Offshore
Video
Startup Archive
RT @Alfred_Lin: He is right, and @rabois is himself a barrel.
tweet
RT @Alfred_Lin: He is right, and @rabois is himself a barrel.
Keith Rabois: “The velocity of your company improves by adding barrels”
Keith shares his “Barrels and Ammunition” framework for building effective teams:
“Most companies—once they get into hiring mode—just hire a lot of people. And you expect that as you add people your throughput and velocity of shipping things is going to increase. But it turns out it doesn’t work that way. Usually when you hire more engineers, you actually don’t get that much more done. You sometimes get less done.”
Keith argues that the reason for this is that most people in a company—even great people—are “ammunition.” But to improve velocity, you need “barrels”. He defines barrels as extremely talented people who can take ideas from inception all the way through to fully shipped product. Most companies start with one barrel (the founder). And when they add another, they can get twice as many things done per week, quarter, etc.
But true barrels are incredibly difficult to find:
“When you have them, give them lots of equity, promote them, take them to dinner every week because they’re virtually irreplaceable. They’re also very culturally specific. A barrel at one company may not be a barrel at another company.”
Video source: @ycombinator (2014) tweet
Offshore
Photo
Bourbon Capital
Mark Massey sold 50% $GOOG and 100% $FICO
$AMZN still his largest position https://t.co/L1ftpWei2p
tweet
Mark Massey sold 50% $GOOG and 100% $FICO
$AMZN still his largest position https://t.co/L1ftpWei2p
tweet
Offshore
Photo
Quiver Quantitative
JUST IN: We're opening up the Quiver API to everyone.
You can use it to build stuff on top of our data on:
- Politician trades
- Insider transactions
- Hedge fund moves
& more.
Sign up at https://t.co/c6cpRFWoK5.
Use the promo code TWITTER for a free trial. https://t.co/N0CRgsEhsP
tweet
JUST IN: We're opening up the Quiver API to everyone.
You can use it to build stuff on top of our data on:
- Politician trades
- Insider transactions
- Hedge fund moves
& more.
Sign up at https://t.co/c6cpRFWoK5.
Use the promo code TWITTER for a free trial. https://t.co/N0CRgsEhsP
tweet
Offshore
Photo
Dimitry Nakhla | Babylon Capital®
Mark Massey — AltaRock Q4 25’ 13F
Top 5 holdings: $AMZN $TDG $MSFT $MCO $MA
___
Source: Dataroma https://t.co/gfljSnS7ea
tweet
Mark Massey — AltaRock Q4 25’ 13F
Top 5 holdings: $AMZN $TDG $MSFT $MCO $MA
___
Source: Dataroma https://t.co/gfljSnS7ea
tweet
Dimitry Nakhla | Babylon Capital®
What helped make Amazon so successful — persistent, large-scale reinvestment — now appears to be the very source of discomfort for some investors.
___
I’d argue it’s largely a function of fear around the unknown / uncertainty.
On the surface, the concern is understandable. But historically, wouldn’t you want a business with a long track record of disciplined, high-return reinvestment to continue investing heavily?
Over time, Amazon has demonstrated itself to be a strong steward of capital. Patient shareholders who looked through near-term noise have been rewarded accordingly.
$AMZN
tweet
What helped make Amazon so successful — persistent, large-scale reinvestment — now appears to be the very source of discomfort for some investors.
___
I’d argue it’s largely a function of fear around the unknown / uncertainty.
On the surface, the concern is understandable. But historically, wouldn’t you want a business with a long track record of disciplined, high-return reinvestment to continue investing heavily?
Over time, Amazon has demonstrated itself to be a strong steward of capital. Patient shareholders who looked through near-term noise have been rewarded accordingly.
$AMZN
It will always amaze me how armchair experts will claim big tech is wasting money on all this capex with “unknown” ROI
Meanwhile $AMZN straight up says they WILL be capacity constrained for years… tweet
X (formerly Twitter)
Aria Radnia 🇮🇷 (@QualityInvest5) on X
It will always amaze me how armchair experts will claim big tech is wasting money on all this capex with “unknown” ROI
Meanwhile $AMZN straight up says they WILL be capacity constrained for years…
Meanwhile $AMZN straight up says they WILL be capacity constrained for years…
Offshore
Video
Moon Dev
I Analyzed 5,000 Whale Wallets: The $200,000 “Human Tax” You Are Paying to Hyperliquid
tracked five thousand of the wealthiest traders on hyperliquid and what i found proves that your biggest fear about the market is actually a lie. most of us think the big guys have some secret edge that we could never access
they have the math degrees and the hundred million dollar bankrolls so we assume they must be winning while we struggle. but when i ran a script to see how many of them actually survived the results were so catastrophic that it changes everything you know about trading
i spent years thinking i was the problem because i kept getting liquidated and losing money to over trading. i even spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on developers to build apps because i thought i was not smart enough to code the solutions myself
then i decided to learn live on youtube and started building my own bots to solve the problems i was facing. i wanted to know if the whales were actually better than us or if they were just better at hiding their losses
the script i wrote scanned the top five thousand depositors on hyperliquid who each put in at least a million dollars. these are the elite players the institutions and the guys we are supposed to be afraid of in the order book
as the progress bar ticked up i watched something unbelievable happen right in front of my eyes. out of the first thirteen hundred wallets checked only four hundred had more than ten thousand dollars left in their accounts
that means over seventy percent of the biggest traders on the planet have been completely obliterated. they started with millions and ended up with almost nothing which means they are trading just like the average person in a casino
this leads to a massive question about why these people with unlimited resources are failing so spectacularly. the answer is not just bad luck or market manipulation but something much more subtle that is draining your account right now
one of the biggest killers of any trading account is the hidden cost of being a human being. when you trade by hand you are prone to emotions and those emotions force you to use market orders because you feel like you have to get in right now
market orders are basically an emotional tax that you pay to the exchange for the privilege of being impatient. the fees for a market order are usually three times higher than a limit order and that difference is the line between profit and bankruptcy
i saw one trader who had spent over six hundred thousand dollars just on transaction fees. if that person had used a simple bot to enter and exit their positions they would have saved nearly two hundred thousand dollars in cash
that is money that could have stayed in their account but instead it went straight to the exchange. this is exactly why the exchange wants to speed you up and keep you staring at those flashing lights all day long
the more emotional you get the more you trade and the more you pay in market fees. it is a game designed to make you fail and even the smartest guys with a hundred million dollars are falling for it
most people tell me they want to keep their intuition when they trade because they think they have a special feeling for the market. but i have to ask you if your intuition is worth the three hundred percent premium you are paying in fees every single time you click a button
there is no intuition in paying three thousand dollars for an iphone that costs one thousand just because you could not wait two seconds. yet that is exactly what hand traders do every single day when they refuse to use automation
the math is actually terrifying when you look at how fast fees can kill a healthy account. if you have a twenty five thousand dollar account using high leverage and trading five times a day you will blow up in about a month just on fees alone
that is not even counting the money you lose on bad trades which makes the situation even worse. by simply switching to a[...]
I Analyzed 5,000 Whale Wallets: The $200,000 “Human Tax” You Are Paying to Hyperliquid
tracked five thousand of the wealthiest traders on hyperliquid and what i found proves that your biggest fear about the market is actually a lie. most of us think the big guys have some secret edge that we could never access
they have the math degrees and the hundred million dollar bankrolls so we assume they must be winning while we struggle. but when i ran a script to see how many of them actually survived the results were so catastrophic that it changes everything you know about trading
i spent years thinking i was the problem because i kept getting liquidated and losing money to over trading. i even spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on developers to build apps because i thought i was not smart enough to code the solutions myself
then i decided to learn live on youtube and started building my own bots to solve the problems i was facing. i wanted to know if the whales were actually better than us or if they were just better at hiding their losses
the script i wrote scanned the top five thousand depositors on hyperliquid who each put in at least a million dollars. these are the elite players the institutions and the guys we are supposed to be afraid of in the order book
as the progress bar ticked up i watched something unbelievable happen right in front of my eyes. out of the first thirteen hundred wallets checked only four hundred had more than ten thousand dollars left in their accounts
that means over seventy percent of the biggest traders on the planet have been completely obliterated. they started with millions and ended up with almost nothing which means they are trading just like the average person in a casino
this leads to a massive question about why these people with unlimited resources are failing so spectacularly. the answer is not just bad luck or market manipulation but something much more subtle that is draining your account right now
one of the biggest killers of any trading account is the hidden cost of being a human being. when you trade by hand you are prone to emotions and those emotions force you to use market orders because you feel like you have to get in right now
market orders are basically an emotional tax that you pay to the exchange for the privilege of being impatient. the fees for a market order are usually three times higher than a limit order and that difference is the line between profit and bankruptcy
i saw one trader who had spent over six hundred thousand dollars just on transaction fees. if that person had used a simple bot to enter and exit their positions they would have saved nearly two hundred thousand dollars in cash
that is money that could have stayed in their account but instead it went straight to the exchange. this is exactly why the exchange wants to speed you up and keep you staring at those flashing lights all day long
the more emotional you get the more you trade and the more you pay in market fees. it is a game designed to make you fail and even the smartest guys with a hundred million dollars are falling for it
most people tell me they want to keep their intuition when they trade because they think they have a special feeling for the market. but i have to ask you if your intuition is worth the three hundred percent premium you are paying in fees every single time you click a button
there is no intuition in paying three thousand dollars for an iphone that costs one thousand just because you could not wait two seconds. yet that is exactly what hand traders do every single day when they refuse to use automation
the math is actually terrifying when you look at how fast fees can kill a healthy account. if you have a twenty five thousand dollar account using high leverage and trading five times a day you will blow up in about a month just on fees alone
that is not even counting the money you lose on bad trades which makes the situation even worse. by simply switching to a[...]
Offshore
Moon Dev I Analyzed 5,000 Whale Wallets: The $200,000 “Human Tax” You Are Paying to Hyperliquid tracked five thousand of the wealthiest traders on hyperliquid and what i found proves that your biggest fear about the market is actually a lie. most of us think…
bot that uses limit orders you can extend the life of that same account by hundreds of days
this realization is why i say code is the great equalizer for the retail trader. it allows us to build walls around our capital that the big institutions are too emotional to build for themselves
i used to be the guy getting liquidated and feeling like i was gambling my life away. but now i have fully automated systems that trade for me instead of getting emotional and clicking buttons in the middle of the night
you do not need a math degree to do this and you certainly do not need to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on developers like i did. you just need to realize that the market is a system and the only way to beat a system is to build a better one
the big guys are failing because they are still humans trying to outsmart a machine. when you automate your trading you stop being the victim of the order book and you start becoming the architect of your own success
i decided to build all of this live on youtube so everyone could see that it is possible to iterate your way to success. it is not about being right on every trade but about having a system that is robust enough to survive the madness
the whales are getting obliterated because they think their money makes them smarter than the code. but the data shows that seventy five percent of them are gone and they are never coming back to the market
you have a choice to keep trading like a whale who is headed for a zero balance or to start building the bots that will protect your future. the tools are all there for you to take and the code does not care how much money you started with
it only cares about the logic you give it and the discipline you have to let the system work. if you want to stop being part of the seventy five percent who blow up then it is time to stop clicking buttons and start writing lines of code
this journey started for me because i was tired of losing and i knew there had to be a better way. now that i have seen the data i know for a fact that the only way to win long term is to remove yourself from the equation entirely
the exchange is counting on you to be emotional and to keep paying those massive fees. but once you automate your entry and exit you take that power away from them and put it back in your own pocket
the real secret to trading is that there is no secret other than staying alive long enough to let the math work in your favor. if the biggest traders in the world cannot survive with their intuition then you should probably reconsider yours
take a look at your own fees and your own trade history and ask yourself if you are building a legacy or just funding someone else’s exchange. the answer is usually written in the code and it is waiting for you to find it
i am going to keep building and showing every step of the process because i want everyone to have access to the great equalizer. the whales are falling but you do not have to fall with them if you are willing to learn and adapt
your financial freedom is not going to come from a lucky trade but from a persistent bot that never sleeps and never gets tilted. start small and keep iterating until you have built the system that sets you free from the screen forever
tweet
this realization is why i say code is the great equalizer for the retail trader. it allows us to build walls around our capital that the big institutions are too emotional to build for themselves
i used to be the guy getting liquidated and feeling like i was gambling my life away. but now i have fully automated systems that trade for me instead of getting emotional and clicking buttons in the middle of the night
you do not need a math degree to do this and you certainly do not need to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on developers like i did. you just need to realize that the market is a system and the only way to beat a system is to build a better one
the big guys are failing because they are still humans trying to outsmart a machine. when you automate your trading you stop being the victim of the order book and you start becoming the architect of your own success
i decided to build all of this live on youtube so everyone could see that it is possible to iterate your way to success. it is not about being right on every trade but about having a system that is robust enough to survive the madness
the whales are getting obliterated because they think their money makes them smarter than the code. but the data shows that seventy five percent of them are gone and they are never coming back to the market
you have a choice to keep trading like a whale who is headed for a zero balance or to start building the bots that will protect your future. the tools are all there for you to take and the code does not care how much money you started with
it only cares about the logic you give it and the discipline you have to let the system work. if you want to stop being part of the seventy five percent who blow up then it is time to stop clicking buttons and start writing lines of code
this journey started for me because i was tired of losing and i knew there had to be a better way. now that i have seen the data i know for a fact that the only way to win long term is to remove yourself from the equation entirely
the exchange is counting on you to be emotional and to keep paying those massive fees. but once you automate your entry and exit you take that power away from them and put it back in your own pocket
the real secret to trading is that there is no secret other than staying alive long enough to let the math work in your favor. if the biggest traders in the world cannot survive with their intuition then you should probably reconsider yours
take a look at your own fees and your own trade history and ask yourself if you are building a legacy or just funding someone else’s exchange. the answer is usually written in the code and it is waiting for you to find it
i am going to keep building and showing every step of the process because i want everyone to have access to the great equalizer. the whales are falling but you do not have to fall with them if you are willing to learn and adapt
your financial freedom is not going to come from a lucky trade but from a persistent bot that never sleeps and never gets tilted. start small and keep iterating until you have built the system that sets you free from the screen forever
tweet
Offshore
Video
God of Prompt
RT @godofprompt: Sora, Runway,... they all do the same damn thing.
You prompt. You wait. You get a clip. You start over.
That's not creation. That's a glorified vending machine with a $20/month subscription.
PixVerse R1 just made all of it look ancient. Real-time 1080P video that listens to you while it's generating. No render bar. No fixed clips. No "try again."
Here's why nobody's ready for this: 👇
tweet
RT @godofprompt: Sora, Runway,... they all do the same damn thing.
You prompt. You wait. You get a clip. You start over.
That's not creation. That's a glorified vending machine with a $20/month subscription.
PixVerse R1 just made all of it look ancient. Real-time 1080P video that listens to you while it's generating. No render bar. No fixed clips. No "try again."
Here's why nobody's ready for this: 👇
tweet
The Transcript
Microsoft commits to building frontier in-house foundationreducing OpenAI dependence
"We have to develop our own foundation models, which are at the absolute frontier, with gigawatt-scale compute and some of the very best AI training teams in the world" - $MSFT AI chief
[FT]
tweet
Microsoft commits to building frontier in-house foundationreducing OpenAI dependence
"We have to develop our own foundation models, which are at the absolute frontier, with gigawatt-scale compute and some of the very best AI training teams in the world" - $MSFT AI chief
[FT]
tweet
Offshore
Photo
God of Prompt
RT @godofprompt: 🚨 I just read Google DeepMind’s new paper called "Intelligent AI Delegation."
And it quietly exposes why 99% of AI agents will fail in the real world.
Here’s the paper:
Most “AI agents” today aren’t agents.
They’re glorified task runners.
You give them a goal.
They break it into steps.
They call tools.
They return an output.
That’s not delegation.
That’s automation with better marketing.
Google’s paper makes a brutal point:
Delegation isn’t just splitting tasks.
It’s transferring authority, responsibility, accountability, and trust across agents dynamically.
And almost no current system does this.
Here’s what they argue real delegation actually requires:
1. Dynamic assessment
Before assigning a task, an agent must evaluate:
- Capability
- Resource availability
- Risk
- Cost
- Verifiability
- Reversibility
Not just “who has the tool?”
But: “Who should be trusted with this specific task under these constraints?”
That’s a massive shift.
2. Adaptive execution
If the delegatee underperforms…
You don’t wait for failure.
You reassign mid-execution.
Switch agents.
Escalate to a human.
Restructure the task graph.
Current agents are brittle.
Real agents need recovery logic.
3. Structural transparency
Today’s AI-to-AI delegation is opaque.
If something fails, you don’t know:
- Was it incompetence?
- Misalignment?
- Bad decomposition?
- Malicious behavior?
- Tool failure?
The paper proposes enforced auditability and verifiable completion.
In other words:
Agents must prove what they did.
Not just say they did it.
4. Trust calibration
This is huge.
Humans routinely over-trust AI.
AI agents may over-trust other agents.
Both are dangerous.
Delegation must align trust with actual capability.
Too much trust = catastrophe.
Too little trust = wasted potential.
5. Systemic resilience
This is the part nobody is talking about.
If every agent delegates to the same high-performing model…
You create a monoculture.
One failure.
System-wide collapse.
Efficiency without redundancy = fragility.
Google explicitly warns about cascading failures in agentic economies.
That’s not sci-fi.
That’s distributed systems reality.
The paper also breaks down:
- Principal-agent problems in AI
- Authority gradients between agents
- “Zones of indifference” (agents complying without critical thinking)
- Transaction cost economics for AI markets
- Game-theoretic coordination
- Hybrid human-AI delegation models
This isn’t a toy-agent paper.
It’s an operating system blueprint for the “agentic web.”
The core idea:
Delegation must be a protocol.
Not a prompt.
Right now, most “multi-agent systems” are:
Agent A → Agent B → Agent C
With zero formal responsibility structure.
In a real delegation framework:
• Roles are defined
• Permissions are bounded
• Verification is required
• Monitoring is enforced
• Market coordination is decentralized
• Failures are attributable
That’s enterprise-grade infrastructure.
And we don’t have it yet.
The most important line in the paper?
Automation is not just about what AI can do.
It’s about what AI *should* do.
That distinction will decide:
- which startups survive
- which enterprises scale
- which ai deployments implode
We’re entering the phase where:
Prompt engineering → Agent engineering → Delegation engineering.
The companies that figure out intelligent delegation protocols first will build:
• Autonomous economic systems
• Scalable AI marketplaces
• Human-AI hybrid orgs
• Resilient agent swarms
Everyone else will ship brittle demos.
This paper isn’t flashy.
No benchmarks.
No model release.
No hype numbers.
Just a 42-page warning:
If we don’t build adaptive, accountable delegation frameworks…
The agentic web collapses under its own complexity.
And honestly?
They’re probably right. tweet
RT @godofprompt: 🚨 I just read Google DeepMind’s new paper called "Intelligent AI Delegation."
And it quietly exposes why 99% of AI agents will fail in the real world.
Here’s the paper:
Most “AI agents” today aren’t agents.
They’re glorified task runners.
You give them a goal.
They break it into steps.
They call tools.
They return an output.
That’s not delegation.
That’s automation with better marketing.
Google’s paper makes a brutal point:
Delegation isn’t just splitting tasks.
It’s transferring authority, responsibility, accountability, and trust across agents dynamically.
And almost no current system does this.
Here’s what they argue real delegation actually requires:
1. Dynamic assessment
Before assigning a task, an agent must evaluate:
- Capability
- Resource availability
- Risk
- Cost
- Verifiability
- Reversibility
Not just “who has the tool?”
But: “Who should be trusted with this specific task under these constraints?”
That’s a massive shift.
2. Adaptive execution
If the delegatee underperforms…
You don’t wait for failure.
You reassign mid-execution.
Switch agents.
Escalate to a human.
Restructure the task graph.
Current agents are brittle.
Real agents need recovery logic.
3. Structural transparency
Today’s AI-to-AI delegation is opaque.
If something fails, you don’t know:
- Was it incompetence?
- Misalignment?
- Bad decomposition?
- Malicious behavior?
- Tool failure?
The paper proposes enforced auditability and verifiable completion.
In other words:
Agents must prove what they did.
Not just say they did it.
4. Trust calibration
This is huge.
Humans routinely over-trust AI.
AI agents may over-trust other agents.
Both are dangerous.
Delegation must align trust with actual capability.
Too much trust = catastrophe.
Too little trust = wasted potential.
5. Systemic resilience
This is the part nobody is talking about.
If every agent delegates to the same high-performing model…
You create a monoculture.
One failure.
System-wide collapse.
Efficiency without redundancy = fragility.
Google explicitly warns about cascading failures in agentic economies.
That’s not sci-fi.
That’s distributed systems reality.
The paper also breaks down:
- Principal-agent problems in AI
- Authority gradients between agents
- “Zones of indifference” (agents complying without critical thinking)
- Transaction cost economics for AI markets
- Game-theoretic coordination
- Hybrid human-AI delegation models
This isn’t a toy-agent paper.
It’s an operating system blueprint for the “agentic web.”
The core idea:
Delegation must be a protocol.
Not a prompt.
Right now, most “multi-agent systems” are:
Agent A → Agent B → Agent C
With zero formal responsibility structure.
In a real delegation framework:
• Roles are defined
• Permissions are bounded
• Verification is required
• Monitoring is enforced
• Market coordination is decentralized
• Failures are attributable
That’s enterprise-grade infrastructure.
And we don’t have it yet.
The most important line in the paper?
Automation is not just about what AI can do.
It’s about what AI *should* do.
That distinction will decide:
- which startups survive
- which enterprises scale
- which ai deployments implode
We’re entering the phase where:
Prompt engineering → Agent engineering → Delegation engineering.
The companies that figure out intelligent delegation protocols first will build:
• Autonomous economic systems
• Scalable AI marketplaces
• Human-AI hybrid orgs
• Resilient agent swarms
Everyone else will ship brittle demos.
This paper isn’t flashy.
No benchmarks.
No model release.
No hype numbers.
Just a 42-page warning:
If we don’t build adaptive, accountable delegation frameworks…
The agentic web collapses under its own complexity.
And honestly?
They’re probably right. tweet