Blog

Governments, tax, shareholders

Isn’t governments the invisible shareholder of all corporations?

Say tax is 25% , essentially gov will take 25 of 100 profit before tax, and the rest $75 are called profit after tax and is distributed to shareholders.

Does it sound odd?

Isn’t governments essentially a permanent 25% shareholder of the company, and the ratio is net by itself.

How convenient.

Btw, shareholders are should give their shares a 25% hair cut.. if they own 50% of a company, they just own 37.5% in case of 25% tax.

Nvidia and BTC

Following the previous post that Nvidia is the central bank, Nvidia also has an interesting relation with BTC.

As Nvidia and compute technology improve, miners buy newer and more expensive machines to stay competitive. Because everyone can access the same better technology, the advantage is quickly competed away through higher hash rates and mining difficulty.

As a result, miners collectively spend more capital to compete for the same fixed amount of new Bitcoin. Higher industry-wide mining costs mean miners require higher BTC prices to justify that investment, creating upward pressure on the Bitcoin price.

The better the Nvidia mining revenue, the higher the BTC price!

In previous mode: larger nominal economy + more dollars + higher price level -> higher nominal gold price

How similar!

Nvidia is the central bank

Token is an asset.

Your account has a number – the number of tokens you can use.

Those tokens can be used to do anything. You either get what you want from tokens, or you make something out of tokens and sell / exchange it for other stuff.

It’s an asset that is so versatile that is like “money”.

In accounting, money is an asset.

In economy, money is the medium of exchange.

Tokens are like money in those regards.

Token factories are like banks.

The factory prints tokens with electricity.

Nvidia’s servers, at the frontier, determines the speed of inflation.

If Nvidia’s next gen servers are too good and sells cheap, token can be printed fast! Thus the token on hand can be depreciated.

In that sense, Nvdia is like Fed that controls inflation.

Thoughts from people more than 75 year ago

Where is our thought leader these days?

Moreover, if we move in the direction of making machines which learn and whose behavior is modified by experience, we must face the fact that every degree of independence we give the machine is a degree of possible defiance of our wishes. The genie in the bottle will not willingly go back in the bottle, nor have we any reason to expect them to be well disposed to us.

Wiener_Norbert_The_Machine_Age_v3_1949

Meanwhile,

I think affluent middle class is key to a lot of things, especially for the US.

The rise of cheap Chinese open-weight models is a shock, if not an “attack”.

“Middle class” that is merely existing without a lot of options in life is not affluent middle class. Free will doesn’t prevail in this case.

About AMD

1/ OpenAI warrants and target price

OpenAI’s AMD warrant (max 160 million AMD shares) agreement says the first tranche follows delivery of the first 1 GW and full vesting requires purchases reaching 6 GW. AMD also disclosed that the stock-price targets rise to $600 for the final tranche.

AMD last year talked about $20 non-gaap EPS within the next three to five years. And now it says it will be significantly above $20.

Using the Nov 2025 stated goal of $20, OpenAI’s last tranche of $600 is 30x, and given it maybe $30 non-gaap eps, it’s just 20x.

2/ Lisa Su doesn’t own much?

Lisa Su currently owns approximately 3.61 million AMD shares outright, equal to about 0.22% of AMD.

AMD’s March 2026 proxy disclosed that Su also held 413,529 options exercisable within 60 days. Adding those to her currently reported actual shares gives approximately 4 milion beneficially owned shares or approximately 0.247% of AMD.

However, she came as CEO. She is not the founder.

What concerns me (3)

Is that today’s major platforms like X and TikTok/Douyin can be used as “thought weapons”.

People/organizations can push a post (twit or video) to millions of people if it fits their interest, regardless of who creates the post in the first place.

At certain scale and with enough repetitiveness, this action can alter a person’s or a group of people’s thoughts.

This influence is sold.

People/organizations can buy the influence without disclosing the intention.

Common folks are blindfolded.

It’s not like an influencer wants  more people to see his/her posts to grow impact.

It’s paying for “thought weapons” to achieve certain goals inexplicitly.

And sometimes, these goals could be evil, or self-interested.

Meanwhile, users who “owns” the attention “sell” their attention for nothing; payers pay to the platforms – they are not even bribing the ones that have original ownership.

What concerns me (2)

Is that current companies or leader of companies at the frontier of AI and robotics talks about advancement everyday, but they said little about ethics, at least in the public domain.

Who to provide jobs if factories are run by robotics? and decisions are made without human in the loop?

How to preserve humanity in a world with automatic war machines / weapons?