Still Early: Why #ICP Will Outperform Every Blockchain in the Next 5 Years 🔥 piped.video/XG2RNDeag8c?si=7rR0… via @YouTube

My Strategy Over the Near Term @thestreetpro Valuations are elevated (96%-tile), investor sentiment is at dangerously optimistic levels, interest rates are rising, inflation is sticky, economic growth is decelerating, the K shaped US economy holds social/economic risks and neither political party gives a damn about our deficit or debt load. I remain bearish in market view. I expect a resolution to the government shutdown in the next few days. I am holding off on more shorts until that expected agreement - at which time I will aggressively short equities (likely on a bump higher). There you have it. Famous last words! @dougkass @business @tomkeene @pboockvar

I would like to clarify a few things. First, the obvious one: we do not have or want government guarantees for OpenAI datacenters. We believe that governments should not pick winners or losers, and that taxpayers should not bail out companies that make bad business decisions or otherwise lose in the market. If one company fails, other companies will do good work. What we do think might make sense is governments building (and owning) their own AI infrastructure, but then the upside of that should flow to the government as well. We can imagine a world where governments decide to offtake a lot of computing power and get to decide how to use it, and it may make sense to provide lower cost of capital to do so. Building a strategic national reserve of computing power makes a lot of sense. But this should be for the government’s benefit, not the benefit of private companies. The one area where we have discussed loan guarantees is as part of supporting the buildout of semiconductor fabs in the US, where we and other companies have responded to the government’s call and where we would be happy to help (though we did not formally apply). The basic idea there has been ensuring that the sourcing of the chip supply chain is as American as possible in order to bring jobs and industrialization back to the US, and to enhance the strategic position of the US with an independent supply chain, for the benefit of all American companies. This is of course different from governments guaranteeing private-benefit datacenter buildouts. There are at least 3 “questions behind the question” here that are understandably causing concern. First, “How is OpenAI going to pay for all this infrastructure it is signing up for?” We expect to end this year above $20 billion in annualized revenue run rate and grow to hundreds of billion by 2030. We are looking at commitments of about $1.4 trillion over the next 8 years. Obviously this requires continued revenue growth, and each doubling is a lot of work! But we are feeling good about our prospects there; we are quite excited about our upcoming enterprise offering for example, and there are categories like new consumer devices and robotics that we also expect to be very significant. But there are also new categories we have a hard time putting specifics on like AI that can do scientific discovery, which we will touch on later. We are also looking at ways to more directly sell compute capacity to other companies (and people); we are pretty sure the world is going to need a lot of “AI cloud”, and we are excited to offer this. We may also raise more equity or debt capital in the future. But everything we currently see suggests that the world is going to need a great deal more computing power than what we are already planning for. Second, “Is OpenAI trying to become too big to fail, and should the government pick winners and losers?” Our answer on this is an unequivocal no. If we screw up and can’t fix it, we should fail, and other companies will continue on doing good work and servicing customers. That’s how capitalism works and the ecosystem and economy would be fine. We plan to be a wildly successful company, but if we get it wrong, that’s on us. Our CFO talked about government financing yesterday, and then later clarified her point underscoring that she could have phrased things more clearly. As mentioned above, we think that the US government should have a national strategy for its own AI infrastructure. Tyler Cowen asked me a few weeks ago about the federal government becoming the insurer of last resort for AI, in the sense of risks (like nuclear power) not about overbuild. I said “I do think the government ends up as the insurer of last resort, but I think I mean that in a different way than you mean that, and I don’t expect them to actually be writing the policies in the way that maybe they do for nuclear”. Again, this was in a totally different context than datacenter buildout, and not about bailing out a company. What we were talking about is something going catastrophically wrong—say, a rogue actor using an AI to coordinate a large-scale cyberattack that disrupts critical infrastructure—and how intentional misuse of AI could cause harm at a scale that only the government could deal with. I do not think the government should be writing insurance policies for AI companies. Third, “Why do you need to spend so much now, instead of growing more slowly?”. We are trying to build the infrastructure for a future economy powered by AI, and given everything we see on the horizon in our research program, this is the time to invest to be really scaling up our technology. Massive infrastructure projects take quite awhile to build, so we have to start now. Based on the trends we are seeing of how people are using AI and how much of it they would like to use, we believe the risk to OpenAI of not having enough computing power is more significant and more likely than the risk of having too much. Even today, we and others have to rate limit our products and not offer new features and models because we face such a severe compute constraint. In a world where AI can make important scientific breakthroughs but at the cost of tremendous amounts of computing power, we want to be ready to meet that moment. And we no longer think it’s in the distant future. Our mission requires us to do what we can to not wait many more years to apply AI to hard problems, like contributing to curing deadly diseases, and to bring the benefits of AGI to people as soon as possible. Also, we want a world of abundant and cheap AI. We expect massive demand for this technology, and for it to improve people’s lives in many ways. It is a great privilege to get to be in the arena, and to have the conviction to take a run at building infrastructure at such scale for something so important. This is the bet we are making, and given our vantage point, we feel good about it. But we of course could be wrong, and the market—not the government—will deal with it if we are.

$GLXY 100% Trevor TAVA 🥲

$IREN CEO “A number of analysts are saying we need 45 GW of new data centers by 2028. We’ve got 3 GW of that. That's the shortfall. So there’s an enormous opportunity.”

🚨ALERT: CoinMarketCap’s Fear & Greed Index has dropped to 20 (FEAR), its LOWEST in months.

Morgan Stanley initiates on Galaxy Digital $GLXY with a $42 PT. But this only includes contracted $CRWV capacity at Helios and they acknowledge a total $30B equity value or incremental $23/sh to PT if fully built

$BTC - Way too early to celebrate, even if it's looking better. OBV with a tiny spike up but the trend is still down. Stocks being green definitely helps too. I'm one step closer to being bullish again but I want confirmation not impulse reactions.

🤔 is this good or bad?

Some thoughts on the locked token market & the biggest source of yield in crypto that no one is talking about I joined STIX a few months back, which is the largest brokerage firm for locked tokens, and have been observing/learning about the secondary OTC landscape. With this new perspective, I have become increasingly excited about a project that we co-lead the seed round on and have worked with as they've become one of our largest clients. That project is @neutrl_labs. I believe they are taking advantage of the strongest remaining source of yield in the market, (& actually making money), which will likely only grow from here. In crypto, the market for locked tokens is very opaque, but generally the way that this market works is the following: A foundation/team/investor/fund wants to offload a position that they've taken on. They approach a seller directly or transact through an OTC firm (typically @stix_co), which we facilitate by tapping into our deep client base/expertise, but who is on the buyside and how are these transactions priced? Locked token OTC transactions are typically done at a discount to the underlying spot price for the asset, this is because the buyer needs to be compensated for the lockup duration and lack of liquidity for the position relative to spot. In some cases, these deals can include liquid tokens being sold at a discount with a self-enforced vest via smart contract. In some cases, lockup periods may be shorter depending on the specific vesting schedule or counterparty agreements in place. I anonymized our recent transaction data and visualized this dynamic, and as you can see, the longer the lock up, the steeper the discount to spot becomes. These discounts can reach well upwards of 50%. The buyside for these transactions is partially made up of individuals/funds that wants to take on the direct naked exposure of the asset being sold. However, a large portion of our client base is typically coming in on the buyside to source one leg of the "OTC arbitrage trade". This is done by purchasing the underlying asset at a discount to spot, shorting, often through perpetual futures, and locking in the spread. For example, say the price of XYZ token is $100, and the locked tokens are sold at a 50% discount, or $50. An entity can buy the locked tokens, short the corresponding perpetual futures associated with that token, then hold both positions to duration. Your profit is: Spot Price - OTC price - Funding rates/fees. At STIX, we expect this yield and arbitrage opportunity to continue to grow. In my view, Neutrl sits in a unique position in the market because its strategy remains attractive even in a bearish altcoin environment. As the altcoin supply continues to expand and selling pressure increases, more holders area likely to exit positions at deeper discounts, further driving the volume and profitability of OTC opportunities. So now that we've laid out the basics of the OTC arbitrage trade, I want to highlight what exactly Neutrl is doing. Neutrl announced its seed round back in April and since has been growing quickly, recently raising over $50mm from private LPs and $75mm in its pre-deposit vault. The Neutrl team has built out a team to execute the OTC arb strategy/yield & packaged it into a yield bearing vault for stakers of its native synthetic dollar, NUSD. These yields can reach low to mid percentage APY, as shown in the graphic earlier in this write-up. Neutrl also deploys capital into liquid delta neutral strategies such as funding rate arbitrage. This approach is similar to that of Ethena’s cash/carry model, but with the OTC component serving as a huge driver of yield. One thing that sets Neutrl apart is that the team is deeply connected and able to negotiate preferential terms directly with foundations, securing shorter vesting periods, steeper discounts, and repeat deal flow. As Neutrl continues to grow, this advantage compounds, reinforcing access to high-quality opportunities. Neutrl also serves as a strategic partner to counterparties by unwinding positions gradually instead of selling on the open market. This ends up being a win/win for both parties. There is not a whole lot to get excited about in the altcoin market outside of Hyperliquid and a few other projects at the moment, but I think Neutrl is the most fundamentally excited I've been about something in crypto in a while. Risks/disclosures: There are risks associated with all crypto currencies. The biggest risk to Neutrl I would say is managing the execution of the short leg of the spread trade, which is worth being aware of. This is not a solicitation to deposit into Neutrl. I have exposure to the project and Neutrl is a growing client of STIX's on the buy side so I may be biased. Never financial advice, conduct your own research, etc.

An important clip on concerns related to quantum computing and Bitcoin. Do not miss this👇🏼 Does quantum impact your outlook on Bitcoin? Comment below.

Bought more $GLXY calls, IMO significant repricing coming in over the next 3-6 months: 1) Next 800MW approval (hopefully by EOY) 2) Lock down a second anchor tenant (likely big tech) potentially $MSFT $GOOG $AMZN $ORCL 3) Helios Phase 1 with $CRWV starts cash flowing proving to the market Galaxy can execute (Q1 2026) If they can build the second 800MW in parallel with the current 800MW we could see Galaxy bringing 1.6GW of capacity online by ~2028. On the same economics as the $CRWV lease that is >$2.1B in EBITDA/year... The stock is trading at ~$13.6B right now + a $4B balance sheet & crypto business that did $500M in Net Income for Q3 (although decent chunk came from venture book mark up). For me this is such a no brainer.

I think the reason so many bitcoin OGs are selling is that unfortunately many bitcoin OGs are also crypto OGs who hoped they could margin-long alts at the kickoff of an anticipated alt season. Now they are broke and being margin called on their fiat shit coin scammery and becoming forced sellers of their bitcoin.

Where’s the glut? Great video emwith Jeff Currie piped.video/mKFpCVKY4q0?si=r5Ix…

17 years after the white paper, the Bitcoin network is still operational and more resilient than ever. Bitcoin never shuts down. @SenateDems could learn something from that.

Is U.S. $Oil production really growing? Thanks Anne.

San Francisco has the equivalent of 20 Salesforce Towers worth of empty office space and the number is only expected to grow. This will mean lower tax revenues and a growing city budget crisis. As mayor, I will approach this with surgical precision, investing where we need it most and cutting where we aren’t getting results. We literally cannot afford to wait. sfstandard.com/2023/12/18/sa…

BJJ BEGINNER 😃 How to ESCAPE OMOPLATA THE BEST WAY If you found this video useful, please SHARE 👍 #bjj #bjjtwitter #jiujitsu #grappling

$MSFT's Satya is saying that compute is not the bottleneck, but energy and data center space is. In fact the problem he has is that he has a surplus of GPUs right now sitting which he can't use (glut?). He is also saying he doesn't want to over buy one generation of $NVDA GPUs. (as each year a new much more capable GPU is coming out). Hint: usefulness of life of GPUs. I have been saying this for some time now.

What’s the best credit card for earning bitcoin ?