golergka
@golergka
Past bets that played out
These are the clearest thesis calls with observable outcomes, linked back to the original videos.
Post discusses difficulty of auditing ML model weights and the security risk of open models being “Manchurian candidates.” It’s a general AI security/governance debate with no concrete corporate event, product announcement, regulation, or catalyst. Low direct tradability; at most it gestures toward demand for AI security, model governance, and closed/proprietary model preference.
Post discusses difficulty of auditing ML model weights and the security risk of open models being “Manchurian candidates.” It’s a general AI security/governance debate with no concrete corporate event, product announcement, regulation, or catalyst. Low direct tradability; at most it gestures toward demand for AI security, model governance, and closed/proprietary model preference.
Post discusses difficulty of auditing ML model weights and the security risk of open models being “Manchurian candidates.” It’s a general AI security/governance debate with no concrete corporate event, product announcement, regulation, or catalyst. Low direct tradability; at most it gestures toward demand for AI security, model governance, and closed/proprietary model preference.
What this channel is watching now
Recent mentions show where this author is concentrating attention right now.
Latest videos and market context
Recent source posts from this author. Create an account to inspect the complete persisted research trail.
max guy 😐 @GolerGkA 9m How the hell do you audit the weights? The real danger of open models is a Manchurian candidat...
Post discusses difficulty of auditing ML model weights and the security risk of open models being “Manchurian candidates.” It’s a general AI security/governance debate with no concrete corporate event, product announcement, regulation, or catalyst. Low direct tradability; at most it gestures toward demand for AI security, model governance, and closed/proprietary model preference.
max guy 😐 @GolerGkA 24m what the hell happened to 5.5 so it started to reply with "Annotation X"? is it a model or ha...
A social post complaining that “5.5” started replying with “Annotation X,” possibly due to a model or harness update; no market, macro, company, or financial information provided.
max guy 😐 @GolerGkA 36m What’s the best coding games for autonomous programmatic invocation mode (like claude-p)? 58
Non-financial social post asking about “coding games” for autonomous programmatic invocation mode (like claude-p). No market, macro, sector, company, or tradable catalyst content.
max guy 😐 @GolerGkA 4h nothing like spending $600 of my own money per month on ai and still feeling token poor 5 150
A social post complaining about spending ~$600/month on AI services and still feeling “token poor.” No companies, products, or investable claims are specified.
Proof-backed call history
These are recent thesis calls tied to original source content where available.
Post discusses difficulty of auditing ML model weights and the security risk of open models being “Manchurian candidates.” It’s a general AI security/governance debate with no concrete corporate event, product announcement, regulation, or catalyst. Low direct tradability; at most it gestures toward demand for AI security, model governance, and closed/proprietary model preference.
Post discusses difficulty of auditing ML model weights and the security risk of open models being “Manchurian candidates.” It’s a general AI security/governance debate with no concrete corporate event, product announcement, regulation, or catalyst. Low direct tradability; at most it gestures toward demand for AI security, model governance, and closed/proprietary model preference.
Post discusses difficulty of auditing ML model weights and the security risk of open models being “Manchurian candidates.” It’s a general AI security/governance debate with no concrete corporate event, product announcement, regulation, or catalyst. Low direct tradability; at most it gestures toward demand for AI security, model governance, and closed/proprietary model preference.
Post discusses difficulty of auditing ML model weights and the security risk of open models being “Manchurian candidates.” It’s a general AI security/governance debate with no concrete corporate event, product announcement, regulation, or catalyst. Low direct tradability; at most it gestures toward demand for AI security, model governance, and closed/proprietary model preference.
Post discusses difficulty of auditing ML model weights and the security risk of open models being “Manchurian candidates.” It’s a general AI security/governance debate with no concrete corporate event, product announcement, regulation, or catalyst. Low direct tradability; at most it gestures toward demand for AI security, model governance, and closed/proprietary model preference.
The source is a political comment/question referencing historical actions in Germany (banning opposition parties) and contains no market, economic, company, or policy information that can be tied to a specific tradable catalyst.
Post claims a US–Israel arrangement functioned like a ~50% discount on Israeli arms purchases in exchange for non-compete plus R&D/intel sharing; asserts the deal benefits the US more than Israel and that Israel is exiting; also claims there is “zero cash” flowing US→Israel aside from the discount. No concrete policy document, timeline, procurement program, or named contractors are provided, so tradability is limited and confidence is low.
Post claims a US–Israel arrangement functioned like a ~50% discount on Israeli arms purchases in exchange for non-compete plus R&D/intel sharing; asserts the deal benefits the US more than Israel and that Israel is exiting; also claims there is “zero cash” flowing US→Israel aside from the discount. No concrete policy document, timeline, procurement program, or named contractors are provided, so tradability is limited and confidence is low.
Post claims a US–Israel arrangement functioned like a ~50% discount on Israeli arms purchases in exchange for non-compete plus R&D/intel sharing; asserts the deal benefits the US more than Israel and that Israel is exiting; also claims there is “zero cash” flowing US→Israel aside from the discount. No concrete policy document, timeline, procurement program, or named contractors are provided, so tradability is limited and confidence is low.
Post claims a US–Israel arrangement functioned like a ~50% discount on Israeli arms purchases in exchange for non-compete plus R&D/intel sharing; asserts the deal benefits the US more than Israel and that Israel is exiting; also claims there is “zero cash” flowing US→Israel aside from the discount. No concrete policy document, timeline, procurement program, or named contractors are provided, so tradability is limited and confidence is low.
Post claims a US–Israel arrangement functioned like a ~50% discount on Israeli arms purchases in exchange for non-compete plus R&D/intel sharing; asserts the deal benefits the US more than Israel and that Israel is exiting; also claims there is “zero cash” flowing US→Israel aside from the discount. No concrete policy document, timeline, procurement program, or named contractors are provided, so tradability is limited and confidence is low.
Non-financial commentary about “Watch” vs “Agent” having a model of reality and behavior/integrity. No market, macro, sector, company, catalyst, or tradable implication is provided.
About this channel
Channel bio, source link, and public-market context from YouTube.
@golergka
Most recognized assets
Unlock the full track record
Create an account to inspect the complete author history, trust-weighted rankings, and persisted research across authors, theses, and assets.
2 more thesis calls are available after sign-up.