ungovernableCat

Almost all the CEOs of top companies by marketcap are straight men. But even if that wasn't the case I think men and women are wired differently when it comes to pursuing after sex so your strategy would have to be different.

The audience who pays for porn is almost exclusively male for example. Male porn stars usually cater to a gay male audience even though straight women outnumber gay men by a huge margin.

If you look at literotica however, it flips and it's more of a female audience.

Affairs sound so last century when you spend your weekends doing ayahuasca trips with your polycule who all work in AI and love effective alturism.

OAI is in the middle of another funding round at $1.25T. If Anthropic with allegedly better financials can't get above $1.1T then why would anyone buy OAI at $1.25T

I don't know who's proposing tax paid pet food but is it that surprising more people would rather spend money on that than on wars in the middle east?

Auto reply emails aren't a new thing. Most come with a disclosure at the end that it's automated and they have a neutral tone "We acknowledge your reported problem, it's been forwarded to our engineers" (so people don't bother replying back).

I personally would rather get a literal auto reply ack e-mail generated by some python script than an LLM response that just rephrases the context. The python script will be more compute efficient too for this usecase.

>AI will ultimately prove better at generating the kind of message the author prefers

It's already pretty straightforward to improve this default "You're absolutely right about [your email reworded]" response but you still see it everywhere. The corpos simply don't care to fix it because doing so probably doesn't affect w/e metric they're modelling.

I think the real question to ask is not really about the tools themselves but where the organisation's incentives really lie. I've come to the conclusion that customer satisfaction just isn't up there anymore. You'll eat whatever garbage is served in your trough (from their POV)

Isn’t it the case that the average size of an organism (at least in mammals) correlates a lot with lifespan and cancer rate?

Elephants and whales get cancer much less than humans and humans get it much less than rats. If cancer mutations are a dice roll than the more cells an organism has the more “will I become cancerous” rolls happen, so larger organism had to evolve better mechanisms to kill cancerous cells before they get out of control.

Twitter is still super relevant in crypto circles (you can see for example the (ex) binance CEO using it to give updates about their latest scandal) so I think Vitalik at the very least has financial interests in keeping a presence there.

But then again, he's already fabulously wealthy and could just walk away from the space forever if he wanted to and be just fine.

If I were him I'd just hire a person to handle comms on it for me but I suppose that's not really minimalism.

I have some ex-colleagues that entered the indie dev scene, one man micro SaaS factories. According to them the space has never felt more "toxic" whereas before if you announced your new product you'd see other people in the community congratulating, giving helpful critique, now you see two three people just saying "here's that product but for $0 made by claude" with a vibe coded copy.

I get the sense it's becoming like an influencer marketplace (think instagram or twitch), where you attract new users through your brand as a persona and not so much the product itself.

All I want is that a rich person can't strongly direct the government to do things like idk start wars because they happen to own an intelligence/arms manufacturing company or control how food is regulated so their pocketbook grows bigger at the expense of the health of the country and the taxpayer.

Math is completely abstract and the base rules and mechanics of it are some of the most clear cut and formalised because that’s the entire point of the subject.

Biology is the complete opposite of that.

The business models have become more extractive robbing users of control and agency and herding them to places where the business wants them to be.

E=mc*2 but m is really really tiny

Making it public will invite the deviants who derive pleasure from the audience. Look up historical behaviours of crowds in some of the last public executions in France.

If this were livestreamed you'd have just insanely grotesque stuff like livestream commentators narrating and reacting to the footage while polymarket ads play over it, making memes and remixes of it like what happened with the Charlie Kirk assassination clips. It's all sick IMO.

>Government surveillance is much worse than corporate surveillance

I think in practice you'll find they go hand in hand together.

The 55+ crowd where I'm from have the most active social life. Constantly at each others houses for a chat, activities (gossip parties) after Sunday mass etc.

>The upper class and wealthy socialize a great deal. I mean a ton. Shared vacations, constant social occasions hosting fund raisers galas sports hobbies etc. practically non stop.

I wonder how many of them would count this as work time, since so much of value add at high level positions is precisely through activities like that.

I'm surprised companies are doing take homes in an era of LLMs. I suppose it can save valuable paid time by forcing the candidate to waste theirs instead, but surely you get a lot more signal from actually talking to the candidate and seeing how they think and understand what they're doing.

I do hope for an optimistic outcome of course. But the same cohort that gave us algorithmic screen maximisation is also funding and leading the AI revolution so I'm a bit sceptical they have our best interest in mind.

I'll be the negative nancy and say that I think it's more likely we see an acceleration of the current trend. If we're talking about students, the top students will be doing as well or better than today but the median might see a big regression.

I have friends who work in primary education and they say there's definitely been some sort of decline in cognitive skills. A lot more kids struggle with holding attention and thinking outside of the box.

I think too much screen exposure has been terrible for the average child.

The complexity of manufacturing is one reason why TSMC is one of the most important companies in the world right now and why Nvidia is the most valuable by marketcap.

If you can make a GPU more efficient and cheaper than Nvidia does you can make a ton of money. Plenty of labs around the world are working hard on this problem and yet Nvidia is still dominating (and the market believes this isn't changing any time soon)

Same things for robotics. It's unlikely you'll have a vertical stack on all the different things needed to manufacture your robot on a massive scale. What happens if some geopolitical spat makes getting rare earth minerals and battery tech from China impossible?

Compare that to tokenmaxxing in programming and math, where the only thing you need is a gpu cluster and electricity.

Mathematics and programming is verifiable and fully controllable in a digital environment.

Fusion research and cancer research requires expensive experimentation in the real physical world. You can’t just throw a billion dollar worth of tokens to handle the problem.

Look at all the roadblocks for data centre buildouts which the industry certainly has a financial incentive to complete as fast as possible.

No. His real innovation was shamelessness. A lot of high society functions on these "gentlemen agreements" where you can theoretically get away with murder but it'd be rather uncouth of you to do so. He doesn't care and it's led him very very far in life.

And scarcity gives things value. No one bats an eye at a mass produced cotton t-shirt with a detailed custom print on it. There's services online where you can order a thousand with whatever print on it for quite a cheap price.

But take one of those shirts 80 years back in time and it'll likely impress everyone.

Perhaps that's what's going to happen to software too. If you're an idea guy you might get a monkey paw situation, at least if you planned on making some sort of serious income from your software idea.

You're opening yourself up to data right and privacy risks with that. My company demands that I use their enterprise account because they can claim full ownership of all produced output and have full logs of every interaction.

I think that gets legally murky, if the employee is the one who pays for the tool.

A trillion of these silly small guys pass through us every second. Funny to imagine them like that.

Rank & file employees have very little input with their stake. It's a small piece of a big pie. Consider also that Anthropic is trying to IPO with co-founders holding a share that secures 50.1% of total voting power distributed evenly between them, so not even institutional investors can outvote them.

The company's board and c-suite should be held legally responsible if the company's services do damaging things. Punished by jail time, fines targeting their equity etc.

That would certainly change the game of perverted incentives. I'm afraid they're currently trying to push some sort of absolution of this risk. Even if damage happens they will say we warned people in advance, this was always a risk it's not our fault these systems are opaque black boxes, it's a matter of national security to develop them etc etc.

There is no plan, it's just people's vocalised anguish as they anticipate being left out in the dust. Like a squealing pig before slaughter.

The thought of using Facebook products as a show of rebellion in 2026 is extremely amusing to me.