Rainmanhyperscalper @GaneaJacob

Everything that matters in swing trading, in one list. Thank me after 1 year. - Pick ONE core setup (momentum burst / VCP / EMA pullback / upside reversal whatever fits you) & master it before adding a second. - Add ONE market filter. Know when Market is risk-on vs risk-off before you size up. - Screen for RS & strong uptrend stocks only. Don't touch a falling knife as a beginner - Learn to read a catalyst. No chart exists in isolation - Risk 1-2% per trade & learn position sizing. 20% return means nothing at 2% allocation. - Never average down ,it turns a small loss into a big one. - Book partial profits systematically, trail the rest. Don't hope. This is biggest concern - Create concentrated watchlist. Final list max 5 names - Build a one pager for your process entry, stop, exit. If it doesn't fit on one page, you don't understand it yet. - Run that process untouched for 50 straight trades. No mid-stream tweaks. - Journal everything - trade, mindset, setups & review it weekly & monthly - Ask questions. Out of 20 people you ask, maybe 1-2 reply that's still enough to clear half your confusion. - Read widely early on. Books, articles, threads, blogs you're not learning setups yet, you're learning the language. - Stop following anyone who dumps charts. Follow the ones who explain why, not the ones who create noise. Try becoming elite version of yourself! Discipline compounds faster than any setup ever will.

@bryan_johnson Because of you I’m icing my balls in the sauna and you were right, I failed the shit out of a sperm test before, then got 98th percentile after icing for a couple months

this paper is f*cking insane a HKUST paper built a model that detects market crashes by watching correlations collapse across 24 assets the result: 1.13 Sharpe with 15.6% CAGR and -7.5% max drawdown vs 3.7% CAGR and -33.7% drawdown for buy & hold the crazy part is it does not wait for volatility to spike it sees diversification disappearing before the crash hits bookmark before this thread gets buried

Tatara @0xTatara

2 weeks ago

x.com/i/article/2078…

8 25 164 451K 530

Any sane post-COVID civilisation (and especially one on the cusp of mass democratisation of cutting edge biotech information via LLMs)… should be going all in on physical biodefence everywhere, such as: - wastewater detection - DNA synthesis screening - broad spectrum antivirals - far UVC - cheap effective PPC

Mike Solana @micsolana

a week ago

knowing what we now know, what *was* the proper course in februrary 2020? we've had many years to think this over, and should probably come to some agreement here before the next one.

260 16 956 142K 78

Most don’t recognize it, because we are in the moment, but the world is currently undergoing a transformation unlike anything we have ever seen. The world map is being redrawn, and the “Old Guard” is being uprooted and replaced. The US Military decided they had to step in and put a stop to the global corruption before it was too late, and what we are witnessing is a carefully constructed timeline to transition from the Old Guard, to the Golden Age of Humanity. We are sort of in the middle of WW3, it’s just not full-scale global kinetic nuclear war like everyone expected WW3 to be. It’s controlled pockets of fighting, between the US MIL and Deep State proxies/assets, combined with global information/psychological warfare. We are witnessing a controlled extermination of a transnational criminal organization, that has embedded itself within governments around the world. Once you understand the gravity of our situation and this period in history, Trump running in 2028 doesn’t sound so crazy. We are undergoing a transformation similar to WW2. We are at war with a global enemy, and defeat is not an option. Everything is on the table.

One key point from my recent APEC presentation is that the connection between zero-point energy and nanocavity engineering begins with something surprisingly basic: ordinary electromagnetic mode counting. For free-space electromagnetic modes, the density of states per unit volume and angular frequency is g(ω) = ω² / π²c³ This tells us how many electromagnetic modes are available near a given frequency. Each allowed mode behaves like a quantum harmonic oscillator, with energy levels Eₙ = ħω(n + 1/2) Even in the ground state (n = 0), the mode retains the zero-point contribution E₀ = ½ ħω Multiplying the number of available modes by the zero-point energy carried by each mode gives the spectral zero-point energy density: u₀(ω) = g(ω) E₀ u₀(ω) = (ω² / π²c³) × (½ ħω) u₀(ω) = ħω³ / 2π²c³ This also explains the familiar ω³ scaling: the ω² factor comes from the number of electromagnetic modes available, while the extra factor of ω comes from the energy assigned to each mode. Nanocavity engineering enters through the boundary conditions. In the idealized mode picture, the cavity does not change the universal ground-state weighting of ½ ħω for a mode at frequency ω. Instead, its geometry and materials reshape which modes are supported, their resonant frequencies, their spatial field profiles, their linewidths, and how strongly those modes are available at a particular location. Globally, this is described through the density of states (DOS). Locally, the local density of states (LDOS) describes how strongly electromagnetic modes are available at a given position and frequency. In Green-function language, LDOS is obtained from the response evaluated from a point back to itself. At the two-point level, the cross density of states (CDOS) describes how the electromagnetic mode structure connects two different positions, including its polarization-dependent spatial coupling and coherence. Instead of using only G(r,r;ω), CDOS is constructed from the two-point response G(r₁,r₂;ω). The full complex dyadic Green function contains still richer information, including directional, polarization-resolved, dissipative, and reactive structure. DOS, LDOS, and CDOS therefore represent progressively richer ways of characterizing how a structured electromagnetic environment organizes its available field response. This forms part of the standard foundation behind cavity QED, Purcell enhancement, plasmonic confinement, Casimir interactions, and the broader engineering of structured electromagnetic environments. The central engineering question is therefore how boundaries redistribute electromagnetic mode structure and create measurable local and two-point contrasts in the vacuum response. @zpfTechnologies

Thymulin, the peptide derived from the thymus, suppresses age-related inflammaging and, in the experimental model, helps protect vs cancer nature.com/articles/s4146…

I’d prefer a certain threshold of intelligence is reached in open source models so that the public has semi permanent access to that level of capability to prevent gatekeeping by the state and prevent a scenario where the state becomes tyrannical and there’s nothing we can ever do about it. If powerful super intelligence is abundant and access ubiquitous, that to me provides the similar protection as the second amendment. That matters far more than protecting the profits of frontier labs just so we can tax the shit out of them soon anyway. And for what? To fund UBI? If that’s what you think then you actually don’t appreciate the economic problem we face, you can scoff at the robotics argument all you want, you don’t know what you’re saying. YOU NEED MORE STUFF, INCREASE THE SIZE OF THE PIE! Build factories and build robots of all types to increase the labor force, then you get to print money. Sell this properly and the market will let you run a bigger deficit to make this all happen faster. This is the only thing that leads to UHI without hyper inflation.

@coooooooopppppp @TMTLongShort Identical if you’re thinking of this myopically without appreciation for much broader context surrounding the issue

@coooooooopppppp @TMTLongShort No it’s not

Regulation risks gatekeeping anyway and we can’t allow that risk. Open source route at least allows access to powerful enough models that independent researchers could iterate on them and keep up with frontier labs even if 6 months behind or whatever. Access matters more than anything to me.

The value capture isn’t gonna be big enough to justify the risks, I’d rather have powerful local open source models of a certain capability available to the public so the state can’t gain a permanent stronghold and decide what you can or can’t do with the tech. The frontier labs will continue to innovate regardless, I don’t buy any argument that they won’t. The part of the sequence that matters most is the robotics at this point, that was my point, sufficient AI will be there for the robotics by the time we have enough robots and that’s what matters economically, this is first and foremost an economic problem we have to navigate.

Yeah…nah. Here’s what I think is happening instead. I haven’t wanted to say this, but there is a problem with organized Skepticism even more than conspiracy theories. My claim is that from hard evidence NOT ONE of the following is an extraordinary claim: The CIA not only gathers intelligence but kills people, violates rights, gaslights and evades scrutiny and oversight. The U.S. hides bioweapons programs. The U.S. engages in regime change through charity and aid programs. We in the U.S. medically experiment on our own citizens without consent. We run drugs. The DOJ and FBI are actively and flagrantly obstructing justice. Putin easily kills people outside Russia. We conspire and use academics for sheepskin washing our dirty work. U.S. newspapers actively avoid reporting stories about which the U.S. population is desperate for information. They also carry extremely non neutral biases. We actively conspired to hide open and obvious presidential dementia. And by extension, there are massive conspiracies at every level below that one. At a mind boggling level. There are Special Access programs that are about real and/or fake NHI/UFOs Etc. ———— The last thing we need is skeptics telling us the bar for such conspiracies and/or governmental accountability requires extraordinary evidence. Somehow the skeptics have it totally wrong. After Watergate, Iran-Contra, COVID, Church/Pike committees, etc. these are no longer extraordinary claims to raise. They are ordinary claims. I have no idea whether Lindsay Graham died of natural causes. But I can tell you the difference between a skeptic and a scientist looking at the claim. A skeptic’s first move is to lurch for the budding conspiracy and try to pull the idea of foul play off the table first and then to require a mountain of evidence to consider such a thing. A scientist firmly grabs the skeptic’s hand and forces him to put the hypothesis back on the table and says “Uh, you’re not in charge here. There’s a history…and I’m going to need to see something other than reference to null hypotheses, William of Occam and Carl Sagan…because that’s not how science and investigation works.” Time for extra scientific skepticism to die I think. Covert operations and conspiracies are difficult enough to document as it is. We don’t need skeptics as self appointed referees.

Michael Shermer @michaelshermer

3 weeks ago

Re conspiracy theories already surfacing that Lindsey Graham was murdered by Russians, here is SuperGrok's latest info on his cause of death. "Aortic dissection due to arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease" not a poison-tipped dart, plutonium trace, etc. x.com/i/grok/share/f…

87 4 47 449K 13

Because of what UBI will do to the money supply, AI and robotics based massive disinflation, the FED’s response to this disinflation which will be lower rates, money printing, more UBI, the soon to be unleashed latent demand by over half the country that can’t afford a 500 emergency when they soon have extra money to spend on things they wish they could buy today.. not a great question sir 💩

This is insane. The Catalyst database just got a MAJOR level up. NEW Runners Chartbook: Study 30 years of the best performing stocks (1996-2026) with annotated charts! (first iteration, more to come soon) Gap Database: Full chartbook with annotations, as well as table view with extensive statistics. Full PR data, earnings figures, stats, etc. all sortable and filterable This is the kind of resource I wish existed when I started.

1 piece of advice I hear all the time is, "Study the greats." I couldn't agree more...but I also think MOST people misunderstand what that actually means. When I say I've studied traders like William O'Neil, @markminervini, @OliverKell_, @Qullamaggie, Paul Tudor Jones, Stan Weinstein, and more recent greats who I align with like @RealSimpleAriel + @ShakePryzby1 & so many others, I don't mean I watched a couple of YouTube videos or skimmed a book over the weekend. I mean I've spent months + years reading thousands of pages, highlighting books, listening to interviews multiple times, revisiting old notes, comparing methodologies, and trying to understand "WHY" they thought the way they did. I wasn't looking for a magical setup or a profitability hack... I was trying to understand the principles that shaped their everyday execution + psychology. I realized pretty quickly that none of these traders trade exactly the same. In fact, many of them don't think like each other, and at first, that confused me. Then it became 1 of the biggest lessons of my entire journey. The goal isn't to copy someone else's system word for word. The goal is to borrow the pieces that fit your personality, your psychology, and the way "YOU" naturally see the market. So... that's exactly what I did! I took Oliver's obsession with relative strength. I took O'Neil's emphasis on leadership and fundamentals. I took Stan Weinstein's focus on Stage 2 breakouts and drawdown control. I took Qullamaggie's patience + emphasis on tightness. Then I spent years testing those ideas, throwing away what didn't fit me, and keeping the pieces that consistently made sense within my own process. Your edge isn't found by copying 1 person. It's built by understanding many people and slowly becoming yourself. I also think 1 of the most underrated reasons to study great traders has nothing to do with finding new strategies. It's learning from their MISTAKES. Every great trader has already paid tuition to the market. They've blown up accounts, held losers 2 long, overtraded, chased breakouts, ignored risk, and made almost every mistake you and I are capable of making. If I can learn those lessons through their experiences instead of my own, why wouldn't I? When I read a book now, I'm constantly asking myself questions... > Why did this work for them? > Would this fit my personality? > What assumptions are they making that I might disagree with? > What mistake are they warning me about that I haven't experienced yet? Those questions have become far more valuable than simply memorizing "someone's rules." The longer I've traded, the more I've realized that becoming proficient at anything isn't about finding one life-changing idea. It's about collecting hundreds of small lessons over years, connecting them together, and slowly building something that's uniquely yours. That's why I still read. I still take notes. I still revisit books I've already finished. Every time I come back, I notice something I completely missed the first time because I've grown as both a trader and a person. Experience teaches you what works. Studying others often teaches you why it works. & I think you need both. If I could leave you with 1 piece of advice, it would be this: don't just study people's wins... Study their routines + study their habits + study how they think under pressure + study how they manage risk + study how they responded after devastating losses. Because truthfully, those are the lessons that tend to stick with you long after the chart patterns are forgotten. At the end of the day, my goal has never been to become the next KQ or Oliver Kell. It's to become the best version of myself as an individual + trader. And studying the greats has been 1 of the biggest reasons I've been able to do exactly that. Don't take my words as truth, go study them yourself. Happy 4th, family!

By daily looking at stocks up 20% in last 5 days

Kubertrades @KUSHOFFICIAL_11

a month ago

@PradeepBonde @PradeepBonde Sir How to identify themes which are current working in the market environment ?

1 0 0 16K 0

I’m so excited to share this update on @Conception – We’ve generated the first early human eggs derived from stem cells. This is a big deal -- the potential to redefine fertility is real.

@ChrisBooksVines @PeterDiamandis Been saying this for years now, they can’t get access unless under full supervision, like anyone else with access especially as things get weirder, there are less dystopian ways to achieve this and I hope we back into the the right system for all