I haven’t seen anything specific, but Cloudflare says its “global network” is down (regional networks are fine).

So yeah, maybe DNS like AWS.

Most of them, sure, I’m talking about the ones who actually believe it.

The topic is puddles/lakes, not rivers.

I’m just saying that’s the general level of proof they have. They ignore important effects and focus purely on observations. Basically, the only way to really disprove them is to take them to space, and that’s obviously not happening.

Your body needs some salt, and it sweats out salt. So it needs to be replaced.

aliens

Eh, I think the alien ones are interesting. We know the government is hiding something, we just don’t know what, and if it was aliens, this is how I’d expect them to act. But it could also be a number of other things, and the evidence is usually quickly discredited by experts.

A better example would be something like Sasquatch.

Well it does. Here’s the logic, with proof by negation:

1. Earth is round (assertion to disprove)
2. Water flows around round objects
3. Water doesn’t flow on the earth, it stays put, therefore the earth is not round

That’s as far as it goes.

There’s a Linux gaming community, that’s probably where you’d get a better answer.

And I argue it’s not a given that someone is a bad person just because they have billions of dollars.

If the mere fact of being a billionaire is bad, which it obviously is,

I don’t think that’s obvious at all. Becoming a billionaire just means you have a billion dollars worth of assets, and it doesn’t say anything about how you got that money.

There’s a high correlation between billionaire’s and being a bad person, but it’s not 1:1.

All that shows is who the business partners are. Nvidia sells GPUs, AI companies buy GPUs, and companies buy products from AI companies. For example, Microsoft’s Copilot is based on OpenAI’s models. End customers buy products from companies that either do AI themselves or buy products from AI companies.

All you’re seeing here is how markets work. If it’s a bubble, it’ll likely impact those in the picture, but it’s not a bubble because of the picture.

I’m pretty sure he is the anti-christ…

So, short the financial sector. Got it.

Yeah, a “safe” PE ratio is around 20. The PE of the entire market is about 28, so investors are basically saying Nvidia is going to grow at double the rate vs the rest of the economy.

I think that’s bonkers, but what’s even more bonkers is Palantir with a ~1700 PE ratio. That’s ludicrous.

If Nvidia crashes, I expect it fall to about half it’s current valuation, maybe a bit higher, and that’s assuming their sales aren’t impacted. If the floor falls out from GPUs, then drop that to 1/3 or so.

The best case, I think, is for Nvidia and Tesla to do well in the short term (next 6 months or so) and then crash. That way Thiel and most people following his investment advice get to eat it, but the bubble doesn’t stay propped up for too long.

Yup, I have ~15 options. Basically:

• low cost S&P 500, US mid-cap fund, US small-cap fund, and total international funds (all under 0.10% ER)
• 1-2 actively managed options for each of the first bullet point with much higher fees
• 3 bond funds
• a cash fund
• a retirement fund (tons of bonds and cash)

I’m in a mix of the first bullet point.

401ks won’t let you pick specific stocks, generally speaking, but they should have more options than just target date funds. Most will at least have an S&P 500 fund and usually an international fund.

I like their first party games, not so much their published games. They should stick to what they do best.

Bill & Malinda Gates Foundation

It’s a fantastic charity, and it funds a lot of other great charities. I’m very much not a fan of Bill Gates’ career (I’m a diehard Linux user), but his charitable endeavors and recommended book lists are fantastic.

I don’t care if the person running a charity is a billionaire, I care that they do a good job. He has made philanthropy his life’s mission, and that’s exactly the kind of person I want backing a charity.

ethical billionaire

A close example is Warren Buffett. He’s about as ethical as they come IMO. He still lives in the same house he bought over 60 years ago, and he has given away a ton of money:

As of June 2025, Buffett had donated over $60 billion to charitable causes.

Hearing him talk about it, it’s apparently really hard to give away that amount of money. He wants to give away something like 99% of his money, but he seems to really like his job and that takes priority for him. He has claimed his children are tasked w/ giving the rest away within 10 years of his passing, outside of the little he has marked for inheritance.

money… is made from merely money being passed around whilst no actual value is created

Crypto is a zero-sum game, so money is never “made,” it’s exchanged. So if one person does well, another person must do poorly. That’s the same for stocks, though stocks are a bit different in that the stock price includes the actual, physical assets a company owns.

Real estate isn’t. When real estate increases in value, that doesn’t mean another property decreased in value, it just means people value that property more today than in the past. This could be due to limited supply (there are only so many plots a geographic area) or renovations, meaning its intrinsic value changes (higher expected rents), therefore it’s not a zero sum game.

So you really need to define what “wealth” is if you’re going to lump real estate in with stocks and crypto currency.

Stocks were a share of ownership in a structure

They still are. The stock price includes the intrinsic value of the company, as well as expected future growth in its intrinsic value. It’s that expected future growth that is doing a lot of work here, and it’s why companies like Palantir can trade at ~1700 times earnings when a “normal” company would be around 10-20x (for reference, Nvidia trades around 50 times earnings, Johnson and Johnson is around 20), people expect Palantir to grow way faster than “normal” companies.

Expected future growth has always been a part of that equation, that’s not new. What is new is the amount of hype around certain stocks, and that probably has more to do with the news cycle (people have access to information way quicker than 50 years ago or even 20 years ago).

each token can claim less and less quyantities of the traditional underlying value things - just notice food inflation.

Inflation has also been a thing as long as fiat currencies have been a thing. The target has been 2%, and the average between 1913 and 2020 was about 3.6% (source; I took the total 2555% and divided it by the 87 years of that period).

Whilst official Inflation numbers don’t tell us this story

Do you have evidence of that? The CPI the US uses has been criticized for various reasons, but it’s still the official measure used, and there’s a good reason for that: it’s pretty good.

Things like housing are very location-dependent, so changes in one region won’t really reflect on overall inflation figures if other areas aren’t experiencing that as well. But if you look at expenditure figures using percentages of peoples’ incomes, housing stays relatively constant in overall percent, which is around 30%. Again, these are national numbers, things may certainly vary by region, since areas like LA will be quite a bit different than rural Texas.

The societal consequences of the value-representation structures we have (literally, of thing like money, stocks and even certificates of ownership) unwinding would be huge.

Sure, if what you say is actually true. But I don’t think that’s the case. I think instead, salaries increases tend to trail inflation, and some people still haven’t yet caught up from the high inflation just after COVID. The averages look good, but that breaks down in individual cases.

Rents, for example, are starting to come down in my area (about 6.5% from last year), which was one of the hardest hit. A lot of the problem was due to new construction projects getting delayed due to COVID supply-chain disruption, and we’re finally catching up to where we should’ve been.