if i were an intelligence agency, and i was concerned my adversaries were using crypto to launder funds-- how would i stop that?
first i'd find the central casting idea of a tech founder-- mit dropout, finance, cargo shorts, long hair, sleeps on a beanbag kind of guy
then i'd stick him offshore and claim he's discovered an "arbitrage" on a forex market. the details don't matter, but it should require unauditable otc transactions and credibly add up to a couple billion bucks.
all that matters is its mildly believable and its not on chain
then i'd have him use those funds to build a very large crypto exchange. the goal here is to subsidize the thing until you see enough trading volume to see the state of the market at any moment.
only then you can start understanding how these "illegal war funds" are moving.
great-- ok now you have legibility into all crypto transactions for a handful of currencies and you are starting to understand where cashflows are going.
what's next? every time a project fails, lets take a little bit of that arb money and use it to bail out their products
on the grand scale of things, this is a tiny cost compared to what you are making in suitcases of cash washing up outside of your office-- but gives you information rights into any currency you can own on your exchange.
ok, now you essentially have rebuilt IRS level audibility into decentralized currencies in just a few years. your great power adversaries are significantly weakened.
total cost? a few billion and a sports stadium sponsorship
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
basically everyone underestimates how big of a role office selection plays in the outcomes of companies and their cultures.
i recently had the chance to spend 24 hours at LEGO headquarters. it is a great example of how company culture is directly downstream of physical space
LEGO is a relatively strange company for the toy industry. even at ~$10b in annualized revenue, the company has never taken a dollar of equity financing, and is still family owned and controlled since 1932
the company is based in billund denmark, a farm town of just 7000.
the company and the kristiansen family through their holding company (KIRKBI) functionally own the town of Billund from the airport (majority control), to a large majority of real estate, and hotel/tourist infrastructure.
this allows them to make remarkably long term decisions
regardless of where the ai cycle ends, it is inevitable that the number of investable assets pre-ipo is going to go from 1000s to dozens pretty quickly
most of the market has intuited this, but very few are taking it deadly seriously.
my view of what’s going on here;
I’ve written about the causes of this shift elsewhere, but the story is very simple,
even if all model progress plateaus tmrw (or already has months prior) we already have a world where the marginal cost of the inputs that make up a company are orders of magnitude cheaper
this means, counterintuitively, the cost of building anything consequential is much more expensive
things that used to be cheap as a result of good software— distribution, attention, install base— are now order of magnitude more expensive and the returns they drive much greater
if you talk to every investor up >80% this year at institutional scale they all have kind of the same view in private
ai will not lead to super intelligent utopia, it’ll plateau far before then, but it will allow everyone to wirehead themselves on fake companionship, labor, etc
the question for the entire street is how do you invest in a “global opt out” in a way where the Qataris can still run billions with you.
the answer seems to be to continuously talk about super intelligence and buy the precursors instead of the sin stocks directly
you’ve seen this kind of “motte and bailey” trade before when crypto was going to rewire the entire US financial system, and wasn’t actually just a way to loot retail for exit liquidity at scale
that isn’t to say these models don’t have huge effects on cost structure
its hard to pinpoint exactly when it happened, but sometime in the last five years our world shifted from most people being resonable, high social trust actors
to grifting, scamming, and violence being the norm and i don't think we're going back to high trust society.
whatever the cause, i'm very unsympathetic to the easy explanations like "m2 supply" "trump" "plandemic" etc. there's something different going on here that started before 2016.
i am even less sympathetic to the idea that the solution is "monasteries" or some kind of "exit"
my rough view is that we've been living in an island of false stability since that started some time during the post-war-reconstruction period (maybe 46-47?) that lead to a tremendous amount of technological/cultural progress
the cultures of tech and washington are fundamentally incompatible.
in tech the foundation of a good career are reckless sharing of favors, expecting nothing in return, endorsing young ideas and people, and public networks of influence
in washington, any of these will end you
in the fullness of time tech will end up having dramatically less influence on american politics than finance or any other industry that was once a similar size.
we are used to infinite, positive sum games. tech came in like a conquering army, and will be run out by midterms
it'll be a record year for lobbying firm profits, certainly a record year for _state house_ lobbyists as tech learns their ABCs of government, and you should expect a lot of consolidation and retirements in this space.
but the # of bills will be all time low, this too will fade
the reason you feel exhausted is because you've convinced yourself being always online is the requirement for great work. great work isnt driven by 24/7 slack messages, isn't driven by coding at the party. great work is driven by intense periods of focus, followed by leisure
this is ultimately one of the weird side effects of 1) internet companies spitting off so much cash and 2) that cash being so unattributable from the individual labor/work units of a single individual.
when the faangs professionalized, they brought in professional management
general management, the product 90s MBA programs,-- is so deeply weighted in factory floor mgmt/effficiency movement/taylorism.
this means professional management obsesses with the legible inputs (meetings, messages, responsiveness) and is allergic to the magic of technology