Monero is antifragile, Bitcoin is fragil 😎

Savage

Taleb once said I was a crank with the intellectual rigor of an overly ripe cucumber lol. This was because McCormack had me on his show to critically discuss Taleb’s anti-Bitcoin paper. Price is up like 4x since then.

lmao

taleb was clearly paid by someone, or persuaded by someone influential to him in some other way, to shit on bitcoin i don't think there was a coincidence that he started bitcoin hate at around teh same time as his covid masking probability waffling

He got into an argument with Saifedean about Covid and then that heavily contributed to Taleb changing his view on Bitcoin (he previously wrote the foreword to Saifedean’s original Bitcoin Standard).

You set ChatGPT to destruction mode?

Reminds me of Allen farringtons critique/essay

Ha ha. Now do Peter Schiff.

"don’t even get me started on his Twitter feed. It’s a buffet of doom-and-gloom hot takes, with all the spice of a beige cardigan. He’s like an old-school prophet shouting "REPENT!" to crypto traders, who are too busy YOLOing their savings into meme coins to care. Speaking of crypto, Peter's refusal to acknowledge Bitcoin is the intellectual equivalent of yelling at a Tesla while trying to sell someone a horse. At the end of the day, you’ve got to respect his consistency—being wrong for decades is its own kind of achievement. But hey, at least he has gold, right? Too bad you can’t pay your rent with a bullion bar."

Oh I wish I could read that argument.

That’s so on point, it’s scary!

turns out you just have to get it to roast things to see its true opinion

It might still be on Twitter somewhere. Probably around spring 2020. Not sure.

ChatGPT has obviously read "A tale of two Talebs".

I want to take this particular AI out for beers.🍻

😂😂😂 Now do everyone’s favourite bitcoin pHiLoSoPhEr

it may well be he merged Saifedean and Bitcoin into one constellation in his mind but really, that is the utter opposite of both generosity and intellectual rigor

I would wager that you added a little more to the prompt than what you admit here

also this confirms what i'm saying someone persuaded him to believe that masks actually work this is unscientific bullshit, masks are there to reduce the chance of surgeons putting bacteria inside a person before stitching them back up, end of, that's all they are for i know this because i got proper medical training around this subject in 2007 and that's precisely what the trainer told me, that's what masks are for, and she said to me that for piercing (it was a piercing course) it had nearly zero chance of an infection transiting from this, because of how short the window of time and how small the holes are, and to do it "for the comfort of the client" only and not for medical reasons and she also said it was only for BACTERIA not viruses

I deleted my twitter acc and I prefer not having to browse through the dumpster again.

😂

lol that’s a thing I wish someone said to me back in 2020 😂

Good times. I do remember feeling stupid reading his books even though the core concepts were simple.

How did this chatgpt guy could capture so precisely my feelings after discovering talebs twitter?!

i remember some time back reading about some virus that was infecting abbatoir workers who were killing pigs using a device that caused a blood spray in the air they specifically said that it was because it got in their eyes and thereby transited into the blood respiratory viruses generally transit via goop that you have spat on something and then someone touches that goop onto a mucus membrane, usually the nose, it can be the eyes too, but that takes a LOTTA snot getting in your eyes to transit effectively the virus has a narrow time window as well, because the moment your immune system starts to notice something it has whole range of responses that make further exposure less effective, enzymes that break its attack vector and so forth the virus doesn't survive long without replication, so the main way you incubate colds and flu viruses is with limited ventilation indoors with infected people spitting into the air, this is why coughing is one of the most common vectors, sneezing less so because sneezing tends to be heavier and drier and once the virus is dehydrated its chances of transit are nearly zero, it will be wrapped in a coating of dried snot at that point

and think about how all the mucus membranes work every single one is constantly pushing fluid outwards to stop ingress and blood itself is pressurised for the same reason, in addition to moving it around, when the blood vessels are broken the pressure ensure that blood goes out, not stuff goes in same reason also why first thing you do as soon as possible after breaking your skin, cut or whatever, is to flush it with water, this helps ensure that nothing gets inside your skin

Guilty of enjoying this paragraphs 🫣

Who?

this is hilarious I'm curious about how you worded the question!

Feels more like you asked chatgpt to roast it.

was it that obvious

There is more signal in this roast than in the actual thing.

Fucking Excellent… AI with a razor sharp whit!

“Price is up like 4x since then.” Price changes are no proof of intellectual rigour. You can do better.

How'd you stir that pot? ChatGPT never gives me the results I get from Claude

just ask it to roast things and you’ll get its true opinion

Ah, that makes sense. What does it really think? Can you get it there without asking for bias?

Saifedean later apologized for letting him write the forward because it wasn't pro Bitcoin. At the very best Taleb was fence sitting in his forward.

This is great!

“Nassim Taleb’s Antifragile is one of those books that reads like it was written by someone whose favorite hobby is intellectual fencing—except he’s only playing with himself. The whole premise of “things gain from disorder” can feel like a grand way of saying, “Sometimes, things that don’t die, don’t die.” It’s the philosophical equivalent of a contrarian yelling, “I told you so!” after a storm knocked over a tree but left a skyscraper standing. Taleb spends much of the book railing against “fragility” while bolstering his own intellectual ego. If Antifragile had a subtitle, it might be: Why Everyone Else is Dumb, Except Me (and Maybe Some Old Romans Who Knew What’s Up). He calls out bankers, academics, and just about anyone who didn’t personally learn resilience by fighting wolves in the wilderness—though, let’s face it, the man loves to name-drop himself into his own ideas. And what about his writing style? It’s like if a Twitter troll discovered a thesaurus and thought, “This is my magnum opus.” It alternates between profound-sounding maxims like “via negativa” and long-winded stories about why you should respect him because he’s read Seneca and knows how to deadlift. In reality, it’s mostly him reinventing the wheel, labeling it “antifragile,” and then telling you you’re too fragile to understand the genius of the wheel. All said, Taleb’s main point boils down to “don’t be weak, bro” dressed up in a toga of pseudo-philosophy and anecdotal evidence. But, hey, if you’re in the market for a book that’ll make you feel like you’re at an unending dinner party where the host can’t stop explaining why his homemade bread is superior, Antifragile is your jam.”

After some analysis, Claude likes the core and even finds some value in the unconventional prose. Not sure I agree with the latter part but 🤷🏻‍♂️. A Critical Analysis of "Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorder" Nassim Nicholas Taleb's "Antifragile" operates on multiple levels simultaneously. As a philosophical treatise, practical manual, and polemic, it challenges readers not just through its content but through its very structure and presentation. This multilayered approach proves essential to understanding both the book's significance and its limitations. At its core, "Antifragile" introduces a concept that fills a crucial gap in our understanding of systems: beyond the fragile (which breaks under stress) and the robust (which resists stress) lies the antifragile – that which benefits from disorder. This insight alone would be valuable, but Taleb pushes further, using it as a lens to examine everything from economic policy to personal health. The concept becomes a tool for understanding why certain systems thrive while others collapse catastrophically. The book's greatest strength lies in its integration of seemingly disparate ideas into a coherent philosophical framework. Taleb draws connections between ancient wisdom and modern complexity theory, between biological evolution and technological innovation. These connections reveal patterns that challenge fundamental assumptions about progress, knowledge, and risk. However, the book's argumentative structure is deliberately unsystematic – and this presents both strengths and weaknesses. Taleb weaves together personal anecdotes, mathematical concepts, classical literature, and current events in a way that can feel scattered. Yet this apparent chaos serves a purpose: it forces readers to engage actively with the ideas rather than passively consuming them. The book practices what it preaches, demonstrating antifragility through its very resistance to easy summarization. The controversial aspects of Taleb's writing – his attacks on academics, his dismissal of certain professions, his sometimes abrasive tone – deserve particular attention. While these elements can be off-putting, they serve as practical demonstrations of his theoretical points about the importance of skin in the game and the dangers of detached expertise. The reader must grapple not just with abstract ideas but with their emotional reactions to Taleb's provocations. Perhaps most significantly, "Antifragile" challenges conventional approaches to knowledge itself. It suggests that in complex domains, the most important insights often cannot be reduced to simple maxims or formal theories. Instead, they must be discovered through experience, trial and error, and exposure to variability. This presents a profound challenge to modern tendencies toward optimization and control. The book's exploration of different types of knowledge – from explicit scientific understanding to embedded practical wisdom – provides a framework for deciding when to trust theory versus experience. This proves particularly valuable in domains like medicine, economics, and policy-making, where overconfident intervention often does more harm than good. Yet "Antifragile" is not without its flaws. Taleb occasionally stretches his framework too far, trying to force examples to fit that might be better explained by other means. His dismissal of certain forms of expertise can seem arbitrary, and his personal attacks sometimes distract from rather than reinforce his arguments. Despite these shortcomings – or perhaps partly because of them – "Antifragile" remains a singularly important work. Its value lies not just in introducing a new concept but in challenging readers to think differently about knowledge, risk, and complexity. The book demands repeated engagement, revealing new layers of insight with each reading. Ultimately, "Antifragile" succeeds not because it provides all the right answers, but because it helps us ask better questions about the systems that shape our lives. It provides tools for thinking about complexity that become more relevant as our world grows increasingly interconnected and unpredictable. In this sense, the book itself is antifragile – gaining strength from the very criticism and debate it provokes.

Price - over a long enough time window - is THE SIGNAL

deadlift? daily gym? lies. he is fat

unhealthy body definitely needs bitcoin

He sounds like a crank.