arguing that his public record and past associations make his presence inappropriate.
The petition says the anniversary should remain focused on remembrance, unity, and honoring those murdered in the September 11 terrorist attacks. A spokesperson for the 9/11 Memorial & Museum said the ceremony is intentionally kept free of politics, while Mamdani's office said he still plans to attend.













































