vessenes 7 hours ago

This is everywhere. For reference, former FTXer and OpenAIer raised $225m into a hedge fund structure, went long and short, and reportedly peaked at $40bn of value; leverage bit hard this week and they sold their entire-ish portfolio to Citadel at $10bn. (Which, I imagine was very likely aiming at this outcome in their trading in the last few weeks).

Not reported anywhere -- was additional money raised in to the fund, and what is the LP basis? The story might be: wunderkind 40x+ed his first hedge fund and sold it to Citadel, or it might be: wunderkind raised $20bn and turned it into $10bn fast trading against Citadel.

Inquiring minds want to know!

  • changoplatanero 7 hours ago

    Say more about how citadel made this happen with their trading?

    • infecto 6 hours ago

      Firms like citadel will run crowding analytics, who owns what, at what leverage and rough margin trigger points. Over simplifying but they could be shorting the longs and going long on the shorts. Everyone generally knew situational was heavily levered.

    • vessenes 6 hours ago

      To be clear, I'm not claiming Citadel created double digit drops in SK Hynix / Samsung. I am saying that as market vol hits, vol traders might choose to make it worse. And when word hits the street someone has a liquidity position, prop traders WILL come and pressure. SA's filings were clear how concentrated they were, and this was known. In this case, Citadel (hedge fund) bought, while I imagine Citadel Securities would have been doing this (speculated upon) trading. We'll know more when the filings come out though. I'll be curious what of the portfolio they kept and what they worked / rolled in the market

      • Ekaros 4 hours ago

        It really sounds like market manipulation... But oh well it is the biggest boys doing it so it can't be that illegal... Free markets and everything for them right?

        • bad_haircut72 4 hours ago

          Im not a trader but my understanding was that some traders at Citadel heard a rumor these guys were exposed, which gave Citadel an advantage because they knew they would have to liquidate? That doesnt sound like market manipulation to me, just trading with all the information you have

        • victorbjorklund 3 hours ago

          Short squeezing is legal. No need to protect short sellers from the market.

        • quickthrowman 2 hours ago

          Situational Awareness filed a 13F that lists a hedge fund’s long and short positions with the SEC. It’s public information, forcing an overleveraged fund to liquidate by pressuring the instruments they’re exposed to is not market manipulation, leverage cuts both ways and all of the people/institutions involved are professional/sophisticated investors

          Here are all the SEC filings from Situational Awareness courtesy of SEC’s EDGAR: https://www.sec.gov/edgar/browse/?CIK=0002045724

    • jvsg_ 6 hours ago

      Citadel spread the rumor that the Fed was going to hike rates this week. This led to Situational Awareness getting margin called on their longs.

      • energy123 6 hours ago

        That's a meme conspiracy theory on twitter that nobody in the industry takes seriously.

  • moralestapia 6 hours ago

    Wow, so, he narrowly avoided prison while at FTX, then went to work for Scam Altman, now does "investment funds" (a classic trope).

    The guy really really really wants to end up in prison, lol.

  • Diogenesian 5 hours ago

    I strongly suspect it's closer to the latter; CNBC says they had to sell rapidly to meet margin requirements and it couldn't be confirmed if they actually succeeded. Suggests there was a lot more than $250m in collateral on the line.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2026/07/30/leopold-aschenbrenners-hedge...

    • reisse 2 hours ago

      Nah, if they reinvested realized profit they can still be in the green overall

  • tyre 5 hours ago

    You’re talking about the same fund.

    They were open about their gains. It was the margin calls and illiquidity that got them, not going negative. Some of their assets, like Anthropic stock, isn’t worthless, it’s just illiquid.

    • andy_ppp 4 hours ago

      “isn’t worthless” is still to be decided IMO. Until you can sell it it defines worthless!

      • victorbjorklund 3 hours ago

        You can sell it on secondary market? I’m sure many investors are bound up but there are transactions there.

  • animal_spirits 3 hours ago

    If you owe someone 10 thousand dollars that’s a big problem for you. If you owe someone 10 billion dollars that’s a big problem for them

cmiles8 6 hours ago

An inexperienced portfolio manager that’s never seen a down tech market in his life has created a massively leveraged position on frothy assets in a bubble and the bubble is looking ill. What could possibly go wrong.

Many of these AI plays are massively entangled and leveraged. It all looks good until it doesn’t and when there’s a hiccup things unravel quickly and exponentially. I fully expect in the next 12 months we’re going to see some rather spectacular investment implosions with folks losing their shirts. Get your popcorn ready.

  • forgetfreeman 5 hours ago

    I'd be excited for the show myself if I had any idea how to prevent my portfolio from tanking when this clusterfuck finally unravels.

    • cmiles8 4 hours ago

      Stay market diversified and you will be fine in the long run. The AI bubble popping will be painful for all in the short term but a blip on the radar in the long term.

      These hedge funds get wound up in complicated, leveraged, illiquid layered stacks of (often private) investment vehicles that go from highly profitable to financial nuke overnight. Thats how they just get wiped out while everyone else just has a bad day.

      Ironically the whole point of “hedge” in hedge fund is for this to NOT happen but we’re seeing increasingly inexperienced players like here just building a financial nuke and then acting all surprised when it lights off.

    • holtkam2 3 hours ago

      That question is probably what inspired someone to create the first ever derivatives market

    • mikestew 3 hours ago

      Sibling comment says "diversify", and I tend to agree. I've seen some shit, man. 2000 dot bomb, 2008, bumps along the way. 2000, I was in tech stocks like everyone else, lost a bunch. 2008, learned my lesson and was much more diversified. Lost some money, but not nearly as much as others. It was amazing watching, say, the S&P crater while our portfolio..just didn't. It just went down a fair chunk, and came back later (and probably didn't come back as much as it did for those that held on to their equities).

      Diversification is a smoothing function. You won't get as much upside holding 25-30% bonds, but your portfolio won't suffer as much on the downside. If you're young and not ready for boring old-people investments like bonds, at least limit your tech stock exposure. Go buy boring utilities or something, maybe Berkshire Hathaway B shares.

      One other advantage to diversification that I hear very little about is this: if you have to sell in a down market, you can sell your bonds and hold on to your equities in the hopes they'll bounce back. Regardless, you're not held to selling depreciated assets like equities, you can sell the bonds which are boring, but probably actually went up while everything else turns to shit.

      • 2OEH8eoCRo0 40 minutes ago

        A side effect of keeping a stock/bond asset allocation is that when the stocks tank you'll naturally be overweight on bonds, so you can sell bonds to buy stocks (the dip).

  • bwfan123 5 hours ago

    > What could possibly go wrong

    A barometer of the mania and one for the history books. A 23 year old wunder-kind publishes a 156 page prophesy with a catchy title which was lapped up by the silicon valley elite and funded to the tune of 10s of Billions. And, not sticking to his lane, the wunder-kind enters the finance world thinking his brilliance translates there too, and he was promptly taken to the woodshed by the wall street sharks.

    • cmiles8 4 hours ago

      Wall Street eats these types for breakfast and then moves onto another meal for lunch. Once more sophisticated players smelled blood in the water they just had a field day here. There are many more setups out there like this and there’s a whole army of folks just salivating for when they can blow up more AI over-leveraged financial nukes inexperienced and FOMOed investors have assembled.

      • bwfan123 4 hours ago

        > leveraged financial nukes inexperienced and FOMOed investors have assembled

        A lot of debris waiting to happen in data-center debt for sure. The next several years are going to be interesting with more of these type of blowups. This is a canary in the ai-wreck coalmine.

      • blitzar 1 hour ago

        If you are going to send fools, they will be parted with their money.

        What worries me most, is that people think this guy is some kind of genius.

scrlk 6 hours ago

> Aschenbrenner party blamed short sellers who targeted the firm’s positions for exacerbating the fund’s losses, the letter said. The letter compared Situational’s experience to a bank run.

4 years ago, it was SBF blaming Changpeng Zhao for shorting FTT and triggering a run on FTX.

Now another EA has followed the path of making a lot of money relatively quickly and losing it just as fast, using the exact same arguments for why it happened.

  • 2PqboPPmKegvanx 6 hours ago

    >Now another EA has followed the path of making a lot of money relatively quickly and losing it just as fast

    let's be clear here - he didn't actually "lose" a ton of money. he was up 439% net in the first half of 2026.

    his issue was getting margin called due to being short on software (which went up) and long on AI infra (which went down) - getting margin called != losing money.

    • uncivilized 6 hours ago

      Yes he lost a ton of money. He went from being up as much as you said to up only 80% and getting liquidated at that point. If it weren’t for Citadel stepping in to buy his investments who knows how much worse it could have gotten.

      The only thing you can argue is realized vs unrealized.

      • bigstrat2003 3 hours ago

        Unrealized losses do not count as losing money (and similar for gains, of course).

    • chollida1 6 hours ago

      > let's be clear here - he didn't actually "lose" a ton of money. he was up 439% net in the first half of 2026.

      He's down 67% on the month. He most certainly lost alot of money.

      He'll be fine and i think he'll be successful at raising more money, and he's still up on the year as far as I've been told by LP's, but he sure did lose alot of money this month.

      • chaos_emergent 5 hours ago

        Aren’t month over month gains and losses aren’t particularly surprising nor noteworthy when you’re operating a leveraged fund? Shouldn’t one expect higher volatility, but also higher returns?

        • chollida1 5 hours ago

          yes, monthly returns are expected to be volatile for a fund like this.

          No in that, no LP wants 2/3rd down months. That kind of swing is insane.

          That' means any LP that invested in the past 3 moths is completely wiped out, as in their full investment into the fund is at zero.

          Now most LP's are probably investors for 6 months or more so they'll be ok.

          What I'd be worried about is that if its true that he liquidated his entire public portfolio and only holds privates, where are the returns going to come from when anthropic is currently valued at what it is likely to go public at, and where is investor liquidity going to come from when they want to redeem.

          He looks like he's turning his fund into a venture capital fund, which might be for the best given that he seems good at that and poor at running a hedge fund that invest in public securities.

  • RIMR 6 hours ago

    Sounds like someone took huge risks, incurred huge losses, and thought they were entitled to always win. It honestly feels good seeing these folks get knocked down a peg.

  • mamonster 6 hours ago

    >Now another EA has followed the path of making a lot of money relatively quickly and losing it just as fast, using the exact same arguments for why it happened.

    I would be very interested to know what he did with the management and performance fees (and how much they were) he gathered over the last 3 years. Just the perf fees from 2025 are probably enough to set him up for life. If he reinvested not so great.

    • hn_throwaway_99 6 hours ago

      > I would be very interested to know what he did with the management and performance fees

      I mean, I'm pretty sure he pocketed the money and got richer. Most hedge fund compensation structure has always (ironically, I'd add, given the name "hedge" fund) incentivized volatility over long term performance.

  • stephbook 6 hours ago

    Even Wirecard – a fraudulent German bank missing some billions of euros and run by a Russian spy – always blamed bad press.

    Denials mean nothing.

  • cmiles8 4 hours ago

    He had to liquidate everything that’s liquid and is left, seemingly, with some iffy-looking things that have paper returns but are broadly illiquid. Thats a disaster for a fund no matter how you slice it.

asats 6 hours ago

>Even including July's losses, the fund remains up about 80% on the year

Spectacular blowup and a lesson on leverage, but let's not miss this line.

  • bpodgursky 6 hours ago

    It's hopeless, people see what they want to see.

  • cmiles8 6 hours ago

    You’re missing the core story which is that they don’t have a returns crisis they have a liquidity crisis. Finds don’t blow up because they have bad returns. Funds implode because they have no cash to cover their calls and other needs for cash.

    • windexh8er 4 hours ago

      But that's not what they want to see. They want to see that AI is a savior for all. The psychosis of what AI is, especially in these comment walls, is unfortunately and spectacularly real.

      Anyone who's done any amount of investment can see this through the lens of history and I'm right there with you. This is the Lehman Brothers stage of the game and SA could be that "one". But Bro, we're still up 80%! - even WSB isn't filled with this level of ignorance.

  • bagacrap 2 hours ago

    Well micron is up 165% on the year so he could have just bought a single stock and done a lot better. The point being that you wouldn't consider someone a genius if they did that, just lucky.

    Not sure why anyone thought he was a brilliant investor to begin, as there's always going to be at least one investor of all the millions out there who makes a radical bet and is up 1000%, just like powerball has winners.

ymolodtsov 6 hours ago

I like how Matt Levine formulated it.

His thesis was correct. The problem is, his thesis was measured in years if not decades when his funding was measured in days and hours.

  • bagacrap 2 hours ago

    I mean that's always the case... we all know that stocks in general are going to be up 30 years from now. But we don't all leverage up 400%.

1vuio0pswjnm7 1 hour ago

Alternative to archive.ph

No Javascript required, no CAPTCHA, text-only, HTTPS optional

   tnftp -4o"|grep -o '<p.*</p>' \
   |tr -d '\134' \
   |sed '1s/^/<meta charset=utf-8>/'" \
   https://assets.msn.com/content/view/v2/Detail/en-in/AA296NRC > 1.htm

   firefox ./1.htm
   #links 1.htm
   #elinks 1.htm

   links -dump \
   https://assets.msn.com/content/view/v2/Detail/en-in/AA296NRC \
   |sed '1,/body\"/d;/readTime/,$d' \
   |less -r
bagacrap 2 hours ago

I don't understand why this thing is called a hedge fund. Usually, a hedge fund makes many non-correlated bets across many markets (commodities, stocks, bonds, public and private markets).

This guy made exactly one bet, which is that AI would eat software (long AI hardware stocks, short Adobe etc), leveraged it to the tits, and kept adding more leverage even as the trade moved in his favor.

Where is the "hedge"? Normally we just call this a "fund".

alasr 7 hours ago

Earlier on HN:

Martin Shkreli breaks down the collapse of Situational Awareness - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49119380

Edit: added context

  • malfist 6 hours ago

    Why are you promoting content by Martin Shkreli? You know, the guy who committed securities fraud to rip off desperate patients?

    • ForHackernews 6 hours ago

      seems like someone who is knowledgeable about financial shenanigans

    • WarmWash 6 hours ago

      Like black hats getting cyber sec jobs, they probably know a thing or two.

    • r_lee 6 hours ago

      I don't think those two cases are related

      he's a relatively well known figure in finance and pharma investing

    • jakevoytko 6 hours ago

      If you’re gonna be a hater you at least gotta do it right! The pricing and the securities fraud were two separate things you can count against him.

    • petesergeant 6 hours ago

      Because he’s an expert.

      Edit: I don't do podcasts but this is absolutely worth some of your time to watch.

    • gessha 6 hours ago

      You can still learn from thieves and crooks. Especially if they break down what they did and how they did it.

      • dgellow 6 hours ago

        Just keep in mind you might be the mark of his current scheme

    • infecto 6 hours ago

      He is one of the few folks in finance who regularly streams and is directionally interesting. He served his time.

    • zetanor 6 hours ago

      Can you provide a comparable or superior analysis by someone else?

    • rib3ye 6 hours ago

      He has done more for wallstreet-to-mainstreet transparency than you believe.

      His investor literacy youtube backlog is unusually deep and as of yet has only shilled his own trading product.

      But your point is valid, he will never live down the fraud conviction and his face is so punchable.

      • dgellow 6 hours ago

        The shady crypto projects he did after his release are also good reasons to distrust the guy

    • loco5niner 6 hours ago

      I really don't like this guy, seriously he's a shark (he's probably right, but what a jerk): "If you know somebody has to liquidate, the best thing you have to do, unfortunately, sadly, Darwinian is to go sell all the positions you have in common, then start shorting everything they have. It accelerates the downfall as quickly as you can." of course then he says 'It's nothing I would ever do...'

      • infecto 6 hours ago

        That’s truly the playbook when you are on the other side of a levered firm though.

        • loco5niner 6 hours ago

          Yeah, probably. Its too bad.

          • infecto 6 hours ago

            Why too bad? This is how the market ultimately comes to the right price.

          • ymolodtsov 6 hours ago

            If there's any purpose in hedge funds as a structure it's that they provide liquidity for the market. So it's in everyone's best interest to let them do price discovery against each other.

          • literalAardvark 6 hours ago

            Not really.

            Using leverage has risks that you're supposed to understand before you do it.

            It's not a free lunch, unless you're putting the sharks' interest ahead of yours. Or clueless, which was the case here, as L.A. is not a trader and has no business running a fund.

          • quickthrowman 5 hours ago

            Too bad for the people that were overleveraged? I don’t see why, they assumed too much risk and lost. This isn’t a WSB guy blowing up, it’s a collection of capital from sophisticated investors that understand the risks.

    • jvuygbbkuurx 6 hours ago

      He has served his time for those crimes

    • literalAardvark 6 hours ago

      Because hn is primarily about competence, knowledge and tech, which Martin has in spades.

      The arguments against him barely hold water in general anyway.

      • fred_is_fred 6 hours ago

        A federal jury sure thought they held water.

        • literalAardvark 6 hours ago

          Martin was convicted on three counts of securities fraud. The TL;DR is he was shilling a successful fund while sitting on massive losses. A Madoff kinda thing.

          This has nothing to do with what people actually hate him for, and for which he was not convicted, because extracting money from a captive clientele is exactly what the US healthcare system is designed to do.

      • forgetfreeman 5 hours ago

        So competent sociopaths get their roses on HN? Good to know.

    • baggachipz 6 hours ago

      He's an absolute ghoul, and to see sibling comments praising him breaks my heart. Yeah, he "did his time", but he also took advantage of sick people for immense profit. You don't get a pass for that.

      • malfist 4 hours ago

        He's a person that has told the whole world who he is, and some people, especially temporarily embarrassed billionaires on this platform, love him for his unmasked self.

    • alasr 5 hours ago

      Why do you think that just sharing a link to an earlier HN post means 'promoting' someone? I referenced the HN post because I found that it's less about Martin Shkreli himself and more about a quality conversation with good analysis about the inner workings of 'Hedge fund' world and market dynamics.

      If you've a better source, share it; I'll have a look and might use that one in the future. Otherwise, if you can't contribute in a constructive manner, stop making baseless comments about others intention without understanding them first.

sudb 3 hours ago

I found a tweet purporting to show the letter that Leopold sent to his LPs - it looks pretty thoughtful and doesn't sound as bad as some news sources seem to be portraying.

https://x.com/tbpn/status/2083226453509030285

  • bagacrap 2 hours ago

    What exactly do you think he's gonna tell his clients? "Oops haha I'm a fraud"

foltik 6 hours ago

Where do I sign up to get $100M to dump into long AI positions?

bwfan123 5 hours ago

Deja-vu from dot-com. The tech-wreck had similar hedge-fund road-kill. Munder net-net fund comes to mind. A lot of hubris and leverage on a thesis that is not proven, and liquidity matters. Data-center debt will likely see similar debris in the next several years.

neom 6 hours ago

Worth noting, even with the margin call, he's still up 80% on the year: https://www.ft.com/content/a0a5e3a7-c4e6-42a6-9a7b-a780422bc...

  • bagacrap 2 hours ago

    I'm pretty sure that's time weighted return that's being quoted, and not dollar weighted. What that means is that after he was up 400%, he accepted a lot more external investment. Then he lost 67%. So many/most investors lost a lot of money. "Time weighted" tracks a single dollar invested on January 1 while "dollar weighted" describes whether he actually "created" or "destroyed" value for his clients overall.

bix6 6 hours ago

Situational Awareness. Fitting name.

energy123 5 hours ago

He played his cards well given the incentives. Most investors wouldn't tolerate such recklessness, and accordingly, most funds have to operate under strict risk management or they don't get funded. PMs at multi managers are only allowed about 5-8% drawdowns.

Leopold's public visibility gave him access to dumb money whales who allowed him to personally profit off the variance by collecting bonuses when times were good, leaving the investors with the bag when the blow up happens. These investors got lucky that there were still gains after the margin call. Being up 80% after such a large drawdown is bad performance on a risk adjusted basis and is not distinguishable from chance due to the magnitude of the variance.

redwood 6 hours ago

Incredible that the founder is engaged to be wed this very weekend to the chief of staff to Anthropic's CEO

wxw 4 hours ago

> Situational’s gains earlier in the year were so large that, even including July’s losses, the fund remains up about 80% on the year, the letter said.

80% return is still excellent.

cmiles8 4 hours ago

"Smart men go broke three ways - liquor, ladies and leverage."

  • ElProlactin 3 hours ago

    And if you're really good, you do all three.

  • Biologist123 2 hours ago

    And the rest you squander. (RIP George Best).

francisofascii 6 hours ago

Which AI stocks suffered a rout?

  • marcosdumay 6 hours ago

    SPCX is getting lower and lower, MSFT is currently down 15% in an year, Oracle is close to 50% YoY...

    • mr_toad 3 hours ago

      It’s an odd kind of bubble that slowly deflates over the course of a year.

      • bonesss 1 hour ago

        To my speculative thinking the downslope of this LLM hype bubble might be different shaped because of the underlying assets and geopolitical situation.

        Securing data center land, contracts, water rights, and execution capacity doesn’t seem like a terrible position to have in a digital, cloud, ML, crypto, and ‘prediction’ heavy future. Especially for the big players who are also cloud providers who might capture big chunks of secondary growth even if they fail in their LLM effort (and ditch the hardware?).

        The LLM stuff seems very over priced, but also Ukraine is making a million or whatever drones a year all with a need for ML-powered planning, routing, and terminal guidance. Elons space data centres seem kinda dumb, but in a world where Palantir needs to be tightly in the loop for orbital or near-orbital operations, or autonomous orbital defence... The worse things get in those ways the stronger the long-term positioning of the cloud giants to build or capture critical defence operations and associated spending.

        We’ve learned Skynet as AGI won’t come from the tech, so the bubble gasses out. But Skynet as Skynets military is here, now, and the AI/cloud providers own key logistical elements, so the bubble loses gas slowly.

      • marcosdumay 57 minutes ago

        The only AI-only stocks you will find are Oracle and Space-X. Microsoft, Meta and Alphabet are all reasonably diversified companies that can possibly take the loses without breaking.

        The thing about this bubble is that everything publicly accessible is already a step or two removed from it. All the growing, and all the current popping are happening on those rich-people funds the article is about.

boringg 7 hours ago

Yesterdays news. High leverage. Sounds like citadel got a deal.

eigenspace 6 hours ago

Quite the funny headline. It initially made me think that someone had come up with some sort of quantitative measure of the situational awareness of traders, and was claiming that there was an increase in traders making dumb trades that misread the situation or something.

Ironically, I would describe this selloff as an increase in situational awareness.

  • willchis 6 hours ago

    Ha yes it definitely reads like an Onion headline.

  • HarHarVeryFunny 6 hours ago

    Well, effectively that is kinda what it is saying, although it's the situational awareness of one particular trader it's referring to. The situational awareness of Citadel who scooped up their portfolio at fire sale prices seems quite good!

  • deadbabe 6 hours ago

    I would definitely be interested in seeing someone come up with some kind of “situational awareness” index, to evaluate how much the market actually knows about what it’s investing in.

    • eigenspace 5 hours ago

      It'd only really work retrospectively, but would be quite fun to see. Especially ones that investigate previous bubbles.

next_xibalba 6 hours ago

And yet:

> Despite the July losses, Situational Awareness remains up about 80% on the year and holds a portfolio of investments in private companies including Anthropic.

80% return (YTD) is the type of performance for which many hedge fund managers would sacrifice their first born.

Aboutplants 7 hours ago

[flagged]

  • drexlspivey 6 hours ago

    Pardon for what? The crime of losing money?

    • RIMR 6 hours ago

      Believe it or not, you are legally bound to act in the interests of shareholders.

      Though you cannot be pardoned from civil stuff, and the options to actually prosecute are pretty slim, so I doubt it.

      Though, even if this is just tongue-in-cheek, you can literally buy a pardon in America right now with just a little bit a money into the pockets of the Trump family, in case you didn't get the joke (that the US government is literally pro-corruption right now).

      • mikestew 6 hours ago

        Believe it or not, you are legally bound to act in the interests of shareholders.

        Though a common Internet trope, this is incorrect. However, “legally” or not, you might find yourself unemployed should you ignore the shareholders.

    • xenospn 5 hours ago

      Good for one free crime of your choice

  • 2PqboPPmKegvanx 6 hours ago

    what law are you insinuating Aschenbrenner broke?

    • jghn 6 hours ago

      I say this with absolutely no evidence and only stating it as a hypothetical. But as an example it would be plausible that insider trading was involved.

      • 2PqboPPmKegvanx 6 hours ago

        trust us, it's quite clear you have no knowledge about the topic you are speaking on.

      • infecto 6 hours ago

        Then why state it?

        • axus 6 hours ago

          Because Hacker News appreciates discussion of the theoretical, that exceeds the bounds of what mainstream society thought was possible.

          • infecto 6 hours ago

            [flagged]

            • jghn 5 hours ago

              What I was specifically pointing at was it being a heavy AI play combined with the direct relationships he has at high levels with AI companies. For instance the chief of staff to Anthropic's CEO.

              What I was specifically referring to was a hypothetical that he could need a pardon. There was a question on what possible crime could be involved.

              All that said, I'd imagine if this was really happening that we wouldn't have today's headline in the first place.

dogmayor 7 hours ago

Shocking to see a highly levered and highly concentrated fund blow out /s

  • bagacrap 2 hours ago

    I feel warm on the inside

sakopov 5 hours ago

Equally interesting to me is how Citadel made up a rumor about the FED raising rates at this weeks FOMC meeting causing a historic selloff in AI stocks which then allowed them to pick up Situational Awareness on the cheap.