Invest Like the Best with Patrick O'Shaughnessy
00:12:55 · Jeremy Giffon
They can lie to themselves and say they're on it for other reasons but it's just to be entertained. That's obviously what the algorithms are selecting for. There's this idea that the most entertaining, novel, somewhat interesting, somewhat correct thing is going to set the actions and the consensus for everyone on a day to day basis and this translates into their actions.
00:13:17 · Patrick O'Shaughnessy
[00:13:17] S0: Vanta automates security and compliance for over 16,000 fast moving companies like Ramp, Cursor, and Harvey, keeping them audit ready around the clock. It's the number one agentic trust platform, and it now helps companies like yours watch for the risks that show up between audits, across your vendors, your AI tools, and your whole environment. Every new tool your team signs up for, every vendor that turns on AI features is an opportunity for something to go wrong, and most security programs weren't built for AI's pace of growth. The Vanta agent works like a twenty four seven GRC engineer in the background, finding issues, drafting fixes for you, and cutting vendor assessment time by up to 50%. Whether you're fast growing startup or a global enterprise, Vanta helps you earn and prove trust. Invest like the best listeners get a special offer for $1,000 off at vanta.com/invest. Ridgeline is the first end to end system of record with embedded AI for investment management firms, running portfolio accounting, reconciliation, reporting, trading, and compliance on one unified platform. Firms are moving off legacy technology and onto Ridgeline because of how far ahead Ridgeline's AI features are compared to anything else in investment management software. I've been hearing from a lot of investment managers about AI, and they fall roughly into two camps, with some unsure of where to even start and others convinced they can build their own order management system over a weekend. The reality is that running an investment firm will always require governance, controls, and a single source of truth for your data, and no amount of AI enthusiasm changes that requirement. Ridgeline is built on exactly that foundation, which is why I believe that firms that come out ahead in AI era will be the ones running on Ridgeline's unified platform. If you're serious about your firm's AI strategy, Ridgeline should be part of that conversation. You can request a demo at ridgeline.ai. Is this all just fueling the fire for the notion of power law in general? One of the things I've noticed in our show is it used to be that the variance was quite low. The very best one did a bit better, but not a crazy amount better than the worst one in terms of performance. And that has completely changed.
00:15:24 · Patrick O'Shaughnessy
And now there seems to be this threshold we were just talking about this morning, that if you breach the containment, if you breach this threshold, it literally feels like you have taken over the world's brain and just shoved everyone's eyes at your thing for a short period of time. The impact of those handful of things are so much bigger than the all the rest of them combined. So what you're playing for is really to be just one of these breakout things. Is that the right way to think about the timeline is that actually is all that matters is that you get one of those. So you should be living at the edge of the distribution as much as possible in what you're posting about writing about.
00:16:03 · Jeremy Giffon, Patrick O'Shaughnessy
[00:16:03] S2: Everything is just downstream of technological change. So the reason podcast followed a normal distribution was because the technology delivering it was an RSS feed. And now it's an algorithm and it's clips and I mean even the method. I'm sure some obscene amount of your viewers watching or listening on YouTube, which is new. Even if you subscribe to a podcast on YouTube they're not gonna show you every single episode in chronological order. So I think this stuff is all just new, just downstream of technology. I don't think something has changed in the content or in the listeners, it's just how it's delivered. In that sense, maybe one world where the podcast world sort of lags behind the YouTube world is that the podcast world is still highly naive to serving content to the algorithm. You know, if you get deep into the Twitter group chats, especially now that they've posted the algorithm, there are all these very specific things that you can do around replies and likes and length and all these numbers that the algorithm is selecting for streamers and people on YouTube and so I certainly understand that. I think maybe the reason it feels a little bit random is because podcasts still like really aren't into the meat of understanding that we are recording this video for a LLM to review and decide what it wants to show people and then people will decide if they like it or not. That first filter we don't really think about but that is the case. [00:17:22] S0: Does that stress you out? Does that feel deeply dystopian?
00:17:24 · Jeremy Giffon
[00:17:24] S2: I hear a lot of lamentation over the death of books. People don't read anymore. And it's so interesting to me because I've read a lot of books, I like books, I've spent a good portion of my life reading books. I don't see the big crisis that everyone laments about with books. Mean, the attention span thing maybe is true, like it's certainly way harder for me to read a book just on a pure focus. But I feel like the sum total of the interviews that I listen to and the things that I read and all this stuff are great. I don't think I don't have an appetite for books just because they're harder to read. I think I'm like feeling nourished from the other sources. If you think about porn, it's like more obviously bad because people don't have sex and they watch porn and it's fairly straightforward that sex is better than porn. That seems like an obvious thing. People will hold that up right next to books and to me the book thing feels a little bit like a swan song for a technology that there will still be a place for. It was the best way we had of delivering information and now there's new ways and they're more compelling and more interesting. You have to caveat that of course with I'm very sensitive to language and the terms that we use terminally online, brain rot, we recognize these are terms of death and rotting and destruction and very negative nihilistic terms. You do have to balance that with we didn't pick neutral or positive terms for these activities and I don't think anyone ever would self conceive of reading a lot of books as being this like very negative thing. The counter argument would be that we have this deep sense that it is bad. Maybe like everything it's just less forgiving. If you're highly disciplined and motivated, the way that you can use new media is better than ever, but if you're not then it's just going to be worse than ever. It's just going to be really tough.
00:19:08 · Patrick O'Shaughnessy, Jeremy Giffon
[00:19:08] S0: You mentioned the White House, I'm certainly this is the first White House that feels completely timeline native and reactive. [00:19:14] S2: Yes, I think it's the first modern administration for better for worse. [00:19:17] S0: What else does modern mean in that context other than timeline native?