Riley on the day · June 15th

Early in the 11th century, a young Benedictine monk named Eilmer jumped from the 150-foot tower of his abbey in the small English town of Malmesbury, wearing a pair of crude wings he’d fashioned from willow wood and cloth. Eilmer managed to glide a good 600 feet, passing over the city wall before crash-landing in a small valley near the river Avon. The fall broke both his legs, crippling him. Malmesbury Abbey still boasts a stained-glass window in honor of Brother Eilmer. This legendary experiment in medieval aviation comes to us via 12th-century historian William of Malmesbury in an account written circa 1125, although William neglected to provide future historians with an exact date for the feat. But William does mention another key episode in Eilmer's life when the monk was "advanced in years": Eilmer witnessed Halley's comet in 1066, commenting, "It is long since I saw you." Some historians have interpreted this to mean that Eilmer saw Halley's comet on an earlier fly-by in 989, when he would have been a young boy. Assuming Eilmer was at least five years would in 989, he would have been born no later than 984. This would make Eilmer in his 80s in 1066, with his attempt at flight—which occurred when he was "in his first youth"—likely falling between 1000 and 1010. However, it's an estimate that is based on a lot of assumption, according to James Aitcheson of the University of Leicester, who argues in a paper published in the journal Notes and Queries that Eilmer may have seen a different comet altogether in his youth—the comet of 1018. If so, he would have been born much later and the date of his flight would have occurred between the 1020s and 1040s.

Early in the 11th century, a young Benedictine monk named Eilmer jumped from the 150-foot tower of his abbey in the small English town of Malmesbury, wearing a pair of crude wings he’d fashioned from willow wood and cloth. Eilmer managed to glide a good 600 feet, passing over the city wall before crash-landing in a small valley near the river Avon. The fall broke both his legs, crippling him. Malmesbury Abbey still boasts a stained-glass window in honor of Brother Eilmer. This legendary experiment in medieval aviation comes to us via 12th-century historian William of Malmesbury in an account written circa 1125, although William neglected to provide future historians with an exact date for the feat. But William does mention another key episode in Eilmer's life when the monk was "advanced in years": Eilmer witnessed Halley's comet in 1066, commenting, "It is long since I saw you." Some historians have interpreted this to mean that Eilmer saw Halley's comet on an earlier fly-by in 989, when he would have been a young boy. Assuming Eilmer was at least five years would in 989, he would have been born no later than 984. This would make Eilmer in his 80s in 1066, with his attempt at flight—which occurred when he was "in his first youth"—likely falling between 1000 and 1010. However, it's an estimate that is based on a lot of assumption, according to James Aitcheson of the University of Leicester, who argues in a paper published in the journal Notes and Queries that Eilmer may have seen a different comet altogether in his youth—the comet of 1018. If so, he would have been born much later and the date of his flight would have occurred between the 1020s and 1040s.

Early in the 11th century, a young Benedictine monk named Eilmer jumped from the 150-foot tower of his abbey in the small English town of Malmesbury, wearing a pair of crude wings he’d fashioned from willow wood and cloth. Eilmer managed to glide a good 600 feet, passing over the city wall before crash-landing in a small valley near the river Avon. The fall broke both his legs, crippling him. Malmesbury Abbey still boasts a stained-glass window in honor of Brother Eilmer. This legendary experiment in medieval aviation comes to us via 12th-century historian William of Malmesbury in an account written circa 1125, although William neglected to provide future historians with an exact date for the feat. But William does mention another key episode in Eilmer's life when the monk was "advanced in years": Eilmer witnessed Halley's comet in 1066, commenting, "It is long since I saw you." Some historians have interpreted this to mean that Eilmer saw Halley's comet on an earlier fly-by in 989, when he would have been a young boy. Assuming Eilmer was at least five years would in 989, he would have been born no later than 984. This would make Eilmer in his 80s in 1066, with his attempt at flight—which occurred when he was "in his first youth"—likely falling between 1000 and 1010. However, it's an estimate that is based on a lot of assumption, according to James Aitcheson of the University of Leicester, who argues in a paper published in the journal Notes and Queries that Eilmer may have seen a different comet altogether in his youth—the comet of 1018. If so, he would have been born much later and the date of his flight would have occurred between the 1020s and 1040s.

From storyflo. This is your daily audio brief for June 14th.

Hey, it's Theo. June 14th. Five things in tech that mattered this morning — let's start with the one that surprised me most.

Let's get into it.

First, from The Verge AI. Amazon security research reportedly led to the White House’s Anthropic Fable ban.

So Amazon did some security research and found that they could get Fable 5 to give up information that could be used in cyberattacks just by using the right prompts. Apparently, Amazon's CEO shared these findings with the White House, and not long after, the government decided to block foreign nationals from using it. It's interesting that Amazon's research was a key factor in this decision, and it's not clear what the full implications will be, but it's definitely a significant development. Amazon's research seems to have highlighted some potential security risks with Fable 5.

On the markets — Kalshi traders have been actively repricing this story in the last day.

Next.

Second, from The Decoder. Amazon and five other companies reportedly triggered the government crackdown on Anthropic's Fable model.

Amazon’s security team, together with five other tech firms, quietly raised alarms to the White House about hidden flaws in Anthropic’s Fable model. They flagged how the model could be coaxed into leaking proprietary code and even exposing export‑controlled data, something that would clash with U.S. regulations. Within a few hours the administration acted, issuing an export‑control order that pulled the model from public access.

What’s striking is the speed of the response—an internal corporate warning turned into a federal shutdown almost instantly. The move shows how quickly policy can bite when a private‑sector risk assessment lands on a government desk, especially when the same company, Amazon, is also a major investor in Anthropic.

The result is a double‑edged signal: a legitimate security precaution on one hand, and a reminder that even friendly investors can trigger regulatory pressure when a product looks risky enough. It leaves Anthropic scrambling to address the vulnerabilities while navigating a new layer of oversight.

On the markets — Kalshi traders have been actively repricing this story in the last day.

Up next.

Third, from The Decoder. AI coding agents find the right file but miss the exact lines that matter, study shows.

I’ve been thinking about this new SWE‑Explore benchmark and it’s kind of a wake‑up call for the coding bots we’ve been bragging about. They’re actually pretty good at the first step—spotting the right file in a huge codebase—but once you hand them the file, they start skimming over the parts that really need fixing. The study shows they miss the critical lines most of the time, which means the “fix” they suggest often falls flat because it lacks the context to apply correctly.

From storyflo. This is your daily audio brief for June 14th.

Hi, it's Iris. June 14th. Ten in health — the one that made me re-read the abstract is at the top.

Let's get into it.

First, from Emily Ley. The Sunday Scroll #145.

Hi friends! Happy Sunday! If you’re new here, The Sunday Scroll is a collection of articles, essays, and more that grabbed my attention during the week. Delivered straight to your inbox by 7am every Sunday morning perfect for scrolling with your coffee on the couch. I made a quick trip to DC last week to accept the 2026 Client Courage award from the New Civil Liberties Alliance and well, receiving such a thing in such a place (Madison Hall at the Library of Congress) was just surreal. What is this life. We just got my oldest back from Wake Forest Golf Camp and have one more week with Caroline before she’s off to Camp Greystone (for five weeks… hold me). I’m taking it easy with work this week to spend some fun time with her in the lake and at the pool! Hope your weekend is wonderful! If you enjoyed my post on what women are outsourcing (and how every time we say yes to doing something ourselves, we are saying no to something else) you should check out this deep dive on mother’s helpers and house managers, specifically, including how much women are paying for help and where they’re sourcing it. I love to see these conversations playing out in public, it’s so powerful. 41 things a soon-to-be 41 year old mom has learned (and is still learning) in life. A life changing laundry routine, you say? I’m all ears! Everything you never knew you needed to know about enzymes, water temperature, and rinsing. “Because time is the strangest thing we live inside. We never actually see it move.” This is so cool…eight photos that put life and time in perspective. Our toddler days feel like a distant memory, but if you’re in the thick of it this is really good advice on how to enjoy toddlerhood (not just survive it). I’ve been having so much fun shopping for 4th of July outfits! I don’t know if it’s because of America’s 250th, but I feel like there’s a lot of cute red, white, and blue fashion this year. Hello, this hat is perfection and if you just want a subtle Americana detail this neckerchief is darling. I saved a bunch of stuff here! (And if you too are having complicated feelings about the fourth, love for a country — like love for a person — doesn’t require pretending it’s perfect. You can hold its brokenness in one hand and your hope for it in the other, and still mean it when you say you love America.) A very fun roundup of soccer movies for kiddos excited about the World Cup! And in that same vein, why watching sports makes people happy. Forever a Nap Dress fan, but this $70 smocked dress is a really close second! Never thought I would be so excited about celebrities using a Cricut machine, but everything about Taylor Swift and the Haim sisters wearing homemade t-shirts makes me happy. My friend wrote this sweet piece about our time working together last year (first doing press for my cookbook, talking about pot roast… then doing press for my lawsuit, talking about tariffs and international trade… what a ride). I brought this little printer with us so I could print out photos of the kids from camp. I’m trying to be better about our pictures not just living in our phones! Mosquito repellant bracelets, because, of course. File this under things I’m loving because my family continues to think I’m insane, but this hat brings me so much joy. My favorite sunglasses (which are currently 30% off!) Handy zipper pouches for organizing crafts, boat things, pool things. I’ve been living in these jelly sandals, they make my millennial heart so happy. I’m always on a mission to find ways to keep my business and life more organized (hello, I literally created a planner). When it comes to apps it feels like I’ve tried them all — and I have thoughts! I’m working on a massive post of all the apps that keep my business and life organized, how I utilize them, and what’s actually worth paying for. If you too find joy in organization, this post is for you!

Three years ago I wrote a “lightness” manifesto, hoping that cutting back on work would give me room for reading, walks, and guitar. The plan worked on the surface—fewer PowerPoints, more quiet time—but the feeling of lightness never arrived.

The missing piece is Jevons’s paradox: when something becomes more efficient, we end up using more of it because it feels cheaper. The same thing happens with time—once each hour stops costing money, we start treating it as free and fill it with more activities.

My brain kept measuring every hour by output—pages read, miles run, chords learned—so the newly “free” time turned into a longer to‑do list instead of genuine ease. The paradox isn’t about tech; it’s about the internal price tag we still attach to every moment.

The lesson is simple: efficiency alone won’t bring lightness. To feel lighter you have to reprice your time, letting some hours simply be, without the pressure to produce something measurable.

The evidence behind breast‑cancer screening is solid—large randomized trials and meta‑analyses show that regular mammography reduces mortality, especially when started at the right age for a person’s risk level. For most women with average risk, starting at 40 or 45 years and screening every two years is well supported; higher‑risk groups (family history, genetic mutations) may benefit from earlier, annual imaging and often add MRI to catch cancers that mammograms miss.

Risk isn’t just age. Tools that combine family history, breast density, and lifestyle factors can stratify women into low, moderate, or high risk, guiding both the start age and the interval between screens. The higher the risk, the more frequent and comprehensive the imaging should be, but the trade‑off is more false positives and follow‑up tests, so it’s a personal balance.

Choosing the right imaging strategy depends on what the breast tissue looks like. Dense breasts can hide tumors on standard mammograms, so adding ultrasound or MRI improves detection, though MRI is more costly and requires contrast. For most women with fatty or moderately dense tissue, a standard digital mammogram is sufficient; for those with very dense tissue, supplemental ultrasound or MRI may be worth discussing.

Ultimately, the decision hinges on a shared conversation: weigh the modest benefit of earlier detection against the potential anxiety and extra procedures. If you’re unsure where you fit, a brief risk assessment with your clinician can clarify whether you should start earlier, screen more often, or stick with the standard schedule.

The SpaceX IPO has arrived with the kind of fanfare that only comes around once in a generation. The company is now the 6th largest publicly traded entity in the United States, carrying a market cap north of $2.1 trillion and joining an exclusive club of just 12 American companies valued above $1 trillion. The financial media is breathless, retail platforms are rationing allocations, and the hype machine is running at full capacity. Before you reach for your wallet, it is worth pausing to examine what you are actually buying and what history says happens next. The raw financials tell a story that the hype does not. SpaceX reported $18.7 billion in total revenue for 2025, which sounds impressive until you see the other side of the ledger: $20.7 billion in capital expenditures, negative $13.8 billion in free cash flow, and a net loss of approximately $5 billion. In the first quarter of 2026 alone, the company burned through $9.1 billion in free cash flow on just $4.7 billion in revenue, with the newly merged xAI segment consuming the majority of that capital. The company has even acknowledged that the xAI division may never become profitable. This is not a growth company temporarily investing for future returns. This is a structurally capital intensive business that destroys cash at a historic rate. What makes the SpaceX IPO uniquely dangerous is not just the valuation disconnect, but the mechanics of how the stock has been structured to distribute risk onto retail investors while giving insiders a clear and early exit. The combination of extreme overvaluation, asymmetric lock up rules, and the brutal historical track record of major IPO drawdowns creates a setup where the risk is overwhelmingly skewed to the downside for anyone buying at current prices. The $2.1 Trillion Valuation Trap: SpaceX is now the 6th largest US company by market cap at approximately $2.31 trillion, despite burning $13.8 billion in free cash flow in 2025 and recording a net loss of $5 billion. It carries the highest cost of ownership of any stock in the top 12. The Retail Lock In: Retail investors buying through platforms like Fidelity are subject to a 15 day flipping rule. Sell within that window to protect yourself from early volatility and you face a six month ban from future IPOs. A third offense triggers a permanent lifetime ban tied to your Social Security Number. The Insider Release Valve: While retail is penalized for selling, pre IPO insiders have a structured schedule that allows them to begin offloading shares right after the Q2 earnings report on June 30th, with up to 30% of eligible locked up shares available for sale at that first unlock. The Historical Drawdown Reality: Research on major market debuts shows that between 55% and 60% of top IPOs experience significant drawdowns, frequently falling 30% to over 80% from their first day highs within the first 12 to 36 months of trading. The Buffett Rule: Warren Buffett has long avoided IPOs for a simple reason: they are negotiated transactions timed entirely by the seller to extract maximum value, making it highly unlikely the timing is favorable to the buyer. THE SPACEX IPO REALITY CHECK: 60% of Major IPOs Drop 30-80% Within the 1st Year, Warren Buffett’s take and why SpaceX at ~$2.1 Trillion is the Most Asymmetric Risk Setup in the Market Right Now! So, let’s go…

Clients often ask about a particular stock or what the next hot stock sector will be. (My response is always a rendition of: “I don’t know the future and neither do you.”) Luckily, arithmetic is much more foreseeable, however, and we know that investors as a whole will earn the market return minus costs. Nobel laureate economist Harry Markowitz coined the concept of “the only free lunch,” meaning that diversification is the only way to reduce your portfolio’s risk, without simultaneously reducing its expected returns. My take is that diversification is even better than a free lunch. Diversification is so valuable using a very simplistic example (that I used to present when I taught investing.) Let’s say there were two companies: Rainy Day Umbrellas (RDU) and Sunny Sunscreen (SSI). A further simplification is that a year is either sunny or rainy and there is a 50% chance of either. In a sunny year, RDU doesn’t sell many umbrellas and declines by 10% while SSI gains 30%, selling a lot of sunscreen. In a rainy year, the opposite happens. You will invest for two years. If you pick one stock, on average you will be right one year and wrong the other. Your expected return is (1.3 x 0.9) – 1 or 17%. The average annual return (known as the geometric return) is 8.2%. It doesn’t matter if you were right the first or second year, only that you were right one year and wrong the other. Now, instead of picking one stock, say you put half in each. You would earn a guaranteed 10% return each year as one stock would lose 10% while the other would gain 30%. After the first year, you rebalance so that half of your proceeds are back at each stock. You will again get a guaranteed 10%. Over the two-year period, you get a 21% return (1.1 x 1.1) -1. You earn 21% instead of 17%, or four percentage points more. A couple of things to note before we leave theory land. First, the arithmetic average return for the two years is 10% whether you diversified or not. Second, the total returns (also known as geometric) were very different in that the lower amount of volatility (in the second case, zero), the closer the geometric return was to the arithmetic return. In the example above, diversification not only reduced the volatility, it increased the total returns. It was beyond a free lunch in that you actually got paid to eat that delicious meal. In reality, of course, no assets (I know of) have both an attractive return expectation combined with a negative one correlation. But asset classes with lower correlations can both decrease risk and increase expected returns. You may not get paid as much as the four-percentage point increase in returns (21% vs. 17%) but you do get paid by lowering volatility from diversification. Let’s look at some real data to check out the theory. It turns out that 96% of stocks, on average, return about the same as a short-term Treasury Bill, according to a study by Hendrik Bessembinder at Arizona State University. A handful of stocks, like Nvidia, account for all of the excess returns over a T-Bill. Even a portfolio of 100 stocks has less than a 50% chance of earning the market return. Thus, the portfolio would likely have a higher volatility, but the same average arithmetic return. With higher volatility, the geometric return is likely to be lower than owning the entire market. Sure, arithmetic and geometric returns are paramount, but the most important return is the investor return and that’s what the investor actually earns. Morningstar does an annual study called “Mind the Gap” where they calculate both the fund return and the actual investor return. Because investors generally chase past returns, they time the markets and asset classes poorly. On average, Morningstar finds the average investor return to be 1.2 percentage points lower than the fund (geometric) return based on the ten years ending on December 31, 2024. But let’s look at the gaps by fund type from the lowest diversification to the highest. Sector funds have a gap of 1.5%, while those differences are much lower in US Equities (0.6%) and Asset Allocation (0.1%). The narrowest funds (sector) have the widest gap, showing more performance chasing, while asset allocation funds have the lowest gap, or the least amount of performance chasing. Note that adding other asset classes, such as high-quality bonds can not only lower volatility, they can also increase returns because they typically rebalance rather than chase past performance. Don’t Get All Emotional. Diversification is one of the four key ingredients of investing, which I define simply in eight words: “maximize diversification and discipline; minimize expenses and emotions.” Own the entire world in total US and total international stock index funds along with high quality bonds, including inflation protected securities. Own them at the lowest costs and have the discipline to rebalance.

President Trump posted on Truth Social Sunday, framing a new memorandum of understanding with Iran as a “great deal” that would bring peace and security to the region. He highlighted the opening of the Strait and the resumption of oil flow as signs of progress, positioning the move as a birthday gift to himself.

In reality, the document is a preliminary step, not a formal treaty or lasting peace agreement. It sets a 60‑day window for negotiations on broader terms, essentially extending the current ceasefire rather than delivering the sweeping stability Trump described.

The distinction matters because the promised “peace” hinges on future talks that haven’t yet materialized. Until those negotiations conclude, the region remains in a fragile pause rather than a confirmed settlement.