Just to clarify, I'm not talking about making speculative plays -- I'm talking about investing in the obvious infrastructure-level winners (NVDA, ALGO, MSFT, GOOG, AMZN), as well as the current big cap tech companies that are extremely well-positioned to create and leverage huge moats in order to ensure that they capture tremendous upside in these emerging AI-driven markets (TSLA, PLTR, GOOG and AMZN once again, etc.)

And I still believe that BTC and other "bluechip" cryptos (ETH, SOL, etc.) remain solid long term holds, as well.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5846060&forum_id=2...id#49746436)

This is probably directionally correct, but there will still be more middle ground than that. Lots of faggots reading this right now could -- if they simply took action -- pretty easily invest six figures of capital (in some cases, seven figures of capital) into the STONKS I have called out in the OP.

If you're holding six (or especially seven) figures worth of capital in those STONKS heading into this process, there's a very good chance you're going to come out doing very well on the other side. After all, what % of human beings on earth right now fit that criteria? Maybe a few hundred thousand total (especially if we lift the bar to seven figures worth of capital investment)?

Perhaps you won't be living a life of unimaginable opulence on a private island like the real winners, but you also won't be living in a shitty hovel and eating cold garbage scraps like the vast majority of proles who will be PERMAFUCKED FOR LIFE. Instead, worst case is that you'll emerge with real capital which you may still be able to turn into yuuuuge generational wealth just as long as you continue to play your cards right down the line.

Ironically, out of all of the messageborts on the internet in 2026, XO is perhaps uniquely well-positioned to both recognize where this AI shit is heading *and* deploy meaningful money to capitalize on it for personal gain... just like we were with crypto.

And yet very few people here managed to get rich from crypto.

The question is how many of you faggots will learn your lesson and actually take decisive action this time around?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5846060&forum_id=2...id#49746506)

"I would diversify more broadly to better ensure exposure to the biggest winner."

Not sure I follow here brother, can you elaborate?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5846060&forum_id=2...id#49746566)

I think AGI is achievable and not all that far out, and I think that the winner will use it to cannibalize value from much of the rest of the market, meaning you'll still get wealthy through the disproportionate winner even as value of its competition atrophies

In the longer term, being in on the actual winner will be more important than being in on the ancillary supports, so I would diversify for that, with the benefit of still being heavily exposed to the types of companies you mentioned

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5846060&forum_id=2...id#49746619)

Oh I would never call someone an idiot for holding a solid portion of their portfolio in one or more reasonable ETFs. No disagreement here.

But I do think that we're currently in a unique situation where there's an incredible asymmetry happening right now: if you're paying attention (most people aren't) and you're not retarded (most people are), it doesn't take *too* much foresight to see where this is heading -- and once you clear that hurdle, it also doesn't take too much intelligence to reason out which individual companies are almost certainly going to HUGELY benefit from this process over the next ~5-10 years.

And then even within the winnowed subset of people who reach that stage of the process, a substantial percentage are still going to be too poor or too chickenshit (or both) to actually stake major capital behind their convictions.

Those who clear all of those hurdles now or in a relatively short time window from now will capture incredibly massive upside, to a degree that we certainly haven't seen since crypto (which I think was also a far riskier and more opaque bet). Frankly it amazes me to think that there are people out there who are smart enough to browse XO but might still be dumb enough not to make these moves. I guess some people just really love staying poor.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5846060&forum_id=2...id#49750280)

I think most of it hinges on a couple inflection points: (1) can humans actually build in safeguards to retain control until they can merge into it (I don't think so, and I'm not sure why AI would want to actually merge instead of just creating a drone class...but I'm no superintelligence), and (2) can the people who want to rule build enough tech death squads before being exposed/giving the game away?

We're all pretty fucking stupid. I don't bet on either being true, let alone both. So I'm really doubtful that things will end well even for what seems at first to be the top

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5846060&forum_id=2...id#49746656)

2. AI supercharges winner-take-all dynamics. Merely being top 1% or even top 0.1% won't be good enough.

3. Yes, we'll lose control.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5846060&forum_id=2...id#49747768)

ETFs have a respectable place in a balanced and reasonable portfolio, but there are also times for big plays and this is one of them.

If you believe that AI is headed where my OP presumes it is, it's time to place some bets -- and unlike the early days of the internet, we're extremely lucky in that it's actually very easy to confidently identify at least some of the longterm winners right now.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5846060&forum_id=2...id#49746578)

Imagine my shock to see a notorious midwit like you propounding this perspective!

This "logic" quickly pancakes down to pure unadulterated nihilism that only supports total paralysis. Being "merely" Top 1% in wealth and intelligent = you're completely fukt it's so over, but if you can make it into the Top .0001% you'll be doing awesome? OK yeah that totally makes sense, because... uh... wait, why does that make sense again?

What *could* actually happen is that all humans without exception end up getting totally fukt by the rise of AGI -- and I think most people (including myself) who are seriously into thinking about where this leads readily acknowledge that possibility. If shit really goes off the rails on a macro level, then by far the most likely outcome is that no level of wealth or intelligence will insulate you from annihilation.

But then again, if you truly believe that's the future we're heading into, why are you even bothering to continue to live right now? Just kill yourself and spare yourself the misery of the world-ending apocalypse that lies ahead. And yet here you are, continuing to poast. Odd case.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5846060&forum_id=2...id#49750273)

i don't necessarily buy it, but that's the argument

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5846060&forum_id=2...id#49746646)

the frontier AI companies will always be the best and most profitable investment for this reason (in the hypothetical world we're imagining)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5846060&forum_id=2...id#49746663)

1. If we're hypothesizing about a world where *true* AGI has not only been achieved but is fully scaled up and commoditized, we're so far down the path on this process that we might as well be having a conversation about what life on Earth will be like once we've colonized a few other planets. I don't doubt it will happen at some point -- and quite possibly much sooner than any of us are ready for -- but it's extremely hard to really conceptualize exactly what that world actually looks like, and we can say definitively that it's not happening tomorrow. There's still plenty of runway left (be it a few years or a decade or two) to make smart economic bets on this process as it unfolds, and there's absolutely no reason not to place those bets.

2. I think that in a medium-term timeline, the process that you're describing also holds much more true for "pure" (i.e. unembodied) AI than it does for embodied AI. LLMs and their ilk will indeed be quickly commoditized in function for the vast majority of purposes, which is one of the reasons I'm not planning to necessarily invest in OpenAI when it IPOs. But cars that drive themselves *and* can be efficiently mass produced at scale? Or intelligent and effective humanoid robots that can similarly be mass-produced and then sold to industry / consumers at a reasonable price point? The companies that are capable of creating products which profitably address those insanely massive new markets (at least in the early years of their maturation) are going to be strictly limited in number due to how labor + capital intensive those endeavors are and how difficult and expensive it is to achieve the necessary economies of scale to make the economics work -- and that's the primary reason that I am so bullish on Tesla in the long run.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5846060&forum_id=2...id#49750276)

You can invest directly in OpenAI or Perplexity w Templum.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5846060&forum_id=2...id#49746676)

nlr holds nuclear power generation companies (constellation), manufacturers of reactors (cameco, which owns 49% of Westinghouse), nuclear startups (oklo), and uranium miners.

ura is more volatile and mainly holds uranium miners.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5846060&forum_id=2...id#49747688)

That's a good question, and I haven't actually given that a ton of thought. We're going to be an incredibly power-hungry world for the foreseeable future (much moreso than at any other time in the past), so I think we could definitely see major movement there.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5846060&forum_id=2...id#49750278)