How To Take Bets
2021年6月22日Register here: http://gg.gg/v3g9x
Oil Traders Take Long Bets amid Speed of Recovery in Global Energy Market Crude oil prices traded higher at the first trading session of the week, triggered by reports that the $1.9 trillion.
Point spread betting is the most popular form of sports betting. The vast majority of sports wagers use a point spread thanks to the popularity of football and basketball. Even though this type of betting is so popular, it may take awhile to understand.
*Manage Your Bankroll and Create a Unit Size. It’s integral that, as a sports bettor, you decide how.
*NFL divisional round best bets and LeBron’s Lakers take on Zion’s Pelicans in Los Angeles. It was in that newsletter when I told you to take the Grizzlies +2.5 on the road against Minnesota.
The point spread is sometimes known as an equalizer for sportsbook operators. All teams aren’t created equally, so sportsbooks can create a point spread for a game so that each team playing has an almost even chance of winning the game. In a way, the point spread will even the field for both teams.
The point spread gives a reason for bettors to risk money on both teams. The better team playing in the game is considered favorite. They have to win by the point spread offered by the sportsbook. The favorite in a game is listed as being minus (-) the point spread.
The worse of the teams playing in the game is called the underdog. The bettor wins if this team wins the game outright or loses by an amount smaller than the point spread. The underdog in a game is listed as being plus (+) the point spread.
Powerball plus payouts. You can win $4 just for matching the Powerball, while the jackpot is won by matching all five main numbers plus the Powerball. The top prize starts at $20 million (. During the Coronavirus pandemic, the starting jackpot may be lower than this) and increases every time it is not won. PowerBall Plus Prizes. Enter PowerBall Plus and get the chance to win one of nine different prizes, on top of anything you win in the main PowerBall draw. You can win a prize just by matching the PowerBall, and there’s a multimillion-rand jackpot on offer in each twice-weekly draw. The top prize can often be worth more than the jackpot in the.
Let’s use this past Super Bowl between the Tampa Bay Buccaneers and Kansas City Chiefs as an example.
Using this example, the Chiefs were 3-point favorites over the Buccaneers. The Chiefs needed to win by 4 or more points to cover the spread.
Likewise, the Buccaneers were 3-point underdogs. That means the Buccaneers needed to win the game outright or not lose the contest by 4 points or more. At Chiefs -3, if they won by exactly 3 points, the betting result would have been a “push” and bettors for both sides would have gotten their wagers refunded.
The Buccaneers pulled off the upset, winning by a score of 31-9, and rewarded bettors who backed them at +3.Point spread betting odds
Point spreads are usually set with -110 odds, but pricing often fluctuates at online sportsbooks. This is the sportsbook operators’ house edge. The odds guarantee the sportsbook operator will see a little money over time. When the odds are set at -110, the bettor must wager $110 to win $100 (or $11 to win $10).
The odds on a point spread are most commonly known as the vigorish or “vig” for the sportsbook. You might hear this small profit margin for the sportsbook called the “juice” by some sports bettors.Point spread FAQsWhat does ‘pick em’ or ‘pick’ mean in NFL betting?
A “pick em” (sometimes seen as “pick”) is when the teams have a point spread of zero, meaning neither team is favored. In this instance, you’re essentially picking moneyline and your bet will be determined on the winner alone.What does -7 and +7 mean in NFL betting?
A spread of minus-seven (-7) means that a is favored to win the game by a touchdown (technically, a touchdown and the extra point). A team favored by -7 must win the game by eight or more points to win the bet. If the team wins by seven, the result is a “push” and the bet is refunded.
A spread of +7 means the team must win the game or lose by fewer than seven points to win the bet. A loss by seven would result in a push.What does -3 and +3 mean in NFL betting?
A -3 spread means that the favorite must win by more than a field goal to win the wager. Super free bingo. A three-point win would result in a push and the sportsbook would refund the wager.
A spread of +3 means the team listed as the underdog must win the game or lose by fewer than three points to cash the bet. A three-point loss would be graded as a push by the sportsbook and the bet would be refunded.Why are point spreads in the NFL so much lower than in college?
In 2019, the Baltimore Ravens led the NFL in point differential per game at +13.7 points; the Miami Dolphins ranked last in the NFL in point differential per game at -11.7. Even Kansas City– known for their explosive offense– had an average point differential in 2019 of just 9.7 points. The net point differential in the NFL is -14.1, or -0.9 points per game. Basically, the talent differential in the NFL is so minute that even mismatched teams often draw games within a score of each other.
NFL spreads are most commonly between one point and four, with six being a heavy favorite and extremes coming out around 15-20 point favors. (For those wondering, the 1941 Chicago Bears hold the NFL record of point differential at +15.7 points per game. Conversely, Ohio State had a +33.1 average point differential in 2019.)Point spread and odds movement
Sportsbook operators often aim to have equal money on both sides of a point spread. When the money is exactly split the sportsbook operator will see the exact vigorish as their profit margin. If all things are equal over time this will maximize how much money the sportsbook operator can make.
In an effort to have equal money on both sides of a wager, the sportsbook operator will move the point spread to attract money on the side that customers aren’t betting on. The odds for a point spread might change before the actual point spread. There are certain point spread numbers, like 3 and 7 in football, the sportsbook operators would like to avoid moving away from since the final score margin falls on these two numbers most often.
For example, if a lot more money is wagered on the New England Patriots -3, the vig may shift from -112 to -115 and -120 before the line moves to -3.5.Run and puck lines
Football and basketball games are mostly bet using a point spread. The less popular major sports, baseball and hockey, are mostly bet using a moneyline. In an effort to make baseball and hockey more appealing to point spread bettors, the sportsbook operators offer run and puck lines, respectively.
These alternative lines give point spread bettors a chance to wager on other sports using a more familiar method of betting. Since points (runs and goals) aren’t as easy to come by in baseball and hockey, the odds with the lines may have a wider spread than a football or basketball game.
I previously wrote about how starting a company is less risky than people think. This piece is a follow up to that piece as well as my piece on building personal moats.
To recap: remember, there’s two types of risks:
Job Risk: the chance your job will no longer exist
Career Risk: the chance your long-term career will be negatively affected
Founding a company might have job risk, but it often has little career risk. It’s an example of an asymmetric bet—a bet that, if it works, will have tremendous upside, and if it doesn’t, will still generate optionality.
I think the ways we’re taught to think about these concepts is backwards: we think something is risky (e.g. starting a company) when it actually buys optionality, and we think we’re buying optionality (e.g. joining Goldman Sachs) when we’re actually taking a big risk. In starting a company, we’re capping our downside—assuming the privilege to afford it—and in joining Goldman Sachs etc, we’re capping our upside.
In short, I think the mistake we make is not understanding that taking more risk, when the benefits are asymmetric, often creates more optionality.
Consider starting a company for example—the bigger risk is not that you fail, it’s that, if you don’t start enough companies, you don’t get enough actual shots on goal to actually create a big company.
I want to talk about asymmetric bets more broadly and how people should pursue them—particularly early in their career—as their downside is often just their time.
As an example, let’s consider crypto investing over the last few years:
If you think about it, many prominent crypto fund managers are in their early/mid 20s, whereas most successful tech VCs are often 2x their age.
There’s no axiomatic reason for this age difference. VCs in theory should have the same advantages: investing acumen, operating experience, relationships, etc.
Why is this not the case? In my opinion, it’s a form of the Innovator’s Dilemma at work:
In 2014, it was far easier for VCs to cater to existing customers (traditional tech startups) than to sacrifice that and explore this new space (crypto) that was weird, unproven, and entailed reputational risk.
Consider Kyle Samani, one of the aforementioned young hedge fund managers.How To Take Better Care Of Yourself
In 2016, he was 26, unemployed, unknown, and playing a lot of video games. He soon got into crypto.
In 2015/2016, Crypto had the following attributes, among others:
1) The financial opportunity was still largely unclear.
2) Specializing in crypto entailed social & reputational risk.
3) You needed to spend a lot of focused time in different social/intellectual circles to get smart.
In 2015, if you had something to lose, it was a lot harder to get into crypto. It was financially risky. It took a lot of time. You also took real reputation risk—if it didn’t work, you’d look dumb.
And no to mention there was already this tried and true way of making money, so why risk it on this new, unknown thing?
So in 2015, the best person suited to get into crypto was someone who didn’t have a lot at stake—financially or reputationally. Or, in other words, a young, unemployed, unknown person with lots of time on their hands. (Bonus points if you had a cartoon twitter avatar.)
It’s worth emphasizing that the biggest risk was neither financial nor did it have to do with time—it was the reputational risk.
Kyle was used to that. Before starting a crypto fund he started a company built on top of Google Glass. People still make memes of him to this day for that.
However, his risks had an asymmetric payoff: If he’s right, he wins big. If he’s not, who cares — he’d have learned a lot and built a network by being where the cutting edge was. And he’s 26, people forget. Indeed. Years spent on failed ideas are often forgotten when success comes along.
You’re not known for your losses, you’re known for your wins.
e.g. Ever heard of Reid Hoffman’s ’SocialNet’? Nope, because LinkedIn & Greylock.
e.g. Ever heard of Marc Andreessen’s “Ning”? Nope, because Netscape & a16z.
As I mentioned last time, I spent three years working on a rap battle website. I looked dumb before, during, and after. Some people thought it was ingenious. And not just my grandma.
If you’re young, you can always blame it on youth, or find some way to rationalize it post-facto. (“rapt.fm could have been huge. It was ahead of its time.”)
And indeed, as time went on I did look ahead of my time. A website streaming rap battles recently raised over $100M. 40 super hot slot game free. As Marc Andreessen says, there are no dumb ideas. Only early ones.
Joining Product Hunt was also an asymmetric opportunity: If it failed, I’d still have built an incredible network. There’s no other experience I could have pursued that would have set me up to start On Deck and Village Global.
Asymmetric opportunities usually have meaningful upside in a success case, and meaningful learning or development in a downside case. If the downside case is still one of the best case scenarios you can imagine, then that’s an easy asymmetric bet to take. In addition to pursuing things that have meaningful upside (and thus some risk), asymmetric bets can also involve taking a bet in risky spaces that other people aren’t pursuing:
Many ambitious people, even though they understand intellectually how smart risk brings optionality, still prefer the more conventional paths of accumulating optionality.
They compete insanely hard to accumulate options for the future instead of figuring out what they really want to do & doing that instead.
I’d argue we are trained to optimize for optionality from a young age:
“I don’t know what I’m gonna do with my life so I’m gonna get a degree.”
“I don’t know what to do with this degree so I’m gonna get a grad degree.”
“I don’t know what to do with this grad degree, so I’m gonna get a consulting job to figure out what I truly want.”
It’s like spending your whole life filling up the gas tank without ever driving.
Why does this happen? Because people don’t want to look dumb, even for a short period of time.
And that’s the biggest mistake I think young people make: They’re afraid to look dumb, so they follow safe paths that cap their downside, not realizing that they also cap their upside.
And said paths are often tournament-style competitions, perhaps not as safe as they think.
The irony is that, in failing to take risks, we fail to gain the optionality that comes from doing so.
Risk-taking brings its own optionality. Especially when you’re young, accumulate optionality through the skills you gain, knowledge you acquire, and the unique experiences you undergo.
Accumulate optionality through differentiation, not conformity!
I’d even take this one step further to say if what you’re doing doesn’t seem dumb to somebody, or just plain weird, maybe it’s just not interesting enough.
If you’re not afraid to look dumb for a certain period of time, you can benefit from a sort of social-cultural arbitrage—you’ll take high upside bets others won’t take, and you’ll keep trying when your last try fails.
But to the extent that one wants to be seen as “smart,” the goal isn’t to look smart every step of the way; it’s to look “smart” at the end of your journey — often you have to look dumb for a certain period of time to get there. This is why Steve Jobs told Stanford’s 2005 graduating class to ’stay foolish.’
Sometimes, however, you’ll look dumb forever, so pursue something that, even if it bombs, the pursuit was its own reward.
Even if it’s a website for real-time rap battles.
Read of the week: Contra Krugman by Robert Murphy. It’s funny (and inspiring) how some people can do such amazing work purely motivated by proving other people wrong. Unrelated, but Antonio Garcia Martinez’s interview of Martin Gurri is also fantastic.
Listen of the week: Philosophize This is a fantastic podcast. I’ve been listening front to back. I also released a podcast today with Keith Rabois and Jacob Helberg on China and the election. How To Take Better Photos On Iphone
Watch of the week: Patrice O’Neal on white people’s love of Radiohead. Hilarious.
Cosign of the week: Speaking of rap battles, the big homie Frak battled Dizaster, one of the best battle rappers of all time, and while he lost the battle, he won the popular vote 3-1. Here’s a clip. Stay tuned for his upcoming album and for the full battle release.
Until next time,
Erik
P.S. Speaking of asymmetric bets, On Deck is envisioning a demo day early next year for people who want to self-IPO. Stay tuned for more information.
Register here: http://gg.gg/v3g9x
https://diarynote-jp.indered.space
Oil Traders Take Long Bets amid Speed of Recovery in Global Energy Market Crude oil prices traded higher at the first trading session of the week, triggered by reports that the $1.9 trillion.
Point spread betting is the most popular form of sports betting. The vast majority of sports wagers use a point spread thanks to the popularity of football and basketball. Even though this type of betting is so popular, it may take awhile to understand.
*Manage Your Bankroll and Create a Unit Size. It’s integral that, as a sports bettor, you decide how.
*NFL divisional round best bets and LeBron’s Lakers take on Zion’s Pelicans in Los Angeles. It was in that newsletter when I told you to take the Grizzlies +2.5 on the road against Minnesota.
The point spread is sometimes known as an equalizer for sportsbook operators. All teams aren’t created equally, so sportsbooks can create a point spread for a game so that each team playing has an almost even chance of winning the game. In a way, the point spread will even the field for both teams.
The point spread gives a reason for bettors to risk money on both teams. The better team playing in the game is considered favorite. They have to win by the point spread offered by the sportsbook. The favorite in a game is listed as being minus (-) the point spread.
The worse of the teams playing in the game is called the underdog. The bettor wins if this team wins the game outright or loses by an amount smaller than the point spread. The underdog in a game is listed as being plus (+) the point spread.
Powerball plus payouts. You can win $4 just for matching the Powerball, while the jackpot is won by matching all five main numbers plus the Powerball. The top prize starts at $20 million (. During the Coronavirus pandemic, the starting jackpot may be lower than this) and increases every time it is not won. PowerBall Plus Prizes. Enter PowerBall Plus and get the chance to win one of nine different prizes, on top of anything you win in the main PowerBall draw. You can win a prize just by matching the PowerBall, and there’s a multimillion-rand jackpot on offer in each twice-weekly draw. The top prize can often be worth more than the jackpot in the.
Let’s use this past Super Bowl between the Tampa Bay Buccaneers and Kansas City Chiefs as an example.
Using this example, the Chiefs were 3-point favorites over the Buccaneers. The Chiefs needed to win by 4 or more points to cover the spread.
Likewise, the Buccaneers were 3-point underdogs. That means the Buccaneers needed to win the game outright or not lose the contest by 4 points or more. At Chiefs -3, if they won by exactly 3 points, the betting result would have been a “push” and bettors for both sides would have gotten their wagers refunded.
The Buccaneers pulled off the upset, winning by a score of 31-9, and rewarded bettors who backed them at +3.Point spread betting odds
Point spreads are usually set with -110 odds, but pricing often fluctuates at online sportsbooks. This is the sportsbook operators’ house edge. The odds guarantee the sportsbook operator will see a little money over time. When the odds are set at -110, the bettor must wager $110 to win $100 (or $11 to win $10).
The odds on a point spread are most commonly known as the vigorish or “vig” for the sportsbook. You might hear this small profit margin for the sportsbook called the “juice” by some sports bettors.Point spread FAQsWhat does ‘pick em’ or ‘pick’ mean in NFL betting?
A “pick em” (sometimes seen as “pick”) is when the teams have a point spread of zero, meaning neither team is favored. In this instance, you’re essentially picking moneyline and your bet will be determined on the winner alone.What does -7 and +7 mean in NFL betting?
A spread of minus-seven (-7) means that a is favored to win the game by a touchdown (technically, a touchdown and the extra point). A team favored by -7 must win the game by eight or more points to win the bet. If the team wins by seven, the result is a “push” and the bet is refunded.
A spread of +7 means the team must win the game or lose by fewer than seven points to win the bet. A loss by seven would result in a push.What does -3 and +3 mean in NFL betting?
A -3 spread means that the favorite must win by more than a field goal to win the wager. Super free bingo. A three-point win would result in a push and the sportsbook would refund the wager.
A spread of +3 means the team listed as the underdog must win the game or lose by fewer than three points to cash the bet. A three-point loss would be graded as a push by the sportsbook and the bet would be refunded.Why are point spreads in the NFL so much lower than in college?
In 2019, the Baltimore Ravens led the NFL in point differential per game at +13.7 points; the Miami Dolphins ranked last in the NFL in point differential per game at -11.7. Even Kansas City– known for their explosive offense– had an average point differential in 2019 of just 9.7 points. The net point differential in the NFL is -14.1, or -0.9 points per game. Basically, the talent differential in the NFL is so minute that even mismatched teams often draw games within a score of each other.
NFL spreads are most commonly between one point and four, with six being a heavy favorite and extremes coming out around 15-20 point favors. (For those wondering, the 1941 Chicago Bears hold the NFL record of point differential at +15.7 points per game. Conversely, Ohio State had a +33.1 average point differential in 2019.)Point spread and odds movement
Sportsbook operators often aim to have equal money on both sides of a point spread. When the money is exactly split the sportsbook operator will see the exact vigorish as their profit margin. If all things are equal over time this will maximize how much money the sportsbook operator can make.
In an effort to have equal money on both sides of a wager, the sportsbook operator will move the point spread to attract money on the side that customers aren’t betting on. The odds for a point spread might change before the actual point spread. There are certain point spread numbers, like 3 and 7 in football, the sportsbook operators would like to avoid moving away from since the final score margin falls on these two numbers most often.
For example, if a lot more money is wagered on the New England Patriots -3, the vig may shift from -112 to -115 and -120 before the line moves to -3.5.Run and puck lines
Football and basketball games are mostly bet using a point spread. The less popular major sports, baseball and hockey, are mostly bet using a moneyline. In an effort to make baseball and hockey more appealing to point spread bettors, the sportsbook operators offer run and puck lines, respectively.
These alternative lines give point spread bettors a chance to wager on other sports using a more familiar method of betting. Since points (runs and goals) aren’t as easy to come by in baseball and hockey, the odds with the lines may have a wider spread than a football or basketball game.
I previously wrote about how starting a company is less risky than people think. This piece is a follow up to that piece as well as my piece on building personal moats.
To recap: remember, there’s two types of risks:
Job Risk: the chance your job will no longer exist
Career Risk: the chance your long-term career will be negatively affected
Founding a company might have job risk, but it often has little career risk. It’s an example of an asymmetric bet—a bet that, if it works, will have tremendous upside, and if it doesn’t, will still generate optionality.
I think the ways we’re taught to think about these concepts is backwards: we think something is risky (e.g. starting a company) when it actually buys optionality, and we think we’re buying optionality (e.g. joining Goldman Sachs) when we’re actually taking a big risk. In starting a company, we’re capping our downside—assuming the privilege to afford it—and in joining Goldman Sachs etc, we’re capping our upside.
In short, I think the mistake we make is not understanding that taking more risk, when the benefits are asymmetric, often creates more optionality.
Consider starting a company for example—the bigger risk is not that you fail, it’s that, if you don’t start enough companies, you don’t get enough actual shots on goal to actually create a big company.
I want to talk about asymmetric bets more broadly and how people should pursue them—particularly early in their career—as their downside is often just their time.
As an example, let’s consider crypto investing over the last few years:
If you think about it, many prominent crypto fund managers are in their early/mid 20s, whereas most successful tech VCs are often 2x their age.
There’s no axiomatic reason for this age difference. VCs in theory should have the same advantages: investing acumen, operating experience, relationships, etc.
Why is this not the case? In my opinion, it’s a form of the Innovator’s Dilemma at work:
In 2014, it was far easier for VCs to cater to existing customers (traditional tech startups) than to sacrifice that and explore this new space (crypto) that was weird, unproven, and entailed reputational risk.
Consider Kyle Samani, one of the aforementioned young hedge fund managers.How To Take Better Care Of Yourself
In 2016, he was 26, unemployed, unknown, and playing a lot of video games. He soon got into crypto.
In 2015/2016, Crypto had the following attributes, among others:
1) The financial opportunity was still largely unclear.
2) Specializing in crypto entailed social & reputational risk.
3) You needed to spend a lot of focused time in different social/intellectual circles to get smart.
In 2015, if you had something to lose, it was a lot harder to get into crypto. It was financially risky. It took a lot of time. You also took real reputation risk—if it didn’t work, you’d look dumb.
And no to mention there was already this tried and true way of making money, so why risk it on this new, unknown thing?
So in 2015, the best person suited to get into crypto was someone who didn’t have a lot at stake—financially or reputationally. Or, in other words, a young, unemployed, unknown person with lots of time on their hands. (Bonus points if you had a cartoon twitter avatar.)
It’s worth emphasizing that the biggest risk was neither financial nor did it have to do with time—it was the reputational risk.
Kyle was used to that. Before starting a crypto fund he started a company built on top of Google Glass. People still make memes of him to this day for that.
However, his risks had an asymmetric payoff: If he’s right, he wins big. If he’s not, who cares — he’d have learned a lot and built a network by being where the cutting edge was. And he’s 26, people forget. Indeed. Years spent on failed ideas are often forgotten when success comes along.
You’re not known for your losses, you’re known for your wins.
e.g. Ever heard of Reid Hoffman’s ’SocialNet’? Nope, because LinkedIn & Greylock.
e.g. Ever heard of Marc Andreessen’s “Ning”? Nope, because Netscape & a16z.
As I mentioned last time, I spent three years working on a rap battle website. I looked dumb before, during, and after. Some people thought it was ingenious. And not just my grandma.
If you’re young, you can always blame it on youth, or find some way to rationalize it post-facto. (“rapt.fm could have been huge. It was ahead of its time.”)
And indeed, as time went on I did look ahead of my time. A website streaming rap battles recently raised over $100M. 40 super hot slot game free. As Marc Andreessen says, there are no dumb ideas. Only early ones.
Joining Product Hunt was also an asymmetric opportunity: If it failed, I’d still have built an incredible network. There’s no other experience I could have pursued that would have set me up to start On Deck and Village Global.
Asymmetric opportunities usually have meaningful upside in a success case, and meaningful learning or development in a downside case. If the downside case is still one of the best case scenarios you can imagine, then that’s an easy asymmetric bet to take. In addition to pursuing things that have meaningful upside (and thus some risk), asymmetric bets can also involve taking a bet in risky spaces that other people aren’t pursuing:
Many ambitious people, even though they understand intellectually how smart risk brings optionality, still prefer the more conventional paths of accumulating optionality.
They compete insanely hard to accumulate options for the future instead of figuring out what they really want to do & doing that instead.
I’d argue we are trained to optimize for optionality from a young age:
“I don’t know what I’m gonna do with my life so I’m gonna get a degree.”
“I don’t know what to do with this degree so I’m gonna get a grad degree.”
“I don’t know what to do with this grad degree, so I’m gonna get a consulting job to figure out what I truly want.”
It’s like spending your whole life filling up the gas tank without ever driving.
Why does this happen? Because people don’t want to look dumb, even for a short period of time.
And that’s the biggest mistake I think young people make: They’re afraid to look dumb, so they follow safe paths that cap their downside, not realizing that they also cap their upside.
And said paths are often tournament-style competitions, perhaps not as safe as they think.
The irony is that, in failing to take risks, we fail to gain the optionality that comes from doing so.
Risk-taking brings its own optionality. Especially when you’re young, accumulate optionality through the skills you gain, knowledge you acquire, and the unique experiences you undergo.
Accumulate optionality through differentiation, not conformity!
I’d even take this one step further to say if what you’re doing doesn’t seem dumb to somebody, or just plain weird, maybe it’s just not interesting enough.
If you’re not afraid to look dumb for a certain period of time, you can benefit from a sort of social-cultural arbitrage—you’ll take high upside bets others won’t take, and you’ll keep trying when your last try fails.
But to the extent that one wants to be seen as “smart,” the goal isn’t to look smart every step of the way; it’s to look “smart” at the end of your journey — often you have to look dumb for a certain period of time to get there. This is why Steve Jobs told Stanford’s 2005 graduating class to ’stay foolish.’
Sometimes, however, you’ll look dumb forever, so pursue something that, even if it bombs, the pursuit was its own reward.
Even if it’s a website for real-time rap battles.
Read of the week: Contra Krugman by Robert Murphy. It’s funny (and inspiring) how some people can do such amazing work purely motivated by proving other people wrong. Unrelated, but Antonio Garcia Martinez’s interview of Martin Gurri is also fantastic.
Listen of the week: Philosophize This is a fantastic podcast. I’ve been listening front to back. I also released a podcast today with Keith Rabois and Jacob Helberg on China and the election. How To Take Better Photos On Iphone
Watch of the week: Patrice O’Neal on white people’s love of Radiohead. Hilarious.
Cosign of the week: Speaking of rap battles, the big homie Frak battled Dizaster, one of the best battle rappers of all time, and while he lost the battle, he won the popular vote 3-1. Here’s a clip. Stay tuned for his upcoming album and for the full battle release.
Until next time,
Erik
P.S. Speaking of asymmetric bets, On Deck is envisioning a demo day early next year for people who want to self-IPO. Stay tuned for more information.
Register here: http://gg.gg/v3g9x
https://diarynote-jp.indered.space
コメント