如何通过杠杆实现个人财富的指数增长

marsbitPubblicato 2024-08-11Pubblicato ultima volta 2024-08-12

星期一快乐,朋友们!

这可能是我写过的最好的帖子之一(我自己认为)。这是一系列关于投资、成功以及如何过上幸福生活的人生思考。

但首先,你这一周过得怎么样?在一周前的周一惨烈车祸中,你还幸存下来吗?

我与很多人交谈过,令人惊讶的是,许多人都遭遇了失败。

许多加密货币人士存在的一个巨大问题是,他们应用了马丁格尔策略(甚至都不知道),并认为这最终会让他们获胜。

你趁低买入,然后股价进一步下跌,于是你加大赌注,股价再次下跌,你投入更多资金,然后股价再次下跌,你投入最后的资金。令你惊讶的是,股价再次下跌,即使你的杠杆率较低(3-5 倍),你也可能被彻底击败。

一周前的周一,$ETH 在 4 分钟内下跌了 17%。

现在计算一下,如果您对该头寸有 5 倍的杠杆。

投资

如果您投入 x 个小时,您将赚取 y 金额,并生产出 z 金额的产品/服务。

嗯,至少大多数人都是这么想的。他们的思维是线性的。 

但这是正确的思考方式吗? 

如果你利用杠杆和时间,你就能获得复利。你产生的结果将添加到现有的层级中。 

如果你取 10 + 10 + 10 + 10 + 10 + 10 + 10 + 10 + 10,你会很容易地看到它等于 90。

但是如果我让你计算 40 年内投资的 10% 利率,大多数人会认为你只需将 10% + 10% 相加……四十次即可得到 400%。

但答案不是400%。 

答案是:4,525%。

这意味着 10 万美元的投资在 40 年后会变成 4,525,000 美元。

投资

上面说明了复利的原理。

我不会深入探讨这个问题,我只是想展示一个指数思维的例子。

利用杠杆在自己的生活中取得进步

大多数人对生活的看法过于现实。他们没有意识到杠杆可以让你从线性路径转向指数路径。

杠杆有多种形式,例如资本、技术、品牌、网络效应和人员管理。

利用它们来超越线性。你应该在生活中冒险,选择一份可以利用杠杆和复利的职业。典型的朝九晚五工作没有股权补偿,其上升空间非常有限。

相反,尝试自己创业,加入已经创业的人,在那里你可以获得灵活的角色,包括自己的职业发展、股权补偿,以及将来在其他领域或自己的创业公司运用你在那里学到的技能的可能性。

在这个现代社会,我想不出比创立自己的个人品牌更好的方法来最大限度地发挥影响力。我自己也做过,当我回想起我的历程时,我所创造的东西绝对令人惊叹。

人们之所以会读到我的想法,是因为这些想法都是我写的。你想从有切身经验的人那里了解投资、加密货币和最新的收益机会,而不是从你的博士大学教授那里了解。

在你做的每一件事中运用杠杆,开始思考几年后你的知识、技能和思维方式会因指数增长而增加多少。想得更远一些。那些相信自己能改变世界的人会改变世界。

关于承担风险和进行不对称赌注

我想说,一旦你的某种基本需求得到满足,你就应该敢于承担大风险,我喜欢这种 FIRE 思维方式(每月开支 x 12 个月 x 25)。

这个数字应该足以满足 4% 规则,这意味着您可以从股票市场投资组合中提取 4% 并且永远不会将其降至零(假设年增长率为 10%)。

然而,如果你还年轻,没有太多的义务和每月的开支,我认为在没有太多积蓄的情况下冒险是有意义的。

问问自己,最糟糕的情况是什么?通常最糟糕的情况是你最终会回到原来的状态。另一方面,如果你敢于冒险,你可以将现有的财富增加 10 倍(这不仅适用于金钱,也适用于技能和机会)。

瞄准不对称投注(请参阅下面我的推文中的示例):

投资

不对称上行赌注是指如果您赢了,上行收益会为您带来 10 到 100 倍的净收益,但是如果您输了,您只会损失很少。

远离那些如果你正确则会获得小额回报,但如果你错误则会面临巨大潜在风险的风险。

如下所示。

投资

优先考虑长期收益(几年/几十年后)而不是短期收益(每月薪水的舒适状态)。无论如何,生存很重要。

问题在于,许多人对自己的工作感到十分满意,随着薪水的增加,尝试更大回报的风险变得越来越没有吸引力。

替代成本越来越大(至少感觉是这样)。然而,事实是,几乎每个人(至少在西方世界)如果在尝试新机会时失败了,都可以回到现在的工作岗位或类似的替代岗位,薪水保持不变。

全民基本收入刺激创业

摆脱享乐主义的束缚,你就能专注于自己真正的激情或人生使命。我读过 Rutger Bregman 的一本书,名为《现实主义者的乌托邦》,他在书中说,UBI(全民基本收入)将刺激创业精神和社会的创造力增长。

原因其实很简单。假设每个人每月都会从银行账户中收到 3,000 美元。我们还假设这笔钱足够维持生活,这样你就不需要做任何额外的工作来维持你的收入。

全民基本收入将为创业者提供安全感。在实施全民基本收入的某些地区,创业率增长了301 %。有数据显示,一个州的创业率每增加 1 个百分点,贫困率就会下降 2%。

反对 UBI 的一个论点是,许多人最终会变得懒惰、沮丧和无所事事。虽然这可能是真的,但我相信大多数人会尝试追随某种激情。

如果通过成为视频游戏、电视剧或创建初创企业方面的专家,我相信我们最终将获得 UBI 的净积极效应和比我们今天看到的更多的创新。

你一生中真正想要什么?

你可能听过这句话:

给我六个小时砍倒一棵树,我会花前四个小时磨斧头。”

我提到这句话是因为我认为当你面临重大决策并选择专注于什么样的工作时,这句话很重要。

如果你想知道你一生中应该专注于什么样的工作,或者你明年应该优先考虑什么,那么最好花几天时间,在完全沉默的情况下真正制定一个有可操作步骤的计划,而不是马上开始顺其自然。

投资

正如上面《爱丽丝梦游仙境》中的那句话,如果你不知道自己想去哪里,那么你走哪个方向都无关紧要。

重点是花更多的时间思考你真正想做什么。大多数人只要相信自己,就能创造出美好的事物。

我认为在当今的社交媒体社会中,观看关于如何改善生活的短片和抖音视频是一种巨大的趋势,但很少有人付诸行动。他们观看视频,但最终却什么也没做。你可能会觉得很有成效,但这实际上并不比看电视剧好。这只是短期的多巴胺。

问问自己,你是否为自己的长期成长做了任何事情,或者你所做的所有活动是否都是基于短期快乐(食物,性,运动,让你有感觉的视频/音乐,与女孩见面,玩游戏,毒品,酒精)。

投资

虽然做这些事情并没有什么错,但不要让你的生活只围绕着它们。毕竟,你不是猴子。你可以延迟满足(想想棉花糖实验),但猴子不能。

长期活动(长期快乐)的例子:

  • 学习一门语言
  • 创办企业/小公司
  • 完成一场马拉松
  • 获得大学学位
  • 住在另一个国家
  • 写一本书
  • 学习可能改变你职业生涯的技能
  • 投资
  • 减肥
  • 创立个人品牌
  • +++

为什么成为某个领域的佼佼者会带来巨大的回报

另一个因素是,找到你的终极目标是一件非常有趣的事情。当我在一家公司每周工作 50-60 小时时,我讨厌每天的生活,起初我以为这是因为工作时间太长。

但事实并非如此。我讨厌的是不去做一些对我的生活没有影响的事情。今天我为 Route2FI 投入的每一小时工作(是的,只有我一个人)最终都会得到某种回报。好吧,不一定,但好处和坏处都属于我。

这让我非常有动力做好这项工作,因为除了我之外没有人能使这项工作取得成功。如果我不出现,我的动力就会停滞。

如果你仔细想想,成为某个领域 10% 的佼佼者并不一定很难。你只需要花很多时间(努力工作)。但如果你想成为 1-2% 的佼佼者,那么你也必须聪明地工作。

这是我绝对应该改进的地方。有时我会想,如果我外包更多工作,或者完全放弃写推文或新闻通讯帖子,我的业务规模会扩大多少。

然而,我确实很享受这种感觉。而现在,这并不是为了从市场或合作机会中榨取最多的钱。我这样做也是因为它给了我满足感。我现在写下这些文字是因为我从中得到了乐趣。写作是我永远都会做的事情,也是我不想外包的事情。

人生漫长,所以要敢于要求自己想要的东西。不要满足于现状。这既关系到你的事业,也关系到你的伴侣和朋友。如果你想在生活中获得好运,你需要让自己做好准备,让好运来找你。有趣的是,当你努力工作时,好运往往会找到你。

停下来几秒钟思考一下这个问题:

“我一生中想要什么?”

你可能会回答一些你今天没有回答的问题或你错过的问题。不过,让我问你这个问题。

为了得到自己想要的东西,你付出了多少努力?你投入了多少时间?你想创建一个成功的抖音品牌,但还没有开始,因为你觉得它太饱和了?

大多数人推迟开始,或者实际上从未开始做某事,因为他们没有设定小步骤。他们只考虑最终目标,并得出结论,如果不尝试,就不可能实现目标。

获取具体知识

Naval 说你需要特定的知识。特定的知识是只有你才拥有的知识。创造这种知识最简单的方法就是拥有个人品牌。正如我之前提到的。人们读到我的想法是因为我是写这些想法的人。

我们可以把这段文字发给一个不知名的 Twitter 账户,但也不会有太多的浏览量。不是因为文字不够好,而是因为他们没有粉丝。但是,如果你重复这个练习(多年来每周发布),合适的部落就会找到你。

这是我擅长的事情,坚持不懈。我知道我不是最好的作家。我知道如果我花更多时间编辑、制作更好的图形、在发布之前请人给我反馈等,我的文字可能会更好。但我没有做到完美,而是以 80%-90% 的完成度发布。

对我来说,这是完成任务的唯一方法。随着时间的推移,我对此感到非常高兴。我很自豪地回顾这里的 100 多篇文章。如果我太过追求完美,也许我只能完成 25% 的工作量。

获取专业知识。敢于发表奇特的观点。有些人会喜欢你的独特风格。用你的长处而不是你的弱点来定义自己。想象一下,如果你只关注自己的长处,你会有多优秀。

你可以成为某个领域的顶尖 1%。 而不是将你的销售技能从 45% 提高到 50%(这只是一个随机的例子,但我的观点是,要成为最优秀的人之一,你应该专注于你天生擅长的领域)。

确保你有足够的钱来根据你真正想做的事情做出决定,而不是因为对金钱的极度渴求而做出这些决定。

因为在我看来,你能做的最好的事情就是你有内在的动力去做这件事。是的,做普通的工作可以有很大的内在动力,但如果雇主停止支付薪水,大多数人都会辞职。

要了解您是否正在全心全意地做某事,一个很好的测试就是问自己:如果不考虑钱,我会做什么?

您可以观看下面 Alan Watts 的视频。

十年前这句话给了我很大的启发:

很难做好你不关心的工作。

此外,从事自己不喜欢的工作会让你很难对生活完全满意。无论你从事什么工作,都要努力做到最好。要勇敢,在生活中抓住一些机会,尤其是在职业生涯的初期或 20 多岁的时候。

努力与那些在各自领域中世界上最伟大的人交往(就我而言,我在 Twitter 上认识了这些人,我很高兴也在现实生活中认识了他们中的许多人)。

这样想想,你的朋友像你一样真正对某个特定话题感兴趣的可能性很小,然而,在 Twitter 上,有成千上万的人像你一样深入研究同样的问题。

找到他们并与他们成为朋友。

相信我,这是值得的。

我暂时停下来。

如果您喜欢该帖子并且我是否应该分享更多类似的内容,请告诉我。

回头见。

Letture associate

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

In mid-June, three seemingly independent industry events—the compliance-driven throttling of Fable 5, the open-sourcing of GLM-5.2, and the leaked release timeline for GPT-5.6—are pushing the global AI industry toward a watershed moment. These shifts signal a fundamental restructuring of the industry's underlying logic. First, **"usability" has substantially overtaken "advanced capabilities"** as the primary weight, pushing the global large language model (LLM) supply chain into a "dual-track" phase of controlled closed-source and local open-source coexistence. Second, **the competitive moats of closed-source giants are shifting**. Their technical focus is moving from "language intelligence" toward "spatial intelligence (world models)"—a domain heavily reliant on computing power. Third, faced with常态化 transnational compliance risks, **a "model-agnostic" decoupled design has become a survival necessity for application-layer developers to maintain business continuity.** The article details how Anthropic's Fable 5, despite its advanced engineering feats, was restricted for non-U.S. citizens within 72 hours of launch, highlighting how geopolitical compliance can instantly limit even the most advanced models. In response, the open-source camp, exemplified by Zhipu AI's MIT-licensed GLM-5.2, is gaining market share by offering stable performance improvements and significant cost advantages (up to 70% savings for enterprises), while achieving full adaptation with domestic semiconductor platforms. Meanwhile, closed-source leaders like OpenAI are pivoting. The anticipated GPT-5.6 reportedly shifts focus from language to spatial intelligence and world models, aiming to rebuild a generational gap in areas like 3D understanding, simulation, and industrial design that demand immense compute. The core conclusion is that the LLM supply chain's logic has changed. Enterprises must now evaluate infrastructure based on a composite of technical performance and policy compliance. For developers, complete reliance on a single closed-source API poses unacceptable risk. Implementing a truly model-agnostic architecture—enabling swift switches to compliant, locally deployable open-source alternatives—is no longer just good practice but a fundamental baseline for business continuity.

marsbit42 min fa

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

marsbit42 min fa

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

The article discusses the ongoing "token subsidy war" among AI giants like OpenAI and Anthropic, questioning whether it's nearing its end. It reveals that current AI subscription prices are heavily subsidized, with some plans offering tokens at up to 70 times the actual cost to attract and retain heavy users, especially developers and enterprises. This strategy mirrors past internet-era subsidy battles, but with a key difference: AI tokens lack "lock-in" effects. Unlike ride-hailing or food delivery apps, users can easily switch between AI providers as APIs become standardized, making it difficult for companies to raise prices post-subsidy. The piece highlights a structural asymmetry in the competition. Giants like Google, with massive advertising revenue, can afford to subsidize tokens indefinitely, akin to using "tokens as a weapon." In contrast, venture-backed companies like OpenAI and Anthropic face pressure to become profitable, especially as they approach IPO. The article cites Google Ventures founder Bill Maris, who suggests Google could slash token prices by 80%, putting immense pressure on competitors. Two potential endgames are presented: the "internet service" model (subsidize, monopolize, then raise prices) and the "utility" model (tokens become a standardized, low-margin commodity like electricity). Given the low switching costs, the latter seems more likely. The competition may not have a single winner but could instead accelerate AI's evolution into a foundational, infrastructure-level technology, akin to a public utility. For now, users continue to benefit from heavily subsidized token costs.

marsbit59 min fa

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

marsbit59 min fa

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

"Beyond the Pitch: The Profit Game Around the World Cup" The FIFA World Cup transcends being a sporting spectacle, evolving into a massive global arena for speculation and profit-seeking. The 2026 tournament has amplified this dynamic, creating a multi-layered ecosystem of financial opportunism alongside the football. **Prediction markets** have surged into the mainstream. Platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi saw trading volumes for World Cup contracts soar, attracting new users with their financial trading model and high-profile, chain-based wealth stories that overshadow traditional sports betting in terms of growth and narrative. However, **traditional sportsbooks** remain the dominant force, leveraging established user habits, legal markets, and comprehensive product offerings to handle the vast majority of speculative wagers, with projections suggesting record-breaking betting volumes. Capital markets also react. **"Concept stocks"** in countries like South Korea and Japan experience volatile price swings based on team performance and anticipated fan spending on items like chicken, beer, and viewing parties, effectively becoming a stock market reflecting fan sentiment. The **ticket resale market** has become a sophisticated arena for arbitrage. Prices fluctuate wildly based on team draws and star power, with sellers sometimes listing tickets they don't yet own in a practice akin to short-selling, while FIFA's own "Right to Buy" tokens add another layer of speculative trading. **Collectibles and merchandise** offer another avenue. Panini sticker albums, with their inherent scarcity and nostalgic value, can become high-value collectibles. Limited-edition or locally themed jerseys command significant premiums on secondary markets, and even counterfeit vendors profit from fans' desire for affordable match-day identity. The **cryptocurrency** space has seen a frenzy of speculative, unauthorized World Cup-themed meme coins on chains like Solana. These tokens, often exploiting team names and player imagery, experience extreme pump-and-dump cycles, creating stories of massive gains for a few early entrants and steep losses for many others. Finally, an entire industry thrives on **providing information and tools** to other speculators. Developers create platforms like SeatSidekick to track ticket inventory and prices, while paid Telegram groups and subscriptions sell betting tips and predictions, monetizing the widespread desire for an informational edge. In essence, the World Cup has become a compressed, global laboratory for speculation. While the games determine champions on the field, a parallel, complex network of financial transactions—spanning prediction contracts, bets, stocks, tickets, collectibles, crypto, and information services—settles its own scores in the global market.

marsbit1 h fa

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

marsbit1 h fa

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

This article explains the three primary methods for Codex to interact with a computer, each with distinct use cases, permission boundaries, and trust levels. **1. Computer Use:** This offers the broadest access, allowing Codex to visually control and interact with the graphical user interface of authorized macOS/Windows apps, system settings, and even iOS simulators. It's ideal for tasks lacking APIs or structured tools, such as operating legacy software or multi-app workflows. However, it's the slowest method and has the widest permission scope, requiring careful supervision for sensitive actions. **2. Chrome Extension:** This grants Codex access to the user's logged-in Chrome browser state, including cookies, profiles, and open tabs. It's best for tasks requiring user identity across websites like Gmail, LinkedIn, Salesforce, or internal dashboards. Its key advantage is multi-tab control for complex workflows. While more powerful for browser-based tasks than Computer Use, it carries higher sensitivity as actions are performed under the user's identity. **3. In-App Browser:** This is a browser isolated within the Codex thread, separate from the user's personal browsing data. It excels in web development and debugging scenarios—previewing local servers, testing responsive layouts, or annotating designs directly on the page. Its isolation is a strength for development but a limitation for tasks requiring login sessions. The core principle is to choose the narrowest, safest, and most structured interface for the task. Use plugins or MCPs first, resort to visual control (Computer Use) only for GUI-dependent tasks, employ the Chrome extension for identity-reliant browser work, and prefer the In-App Browser for isolated development. **Appshots** are clarified as a fourth, complementary tool for *inputting* context—capturing a screenshot of a window to point Codex to something—rather than a method for Codex to *act*. Together, this layered approach highlights a key to AI agent productization: not granting unlimited permissions, but constraining them within clear boundaries for specific tasks while preserving user oversight.

marsbit3 h fa

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

marsbit3 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片