Category: Posts


  • Warren Buffett is ending his Thanksgiving letter with timeless advice:

    • Don’t beat yourself up over past mistakes.
    • Get the right heroes and copy them.
    • Decide what you would like your obituary to say and live the life to deserve it
    • When you help someone in any of thousands of ways, you help the world.
    • The cleaning lady is as much a human being as the Chairman.

    His letter reads as though he feels his death is near. I learned a lot from everything Warren Buffett has written over his lifetime. I am extremely grateful for that. If there is one thing that he inspired me to do, it is to write publicly. While it feels as if nobody is reading what I write today, I know that there will be one single person 41 years from today who will be just as grateful that I published and not buried my thinking.

  • After spreadsheets became standard in M&A, deals closed significantly slower. M&A deals went from 2-4 months from LOI to close (1970s to 1980s) to 6-12+ months from LOI to close (1980s to 1990s). Deals didn’t improve. 50-70% of acquisitions destroyed shareholder value (same as pre-spreadsheet). Basically, deals got slower, but not any better.

    Why did that happen ? Analysis paralysis, an illusion of precision, the replacement of judgment with calculation, and accountability shifted from CEO and CFO to analysts doing spreadsheets. Nobody except some dealmakers like Warren Buffett or Peter Lynch realized it at that time (“I’ve never seen a deal that didn’t look good in a spreadsheet”).

    Perhaps you’ve recognized some parallels: With AI we are repeating the pattern, only faster and deeper. If human nature stays the same, it will result in an efficiency paradox. Everything will be analyzed and created even faster. But with more output will come slower completion. It will lead to false confidence, zero responsibility (“The AI models said so”). Also, the authority is shifting from human to AI much faster than it shifted from human to spreadsheet.

    What will happen can perhaps be called a quality collapse. The average quality will increase, but the top-end quality will decrease. Everything will be crowded by AI-generated “pretty good” but what will be missing is excellence. Then, at the same time, the AI wave is hitting a succession/retirement wave. Senior experts with real experiential intuition and judgment are retiring. Juniors completely dependent on AI have to take over.

    While it was previously a recognized truth that 30 years of experience >>>> 5 years of experience, we now live in an illusion that 5 years of experience + AI = 30 years of experience. We won’t realize until totally novel problems arise that AI can’t handle because it is not in the training data, while humans are at that stage already cognitively crippled.

    We think we can just go back and “do it without AI if needed” but it will be too late because neural pathways are atrophying right now. Organizations shift all their processes around AI. Skills are not being taught to the next generation but to AI. We are basically already in a state of dependency which looks like empowerment, and we won’t see it until the tool is removed.

    Try doing 1970s M&A deals just with pen, paper, and calculators. How many globally could do it? Same thing will happen with AI but faster. The result – I fear – is that innovation in many organizations will slow down and they will commoditize.

    AI driven productivity gains are a dangerous illusion. Not because of AI (extremely great and powerful tool) but because of how we work with it. Spreadsheets optimized for what was modelable, not what was innovative and couldn’t be seen in numbers. AI will do the same thing, but not exclusively in finance but in all domains.

    What makes AI perhaps more “dangerous” is that it has no barrier to entry. It will enable some selected (rare) individuals to really master what they do (driving real innovation), but the majority (if they are not very careful and intentional) will destroy their own personal economic value.

    With spreadsheets, you had to learn formulas, understand logic, debug errors – which was a protection against overuse. AI has none of that, nothing to learn (if you are really honest, dear AI coaches), no debugging, no logic, no barrier = instant universal adoption which we are observing.

    So, back to the original observation: with spreadsheet everyone got more productive, but deals took longer and outcomes didn’t improve. Now with AI, everyone is getting more productive, but: are projects finishing faster? Is quality improving? Is innovation in the median of corporations accelerating?

    I think: with spreadsheets, people began optimizing for “model says yes” instead of deal is actually good. Are we optimizing AI use for “AI approves” instead of actually valuable?

    We know that if measurement becomes a target, it ceases to be a good target.

    This is by no mean an anti AI stance or anti spreadsheet stance. But I hope to arise some careful thought on the relationship we have with AI and how to avoid the analysis-paralysis of the spreadsheet era.

  • Deep Work 2.0

    Deep work is a term Cal Newport uses to describe the activities performed in a state of absolute distraction-free concentration to push our cognitive capabilities to their limit. I never read the book because the idea is just so simple: schedule a time when you perform real work, no social media, no notifications, just you and the work in front of you.

    When I first heard about Deep Work, it was not a new concept to me. I had already practiced deep focus sessions regularly – usually early in the morning. But it made me definitely more serious. No matter how disciplined I attempted to be, the infinite dopamine from social media and constant notifications from my phone every more often crushed my flow state. Years ago, I tried and then purchased the blocking software Cold Turkey (for Mac and PCs) and an Android app called Digital Detox. Both apps are absolutely great (yes: one-time purchases!). What they allow you to do is block anything you want (for example social media and YouTube) and at the same time make it extremely difficult (if not impossible) to circumvent them.

    Recently, I felt quite unhappy about the lack of progress towards the goals I had set for myself. One part of the equation certainly was the birth of our daughter. Yet, I still managed to schedule at least one Deep Work session each day. What was the missing link? I realized that it is not only social media, YouTube, or news websites anymore – LLMs are now equally distracting as social media.

    Today I created a new blacklist filter in Cold Turkey where I now block all LLM apps and URLs. Could be I’m one of the first persons in the world to do so, but I realized that – for my ADHD type brain – having AI accessible non-stop is an equal distraction as social media feeds: a source of noise and cheap dopamine.

    I realized that using LLMs blindly leads to procrastination, analysis paralysis, decision fatigue, unoriginal thought, loss of free will, decline of deep thinking capacity, atrophy of overall cognitive function, writing skill decline.

    To be totally honest: Instead of working, I prompted. Instead of writing, I prompted. Instead of thinking, I prompted.

    My personal insight is that I must be just as intentional and selectively about using AI as I must be with social media. Instead of using it all the time, I limit it now to very specific tasks where it adds exponential value to the work.

    Let’s be clear: I’m not avoiding AI. I’m also not badmouthing it. I believe AI is one of the greatest technologies humans have invented. What I can tell from my personal experience and observations: AI can be a powerful lever or a heavy burden. Therefore, I believe, it is time for Deep Work 2.0: Deep focus sessions where you intentionally do not use AI at all – at least not actively (i.e., only use pre-prompted conversations or Deep Research reports that you saved as a PDF or Markdown file for your Deep Work 2.0 session).

    What if not only distractions, social algorithms, but also (pretended) AI efficiency is a deadly enemy of our flow state?

  • More than 50% of recently published website texts are now written by AI. This means that from today forward, the majority of all published texts is already synthetic. The same will hold true for any other form of content: images, video, and audio. In and of itself, AI written texts shouldn’t be such a large issue. The problem is not texts written by AI, but that we have simultaneously crossed a point where you can reliably distinguish AI-generated content from human content. I have a strong opinion that AI should sound like AI, I also think that AI chatbots should be apparent as such, and that AI-generated images and videos should have deeply embedded watermarks. This is also why I believe parts of the EU AI Act and the California AI Transparency Act are net-positive for humanity. But why do I believe so?

    The most pressing issue with AI generated content is much less about capability or alignment of AI models, but the collapse of epistemic commons before we even arrive at general-intelligent or super-intelligent AI models. Here is what I mean:

    Most text is now AI-generated, and within months the same will be true for video, images, and audio. When creation costs and efforts collapse to zero, two things vanish simultaneously: trust and meaning.

    We can no longer casually trust what we see. Every text, every video, every expert opinion becomes suspect. As social primates evolved to trust patterns and authorities, we are losing the ability to distinguish signal from noise at the exact moment we need it most.

    Perhaps the deeper crisis isn’t skepticism but meaning collapse. Scarcity and effort have always been core to how humans assign value and significance. When infinite content can be generated instantly and automated for any purpose, these anchors disappear.

    Most look at this as primarily economic disruption, but perhaps it is much more psychological and civilizational because we are eroding the foundations of shared reality before we have built alternatives.

    Then there is this slippery slope: From now on, humans will increasingly interact with and read texts written by AI systems trained on AI-generated texts. Again, soon it is also photos, videos, audio. This training-loop has (at least) the potential to create a cultural drift in directions yet unpredictable. One thing we can be quite certain about is that our human values are already being reshaped by AI systems in ways we cannot track. This in turn makes the question of “alignment” both: more important and at the same time secondary.

    The most pressing risk of human civilization is therefore not hypothesizing a possibly “misaligned” superintelligence, but rather the risk of arriving there divided – socially and epistemically.

    What must be done is certainly harder than alignment of AI systems?

    • Rebuilding trusted information infrastructure
    • Creating new forms of verifiable authenticity
    • Developing cultural “antibodies” to synthetic manipulation
    • Building meaning-making structures that aren’t dependent on scarcity or effort
    • Preserving and strengthening human coordination capacity
    • Etc.

    This is harder than “alignment”, because the more we look at these to-dos from a federal or global perspective, the more impossible they will become.

    Now, to move from the theoretical to the practical: Who are the 5 to 150 people you can still genuinely trust and coordinate with? Because everything else either emerges from functional groups, or it won’t emerge at all.

  • When looking at AI, people are fixated on surface-level effects: economic disruption (jobs disappearing), alignment risks (AI going rogue), or ethical dilemmas (bias of LLMs). While those are all real, they also seem to be distractions from the real shift. The current conversations are not about whether we achieve AGI anymore but about when – some say 10 years, I say it’s basically already here (it all depends on the definition of the term really). By definition, AGI will match and then surpass human intelligence in every single domain: strategic, creative, you name it. Once that threshold is crossed (and it’s closer than many admit), a feedback loop kicks in. AI designs better AI, which designs even better AI, ad infinitum.

    Because we are not yet there, we debate AI as a tool. But as soon we cross that threshold, AI will predict, simulate, and optimize anything logic-based with absolute precision that human input is unnecessary or perhaps counterproductive. Humans – and that means governments, corporations, and individuals – will outsource everything, from policy to life choices, because AI will present the best logical and data-backed option. And because it is so much better in logic, you stop questioning it. The “alignment” problem is therefore ultimately less about making AI safe for humans, but about preparing humans to accept their irrelevance in logical intelligence and – in my opinion – transitioning (or better: re-connecting) them to their intuitive intelligence. If we fail at this, the majority of humans will experience free will only as an illusion.

    We humans derive meaning from struggle, achievement, and social bonds. Within the next 10 to 20 years, we won’t need to struggle to achieve anymore. Achievement will be handed out (or withheld) by systems we cannot understand. What is left are social bonds. But is that really the case? We already see AI-mediated interactions replacing genuine connections (whether emails, eulogies, or even virtual AI companions). If we do not pay attention and re-connect with other humans (our tribes), we risk real psychological devastation at scale.

    If AI is centralized, it will be operated by an elite (that’s at least the current trend). Not only will this elite gain god-like power, but it will form another elite class: humans who are augmented by superintelligence through direct neural interfaces or exclusive AI enhancements. What about the rest? An underclass kept alive by a universal-basic-whatever, but without purpose or power?

    The problem really is: when we cross that threshold, it won’t be fixable. We better collectively act now, or the world will be run by a handful of super-enhanced humans and their AI overlords.

    In 2025 these thoughts will read like speculation. But based on my observations of how the majority of humans started using and adopting AI, the trajectory seems obvious (to me). AI is optimizing for efficiency. Companies adopting it as well. Individuals must – or they are no longer competitive. What is the antidote? I am divided. I don’t believe AI must lead to such dystopia. I am much more convinced that it is our best shot to achieve utopia. But there is a very thin line in-between them: us humans. In how we collectively act. And acting is much (!) less about technological adaptation (from becoming AI “experts” to Neuralink cyborgization) and indefinitely more about re-connecting to what makes us uniquely human: our consciousness, our connection to God, our one Creator, and our unity. Meaning will come from non-competitive pursuits, AI-alignment from balancing logic with consciousness, and happiness from real, deep, social human connections. Intelligent machines – no matter how superintelligent they turn out – can never be conscious. Perhaps it is a wake-up call: we lost our spiritual connection to consciousness – and we must re-connect.

  • One of the biggest problems of humanity is information overload.

    Think about how we used to get information just 50 years ago. We had to deliberately search for them.

    We had to engage in conversations, go to the library or bookshop to search relevant books or buy a newspaper.

    The internet gave birth to niche forums, and we got search engines which allowed us to find blogs and articles.

    Until social media arrived, it was a careful quest for information.

    Social media turned it around. Instead of searching for information, we now get bombarded with news, ideas, opinions – from anyone around the world, nonstop 24/7.

    With ChatGPT, we got a tool that not only bombarded us with human created information, we can now basically create our own information, endlessly.

    The worst: People now flood the internet and social platforms with content they didn’t even write themselves.

    What does this mean?

    It is now easier and cheaper than ever to access information. Which is great!

    But it is harder than ever to focus on what really matters to us.

    The now endless stream of information siphons our energy, distracting us from the intentional paths we truly wish to pursue.

    I think the best way to consume information consciously is to first have a clear picture of what we want to understand and know, and then to dedicate time for deep-reading and deep-writing.

    That means, not only searching for quick information on what truly interests you – but choosing one subject to study, research, and then write your own essay on it.

    Whether you publish that essay or not is irrelevant.

    Merely writing it keeps your thinking-ability alive.

    The important thing is to do it consciously.

    Use AI only as a research partner – not a ghostwriter.

    Pick what you want to master. Then dedicate time to actually master it – not only consume endless information on whatever the world decides is important now.

  • OpenAI released its new o3 models and numerous people argue that this is in fact Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) – in other words, an AI system that is on par with human intelligence. Even if o3 is not yet AGI, the emphasis now lies on “yet,” and – considering the exponential progression – we can expect AGI to arrive within months or maximum one to two years.

    According to OpenAI, it only took 3 months to go from the o1 model to the o3 model. This is a 4x+ acceleration relative to previous progress. If this speed of AI advancement is maintained, it means that by the end of 2025 we will be as much ahead of o3 as o3 is ahead of GPT-3 (released in May 2020). And, after achieving AGI, the self-reinforcing feedback loop will only further accelerate exponential improvements of these AI systems.

    But, most anti-intuitively, even after we have achieved AGI, it will for quite some time look as if nothing has happened. You won’t feel any change and your job and business will feel safe and untouchable. Big fallacy. We can expect that after AGI it will take many months of not 1-2 years for the real transformations to happen. Why? Because AGI in and of itself does not release value into the economy. It will be much more important to apply it. But as AGI becomes cheaper, agentic, and embedded into the world, we will see a transformation-explosion – replacing those businesses and jobs that are unprepared.

    I thought a lot about the impact the announced – and soon to be released – o3 model, and the first AGI model are going to have.

    To make it short: I am extremely confident that any skill or process that can be digitized will be. As a result, the majority of white-collar and skilled jobs are on track for massive disruption or elimination.

    Furthermore, I think many experts and think tanks are fooling themselves by believing that humans will maintain “some edge” and work peacefully side-by-side with an AI system. I don’t think AGI will augment knowledge workers – i.e. anyone working with language, code, numbers, or any kind of specialized software – it will replace them!

    So, if your job or business relies purely on standardized cognitive tasks, you are racing toward the cliff’s edge, and it is time to pivot now!

    Let’s start with the worst. Businesses and jobs in which you should pivot immediately – or at least not enter as of today – include but are not limited to anything that involves sitting at a computer:

    • anything with data entry or data processing (run as fast as you can!)
    • anything that involves writing (copywriting, technical writing, editing, proofreading, translation)
    • most coding and web development
    • SAAS (won’t exist in a couple of years)
    • banking (disrupted squared: AGI + Blockchain)
    • accounting and auditing (won’t exist as a job in 5-10 years)
    • insurance (will be disrupted)
    • law (excluding high-stake litigation, negotiation, courtroom advocacy)
    • any generic design, music, and video creation (graphic design, stock photography, stock videos)
    • market and investment research and analysis (AI will take over 100%)
    • trading, both quantitative and qualitative (don’t exit but profit now, but expect to be disrupted within 5 years)
    • any middle-layer-management (project and product management)
    • medical diagnostics (will be 100% AI within 5 years)
    • most standardized professional / consulting services

    However, I believe that in high-stakes domains (health, finance, governance), regulators and the public will demand a “human sign-off”. So if you are in accounting, auditing, law, or finance I’d recommend pivoting to a business model where the ability to anchor trust becomes a revenue source.

    The question is, where should you pivot to or what business to start in 2025?

    My First Principles of a Post-AGI Business Model

    First, even as AI becomes infallible, human beings will still crave real, raw, direct trust relationships. People form bonds around shared experiences, especially offline ones. I believe a truly future-proof venture leverages these primal instincts that machines can never replicate at a deeply visceral level. Nevertheless, I believe it is a big mistake to assume that humans will “naturally” stick together just because we are the same species. AGI might quickly appear more reliable, less selfish than most human beings, and have emotional intelligence. So a business build upon the thesis of the “human advantage” must expertly harness and establish emotional ties, tribal belonging, and shared experiences – all intangible values that are far more delicate and complex than logic.

    First Principle: Operate in the Physical World

    • If your product or service can be fully digitalized and delivered via the cloud, AGI can replicate it with near-zero marginal cost
    • Infuse strategic real-world constraints (logistics, location-specific interactions, physical limitations, direct relationships) that create friction and scarcity – where AI alone will struggle

    Second Principle: Create Hyper Niche Human Experiences

    • The broader audience, the easier it is for AI to dominate. Instead, cultivate specialized groups and subcultures with strong in-person and highly personalized experiences.
    • Offer creative or spiritual elements that defy pure rational patterns and thus remain less formulaic

    Third Principle: Emphasize Adaptive, Micro-Scale Partnerships

    • Align with small, local, or specialized stakeholders. Use alliances with artisan suppliers, local talents, subject-matter experts, and so on.
    • Avoid single points of failure; build a decentralized network that is hard for a single AI to replicate or disrupt

    Fourth Principle: Embed Extreme Flexibility

    • Structured, hierarchical organizations are easily out-iterated by AI that can reorganize and optimize instantly
    • Cultivate fluid teams with quickly reconfigurable structures, use agile, project based collaboration that can pivot as soon AGI-based competition arises

    Opportunity Vectors

    With all of that in mind, there are niches that before looked unattractive, because less scalable, that today offer massive opportunities – let’s call them opportunity vectors.

    The first opportunity vector I have already touched upon:

    • Trust and Validation Services: Humans verifying or certifying that a certain AI outcome is ethically or legally sound – while irrational, it is exactly what humans will insist on, particularly where liability is high (medicine, finance, law, infrastructure)
    • Frontier Sectors with Regulatory and Ethical Friction: Think of markets where AI will accelerate R&D but human oversight, relationship management, and accountability remain essential: genetic engineering, biotech, advanced materials, quantum computing, etc.

    The second opportunity vector focuses on the human edge:

    • Experience & Community: Live festivals, immersive events, niche retreats, or spiritual explorations – basically any scenario in which emotional energy and a human experience is the core product
    • Rare Craftsmanship & Creative Quirks: Think of hyper-personalized items, physical artwork, artisanal or hands-on creations. Items that carry an inherent uniqueness or intangible meaning that an AI might replicate in design, but can’t replicate in “heritage” or provenance.

    Risk Tactics

    Overall, the best insurance is fostering a dynamic brand and a loyal community that invests personally and emotionally in you. People will buy from those whose values they trust. If you stand for something real, you create an emotional bond that AI can’t break. I’m not talking about superficial corporate social responsibility (nobody cares) but about authenticity that resonates on a near-spiritual level.

    As you build your business, erect an ethical moat by providing “failsafe” services where your human personal liability and your brand acts as a shield for AI decisions. This creates trust and differentiation among anonymous pure-AGI play businesses.

    Seek and create small, specialized, local, or digital micro-monopolies – areas too tiny or fractal for the “big AI players” to devote immediate resources to. Over time, multiply these micro-monopolies by rolling them up under one trusted brand.

    Furthermore, don’t avoid AI. You cannot out-AI the AI. So as you build a business on the human edge moat, you should still harness AI to do 90% of the repetitive and analytic tasks – this frees your human capital to build human relationships, solve ambiguous problem, or invent new offerings.

    Bet on What Makes Us Human

    To summarize, AI is logical, combinatorial intelligence. The advancements in AI will commoditize logic and disrupt any job and business that is mainly build upon logic as capital. Human – on the other hand – is authenticity. What makes human human and your brand authentic are elements of chaos, empathy, spontaneity. In this context, human is fostering embodied, emotional, culturally contextual, physically immersive experiences. Anything that requires raw creativity, emotional intelligence, local presence, or unique personal relationships will be more AI resilient.

    Therefore, a Post-AGI business must involve:

    1. Tangibility: Physical goods, spaces, unique craftsmanship
    2. Human Connection: Emotional, face-to-face, improvisational experiences
    3. Comprehensive Problem Solving: Complex negotiations, messy real-world situations, diverse stakeholder management

    The inverse list of AGI proof industries involve some or multiple aspects of that:

    • Physical, In-Person, Human-Intensive Services
      • Healthcare: Nursing, Physical therapy, Hands-on caregiving
      • Skilled trades & craftsmanship
    • High-Level Strategy & Complex Leadership
      • Diplomacy, Negotiation, Trust building
      • Visionary entrepreneurship
    • Deep Emotional / Experiential Offerings
      • Group experiences, retreats, spiritual or therapeutic gatherings
      • Artistic expression that thrives on “imperfection”, physical presence, or spontaneous creativity
    • Infrastructure for AGI
      • Human-based auditing/verification
      • Physical data center operations & advanced hardware
      • Application and embedment of AI in the forms of AGI agents, algorithmic improvements, etc. to make it suitable for everyday tasks and workflow

    The real differentiator is whether a business is anchored in the physical world’s complexity, emotional trust, or intangible brand relationships. Everything pure data-driven or standardized is on the chopping block – imminently.

  • Nowadays, most emails I receive – including technical and legal ones – are undoubtedly written by ChatGPT. Which I’m okay with – but I find it rather funny that I now have to read what an AI has written only to input the context myself into my AI system. We are effectively constraining AI systems to communicate via human intermediaries – which is a laughably stupid and cognitively inefficient approach.

    I think it is wasted energy to make AIs even better at mimicking human communication – this energy is better used in developing AI-to-AI communication protocols that bypass human language entirely. Instead of exchanging emails written in human language, AIs should directly exchange action items, structured data, intent vectors, or probabilistic models. How valuable is it really in making AI communication more human-readable? I believe it is about freeing AIs to communicate in their “native language” while humans simply set high-level objectives and constraints. No latency, no information loss, no mental drainage, more time for actual human communication and interaction.

  • The supplement industry is a study in contrasts. On one end of the spectrum, you have standardized mass-market products, like the multivitamins lining grocery store shelves. On the other, you have the hyper-competitive world of fitness supplements, where brands vie for attention with protein powders, amino acids, and creatine formulas. Online, the landscape is even more fragmented, with countless niche brands peddling proprietary blends and miracle formulas. And at the top of the pyramid, there are the medical-grade supplements, backed by scientific studies and sold at premium prices in pharmacies.

    But amidst this dizzying array of options, two critical factors are often conspicuously absent: transparency and fair pricing. In the supplement world, markups of 50 to 500 percent are not just common – they’re the norm. And when it comes to the quality and sourcing of ingredients, most consumers are left in the dark.

    The Murky Supply Chain

    The truth is, the vast majority of supplement brands are just that – brands. They might have a catchy name, a slick website, and an army of influencers under contract but they’re not actually manufacturing the products they sell. Instead, the majority of brands outsource production to contract manufacturers, who are responsible for sourcing ingredients, mixing formulas, and packaging the final product.

    But even these contract manufacturers usually don’t have direct relationships with ingredient suppliers. They usually buy from wholesalers, who in themselves import from other wholesalers from locations like Asia. It’s a game of trade, with each player adding their own markup along the way.

    By the time a supplement reaches the consumer, it may have passed through three to five different entities, each taking their cut. The end result? Consumers pay inflated prices, without any real insight into what they’re actually getting.

    The Quality Conundrum

    Transparency around quality is another major issue in the supplement space. While standardized multivitamins from reputable pharmaceutical companies generally adhere to strict quality control standards, the same can’t be said for many of the products sold online.

    To better understand the landscape, we can visualize the supplement market as a quadrant, with quality transparency on one axis and price on the other:

    • High Quality Transparency, Very High Price: This quadrant includes medical-grade supplements sold in pharmacies and premium brands that invest in extensive third-party testing and ingredient traceability.
    • High Quality Transparency, Medium Price: Here, we find standardized multivitamins from well-known pharmaceutical companies.
    • Low Quality Transparency, High Price: This is where many niche online supplement brands and fitness-focused brands reside, often selling proprietary formulas at high prices without clear sourcing information.
    • Low Quality Transparency, Low Price: Generic store-brand supplements and cheap mass-market fitness products fall into this category, offering minimal information on sourcing or quality control.

    The Opportunity: Radical Transparency at Fair Prices

    While the bulk of supplement sales (in terms of quantity) occur in the standardized multivitamin segment, the brands commanding the highest margins are often those with low transparency and high prices. They’ve perfected the art of marketing, using influencers to build trust without actually providing full transparency.

    Herein lies the opportunity: a supplement brand built on the principles of radical transparency and fair pricing. By vertically integrating the supply chain – cultivating raw ingredients, manufacturing in-house, and selling directly to consumers – it’s possible to dramatically reduce costs while providing unparalleled clarity around sourcing and quality.

    The potential for price disruption is significant. By eliminating multiple layers of middlemen and excessive markups, prices could potentially be reduced by 65 to 80 percent compared to current retail averages. This would be achieved through a transparent cost-plus pricing model, with a reasonable markup of 20 to 30 percent to sustain operations.

    A Paradigm Shift

    At its core, this business model is about stripping away the extraneous and focusing on what matters: high-quality supplements at fair prices, with complete transparency. I believe consumers shouldn’t have to choose between quality, affordability, scientificity, and ethical sourcing – they can have all four.

    In many ways, it’s a return to first principles. By questioning the assumptions that have long governed the industry – that complexity is necessary, that opacity is acceptable, that high prices are inevitable – we can envision a new paradigm. One where simplicity, transparency, and accessibility are the driving forces.

    My vision is to build such a fully-integrated purpose-driven supplement company that embodies the principles I hold dear: radical transparency, fair prices, and unwavering integrity. By owning every step of the process, from seed to shelf, we can redefine what’s possible in this industry. I believe that when you put people and principles first, success follows.

  • Secrets of the UFO” is one of the few books that if you read it open-mindedly, it will change your view of the world and universe forever. It is described as an arrangement of condensed and edited received communications from the UFOs and extraterrestrials. And it starts with three chapters summarizing over 25 years of study of the UFO phenomenon and 14 years of study of the “contactee riddle” by the author Don Elkins.

    In this ongoing and updating post, I share my book notes, highlights, and thoughts as I work through the book.

    Chapter 1: A Very Strange Phenomenon

    The book starts by stating that the book is going to be “either nonsense or the most centrally important thing you could possibly learn”. After reading it, I confirm this statement. If you read the book open-mindedly, you’ll not ask yourself whether UFOs exist, but rather WHO they are and WHY they are visiting our consciousness here on earth.

    If we assume the described UFO phenomenons are real, it opens an immense view onto the world and the universe, as it renders many scientific facts we nowadays believe to be true to be false or at least incomplete.

    Studying and understanding UFOs and the underlying technologies may validly be “the most important endeavor which we can undertake.”

    UFOs & Meteoroids

    To put our possibly naive assumption into perspective, the author gives the example of Dr. James E. McDonald, who explained to the U.S. congress in 1968:

    Meteors were once described as “stones falling from the sky” and anyone who curiously questioned this narrative were disregarded as stupid peasants. Well, until one researcher took it seriously and then discovered meteoritics.

    With UFOs, we are now in a “very similar situation in science”. We ignore and don’t take UFO sightings seriously, because it makes no sense from our current scientific understanding of the universe.

    UFOs defy any explanation possible with our current science and understanding of physics.

    We have to understand that our current “status quo” of science may be false or at least incomplete.

    Scientific Ridicule

    Anyone who dares to challenge the current status quo is subject to ridicule. In terms of understanding UFOs, it started in the late 1940s and 50s when the US Air Force – at that time in a Cold War with the Soviet Union – was mystified by UFO sightings. Because it was unexplainable and the technology of UFOs indescribable superior to the military technology the Air Force had access to, they decided it was better to call UFOs a ridiculous fantasy.

    But calling it a stupid fantasy doesn’t help anyone. Nothing constructive is achieved by doing so.

    As the author underlines: “Ridicule is not part of the scientific method, and people should not be taught it is.”

    Unfortunately, this “ridicule” is still in effect today, 47 years after the book was first published.

    Technological Breakthroughs

    To put it into perspective, we can think about any technology we now accept as normal in our present life. Any technology would have been considered a wild and absurd impossibility a scant 100 years ago.

    So can this not also be true for UFO technology?

    Yes.

    The question then is: How many millennia ahead of us are UFO technologies?

    Note: Later chapters will give plenty of descriptions of what these UFO technologies are capable of.

    Beyond the Present Level of Reality

    So the question is: What is holding us back from asking questions which go beyond our current understanding of reality.

    One problem is the current scientific system, which is set up to only investigate the present level of reality within our technological and scientific nexus of thought.

    Or as the author says: “The Jesus of thinking or technology which underlies the UFO manifestations may not have any close connection to our present Earthman’s philosophy of reality”

    And I agree with the author in this.

    Today, the moment we ask questions and venture into the unknown to investigate phenomena beyond our current established framework of thought, what we today believe to be “facts”, we encounter resistance.

    Anything that goes beyond the current technological nexus is dismissed as impossible. And I think it is part of human nature. We simply cannot grasp exponential technological improvements.

    But if we really want to see technological breakthroughs on the level of UFO technologies, which we can observe, science, politics, entrepreneurs (we all) must open ourselves up to the supernatural and the “impossible”. Without being open-minded, we will not make an evolutionary leap forward.

    Today these topics are energy or quantum healing, zero-point energy devices, the enigmatic technologies of UFOs – described later – the vast landscape of consciousness, or the transformative effects of psychedelics (which itself is a thick book we don’t understand and cannot explain).

    The next chapters of scientific discovery await in the prospects of telepathy, real human longevity, the frontiers of artificial superintelligence, the intricate art of matter manipulation, the theories of interdimensional travel, and the concepts of antigravity and warp drive technologies.

    The book” Secrets of the UFO” is an eye-opener to allow us to leave the rigid confines of current science and encourages us to find an elevated state of consciousness to ultimately find answers to what is now called the impossible.

    UFO Sightings

    What follows are 15 cases of UFO sightings…