Joe Lonsdale
Does his own confidence mean anything?
the same scored calls, split by how hard he was pushing at the mention that set his final stance. If credit rises with strength, his table-pounding carries information and you should weight it. If it's flat or inverted, his confidence is noise — treat a ×3 like a ×1. Cells under 5 calls are provisional and get no weight in the replay.
| he was | calls | credit | right/half/wrong | avg α | read |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ×3 table-pounding | 2 | 0.25 | 0/1/1 | -27% | provisional (n<5) |
| ×2 stated with reasoning | 11 | 0.55 | 4/4/3 | +14% | coin flip |
| ×1 offhand aside | 1 | 1.0 | 1/0/0 | +36% | provisional (n<5) |
Which kind of claim to trust
by the tier of the mention that set his final stance — a dated prediction is a different animal from a passing lean, and they don't have to score alike
| tier | calls | credit | right/half/wrong | avg α |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| explicit_prediction | 5 | 0.5 | 2/1/2 | -16% |
| positioning | 1 | 1.0 prov. | 1/0/0 | +77% |
| sentiment | 8 | 0.5 | 2/4/2 | +18% |
What he's actually good at
his row of the scoreboard — these are the exact cells rescore.py uses to weight his mentions. w = clamp(2 × credit, 0.3, 1.5), applied only at n ≥ 5.
Live book — 2 positions
his latest stance on every ACTIVE idea. Expression = what he is effectively long or short: supporting a bearish idea is a SHORT, opposing one is a LONG.
| idea | his stance | expression | conviction | flag | eval in |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🏛️ DOGE delivers real federal spending cuts under unified Republican control CONTESTED | oppose ×2 | ▲ LONG BAH | 16.0 | — | 59d |
| 🤖 Neoclouds are a transitory GPU arbitrage, not a durable business CONTESTED | oppose ×2 | ▲ LONG NBIS | 1.0 | — | 179d |
Where his book points
net push per primary instrument across his live stances — conviction × his agreement × the idea's direction. This is his implied book, not a position he disclosed.
Best and worst calls
How he argues
Latest from him
So I think disinflation is very important, and I think we have to find some way to get there. Chamath may be right that it's worth hitting assets to get to disinflation, that's something that Scott could be working on because of all the debt
It's really interesting what they did is they locked down the full supply of tons of data centers, tons of the power they needed, tons of the chips. They're very, very thoughtful. I mean, they're effectively, they're traders and they're very economic. And I think they have a lot of the stuff well.
Listen, Trump's negotiating, right? ... He's using this to negotiate. ... And I think it's a reasonable thing to use to negotiate and force them to do that.
In China and Indonesia and all these other countries, they are just shitting over the environment as they make things. I think tariffs are very reasonable in that case. It's not fair to make it more expensive for us because we're doing it well, and then we outsource it for them to destroy things.
And it's a really important point also that we should mention, is that the last four years, the economy has looked OK. But part of that is because government's been hiring like mad.
Let's take a million workers out of the consulting class around DC, out of the paper pusher class around DC, and let's actually deploy them to the actual productive economy.
If it was equal to what Elon was doing, it'd be at least five trillion dollars. And I push a bunch of them. They say, Oh, the Congressional Budget Office and all these things. I'm sure there's some tough things there. But like, this is crazy. We need to see what these cuts need to be on Doge. And we need to cut five trillion. And none of these people have the balls to do that. It's not the political will to do it, is my interpretation.
We had a big contest four years ago, L3, Raytheon, Northrop. These guys, in and out of government for decades, they've gotten tens of billions of dollars to the same technology area. When we went head to head with them, we didn't just beat them by a little bit. We shot down the hardened drones nine and a half times farther away. Same size, same power, nine and a half times. Completely wiped the floor.
because the way it's worked for 20 years, like EPROS, you could just raise $250 million this week. It's a great company.
I have someone who works with me, their spouse, was a real estate agent, and they are having a really tough couple of years because the industry has spiked up. If you get the industry down again, there are so many different places in America where people start making money again, with the title companies, with brokers, there are so many things that happen with that.
I think almost all reasonable Americans can see that our growth is ridiculously constrained
This is a key national security thing, too, because we need manufacturing here to be affordable and competitive in order for national security
And the reason they're that angry at them is they were purposely not defining the rules in certain cases and then going after people after not having to find it in order to kind of like play a gotcha game. It was very dishonorable. And Paul sees all that and there's no way he's going to allow that
Listen, I am very bullish Bitcoin. I love all the energy of our society around it
And I think the risks around how he's accessing this is actually very unusual and does scare me a bit