@greyenlightenment's banner p

greyenlightenment

investments: META/FBL, TSLA, TQQQ, TECL, MSFT ...

3 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 04 18:26:17 UTC

blog https://greyenlightenment.com/

Verified Email

				

User ID: 68

greyenlightenment

investments: META/FBL, TSLA, TQQQ, TECL, MSFT ...

3 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 04 18:26:17 UTC

					
				

				

				

				

				

					

User ID: 68

Verified Email

Yeah but the disgusting, revolting and/or morally abhorrent stuff is typically transgressive. it's done for shock value. The AI stuff just feels so bland and generic, like stock photos or those inspiration photos [1], but under the label of art. Or something photocopied from a book.

Such as this [1] https://personalityjunkie.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/inspiration-min.jpg

shows how the health benefits of cycling are to some degree offset by accidents

The number of people displaced in this manner is probably so trivial anyway. Illustrators tend to serve specific needs for clients, not something easily reproduced by ai. AI art is just the latest iteration of the stock photo.

ai art is easy to identify: it's something no one would actually bother to draw

This is expected. AI art encroaches on a profession that tends to be solidly blue, similar to journalism, so there is an overlap between journalists and artists attacking IA art as either theft or being inferior. Some on the right oppose AI art for more asthetic reasons, but much of the criticism does seem from the left.

under body positivity/fat acceptance they are indifferent to it now or see it as a personal matter . I see no evidence of leftists being opposed to to or speaking out against it. Some liberals, yes, but not leftists.

Part of what may be inflating the stock price is the fact it's so expensive and risky to bet against it. shorting is close to impossible due to restrictions and borrow costs; put options absurdly expensive.

i believe Truth Social is profitable as a business and that these $19 million losses are due to one-time expenses, like legal fees . this is under: "Other general and administrative (G&A)"

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2024/08/12/trump-media-truth-social-stock-price/74768174007/

most of those losses due to the development of the streaming service and legal expenses, which is not too bad.

interestingly, GME used its meme stock surge to sell stock to raise funds for various pivots, of mixed success. the ability to sell inflated stock, plus media coverage, improved GameStop's fundamentals overall https://www.shacknews.com/article/140225/gamestop-gme-75-million-shares-june-2024

they have investigated many prominent democrats this year or recently. For example, Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao, and also Eric Adams, Robert Menendez.

Trump Media & Technology Group Corp--Ticker: DJT--keeps going up despite predictions from as far as a year ago about how it it's running out of money. The rapid stock price appreciation over the past 3 months, from as low at $13 to $33, has has caught many short-sellers by surprise, and shows no sign of slowing.

There are a few ways of looking at this:

  1. DJT stock is mostly a proxy for Trump's odds. People are buying DJT stock as a bet on Trump winning. DJT stock has superior liquidity, more possible upside, and less counterparty risk compared to prediction markets. The actual business is less relevant , although Trump Media should get a tailwind from Trump winning in terms of increased traffic and ad revenue to Truth Social and other Trump properties. Cryptocurrency, however, which should also stand to benefit from a Trump win, has seen much weaker price action compared to DJT this week. DJT was up 10% whereas bitcoin was down, suggesting DJT's price action is not entirety a stand-in for his odds, or that other factors are at play, like short covering.

  2. In a blog post, I entertain a completely overlooked possibility: Trump media benefits from free advertising from the Trump brand itself more so than than if he wins or not. Even after losing in 2020, Trump was in the news constantly, or his sons or other family were. Advertising is one of the biggest expenses of any business. Trump gets, by my estimate, hundreds of millions of dollars of free marketing just by existing. This has to be worth something in the context of valuation.

Trump Media can launch a product or enter into a partnership, and the most expensive part--advertising for the userbase acquisition--is instantly covered at no cost. Trump's fans (or Republicans ,in general, or the overlap between Elon's fans and Trump's base) are the users, and the media's coverage (plus Twitter; Trump has the second-most popular account second to the CEO himself) is the marketing. All of it is free. Truth Social has not big a huge success, admittedly, but the market is likely pricing in additional pivots and partnership that should be bigger.

I predict there will be something involving Elon that leverages X/Twitter userbase or something like that. Trump also has his own personal conglomerate, The Trump Organization, which according to Wiki has $600 million in annual earnings. It's possible The Trump Organization can merge or go public under DJT, effectively combining the two under the same ticker. Although, being public, this would bring scrutiny to his business dealings that Trump may want to avoid.

In the context of efficient markets, if DJT were really on a collision course with insolvency as the media claims or as expected, it would be priced more appropriately, closer to zero instead of $33, so there is probably something up. It reminds me of twitter. The company has been stagnant and losing money forever, yet held on from 2013-2022 until being acquired at the upper-end of its price range despite endless losses.

The left doesn't hate McDonald's, or at least not anymore. It employs a lot of minorities, has many inner-city locations, and has always appealed to urban/hip sensibilities. I think there is more hate for McDonald's by the right for the whole obesity/seed oil angle. As part of the whole post-2021, post-Covid health reversal which saw the political polarity flip in terms of health culture, the left went from admonishing fast food in the early 2000s (e.g. Supersize Me) to bringing it under their coalition/fold. This is partly why they were so appalled by Trump working there; the rest because they are appalled by anything Trump does, or other reasons given.

It just seemed interesting as one of those things that seemed to trigger something unexpected in people for reasons that go way beyond the substance of the actual event, and figuring out what's resonating with people in either a positive or negative way, and possibly why, seems like a good path towards predicting future trends.

it's the trump effect, anything he does evokes a disproportionate reaction, because it's trump

Bottom 10% on AFQT is not the same as bottom 10% on IQ test. This would be more like bottom 20% on IQ test. Countries with mean IQs of 85-90 still find uses for these people; otherwise unemployment rates would be much higher. In the US, a high minimum wage and other regulation creates an incentive to choose smarter workers. If you have to pay $15/hour, you're gonna want the smarter worker/.

Also, why does the FBI need to make itself look good to the public? It's not an elected position. Also, it can work either way: rising crime is evidence more funding is needed; falling crime is evidence funding is working.

yes, many such cases. But they are not scalable or have downsides. Smoking is calming ...but lung cancer.

We don't need more hikikomori and drug addicts who don't work. (I will acknowledge that part of the change is due to people who are studying past the age of 25. But this is also bad).

I somewhat disagree. Getting these people out of the labor force may mean better service for customers and productivity for employers. People who have low inclination to work are probably worse employees.

It's not so much that they are arbitrary, but interpreting them is hard, subjective, or imprecise.

Crime is a fascinating but confusing topic because there are so many confounders and ways to interpret the data. What is not counted is as important as what is counted. Homicide rates are affected by treatment; if someone survives due to emergency room treatment and medical advances, it's not a homicide, so it becomes either an attempted homicide or downgraded to something less serious. Crime rate are also affected by reporting and demographics. On twitter, the narrative I see now is that crime of all types is much worse, but this is masked by underreporting or crimes not being prosecuted.

the question is also why are stats revised? how does the the methodology work? If the FBI uncovers a body in 2024 but it's determined the homicide occurred in 2023, then presumably it would be added to the 2023 stats.

In regard to demographics , if today's population were transported to the 60s, would crime be worse? I think it would be. Worse demographics and people being angrier in general and lower social trust could account for crime being worse, not that police are less competent today.

No, Nate isn't "less wrong" because 95% chance of winning and 70% chance of winning don't actually have a meaning in this context. How could you even make such a judgement? How do you know that if we had access to 100 different universes with the exact same 2016 race, Hillary doesn't win 95% of them?

I disagree. By this logic, no polling can be considered useful or skill does not exist in terms of polling. Obviously one cannot redo the election hundreds of times or split off many universes.

They were all wrong, but Nate was less wrong ,so that makes him the winner in this regard. His model was more accurate.

spreads would have nerfed some of those gains too

One-off events are intractable. Kelly does not work on them.

Swing states are so lumpy it's hard to call heads or tails on this.

It's all speculation. Unless you have insider info or some way to arb it, there is nothing rational about it.

Meanwhile, I'm just trying to prepare myself for how much worse things are going to get under the inevitable eight years of Harris.

Political division will increase, as will the intensification of the news cycle, but stocks and the economy should do fine. The wealth tax she floated during early campaigning, predictably, she has discarded in favor of middle-class tax cuts. I don't think it will be as bad as feared in regard to the economy. Also, 'peak woke' was under Biden, whereas wokeness got much worse under Trump. Elon Musk is single handedly doing more to fight wokeness than even any politician now.

Same for DJT stock, which is surging based on possibly renewed hopes for Trump