I was the main counterparty for airline puts before/during the 9/11 attacks (I was in the World Trade Center building for lunch the day before); they were buying puts in $UAL and American Airlines for weeks before the attacks. Brokers would call me and ask for a bid, I sold some, they seemed rich, then richer, then they just kept coming. When someone is buying a dollar bill for $1.01, you think, "sucker." When someone pays you $1.05 for a dollar, you think this is free money; when someone pays you $5 for $1, you bury your face in research, study the trade and you're very worried; when someone pays you $10 for $1, you know you're dead, but it just has not happened yet (and this is after I already got my ass kicked in Enron). The morning of 9/11, I would have blown out hard and would have had to fire about 60 or 70 people; the market didn't open, so that saved my firm. We didn't know there were 4 planes in the air, it could have been 4000 planes for all I knew so I told all of my traders to go home. My office was at the Cboe so I assumed it was also a target, and our lives were in danger. I was very worried that my NYC guys were dead (they were ok). I had no idea what to expect the next few days. When the market did open, I was down massively, but not blown out. The markets were so wide and the trading was so good we were net profitable by early November, a stunning turn of events. Stories about money feel gross when some people lost everything; I'm very sympathetic to the people who went through unimaginable hardship and I feel like me talking about trading is so small and petty in juxtaposition to the seriousness of true loss that many thousands of people experienced.

BREAKING: GLP-1s ARE CHANGING WHAT PEOPLE BUY AT THE GROCERY STORE. New McKinsey data shows that just 6 months after starting a GLP-1, spending shifted significantly: ↓ 11.5% chips + savory snacks ↓ 8.5% sweet bakery items ↓ 7.0% cookies ↓ 6.8% soft drinks Meanwhile: ↑ 1.0% meat snacks ↑ 1.5% fresh produce ↑ 2.5% yogurt And this may only be the beginning. Roughly 60% of consumers say they actively seek protein, fiber, and nutrient-dense foods. Read the report here:

Can we throw out Jevons Paradox and replace it with something more in line with how it’s actually used now? (Aka the paradox of “how can my AI stocks go down when I don’t want them to”) In all seriousness, there’s a perception among too many that it is somehow impossible for stocks to go down while AI models get better. That’s before you get into the people who seem to skip the step of actually understanding anything and just go “this is the AI stock I own and I am bullish on AI so when AI improves then my stock needs to go up” with zero critical thinking involved. I’m all for having conviction, I spent the better part of a year being called an stock pumping idiot by half the people I interacted with because I believed AI would be the biggest trend of our lifetime… (try telling someone that lost 60% being long AMAT, who’s convinced a recession is around the corner, that actually this new chatbot is going to result in higher semicap demand). But…have some humility too, please… If your thesis revolves around an exponentially improving technology, maybe your prior relying on everything else staying static is something worth revisiting.

What’s a successful trader to me? Can you consistently make money, each year, with minimal drawdowns? Can you support the lifestyle you want with your trading profits? As for trading substacks, have you learned something that makes you money? Do you extract value from the ones you subscribe to? If yes, then it’s a good sub! It’s all just not that serious everyone! ❤️

Reuters on Jane Street: "We generally worry most about sharp drawdowns, and buy puts that would help in those scenarios. The losses in AI stocks were relatively spread out throughout the month, so those short-term hedges provided little help," the note added." "Jane Street's capital structure allows the firm to take larger positions when providing liquidity and hold such positions through periods ​when such risks pay off." "Jane Street said it closed a significant portion of risk in ​the specific areas where the firm lost money in July, while also having pulled back on risk-taking in other strategies."

Everyone's trying to find a man in finance, 6' 5", blue eyes, trust fund. But the hardest criteria I've found with dating is finding someone happy. Truly happy, loving life, filled with optimism, and grateful for everything. By far rarer than hot billionaires.

Met with a financial advisor today told him I'm investing 70% of my income his eyes lit up like holy shit you're way ahead of the pack then I let him know it’s all in TSX oil shitcos I bought at the very top… Anyway, i’m retiring at 108

I respect Jukan05 a lot for his great posts and knowledge on tech/semiconductor stocks, but I cannot wrap my head around this one. This sounds like short-terminism. Just 2 months ago he called out SK hynix $000660.KS as his top pick ( At that point SK hynix was trading near ~KRW 2.1M. Now SK hynix is down to ~KRW 1.42M. Fundamentally, not much has changed. In fact, we have seen bullish news around hyperscaler CAPEX and cloud revenue. If you forget about the short-term sentiment and focus on the fundamentals, then SK hynix at KRW 1.42M offers a better opportunity than at KRW 2.1M. The sentiment around memory stocks is quite bad, but fundamentally they are very solid. Selling memory would have made sense at peak euphoria at ATH, not when the sentiment has gone bad and memory stocks are already trading 40-50% from ATH while fundamentals remain solid. That just sounds like surrendering yourself to the latest market trends.

memory narratives running wild!!! the biggest trades I have ever seen are where the market and forward estimates are a mile apart and VOL picks up … most times the estimates are wrong … the forecast is just wrong (market is an amazing discount mechanism) … BUT there are other rare opportunities …where deep work meets conviction in a career changing opportunity - $NOW going public when Gartner said their total revenue opportunity was $900m - $AMZN prior to breaking out AWS -> a small cohort of the NYC mafia did the AWS math and it was so outrageous was hard to believe - $MNST .. competition was going to kill them and had no EPS power - $W … one of the former partners at Adage made a career bet at $35 and was a 10x - $AAPL … anyone remember the Samsung bear case? EPS est just a little Off - $NFLX expanding internationally and launching own content was a battle ground for a long time -> TIGER crushed this trade *many other examples The point is …big trades are extremely uncomfortable … and if you have a unique view… VOL is the toll to be paid TO PAY THE TOLL THOUGH YOU NEED TO BE ABLE TO ANSWER TWO QUESTIONS: -what does the price already discount, and where exactly is the market wrong? -what would prove the market right and I am wrong? Apply to MEMORY and you have your map

I’m sorry, I’m so sick of the Dubaification of America. It used to be that men with the means to drive a Porsche would brag about driving a 2003 Honda Civic and DIY things they could have easily outsourced. Women were at least expected to pretend they didn’t care about a man’s money, and to have some pioneer spirit of “we can build together.” These weirdos on social media have not only undermined those much healthier attitudes, they have warped everyone’s expectations in all aspects of life. I find this especially appalling when it comes to dating, because this BS actively impedes men and women from pairing off and starting families. These days—I don’t mean to sound like a total MRA incel—I feel like I regularly hear otherwise normal, educated women saying insane things about filtering for a man’s money and status that would have been gauche to admit even just a few years ago. It’s the sort of stuff that I previously only heard ethnic aunties say when they were arranging marriages for their children or friend’s children and finding suitors. I think we lose something very special about America when we promote this sort of thing and idk it just makes me sad at this point.

I’ve been asked several times whether Zhilin Yang, the founder of @Kimi_Moonshot was my PhD student. The answer is yes and he is absolutely brilliant. But I’ve been incredibly fortunate to work with so many outstanding PhD students over the years. So I thought I’d brag a little about them and their career paths (of course there are also many MSc and undergraduate students, sorry if I missed anyone): Founders / Founding Team Members Devendra Chaplot @dchaplot PhD, Founding Member Thinking Machines / Mistral Zhilin Yang PhD, Founder & CEO, Moonshot AI Jimmy Ba @jimmybajimmyba MSc/PhD, Co-founder xAI Hubert Tsai PhD, Co-founder Spuree, Apple Nitish Srivastava @nitishsr PhD, Co-founder Perceptual Machines; Co-founder Vayu Robotics Charlie Tang PhD, Co-founder Perceptual Machines, DE Shaw. Professors Paul Liang @pliang279 PhD, MIT Ben Eysenbach @ben_eysenbach PhD, Princeton University Ruosong Wang @RuosongW PhD, Peking University Bhuwan Dhingra @bhuwandhingra PhD, Duke University Roger Grosse @RogerGrosse Postdoc, University of Toronto Alexander Schwing Postdoc, UIUC Research Scientists Shuyan Zhou @shuyanzh36, Postdoc, Meta Superintelligence Lab Tiffany Min @SoYeonTiffMin PhD, Microsoft AI Murtaza Dalal @mihdalal PhD, Tesla AI Minji Yoon @MinjiYoon90 , PhD, Microsoft AI Shrimai Prabhumoye PhD, NVIDIA AI, Mistral Haitian Sun @sun_haitian PhD, Google DeepMind Emilio Parisotto PhD, Google DeepMind Lisa Lee PhD @rl_agent, Google DeepMind Manzil Zaheer @ManzilZaheer PhD, Google DeepMind Jamie Kiros PhD, Google Brain, OpenAI Yuri Burda PhD, OpenAI, Anthropic Cody Severinski PhD, Amazon

Goldman - "As of July 13, a total of over 1.2 million leveraged retail accounts across the Korean market triggered margin calls. Approximately 320,000–360,000 accounts were fully liquidated by brokers. South Korea has an adult population (aged 15–64) of 35.7 million people… i.e. 1 in 30 (3.4%) adults got margin called."