Chris Liss

Friend of mine who is IMO the best documentary-style podcaster on politics around did a deep dive into the Epstein Files. I found it persuasive, answered a lot of questions, surprised me:
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-arch-independent/id1111893533?i=1000766824301

2026-05-19 18:04:22 UTC

- reply

"Vote harder" is cope for being ineffective. If NGU happens the way most people think it'll happen, hodlers will have a LOT of say in how things go.

2026-05-19 17:37:36 UTC

- reply

Agree with this -- puritans of every sort are losers attached to their own purity and ideology. Of course, knee-benders are also losers, those who compromise their ideals entirely are lost.
Have to thread the needle, and HODL's offering a framework: Don't be a virtue-signaling, ineffective purist, instead use the influence you actually have to effect more favorable outcomes.
#nevent1q…ldzj

2026-05-19 10:01:34 UTC

If you want to safeguard a system from AI, exploit its midwit tendency to assume and overrfit, endlessly theorize and speculate in circles. Feel like you could design a trap for it that a human wouldn't fall for. Much harder to design something that could fool both.

2026-05-17 13:20:41 UTC

fuckin' Claude crashed my Mac:
https://blossom.primal.net/0f357699954e6b26bd534902ef873ee1d390035bc27b230c8a18b856ff2d5b77.png

2026-05-11 19:10:46 UTC

worst part about vibe-coding with Claude is it'll use an old file, make changes to it, then you upload and replace and don't realize what happened until you're fixing the same bugs you already fixed. Surprised it's that poor at recognizing it.

2026-05-11 09:40:33 UTC

- reply

Motorized wheelchairs for people who used to walk
#nevent1q…ed4m

2026-05-11 09:36:00 UTC

It's chilly and cloudy out, but I'm going to the fucking track even though I don't feel like it because the GOATs go when they don't feel like it, and I'm the GOAT when it comes to running two 10:30 miles.

2026-05-08 09:17:50 UTC

- reply

Real talk!
#nevent1q…l3rx

2026-05-05 06:44:33 UTC

- reply

Not wrong, but MSTR has hybrid preferreds too that strip out some of the upside, but yield less, and the common is even more volatile than the underlying.

2026-05-04 18:53:00 UTC

- reply

such a mystery, what could it possibly be?
#nevent1q…2cfd

2026-04-26 11:13:38 UTC

wife: did you hear about Sara's friends whose dog got into their mushroom chocolates?
me: no, what happened?
wife: dog was acting very weird
me: probably realized it was a dog and freaked

2026-04-24 07:24:42 UTC

excerpt from latest podcast: https://v.nostr.build/sScYfsYJHmm5NpXR.mp4
link to full: https://fountain.fm/episode/ZMzKzZfzdIkt72VAtmnX

2026-04-24 07:23:46 UTC

- reply

it's out!

2026-04-18 16:23:48 UTC

- reply

Gotta work with what you have

2026-04-08 20:46:08 UTC

- reply

Like the idea of a decompressible starter kit, but don't think it follows that collaboration is necessary. In fact most giant leaps came from individual minds working alone (Newton, Einstein), though obviously building on prior knowledge of others. You might say the starter kit is the scientific method.

2026-04-06 14:04:36 UTC

Think there's a misconception about traditional finance and debt that's similar to the misconception about capitalism itself. Capitalism presupposes private property, and in so doing, doesn't interfere with wealth creation. Crony capitalism is when people who already have capital use it to rig the rules in favor of the connected few. The existence of crony capitalism isn't a knock on capitalism, private property and wealth creation, it's an abuse by bad actors disguised as wealth creation.
Lending and debt are not bad in and of themselves. They allow people and companies to raise capital at an agreed-upon cost. But money printing via debt is an abuse of this tool wherein banks can fund loans out of thin air. For example, if I want to lend money to earn interest, I can loan it to the government (T-Bills) or a company (corporate bonds), but in order to do so I have to raise the cash, maybe be selling some other asset or earning it.
But when a bank issues a mortgage, it's not selling one of its existing mortgages to free up the funds, or selling any other assets. It gets to keep its existing assets while issuing a new loan. That means it's increasing the money supply, i.e., printing. It's subsidizing the goods and services (boosting their prices) for which it lends.
So we rail against a debt-based economy that needs ever more loans to stay afloat, but it's not the act of lending and issuance of debt that is the problem, but the fact that it's issued from nothing.

2026-04-06 13:33:18 UTC

- reply

Many negative things could accurately be said about Trump, but that he is ineffective or just uncannily lucky is probably not one of them IMO.

2026-04-05 11:54:05 UTC

- reply

They're a little bit mutually exclusive -- if closing the SOH and letting the EU have to fend for themselves rather than free-riding on US security as well as re-positioning the US as the supplier of energy is happening, then the strategy was purposeful and quite possibly being achieved. If the war was a catastrophic error that destroys the economy, then the strategy was haphazard and failed.

2026-04-05 11:40:37 UTC

There are two distinct threads of analysis re the middle east war right now:
1. Trump is in big trouble, whatever his ostensible aims were in starting this war, and the US is losing catastrophically, risking WWIII, the global economy and he's getting wiped out in November for starting an unpopular, pointless war.
2. Trump has reset the chessboard, now all the virtue-signaling "green new deal" Europoors are SOL when it comes to energy and will have to get it for themselves. Meanwhile the US has plenty of energy and will benefit from being the new supplier.
I honestly don't know which is true. If I had to make a guess, I'm partial to 2 since those pushing 1 are the same idiots who pushed all the prior psyops like covid, Russiagate, etc. But believing the opposite of what liars tell you isn't a good enough heuristic.
Liars are better off ignored.

2026-03-30 14:08:06 UTC

- reply

very nice -- the guy in the video showed more or less why it terminates, but didn't do the actual proof.

2026-03-29 11:24:09 UTC

- reply

For starters sources who were willing to use their names, and definitely not CNN and other known propaganda outlets relying on anonymous sources.

2026-03-28 11:50:35 UTC

- reply

"according to CNN citing sources familiar" LOL
#nevent1q…2d4h

2026-03-26 10:12:08 UTC

- reply

gotta look into this shit now

2026-03-21 11:05:20 UTC

- reply

It's a form of insanity IMO. A level of demoralization wherein holding onto a delusion is existential.

2026-03-20 13:15:01 UTC

- reply

the level of denial required to defend the covid response is unfathomable to me

2026-03-19 14:10:22 UTC

- reply

Based on the people I know, this is precisely the normie take. Not saying it's incorrect -- I don't know -- but it's what everyone is saying.
#nevent1q…889s

2026-03-18 14:28:04 UTC

- reply

Once the demand for organs is sufficient, and all the depressed and sick people are dead, what's next, Squid Game?
#nevent1q…r6lx

2026-03-17 11:21:21 UTC

- reply

real talk!

2026-03-16 19:38:26 UTC

- reply

Web

2026-03-16 17:59:04 UTC

anyone else finding it impossible to access your notifications on Primal?

2026-03-16 12:11:57 UTC

- reply

In 2021? A lot. People I knew too.

2026-03-16 11:57:25 UTC

I also remember in the height of the vaccine mania. I posted that you should take any medicine, given informed consent, if you deemed its benefits to outweigh its harms. And you should not take any medicine whose harms you deemed to outweigh its benefits. It really didn't matter what someone labeled that medicine.
I think it's the same with actions of the state: if you think the actions will benefit you, you ought to support them. If you think its actions will cause more harm than benefit you should oppose. If you don't know, then you should wait and see before taking a position.
I know most decent people don't like war and most wars have caused more harm than good. So people are rightly wary when one country attacks another. But the word "war" is not very precise. Do we mean a trade war, an information/propaganda war, a proxy war, a military operation, a ground invasion and occupation, all of these can be categorized under "war". But all are very different things.
The question shouldn't be, "am I against war?" but whether this action is going to benefit my interests or go against them. There's no anti-war, there is anti-invading Iraq and killing a million people for non-existent WMD, squandering $6T to the MIC and destabilizing a country. That was not in a regular person's interest.
There is no anti-vax, there is anti covid mRNA shots that don't stop the spread and have disastrous side effect profiles. Don't make vaccines (pro or anti) your religion. Don't make supporting or opposing politicians your religion. Be for what works, what helps. what's in your interest. And against the opposite.
The core problem is people have attached "goodness" to some views and "badness" to others, so they are stuck in concepts and slogans rather than seeing things clearly and evaluating them on the merits.

2026-03-16 11:46:04 UTC

People don't like it when you dissent from their religious beliefs. On Twitter, those beliefs were in "The Science" and experts and vaccines and anti-racism, etc. On nostr, it's libertarianism, anti-state, anti-"war", anti-government. Two sides of the same coin really, that coin making politics one's religion and the state its center point.
Ideally, one should allocate only a limited amount of real estate in one's mind to politics and the state. It should not be a religion such that when someone doesn't adhere to its edicts, you call them "statist" or "racist".
Truth is those for whom the state occupies the largest mindshare are the biggest statists. Just as those for whom race occupies the largest mindshare are the biggest racists. A tell is when you disagree with them, they call you names rather than think through the disagreement.
My views are judge people by the content of their character, not the color of their skin. And judge government action by its harms and benefits to you and your broader interests, not whether it fits one label or another.
You would think these were uncontroversial. And they mostly are. Until they come up against someone's religion.
As someone who dissented from the bio-medical compliance, race-communist, trust-the-experts religion on Twitter and took some heat for it, the dynamic could not be more obvious. The main difference being the neolibs actually had power and they would use it to try and destroy your livelihood. The libertarian nostr people have much less and they'll just try to embarrass and insult you without consequence.

2026-03-16 08:42:46 UTC

- reply

They are taking your money anyway. They have taken your money since before you were born. They are not going to demonstrate to your satisfaction the plausible value, and any reason they do give is probably bullshit. Those are the table stakes. You may wish it were otherwise, but wishing will not make it so.
When we criticize or support a *particular* policy, we are saying, given that they are spending this money they got either via taxation (largely theft) or printing (inflationary theft), is this a good use of it compared to something else they'd spend it on, say welfare for Somalis, infrastructure, conventional medical care for seniors, etc. Whether you think the federal government should be abolished is a different discussion.
My point is maybe this will redound to our benefit. Maybe it won't. I don't know. If Trump's primary motivation is to go down in history as George Washington or Thomas Jefferson, maybe some of these ideas will align with what's good for America. If he's compromised and narrowly craven (rather they broadly ambitious), then it won't.
I know for sure I did not want the Harris-Biden-Walz race-communism, so I voted to give Trump a shot and plan to hold him accountable for the results. But he's the one with access to the information, the man in the arena right now. I am a regular person watching from the sidelines with very incomplete information. So rather than gnashing my teeth based on second-hand reporting about every blow by blow decision, I'm agnostic, withholding judgment until the results are in.
And doing so is a big relief. I don't give a shit about what it makes me look like. I'm not sufficiently libertarian or anti-war or I'm "statist" or whatever. Just don't care. Or maybe I'm not patriotic enough since I'm not sufficiently cheering for this, the defeat of our enemy for the last half-century. I'm only for a successful resolution that aligns with my broad interests and against a failed policy that does not.

2026-03-15 20:56:41 UTC

- reply

Everything the government does costs money. If it builds a bridge, that costs money. But maybe that bridge is a good investment. Same with the Venezuela operation. Everyone who is so sure this will be a disaster was saying the exact same thing about that. So of course you can oppose or support it if you like. My point was personally I will only support it if it turns out to be successful and only oppose it if it goes bad. And I don't know yet, so I'm agnostic, and I don't think it's good or bad to support or oppose or be agnostic to things, and when you remove the good and the bad, usually you just judge by the results, since you're not motivated for anything except wanting things to work out in a way that aligns with your broader interests.

2026-03-15 18:32:04 UTC

- reply

That's fair, but I think there's a big difference between the jabs which involve me directly, literally injecting something into my bloodstream, and a foreign policy operation going on overseas I might oppose based on what I read in the news. And I was opposed to the mandates before the information was known, but I wasn't opposed to people electing to take the shot if they felt like it, nor did I try to argue them out of it. I really didn't know. My opposition was initially only to that it was mandated. Now I think it's poison that should be taken off the market.

2026-03-15 17:41:59 UTC

- reply

My position is I don't know. The burden of proof is on both sides -- someone saying this is a mistake and someone saying this is good. The point I was making in the podcast was not that "yes, this is worth it," but that most people are operating from a stance of whatever makes them feel good about themselves. If you're a rah rah patriot that thinks someone finally had the balls to do something about these theocratic local bullies, you feel good that Trump is taking them out. You believe it's for the greater good. If you're an anti-war libertarian that thinks the state is always up to no good, no matter the bullshit justification, you feel good opposing the operation. I'm just saying I don't know, and in such cases, I'm fine to just let things play out before having an opinion on them. It doesn't make you a good person to speak out against the war, or a bad person to cheer it on, hoping for success. It doesn't mean shit. We'll find out eventually one way or the other.

2026-03-15 17:15:06 UTC

- reply

If the price tag is high, or the war goes on a long time, it'll probably turn out to be against our interests. But you're begging the question. Assuming it goes on a long time, and assuming it's not in our interest, then it's not in our interest. But if it goes on a short time, and the benefit is worth the cost then it is in our interest.

2026-03-15 15:18:21 UTC

- reply

I don’t know if it’s prudent — I just don’t have good enough information. But Trump has been successful with foreign policy thus far and doesn’t seem to want an Iraq style occupation with its attendant costs. So I give the benefit of the doubt and see how it goes. If it goes well I’m for it. If it goes badly I’m against it. And by well I mean advances American people’s interests. And by badly I mean the opposite.

2026-03-15 12:32:30 UTC

- reply

that's my MO, just ask stupid questions until I understand something

2026-03-15 11:46:58 UTC

- reply

ha -- I'm sure that dude knows 10x the math that I do.

2026-03-11 09:28:03 UTC

Went for a run Monday, was windy and chilly. Was stiff and sore from two Padel tournaments on Saturday. Two miles slow, maybe 11 minute pace. Seems like a small thing with all the other things going on in my life, but it's not. Showing up to the track IS what's going on in my life. That slow uncomfortable run is reality itself. The encounter with it is the point. It's not a matter of discipline or self-improvement or getting in shape. Just a basic connection that pervades everything. There is no other life but the slow progression into the wind on the track surrounded by sparse trees and ugly buildings. Going again today. Will stretch for five minutes against a tree afterwards as I always do.

2026-03-09 11:40:37 UTC

- reply

Seen that one! Guy really goes into detail here on the transfinite ordinals. Locates different functions on the FGH using them:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0X9DYRLmTNY

2026-03-09 11:38:16 UTC

- reply

I was the opposite, was hoping for a boy, got a girl, and it's the greatest thing that ever happened to me. Plus, she plays basketball and is balling out. Best of both worlds.

2026-03-09 11:35:25 UTC

- reply

sounds like he has a lot of spirit!

2026-03-08 09:41:26 UTC

14-YO overslept her alarm this morning (has a basketball game), luckily I realized and woke her up, and now she’s pissed at me for waking her up!

2026-03-07 12:42:44 UTC

- reply

cool, will check it out, thanks

2026-03-07 08:02:27 UTC

- reply

Would like to hear it

2026-03-06 11:55:52 UTC

Idea to bookmark for later: real numbers are incompressible like reality itself. Pi and e are compressible reals, ambassadors from reality to the land of reason.

2026-03-04 15:27:51 UTC

Try telling someone last summer it's hitting 72, and you're gonna be happy about it.

2026-03-04 15:25:18 UTC

- reply

Jack Kruse is another version.

2026-03-04 14:30:01 UTC

- reply

Never understand what that dude is getting at either or what he's even talking about. Ray Dailio I can understand what he's talking about, but never what his point is.

2026-03-04 14:27:53 UTC

- reply

love a good Caesar, wife makes one with a lot of garlic

2026-03-04 08:54:36 UTC

Much of the news is not created for your consumption but for geopolitical agendas. You can still react to it if you like, but your reaction is collateral damage of sorts. You were in many cases not the target.

2026-03-03 22:00:14 UTC

- reply

I was aware of different levels of infinity, say the higher level of the reals and the higher level still of the sets that can be made with reals. But in my Claude chat I got some insight as to WHY real numbers can’t map with the naturals the way rationals do, and it got pretty deep.
The real numbers we use like pi and e are the exceptions in that you can generate them with relatively compressed information, kind of like rationals. But reals are uncompressible like reality itself. In fact the rationals are literally rational — figments of the reasoning mind, only a map, so to speak, whereas reals are the territory itself.
When you think about it, there is no circle in nature, no 3, no cutting something in half. They are all abstractions. But reals are reality in its actual detail. Rationals are finitely describable, reals are not except for the few exceptions like pi and e. Otherwise you cannot describe a real with a finite amount of information. Just like you can’t describe or map reality faithfully with a finite map. Which leads to Godel and Wittgenstein.

2026-03-03 19:24:37 UTC

- reply

had a very interesting convo with Claude about this and the diagonalization proof. You’re right.

2026-03-03 07:51:58 UTC

- reply

yeah, his was different, but I had to explain it to a high school student, and this was an obvious way to show it. Could also do square root of 2, square root of 2.01, square root of 2.001, cube root of 2, cube root of 2.01, fourth root of 2, fourth root, etc. No way you can match the naturals to it because there are an infinite number of these series you could do, just to get from 1 to 2.

2026-03-02 22:38:33 UTC

- reply

No, it's the proof that the set of reals is larger than the set of natural numbers, even though the set of odds numbers is exactly the same size as the set of naturals.
The proof is that you could match odds and naturals 1 to 1 forever. Match 1 with 1, 2 with 3, 3 with 5, 4 with 7, etc. You're not gonna run out of odds.
But if you try to match naturals with reals, you run out.
1 with 1.01. 2 with 1.001, 3 with 1.0001. Etc. You will run out of naturals before you get anywhere.

2026-03-02 20:20:35 UTC

- reply

same, but I do think the Cantor stuff is cool where you can't match different levels of infinity one to one.

2026-03-02 18:54:10 UTC

- reply

real talk!

2026-03-02 18:48:31 UTC

- reply

this one is really good too: https://www.numberphile.com/videos/the-goodstein-sequence

2026-03-02 18:47:10 UTC

- reply

ha -- of course I've seen that! Where he does the real comparison on the FGH scale, and you realize TREE(3) grows unfathomably fast

2026-03-02 16:01:01 UTC

- reply

yeah, it's a category error

2026-03-02 15:26:37 UTC

- reply

But we don't care about whether it's a wise policy generally. That's a question for statisticians. We care whether it was wise in this instance, and that we won't know until the result is in.
Actually wrote a piece about this very point a while back:
https://www.chrisliss.com/p/but-my-process-was-good
(Ignore the irony of Sam Darnold suddenly becoming good two years after it was published!)

2026-03-02 10:02:40 UTC

- reply

How it turns out is the thing of utmost relevance.

2026-03-01 16:27:06 UTC

- reply

Perfectly valid to raise concerns about how this could become disastrous, (and it surely *could*) but that's speculation at this point. What I'm seeing is people posting as though it has already become disastrous, or disaster is inevitable now. They were doing the same re Venezuela and while that too *could* become disastrous, it doesn't remotely seem to as yet.

2026-03-01 16:20:53 UTC

- reply

you got rid of the insult, but still didn't bring the substance

2026-03-01 16:08:24 UTC

- reply

respond with substance not insults

2026-03-01 16:00:40 UTC

Lots of people get confused by labels. When evaluating NFL players, people will say, but so and so was a first-round pick when he was taken 28th, and so-and-so is a second-round pick when he was drafted 35th. There's a much bigger difference between pick 6 and pick 28 than pick 28 and pick 35. The "rounds" are just arbitrary cut-off points.
Similarly people will say "Trump promised no wars" and now he's attacked Iran. "War" is like first-round pick. You can define what's happening in Iran as a "war" and sick burn all the peace promises if you like, but the difference between this "war" and a war where we spend trillions, kill millions and destabilize an entire region is a lot different than kidnapping Maduro or taking out Khameni.
If this does devolve into Iraq 2.0 or worse, that'a another matter, but if it's more like Venezuela, then it's not really contradicting the platform on which he was elected. Think a lot of people are conflating the two for clicks and outrage, but it's pretty obviously stretching one label to cover two very different scenarios.
This is not an opinion on whether taking out Khameni (or kidnapping Maduro) was "good," legal or desirable -- we will only know that over the medium and long haul. Only that this conflation of two very different things is lowest-common-denominator posting.

2026-02-28 16:32:26 UTC

- reply

No one thinks Iran would be a cake walk, and he wouldn't have run had he thought his future would be imperiled.

2026-02-28 16:20:54 UTC

- reply

if he were compromised such that he'd destroy his presidency and imperil his future by launching a war that's not even popular with his base he would've sat 2024 out.

2026-02-28 16:04:40 UTC

Very unlikely we will have an Iraq-style war with Iran. Makes zero sense. If Trump were to do this, he'd get destroyed in the midterms, and a democratic would win the white house in 2028 and probably prosecute him and all his friends. He and his admin know this. They know no one who elected him wants an actual war.
But "Israel is controlling him!" No. If he were owned by Israel such that he'd be forced to destroy his presidency and imperil his future, he would've sat 2024 out.
Assume rational actors and work backwards. Probably the Iranian regime wants to settle, but if they did, they'd have to deal with all the hardliners they empowered. They can't just agree and get away with it. Has to look like they were forced.
Just like Trump probably couldn't release the Epstein files given so many of his friends and people he needs for his agenda were/are compromised so he had to outsource to Massie even if Massie isn't in on the game.
I could always be wrong, but it's rarely the case that rational actors do things that make no sense. There is always a reason, and not a stupid one like "Israel owns him dude."

2026-02-27 08:48:38 UTC

- reply

memory-holed everything -- mass formation psychosis

2026-02-26 20:46:14 UTC

https://fountain.fm/episode/LYF4NLonbLa57dI9XBCk

2026-02-26 12:40:08 UTC

- reply

trading firm, and we don't know for sure except what happened every day at 10 am ET didn't happen yesterday, and the price spiked

2026-02-25 17:31:11 UTC

Odd how the price has spiked with Jane Street sidelined. Think it was Max Keiser who said JPM had a short on MSTR so big it would collapse them if the price mooned again. Occurred to me these large connected entities might be working together -- JPM shorts MSTR, scrambles to build competing products (or just hopes to delay/destroy it), knows Jane Street is good for the price manipulation of the underlying, both have inside info re overleveraged players, where the liquidation points are. We'll see, just seems like a hell of a coincidence of timing.

2026-02-25 15:02:38 UTC

- reply

author died in a plane crash IIRC
https://blossom.primal.net/e417d88285692d8e34fb6b89081a424ba65e874d8d4c0f15c4a7e0ed8f6f06b3

2026-02-25 14:52:23 UTC

- reply

Actually have a copy of it -- bought it at a used bookstore a few years ago. Read some of it, will re-visit.

2026-02-25 14:15:25 UTC

Normally I'd out this in a highlighter format and post it natively, but too many screenshots, so I'm linking to the Substack. Plus, probably the only one who will get it is @nprofile…xr40
https://www.chrisliss.com/p/why-we-will-never-have-agi

2026-02-25 11:13:57 UTC

- reply

If anything was ever "alternative medicine" it's the mRNA shots. Alternative (and antithetical) to your own immune system.
#nevent1q…ly5u

2026-02-25 08:43:05 UTC

- reply

Not just in bits, either. Three ramen shops have opened in my neighborhood, four hipster coffee shops, people copy/pasting what they think gentrification looks like. Not individuals with a vision for a style or cooking, but investments in more of the same.
When Blair Witch project came out and did $10M or whatever on a tiny budget, Hollywood execs green-lighted a bunch of bad horror movies. The public must like horror, because of Blair Witch. Nope. They just liked that original movie that was different and not what they were expecting.
The midwit just takes what seemed to work and copy/pastes something similar, but without the soul that made it unique and real. This has been going on forever, only now it's easier to copy/paste than ever.

2026-02-24 14:09:42 UTC

Saw a David Icke interview, saw one with Whitney Webb -- it's all doom and gloom, you are owned, dominated, controlled, disempowered. This and total compliance to the state are but two sides of a coin.

2026-02-24 14:07:26 UTC

Saw an interview with Kobe Bryant. Someone asked him if he loves winning or hates losing more. Kobe replied neither, when he's on the court he's just trying to figure it out.

2026-02-24 14:05:11 UTC

- reply

real man sets up a work station, does his podcast

2026-02-24 14:03:00 UTC

Went to the basketball courts last week with my 14-YO daughter who plays for a local club. Worked on her threes, showed her my spin move, played horse a few times, etc.
We might be paying taxes to pedophiles, the CBDCs might enslave us all yet, but as of February 2026 you can play ball with your kid on a sunny day in the park, and that's the reality.

2026-02-23 14:39:47 UTC

- reply

Have not

2026-02-21 07:46:23 UTC

- reply

Unless Kalshi were doing it and offering 7 percent on the held funds.

2026-02-20 21:36:37 UTC

- reply

He also rented a car two days after he was suicided apparently. And yes, it's the Three-Body Problem that had that exact scenario only via an alien race. Good science fiction is indistinguishable from prophecy.

2026-02-20 19:42:24 UTC

- reply

saw that, but who was the third?

2026-02-20 10:03:43 UTC

- reply

Step 1: Find 100 YODLs.
Step 2: Lambo.

2026-02-20 09:57:45 UTC

My take on the Epstein Files. Trump could not release them. Too many powerful people implicated, would undermine his agenda. Too many of his friends implicated too. His own cabinet (Lutnick). So he needed Massie to do it for him, but he had to shit on Massie. Just like Elon, when his Tesla dealerships were getting vandalized, broke with Trump, vandalism stops, then he says Trump's in the files to create demand from the left for their release. Massie and Kahanna release them, Trump calls it a hoax, but people get exposed.
My take on the "aliens". Maybe real. Maybe not. But what's most important isn't just the aliens but the tech we now have, alien-derived or not. It has to be made public, free-energy, teleportation via wormholes (research MH-370). Simpletons will scream "distraction from the Epstein files" but the Epstein files are a net positive for Trump so long as he has deniability from being responsible for their release.
Two leading physicists were murdered in home invasions in the last two months. Probably not a coincidence. My guess is the big reveal is less about aliens and more about world-changing tech that's been hidden from the public, that physics actually DID progress massively since the 1970s, only was deemed too disruptive, too dangerous, so fake physics that led nowhere (string theory) was pushed in academia, and compliant midwits were too eager to go along in exchange for prestige while cutting edge physics was being done via military and private contractors.
Lot of powerful people benefit from the status quo, don't want to see it overturned. If Trump were sincere in wanting to drain the swamp, he wouldn't be able to do it directly. He'd have to play them. A lot of things you see in the news are not for you. They're for the swamp to keep them believing that Trump still works for them.
I could be wrong. Trump could be part of the swamp or worse -- the more insidious alternative to the swamp we embrace once it has been drained. But it's naive to think Trump and his cabinet are not thinking strategically and are well aware of how most of its moves would be perceived by people who think they've "woken up." Again, I'm not saying Trump is the good guy or that what comes after will necessarily be better. I'm only saying don't be a simpleton and fall for the obvious and tired takes. There's much more going on than that IMO.

2026-02-20 09:16:52 UTC

- reply

Another person onboarded to nostr today -- easier than I thought it would be. Key is to realize your pre-coiner listeners who appreciate your work really want to pay but reasonably don't want to subscribe. Self-interest is what gets people to do something, not high-minded platitudes about "freedom" or "censorship resistance".
#nevent1q…sgs6

2026-02-19 20:58:30 UTC

Excerpt from latest podcast:
https://v.nostr.build/lybQO6w2A9FgZaz4.mp4
Full podcast: https://rumble.com/v75z6zm-what-could-it-possibly-be.html

2026-02-19 10:55:45 UTC

- reply

Not playing this video. Spent too much time on detention in middle school at the hands of these types.
#nevent1q…r37j

2026-02-19 10:38:59 UTC

- reply

sure, DM me some times that work. I'm on western European time, 5 hours ahead of ET.

2026-02-18 22:27:22 UTC

- reply

We can consider all that, but first, I want EVERY elected official and those they appoint to register ALL their assets, show us all their emails, texts and browser history, log all their in-person meetings, post their phone number, email addresses and home addresses. They are *public* servants after all and should lead by example. Only when this has been done under penalty of law, should they get around to debating what *private* citizens might disclose. So long as they do ANYTHING in secret, have any of their actions, work or communications classified, they are in no position to make privacy policy for everyone else.
#nevent1q…fr9m

2026-02-18 20:49:07 UTC

- reply

I would enlist for this