the next 100x is rebuilding the physical world Tech convinced itself it has transcended a few things: - i have spent nearly all my adult life in tech/startups, and have been a relentless optimist in the face of people seeking safety and stability - i have no skills to survive the world that is coming, and so have no outside incentive to post this stuff. i'm interested in truthseeking and speculation based off of that - i’m also not emotional about this like many on this app are. people have used words like doomerism, depressed, psychosis, etc to describe a bear case on the globalized future if we don’t adapt to obvious structural shifts happening in front of us change your lens from “doomer” to “there’s always a bull market somewhere” and it'll read much easier. many tech people have lost epistemological humility - caught up in their own hubris -- and the belief that a single multi-decade anomaly is the default state of civilization. that we have invented our way out of the physical world and preoccupation with it is -- primitive, paranoid or beneath them. most people here have only known an era of cheap energy, cheap capital, stable geopolitics, infinite leverage, and functioning global supply chains. most of us haven't even seen a real bear mkt in our adult life. the conditions we grew up in are not the natural order of the world unless you think we've turned a corner in history ie., this time is different. i've spent a lot of time talking investors who are over 60, operators and investors in real world businesses -- and find them to be much more in touch with reality. tech people live in a different world from them. those industries have spent yrs dealing with an aging workforce, low investment, tight margins, cyclical commodity prices, and the reality that atoms don’t care about narratives. meanwhile tech existed inside the greatest capital abundance regime in modern history (lowest interest rates in 5000 years lol) and started believing that software was the economy instead of a layer on top of it. with the stability of the real world in question again, i think we'll get a massive repricing event. the next era probably rewards resilience, production, people and businesses that can operate under constraint. food, energy, commodities, etc. look at my pinned tweet - we're speedrunning through all of that. tech will eventually adapt but only after they're hit in the face with reality. crypto is already adapting (perhaps because it has seen cycles of underfunding) -- with RWA and commodities taking off - super promising. the point isn’t to panic. the point is to stop assuming the future automatically works itself out. there will still be enormous opportunities ahead -- just not necessarily in the places the current priesthood expects. and that's the opportunity.

Announcing our latest $18M strategic round led by Solana Ventures. We're doubling down on the ecosystem: continuing to develop Solana’s leading multisig solution and expanding our footprint into global business finance with Altitude.

Rise is live. The developer SDK for Phoenix Perpetuals is here, in TypeScript and Rust. Build a trading bot. Power perps inside your existing product. Plug into live market data and trader state. One ergonomic surface for all of it.

did not realize how based jensen is until the dwarkesh interview dwarkesh: if we don't sell the chips to china they'll never be able to catch up jensen: they have infinite energy and half the world's computer scientists, if they have no other choice they'll brute force their way to victory and come up with another architecture dwarkesh: no, according to the models my friends and I who never worked a day in our lives came up with, they'll never manage to catch up with nvidia jensen: we have the best chips. the best architecture. if I had more money I'd throw more behind our architecture. but ultimately it's about energy and computer scientists and the real value people create with these tools dwarkesh: no. if we remove unilateral discretion with multiple concurrent proposers + attesters, the leader is “highly constrained” and must assemble batches from proposer inputs that were witnessed by attesters jensen: ok but who's going to send the transactions dwarkesh: if a correct proposer submits a transaction in cycle c, then within at most λ cycles it either gets included, or there were simply no batches in that interval. In other words, the leader cannot just silently drop an eligible transaction that enough attesters saw jensen: just send the fkn transactions dwarkesh oh my god I don't own enough NVDA