Friday, December 26, 2025

Mission Genesis -- Some Thoughts.

l

Trump's Genesis Mission is tracked at a tab at the top of the page.  

From an earlier post? Link here. What might be the most important "reason" for Trump's "Genesis Mission." What was he thinking? The fact that Palantir was on the list speaks volumes.
 
It all comes down to national security (and money/investing, of course). National security:
  • defense (shooting war)
  • tech (cold war) 
The two most glaring omissions from Mission Genesis?
  • Apple
  • SpaceX 
    • both Grok and xAI made the list 
Apple: its an consumer electronics company; not national security; and, Apple is going its own way.

SpaceX: 1,000% tied up in national defense and tech, but it's the silent partner for Mission Genesis -- SpaceX / US government = hand / glove. 
 
Another interesting absence: Broadcom.

Most interesting name on the Mission Genesis list: Nokia. 
 
AI prompt:  Nokia made Trump's "Mission Genesis" list. There is more than enough tech on that list that Nokia didn't seem necessary. Most glaring omission from the "Mission Genesis" list: Broadcom. What is  Nokia bringing to the table; why is Nokia on the list and why did Broadcom not make the list, or Qualcom for that matter, also? Was there too much overlap among all the other chip companies on that list to add Qualcomm and Broadcom?  The only place I see Nokia is somehow in the same arena as Cisco, but that seems a stretch. Thoughts? 
 
Note: Nokia does not show up on the official Trump Mission Genesis list but does show up on other lists associated with Mission Genesis. Perhaps Trump saw Nokia as a foreign company and was not aware of the company's impact "on big research."
 
Why Broadcom and Qualcomm are ot on the list:  
Genesis' initial public partner list isn't primarily about consumer or modern silicon;
the program's public MOUs are tied to AI research platforms, cloud/compute ecosystem infrastructure -- domains where Nokia, AMD, Nvidia, AWS, etc, are core players.
 
****************************
Nokia
 
What is the relationship between Nokia and Bell Labs and what was the genesis of that relationship?

Bell Labs, originally founded in January 1925 as Bell Telephone Laboratories, Inc., was established through a shared ownership between AT&T and Western Electric to consolidate research in telecommunications. It operated as the research arm of the Bell System until the 1984 breakup of AT&T, after which it became a subsidiary of AT&T Technologies. In 1996, AT&T spun off much of Bell Labs into Lucent Technologies. Lucent then merged with Alcatel in 2006 to form Alcatel-Lucent.

Nokia's relationship with Bell Labs began in 2016 when Nokia acquired Alcatel-Lucent for approximately $16.6 billion, integrating Bell Labs as a subsidiary and rebranding it as Nokia Bell Labs. Today, Nokia owns and operates Nokia Bell Labs, which continues its legacy of innovation in areas like telecommunications, AI, and quantum computing, with headquarters in New Jersey. 

At this point, think ARPANET and DARPA:

With the close relationship between DARPA and Trump's Genesis Mission, why was the latter given to DOE and not DOD (DARPA)? 


When you think back to whom Joe Biden had for his Secretary, DOE, it is just amazing how clueless that administration was -- at almost every level. It was 1000% political as would be expected from someone who spent his entire life (not just career, but his entire live, his entire calling, his entire being) within the political universe. 

Back to the Genesis Mission: ChatGPT provides a lengthy discussion why Broadcom and Qualcomm were not included but ChatGPT's argument fails.

ChatGPT also explains why companies like ATT and Verizon were not included but yet the list does include Cisco, Dell, and Oracle. 

For a "clean" Genesis Mission list, several named corporations need(ed) to be removed, but my hunch is that Trump had strong personal relationships with some of them -- Larry Ellison and Oracle come to mind.  

Genesis Mission Review -- December 26, 2025

 

Trump's "Genesis Mission" is tracked at a tab at the top of the page

Today, a very comprehensive update from Shay Boloor, link here. My investment portfolio is

  • 25%: consumer electronics (AAPL)
  • 25%: legacy energy (oil)
  • 25%: tech (not including AAPL) (includes infrastructure like GLW, SCCO)
  • 25%: large-cap, (mostly) dividend paying US equities (none of the above)

This is the Genesis Mission: it could easily be a proxy for my tech holdings:


 

What might be the most important "reason" for Trump's "Genesis Mission." What was he thinking? The fact that Palantir was on the list speaks volumes. 
 
*********************************
Disclaimer
Brief Reminder 

Briefly:

  • I am inappropriately exuberant about the Bakken and I am often well out front of my headlights. I am often appropriately accused of hyperbole when it comes to the Bakken.
  • I am inappropriately exuberant about the US economy and the US market.
  • I am also inappropriately exuberant about all things Apple. 
  • See disclaimer. This is not an investment site. 
  • Disclaimer: this is not an investment site. Do not make any investment, financial, job, career, travel, or relationship decisions based on what you read here or think you may have read here. 
  • All my posts are done quickly: there will be content and typographical errors. If something appears wrong, it probably is. Feel free to fact check everything.
  • If anything on any of my posts is important to you, go to the source. If/when I find typographical / content errors, I will correct them. 
  • Many posts are not proofread for several days after they've been posted.  
  • Reminder: I am inappropriately exuberant about the Bakken, US economy, and the US market.
  • I am also inappropriately exuberant about all things Apple. 
  • And now, Nvidia, also. I am also inappropriately exuberant about all things Nvidia. Nvidia is a metonym for AI and/or the sixth industrial revolution.
  • I've now added Broadcom to the disclaimer. I am also inappropriately exuberant about all things Broadcom.
  • And Oracle. 
  • Longer version here.

 

TGIF -- What An Incredible Week -- Friday, December 26, 2025

 l

Calendar: without question, the best day of the week for Christmas Eve, New Year's Ev -- Wednesday. What a great week.

Recommendation: when Christmas Day falls on a Thursday, not ready for prime-time:

  • Wednesday, Christmas Eve: 
    • market closes at 1:00 p.m.; 
    • except for mission essential, Federal employees released from work early (by noon).
    • postal employees full day but given compensatory time off on Friday 
  • Thursday, Christmas Day: Federal holiday, of course
  • Friday: 
    • market closes at 1:00 p.m.; 
    • only mission essential Federal employees come in work, but not a Federal holiday
    • no routine postal delivery; priority packages continue to be delivered 
  • similar schedules for days when Christmas falls on any other day of the week, but obviously adjusted for weekends.

*********************************
Back to the Bakken

WTI: $57.66.

New wells reporting:

  • Sunday, December 28, 2025: 68 for the month, 191 for the quarter, 774 for the year,
  • 41553, conf, XTO Energy, HBU Baptiste Federal 34X-11C, 
    • 40958, conf, Devon Energy, Grand National 34-36F 5H, 
    • 40765, conf, Enerplus, Olson 147-97-34-27-7H, 
  • Saturday, December 27, 2025: 65 for the month, 188 for the quarter, 771 for the year,
    • 41554, conf, XTO Energy, HBU Baptiste Federal 34X-11H, 
    • 40784, conf, Enerplus Olson 147-97-34-27-9H-ELL, 
    • 40769, conf, Enerplus, Olson 147-97-34-27-8H, 
    • 40723, conf, Devon Energy, Costanza 24-13 5TFH,
  • Friday, December 26, 2025: 61 for the month, 184 for the quarter, 767 for the year,
    • 41281, conf, Hess, BB-Rice-150-95-0718H-6, 

RBN Energy: why the return of the IEA's current policies scenario matters. Link here. Archived.  

The International Energy Agency’s World Energy Outlook 2025 (WEO 2025) represents a big shift in how the agency is framing the future of global energy. After several editions that leaned hard into an accelerated energy transition, the IEA has brought back its Current Policies Scenario (CPS), a baseline view built solely on policies that are on the books today — not those announced, proposed or aspirational. For folks watching global crude markets, especially in the U.S. oil and gas patch, that is a lot more than just a structural tweak to the outlook. It’s a clear signal that the IEA sees a growing disconnect between its earlier assumptions and how energy demand is really playing out. In today’s RBN blog, we’ll dig into what’s changed and why it matters.

As shown in Figure 1 below, the IEA’s outlook has, in recent years, anchored its long-term oil demand projections around two main scenarios: Net Zero Emissions (NZE; green line) and Stated Policies (aka STEPS; orange line). The NZE envisions an aggressive energy transition pathway, with global oil demand falling steeply to around 25 MMb/d by 2050. STEPS assumes partial implementation of announced government policies, with demand peaking near 100 MMb/d in the early 2030s before gradually declining. These two scenarios, with their widening divergence, have framed much of the global energy transition debate but have increasingly failed to reflect actual consumption trends.