Rhei retweeted
Sea-levels have risen by nearly 400 feet over the past 20,000 years.
For most of the Holocene, sea levels were rising at higher rates 5-10× greater than they are today.
But the climate nancies would have you believe the last 8–12 inches are your GMC Yukon's fault.
Rhei retweeted
True. Without @nathancofnas, the fraudster Jason Arday would still have his plush Professorial Chair at @Cambridge_Uni and continue to mismanage students and disgrace his field, and everyone would still be fawning over him.
The academic mob who has doggedly tried to exclude and cancel Cofnas wherever he goes has inadvertently demonstrated exactly why academia desperately needs heterodox gadflies like him.
Multiple academics had their suspicions about Arday, but virtually none of them dared to voice them openly, for fear of being smeared as racist or being stalked by litigation firms. And the rest were just too ideologically blinkered (or stupid) to notice anything.
Amazingly, legacy media are not only extremely reluctant to acknowledge Cofnas’s role in exposing this scandal, but some of them (@nytimes) are even harsher on the whistleblower than they are on the fraudster himself.
This is absurd. Yes, Cofnas has controversial views, but he is prepared to defend with arguments and research, and in perfectly lucid prose. He’s not a fraud or a plagiarist, and I have yet to catch him lying about anything.
Great piece by @AndrewHammel1 in @Quillette.
Rhei retweeted
Bitcoin maximalism is over. Bitcoin "culture" is over. Bitcoin influencers are over. Every popular hardcore Bitcoin figure has disgraced themself in some way.
Bitcoin will remain, beneficially stripped of the cult around it.
Rhei retweeted
Grit is the currency God accepts when you have nothing else to offer. the man who refuses to quit will be granted wisdom the talented never earn
Rhei retweeted
The easiest beliefs to sell are the ones that convert personal failure into moral superiority. Tell unsuccessful people that success is corruption, tell undisciplined people that standards are oppression, or tell frightened people that courage is recklessness, and they will defend the doctrine because it transforms their limitations into virtues
Rhei retweeted
People don't grasp the sheer speed and scale of Europe's decline.
This 👇 is an extraordinary number shared by Luis Vassy, director of Sciences Po (one of France's most famous schools) in this article: legrandcontinent.eu/fr/2026/…
He calculated that the EU is declining 3 times faster than the Qing dynasty at the height of China's century of humiliation.
Back then, it took China 50 years to drop from 30% of world GDP to 17%, whereas it took the EU just 17 years (from 2008 to 2025).
Insane 😢 And, sadly, given the current direction and the EU's systematically suicidal policy choices (latest example: nitter.cf/RnaudBertrand/status/2…), it's just the beginning...
It always astonishes me how there is virtually ZERO public debate - or even public awareness - in Europe about the decisions that will most shape ordinary people's lives.
These days, the EU is drafting a new anti-China legal framework where - quite literally - the more affordable and competitive Chinese products are, the more illegal they'd become.
You'd think EU citizens would want to be informed about such things - as it couldn't be more consequential for their prosperity.
Yet I bet virtually no EU citizen is even aware of it, beyond a vague sense that there is some sort of trade dispute going on.
So what's going on exactly? It all centers around a new legal instrument the EU is drafting called the "overcapacity instrument" (euobserver.com/218003/china-…).
First of all, the very notion of "overcapacity" is pretty ridiculous to begin with, especially the way it's being defined by the EU, as it basically means being competitive enough to export.
By this definition of "overcapacity," pretty much every European industry that's ever run a trade surplus - German cars, French wine, Italian fashion - has been guilty of "overcapacity."
I'm not even exaggerating: if you read this study by the EU Parliament on "Industrial overcapacities, with a focus on China" (europarl.europa.eu/RegData/e…), they define "overcapacity" as building more capacity than your domestic market can absorb. So the moment you build capacity to export abroad, you're in "overcapacity."
Utterly ridiculous.
And what this "overcapacity instrument" is about is creating a permanent legal mechanism for the EU to block Chinese competition across whole sectors of the economy, if they happen to be in "overcapacity."
In effect, this means that if China is competitive globally in a given sector in such a way that it exports a lot, that's proof of overcapacity, and legally it'd mean that the entire sector can be restricted from the EU market.
Which means it really, factually, is a legal framework where the more affordable and competitive your products are, the more illegal they become.
Which is a CRAZY economic concept! 🤦♂️
Please note that it's different from the anti-subsidy legal instrument, which the EU has already put in place in 2023 (the "Foreign Subsidies Regulation": competition-policy.ec.europa…).
This "overcapacity instrument" would be above and beyond this: it wouldn't even matter if a particular sector was subsidized by the Chinese government or not, the mere fact of its competitiveness in exports would be grounds for restrictions in the EU.
It doesn't take a genius to understand how badly this could impact everyday people: this is European consumers being forced to pay more for worse products by law, so that uncompetitive European firms don't have to improve.
Politicians frame it as avoiding a "China shock 2.0" but really this is choosing an even steeper self-inflicted decline than is already the case, where EU citizens would subsidize mediocre EU companies that would have even less pressure to catch up. It's a hidden tax: subsidies for uncompetitive firms paid by consumers instead of governments, which in turn makes them less incentivized to become competitive.
The first "China shock" did de-industrialize Europe somewhat, but at least it made things cheaper for European consumers. If this becomes Europe's response to a second "China shock" not only it'd make everything more expensive but it'd do nothing for EU industry: you don't become competitive by banning the competition...
Look at China itself: the way it industrialized was NOT by banning Western firms but on the contrary by welcoming them strategically and learning from them. You learn to compete by... competing, duh!
What I find most shocking in all of this isn't even the policy itself - you can make arguments for and against protectionism, and reasonable people can disagree.
What's shocking is that virtually no European media outlet is explaining any of this to the public. This is unarguably one of the single most consequential economic decisions the EU will make this decade, affecting the price of everything, and it's being drafted in near-total silence.
No newspaper is running the headline "EU plans to make Chinese goods illegal if they're too affordable" - even though that's essentially what's happening.
But that's what you call a "democracy" with "freedom of expression" these days apparently...
Rhei retweeted
Stop counting your fuckups. it is self-gratification. you sit at night running the numbers, thinking the math makes you wise. it makes you nothing. it makes you a man with a list. lives do not add, lives turn, five or six times, thats it. one real move erases the record. not forgiven, not healed, erased. ask any man who finally did the thing he was supposed to do. did the old life follow him? no. it died. it was not even real to begin with. it was rehearsal. every wrong thing you did was practice for the right thing you havent done yet. so do it, or shut up about your regrets. one or the other. there is no third option. there is no working on yourself. there is the move or the lying
This is quite a dogshit take in my opinion and completely neglects what most of trading is: absorbing other people’s unwanted risk in exchange for expected return.
Somebody, somewhere, owns capital with real consequences attached. They pay a premium to offload that risk onto whoever is willing to hold it through the pain.
That “whoever” is irreducibly a principal with their own goals, time horizon, and loss tolerance, etc. and an AI optimizing toward a stated objective is just a tool wielded by that principal.
Risk tolerance is exactly the part that can’t be outsourced, because it’s the part where the consequences land on you.
Not surprising to hear this take coming from a guy who called 20% APY on UST “basically risk-free.”
What's the point of a trader when AGI can do it better?
Raoul Pal: "For the first time in all of history, we will not be the super being on the planet. Somebody will be much smarter than us. It'll be the AI."
Trading as we know it probably doesn't survive.
The jobs, the edge, the whole mental framework - none of it maps onto a world where something smarter than all of us does the same thing faster.
His answer? Make enough money NOW so you don't need to care.
FT @wordsofrizdom @RaoulGMI
Rhei retweeted
My opinion, maybe unpopular, is
I don’t think the human arm was meant to withstand hitting a tennis ball repeatedly at 100 mph
$BTC holding the 1h LTF trend to a T while alts are fighting to reclaim it. Can't be bearish here with the king leading the way. Hope alts catch up
$TAO looks interesting here
If it reclaims the 1h trend, it would signal the 12h range reclaim is complete and ready to target range highs
$GOLD losing the 30 min LTF trend and bearish retesting the 4H trend.
In larger context I still believe gold is ranging so I'm just targeting range lows
$HYPE Taking a larger part off here after losing LTF trend. 4h ema is still at the same level so it does not make sense to let it ride back to entry.






























