🤯 Only 3 Presidents Did This

Maria runs a bakery in Portland. Last Tuesday, between the morning rush and afternoon prep, she opened Readdy.ai, typed two sentences about her shop, and had a website live before her espresso went cold.

Online ordering. Hours. Photos of the croissants. A booking form for custom cakes. Indexed on Google by Wednesday.

She didn't call a developer. She didn't buy a template. She didn't watch a YouTube tutorial.

Readdy.ai is built for owners like Maria — people who'd rather spend 45 minutes making bread than 45 hours making a website. Describe your business, get a polished site in under 2 minutes, and update it later by just talking to the AI.

$15/month. Cancel anytime. Your competitors are still waiting on their Wix designer.

Build yours in minutes

Trump dropped a Friday social media post with the diplomatic subtlety of a foghorn.

Iran asked to keep talking. The U.S. said yes. But the ceasefire? "OVER!" His caps, not ours.

Quick recap: several nights of U.S. airstrikes, Iranian counter-strikes, and everyone's group chat on fire.

And yet... no fresh U.S. attacks in recent hours. Washington says it still wants a peaceful fix through "technical talks."

So the ceasefire is dead, but nobody's shooting, and everyone's still talking?

It's the geopolitical version of "we're on a break."

Meanwhile, the market is having the time of its life.

Bank of America says Trump 2.0 is smashing the historical presidential market cycle.

The admin is on track to become just the fourth president ever with four straight years of stock market gains.

How rare is that? Since 1873, only three presidents have pulled it off:

That's 3 out of 39 presidential terms. Rarer than a profitable meme coin.

The hall of shame exists too. Grant, Garfield, and Hoover each suffered four straight years of losses. Brutal.

BofA's kicker: this hot streak makes the midterms the "most binary Wall Street event" of the second half.

The election is now a coin flip with your portfolio on the line.

The professionals pulling ahead aren't working more. They're using Claude.

Our free guide will show you how to:

Transform your workflow with AI and stay ahead of the curve with this comprehensive guide to using Claude at work.

Get The Free Guide

The European Commission dropped its preliminary findings, and they're brutal.

The verdict? Meta's Instagram and Facebook are "addictive by design" and in breach of the Digital Services Act.

The features under fire:

Basically, everything that makes the apps... the apps.

Here's where it gets ugly.

The Commission says Meta knew how much time kids were spending on these platforms at night. And kept optimizing for "excessive or compulsive use" anyway.

That's not a bug report. It’s an accusation of intent.

What about parental controls? The EC called them window dressing. They only work if parents are tech-savvy, they're easy to dismiss, and they don't meaningfully cut screen time.

Like putting a "please don't" sticker on a candy jar.

Now for the money part.

If these findings get confirmed, Meta faces a fine of up to 6% of global annual turnover.

Meta pulled in roughly $200B last year. You do the math. (Fine, we'll do it: that's a potential $12B+ haircut.)

Meta's defense? Social media addiction isn't a real medical condition, and the apps aren't addictive.

Bold strategy, considering who else disagrees:

When that many people are suing you for the same thing, it stops looking like a coincidence.

To be clear: these findings are preliminary. Meta gets to respond before any fine lands.

But the regulatory walls are closing in from both sides of the Atlantic. And Brussels doesn't bluff often.

Michael Burry has a new target. And this time it's not the housing market.

It's AI. All of it.

The Big Short guy dropped a Substack post on Friday saying the entire AI industry built its house on sand.

His argument? AI can't actually think.

Burry introduced something he calls "Ballard's Test." The idea is simple: if you can't reason without language, you don't really understand anything.

Think of it like a parrot with a PhD. It can say all the right words. Does it know what any of them mean?

Here's the kicker.

The AI field originally set out to build genuine reasoning. Actual cognition. The real deal.

Then it got hard. So researchers quit and took the shortcut: language-first models.

Burry calls that pivot a "known flaw" and a "bad start." Basically, the industry skipped leg day and now it's all arms.

The result? What he calls a "parameter trap."

Instead of inventing real intelligence, companies just keep making the same models bigger. More parameters. More data. More scale.

It's like trying to make a calculator conscious by adding more buttons.

And the irony is delicious.

This brute-force approach runs on what Burry describes as "zillions of power-hungry chips."

So the shortcut that was supposed to be easier now needs half the world's electricity and every GPU Nvidia can print. Some shortcut.

Why should you care?

Because trillions of dollars in market cap are riding on the assumption that scaling works. Burry is betting the whole thesis is broken at the foundation.

He was early on housing. He's been wrong plenty since. But when he speaks, it's at least worth a listen.