Their Best Ideas for Variance Collapse Are Invitations to Meet the SEC

Most of the smartest people you know, if they ever claimed to have discovered a method to collapse variance across any meaningful time frame, would almost immediately find themselves explaining it to the Securities and Exchange Commission.

That irony matters.

Because if you told those same people—well in advance—what I actually do, they would dismiss it as “not my style.”

Not because it’s wrong, but because it demands exposure.

And that dismissal reveals a deeper limitation: a preference for insulation over observation, authority over falsification.

Faced with the choice between watching someone operate openly—where claims can fail in public and survive only if they work—or constructing something that invites regulatory consequence, they choose the latter.

That isn’t sophistication.

It’s a failure of insight, and a refusal to let reality, rather than permission, do the sorting.

Which in itself is amusing.