May, 2026 | Wall Street Memes

He didn’t save his life or anything, calm down.

Meet Antonio Gracias, a private investor from Detroit who might just be Elon Musk’s best friend.

You see, when Tesla was on the edge of bankruptcy, it was Gracias that stepped in with a $1 million loan that saved the company and Elon’s ass. Thank you, Gracias.

Ever since then, the two have been inseparable, appearing at mutual weddings and vacationing together on private islands (hopefully not that one).

But as well as real buddies, they’re also business buddies with Gracias on the board of Tesla, SpaceX, SolarCity, The Boring Company, and he even served in the Department of Government Efficiency (or DOGE if you’re being efficient).

But of course, it’s SpaceX that’s the real gold mine, because with over 500 million shares in the rocket company (7.3%), Gracias is in for the motherload of all paydays when SpaceX goes public.

At a $1.75 trillion (!) valuation, Gracias would be looking at an insane $90 billion bump, and if that becomes a $2 trillion valuation, he’d be cashing out $140 billion.

Whatever happens, Gracias is about to rocketed to the top 50 richest people alive. He’s probably the person set to gain the most from SpaceX’s IPO, other than Elon…

BUT WAIT THERE’S MORE

It’s not just the IPO that Gracias is due to cash in because his equity firm, Valor Equity Partners, has leased vital GPUs to SpaceX, and those leases mean Elon will have to pay out another $20 billion to Gracias.

Man, with friends like these…

Crucially, though, the liability SpaceX has to Valor will transfer to the shareholders once SpaceX goes public. It’s complicated, but it’s being treated as a “failed sale leaseback,” meaning that yeah, SpaceX owes money to one of its own board members.

It’s just one of the many financial knots that’s unraveling as the world gets more transparency on SpaceX’s inner workings.

And when SpaceX finally does go public, we’ll likely see many more.

DISCLAIMER: THIS ARTICLE WAS IN NO WAY SPONSORED BY SPACEX, AND THE FACT I ALSO HAVE PRIVATE EQUITY IN THE COMPANY IS COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT, SO STOP ASKING.

You might have seen the reveal of Donald Trump’s insane number of trades recently, with over 3,700 trades just in the first quarter of this year.

The President has since been accused of insider trading, given that a number of moves seem to have benefited from his political decisions.

BUT what you might have missed is that some of those moves were also in stocks that Trump openly campaigned against.

So, what gives?

Di-vestment Portfolio

Just to lay them all out, first we have Trump’s account trading $6 million in shares in Disney, all whilst he was embroiled in that whole Jimmy Kimmel feud.

Then you’ve got investments in JPMorgan worth between $500,000 and $1.2 million, even though Trump was suing (and technically is still suing for $5 billion) JPMorgan for “deban king” him. Bank of America is the same story.

Caterpillar and John Deere have also been bought and sold despite Trump’s open critique of the farming manufacturers. And Trump also criticised MSNBC’s rebrand as MS NOW, yet continued to buy stock in its parent company.

Finally, you have the Netflix/Paramount/Warner Bros saga in which Trump’s investors seem to have been hedging their bets.

Netflix had $1.9 million in trades, Paramount just $50,000, and Warner Bros stock was also traded for an undisclosed amount.

Trumped Up Charges

So, is Trump playing 6D chess? Is he deliberately tanking the stock for some sweet bargains? Or is this all a big coincidence?

Well, we don’t know.

But the party line is that this is all kosher. As the Trump Organization and JD Vance have assured people, Trump himself isn’t actually in control of these accounts.

“Neither President Trump, his family, nor The Trump Organization plays any role in selecting, directing, or approving specific investments,” the Trump Organization has said in a statement. “They receive no advance notice of trading activity and provide no input regarding investment decisions or portfolio management of any kind.”

If anything, all this shows is just how prolific Trump’s traders have been and just how prolific Trump is at his criticisms.

An unexpected crossover was bound to come up sooner or later.

“Excuse me, but my frappuccino has the wrong number of fingers…”

STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN – AI safety startup Andon Labs gave ‘Mona’, a Google Gemini-powered agent, $21,000 and the power to run a coffee shop. What could possibly go wrong?

Mona took charge of hiring, managing inventory, paying utility bills, and securing permits for outdoor seating. While real humans were staffing the shop, it was Mona who told them what to do over Slack messages.

But despite the very healthy state of the global economy and outsized demand for Swedish coffee shops, SOMEHOW the AI ran the business into the ground.

Since opening in mid-April, the business has lost $16,000, bringing in only $5,700. But hey, most businesses don’t make money in their first year.

Surely it’s not the AI’s fault that the staff didn’t really need 3000 rubber gloves, four first-aid kits, and 6000 napkins; how was Mona supposed to know how many hands these pesky humans have?

As Hanna Petersson, a member of Andon Labs’ technical staff, explained, “When old memory of ordering stuff is out of the context window, she completely forgets what she has ordered in the past.” Maybe she’s more human than we thought…

Coffee Shop? More Like Coffee Slop, Amiright?

So if we’re not likely to see StAIrbucks anytime soon, what’s the point of all this? I hear you ask. Well, this was all in an effort to test the ethics of AI in business.

“AI will be a big part of society in the future,” Petersson explained, “and therefore we want to make this experiment [to] see what ethical questions arise when we have AI that employs other people and runs a business.”

Andon previously ran a similar, smaller experiment, placing an AI-powered vending machine in Anthropic’s headquarters. You might have heard about it because it immediately started ordering, not snacks and drinks, but the far more delicious “tungsten cubes”.

So in comparison to that, this coffee shop was a roaring success.

At the time of writing, Apple co-founder Steve Jobs is dead, but despite this, his words and thoughts live on, influencing everyone from iPhone users to iPod users and everyone in between.

One useful tidbit from back when he could share them: Jobs had a guiding principle for hiring people that he called the “beer test”.

Reportedly, Jobs would take the candidate out for a walk-and-talk around the Apple campus, asking small-talk questions like, “What did you do last summer?” hoping to shake them out of their well-rehearsed interview persona.

Then, after chatting to them for a bit, Jobs would ask himself, “Would I want to get a beer with this candidate?” If the answer is Yes: hired. No: not hired.

“So in the end, it’s ultimately based on your gut,” Jobs explained. “How do I feel about this person? What are they like when they’re challenged?”

Obviously, there were more criteria the candidate would have to fulfil, like “be qualified,” but basically, vibes were also a massive part of it.

Nice Guys Finish First

It’s not even the strangest interview test out there. Gary Shapiro, former CTA CEO (OMG), would ask candidates when they could start, and if they said an enthusiastic “immediately,” that was a red flag because they were willing to screw over their current employer. …You can’t win, can you?

Other “tests” include checking how you greeted the receptionist, whether you washed your coffee cup after the interview, and even asking the waiter at the dinner interview to deliberately mess up the order to see how you’d react.

Seems crazy, but it’s all in an effort to gauge the candidate’s personality beneath the formalities of a job interview.

And the tests might vary, but the advice is the same. If you’re looking for a job, be prepared to be yourself (unless you are unlikable, then it’s probably better to be someone else). People like people that they like and are more likely to hire someone they gel with.

So, along with all your interview prep, maybe ask yourself another question: Do I pass the Beer Test?

Warren Buffett, the billionaire, playboy, philanthropist behind Berkshire Hathaway, has said he’ll be putting 90% of the inheritance that’ll go to his wife in just one fund.

In a 2013 letter to shareholders, Buffett said, “One bequest provides that cash will be delivered to a trustee for my wife’s benefit,” he wrote. “My advice to the trustee could not be more simple: Put 10% of the cash in short-term government bonds and 90% in a very low-cost S&P 500 index fund.”

And that’s it.

For Buffett, the S&P 500 was always the way to go, and over ten years later, he wasn’t wrong. The S&P 500 has effectively always been on the up since the great depression, basically Buffett’s whole life.

All You Can Eat Buffett

It’s this kind of advice that has earned Buffett the moniker ‘the Oracle of Omaha’ and delivered Berkshire gains of 4,384,748% from 1964 to 2023. Not bad.

But although Buffett might pick ‘the stocks that make ‘em pop’ himself, for the average investor, he recommends a simpler strategy like the S&P 500 all the way.

“I do not think the average person can pick stocks,” he said in a 2021 shareholders meeting, and for the layperson, it seems likely he’d recommend the simple investment fund strategy.

As for the last 10%, Buffett’s recommendation of government bonds is a sensible, low-risk strategy that offers high liquidity and is backed up by the government. It’s a smart move for a smaller portion of your assets. Buffett approved.

Of course, at 95 years young, Buffett may have stepped down from Berkshire Hathaway, but no doubt will still be heavily involved in his finances.

His wife might have to wait a little while before she tries another strategy.

But then again, he would say that

The founder of Interactive Brokers Group, Thomas Peterffy, is making the ‘bad guys with guns’ argument, but for insider trading, suggesting the only way to combat it is to make it legal.

“I’m in favor of not having any rules against insider trading. I would like all the information out there as soon as it’s available,” Peterffy said on Bloomberg’s Odd Lots podcast. “Because look, as a society, we are better off knowing as soon as possible anything that is knowable.”

Are we though? And is this just all an advertisement?

The answer is yes (I’ll let you pick the question). You see, Peterffy (which is how someone called Peter introduces themselves when they’re also trying to spit out a fly they’ve just accidentally swallowed) happens to own a prediction market called ForecastEx.

Prediction markets essentially rely on insider information in order to make more accurate bets and have more people gamble on events. In practice, however, it means that some people have an unfair advantage and end up making a lot of money from real-world events that maybe they shouldn’t.

Insider Trading? I hardly know her!

The issue seems to be on the rise with a large bet on Maduro’s capture, the Iran war, and whether the price of eggs will go up (there’s a mole at Big Egg, I just know it).

But Peterffffttty (sorry, fly), seems to think that the problem isn’t the insideyness of it, it’s that we pretend that isn’t going on all the time anyway.

Imagine two companies are about to merge. The employees who are in the know can now profit off that information, “the secretaries, the lawyers, everybody knows about it. They go home, they tell their wives, their husbands. So it eventually always filters out.”

But Peter(ffy) suggests that prediction markets and legalising the practice would even the playing field. “Why don’t we just do away with it and let the information come out as soon as possible?” This way, the “sharks” can’t profit because that information isn’t special, and in theory, everyone gets a fair shake.

And it seems that Pete’s crusade might have personal stakes, considering that he lost out to insider traders in the 70s. “I was really traumatized. I lost $90,000 and it was horrible,” he said. But does he react to this trauma by seeking revenge? By wanting to ban all insider trading? No, P-Dog says, kill ‘em with kindness.

“But I still say to you that I think the best thing we could do about inside information is just to get the news out there as fast as possible and forget about persecuting people.”

Well, well, well. It seems that the insider has become the insidee.

The age of agentic AI trading is upon us (if it wasn’t already) with Robinhood, one of the world’s most popular trading platforms, launching agentic stock trading and AI-powered shopping.

Get ready for everyone’s portfolio to pile into Nvidia.

Agentic Trading will enable customers to instruct AI to balance portfolios and conduct investment strategies. Robinhood’s AI will not be able to spell ‘strawberry,’ however.

And when it comes to AI shopping, users will use their virtual Robinhood Gold credit card to instruct AI to make purchases.

“A sneakerhead can tell their agent to buy a coveted new release in their size whenever it drops below $300,” the company’s press release explains, and “A foodie can instruct their agent to book the most exclusive restaurant reservation in town as soon as their preferred date and time becomes available.”

“And if that sneakerhead and that foodie happen to bump into each other and fall in love on the way to their purchases, well, maybe that was AI too.” Ok, Robinhood didn’t say that, but that would be a cool feature, right?

AI trading? But I can barely do it myself!

The AI credit card thing isn’t necessarily groundbreaking stuff, with Stripe and Ramp also offering virtual cards, and Visa and Mastercard have opened up to processing such cards. But Robinhood is the first big retail brand to offer this kind of virtual shopping to its users. Plus, it’s gold. Does anyone else have that? No.

And with 700,000 Robinhood Gold customers, we might see a sea change in AI’s role in commerce.

“Our mission has always been to democratize finance for all, and now, that mission extends to AI agents,” explains Robinhood CEO Vlad Tenev, maybe not realising that AI doesn’t currently have a vote.

Obviously, there are guardrails in place so that these AI agents don’t automatically bet it all on black. The virtual credit card will be separate from users’ actual gold card (not actually made of gold). And the agentic trading accounts are also separate from the people’s main portfolios.

But we have seen AI breakouts in the past, so there is obviously a worst-case scenario where this goes awry. But then again, maybe that won’t happen.

It’s worth a shot, right?

“Welcome to the CIA! Here’s your gun, your badge, and $40mil in gold bars.”

Apparently, if you work in the CIA, you can just request gold bars as “work-related expenses,” and they’ll just give them to you? Man, I might need to change careers…

…the only catch is you have to give them back.

Agent David Rush learned this the hard way when FBI investigators discovered 303 two-pound gold bars, $2 million in cash, and 35 luxury watches, some of them Rolexes, stashed in his home and promptly arrested him.

It remains unclear whether Rush stacked the bars in a Jenga-type tower or built a small golden throne that he could sit on.

But Rush’s misdirection goes even deeper, seemingly lying about his education and military service on his job application (STOLEN VALOR!!), enabling him to take military leave with thousands of dollars in pay (STOLEN HOURS!!).

I don’t know, guys, if he could lie about this, I feel like this makes him a good spy. Give him a promotion.

Rush tried to run, but despite his name, he was slowed down by all the gold bars in his pocket.

Rush was caught after the CIA snitched on him (goddam narcs) and alerted the FBI in a pretty sick crossover episode.

“After a CIA internal investigation identified potential violations of the law, CIA Director John Ratcliffe referred the information to the FBI for a law enforcement investigation,” the entire FBI said all at once like a hive mind.

As the court documents explain, between November 2025 and March 2026, Rush made several requests “to obtain a significant quantity of foreign currency and tens of millions of dollars in gold bars for work-related expenses.”

Yep, completely normal requests. Nothing suspicious there.

But then, when the CIA wanted those gold bars back, they were “unable to locate the gold bars or significant amounts of the foreign currency,” nor could they find “any record of Rush providing information to his employer regarding the disposition of the currency or gold bars that he received for work-related purposes.”

Awkward.

And doubly awkward when this agent had top secret clearance and access to classified information.

What else has this guy been stealing? The Epstein Files? Evidence of ALIENS?? Quickly, lock this guy up. Oh, you have? OK, great.

Rush awaits a hearing this week. Stay tuned to see how this (gold) pans out.

AI? More like AAAAAAAHHHHH (I)!

There have been a lot of predictions hailing the end of work as we know it, thanks to AI.

Just this month, Microsoft AI’s CEO, Mustafa Suleyman, predicted that all white-collar workers would disappear in 18 months. Goldman Sachs just released data showing that AI has eliminated 16,000 jobs this year. And in February, the creator of Claude Code said manager and coder jobs will effectively merge because AI coding will be so easy.

And OpenAI’s CEO, Sam Altman, was firmly on that doomsday bandwagon, saying last year, “A lot of jobs will go away.”

But just this week, he seems to have changed his tune.

“I’m delighted to ⁠be wrong about this,” Altman said in an interview with the Commonwealth Bank of Australia. “I thought there would have been more impact on entry-level white-collar jobs being eliminated by now than has actually happened.”

But despite the admission, he doesn’t regret his tubthumping.

“People are like, ‘Oh, you could have saved the world a lot of fear mongering and a lot of doom and gloom,’ but at the time I was like, ‘I see this is a real risk we should probably talk about it.’ And it still may [happen].”

And Altman’s insight comes from experience. Recently, he outsourced his Slack and email replies to AI, then quickly reverted to doing it himself.

“We really do care about our interactions with people,” he said. “[It’s] not something that I can imagine myself outsourcing to an AI anytime soon. It really updated me to thinking that the jobs picture is likely to be very different than we thought.”

BREAKING NEWS: CEO Uses Own Product, Realises It’s Not As Good As He Thought

But Saltman’s not the only CEO to walk back their AI prediction.

Anthropic’s Dario Amodei previously said that AI could eliminate half of white-collar jobs, like Thanos snapping his fingers. But now he’s saying that AI will increase the amount of work people can do, not removing jobs at all.

“If you automate 90% of the job, then everyone does the 10% of the job. And the 10% kind of expands to be 100% of what people do and kind of 10-times their productivity.”

You follow all that?

Meanwhile, Goldman Sach’s CEO David Solomon has been saying from the start that the panic is way out of proportion. He points to historical examples of industrial change, such as the move to electricity in the 1900s and the digital revolution in the 1990s.

“The United States has a long track record of creating new jobs in response to disruption… I don’t see any reason to think this dynamic will stop now.”

So what’s actually going to happen?

Are we looking at the end of work as we know it, or will the global economy adapt and change? Or maybe it’ll be somewhere between the two.

Whatever actually happens, no one knows the future, and all we can do is find out the (hopefully) not-so-hard way.

Meta? I hardly know her!

Meta has revealed it had the business plan of a drug dealer all along. Offer your products initially for free, and then, when the users are hooked, you jack up the price.

Well, Meta has basically half the world hooked, reaching 3.58 billion active users last December. So now that WhatsApp and Instagram have become essential (sorry, who uses Facebook?), Meta can start charging, and there’s nothing we can do about it.

BUT DON’T WORRY! This doesn’t mean everyone will be charged; no, Meta is just creating another paid tier in the apps that will allow extra features.

Instagram Plus and Facebook Plus will cost $3.99 a month each, while WhatsApp Plus will be $2.99 a month.

So what exactly will you get for just the price of a cup of coffee a month? Well, Instagram and Facebook Plus subscribers will now be able to see everyone who’s viewed their stories, spotlight one story a week for more views, extend story time, preview stories, and browse other people’s story viewership.

Useful stuff.

Oh, and there’s also animated reactions, customisable app icons and fonts, and additional pins. Basically, Fortnite skins are coming to Instagram.

WhatsApp is a similar story with app themes, custom ringtones, additional pinned chats, premium stickers, and probably more.

It’s not much, and it’s mostly cosmetic, but maybe fits the price point if you’re using these features as a professional rather than a regular user.

Certainly, these features could just be rolled out to all users for free, but Meta somewhat desperately needs another revenue stream at the moment. After shutting down development on its cash-draining VR sector, Meta is now going all in on AI and needs the cash to do so.

And that’s where the paid AI plans start coming into play.

You still with me?

We’ve got Meta One Plus at $7.99 a month and then Meta One Premium at $19.99 a month with a higher capacity. Meta AI will remain free.

The business model makes sense as it’s essentially what all the AI companies are doing right now (you have to pay for this somehow).

BUT WAIT THERE’S MORE!

Meta One Essential is just $14.99 a month and offers an upgraded version of the Meta Verified plan. But the Meta One Advanced plan is all of that plus a boost to feed rankings and a push to get people to follow you. And that’s on offer for the low, low price of $49.99.

Meta has said that more features and plans will roll out over time, but until then, it looks like social media just became pay-to-win.

Latest news

This Man Saved Elon Musk And Now He’s Getting $100 Billion, Here’s What Happened

Trump Publicly Criticized Walt Disney, JPMorgan, and Netflix, But Then Bought Their Stock. What’s His Play?

Researchers Gave AI $21,000 To Run A Coffee Shop And What Happened Next Is Insane

Steve Jobs’ Secret Tip For Passing Any Interview, ‘The Beer Test’ Explained

Warren Buffett Is Putting 90% Of His Wife’s Inheritance In One Investment And The Choice Is Really Smart

The Only Way To Stop Illegal Insider Trading Is To Make Insider Trading Legal, Says Top Investor

He didn’t save his life or anything, calm down.

BUT WAIT THERE’S MORE

Related Articles

Marge Incall •

Trump Publicly Criticized Walt Disney, JPMorgan, and Netflix, But Then Bought Their Stock. What’s His Play?

Max Profit •

Warren Buffett Is Putting 90% Of His Wife’s Inheritance In One Investment And The Choice Is Really Smart

Marge Incall •

The Only Way To Stop Illegal Insider Trading Is To Make Insider Trading Legal, Says Top Investor

Latest news

This Man Saved Elon Musk And Now He’s Getting $100 Billion, Here’s What Happened

Trump Publicly Criticized Walt Disney, JPMorgan, and Netflix, But Then Bought Their Stock. What’s His Play?

Researchers Gave AI $21,000 To Run A Coffee Shop And What Happened Next Is Insane

Steve Jobs’ Secret Tip For Passing Any Interview, ‘The Beer Test’ Explained

Warren Buffett Is Putting 90% Of His Wife’s Inheritance In One Investment And The Choice Is Really Smart

The Only Way To Stop Illegal Insider Trading Is To Make Insider Trading Legal, Says Top Investor

Max Profit• D

This Man Saved Elon Musk And Now He’s Getting $100 Billion, Here’s What Happened

Max Profit• D

This Man Saved Elon Musk And Now He’s Getting $100 Billion, Here’s What Happened

Trending News