tweets are not endorsements

Joined March 2010
i used to have these every few months but i realized that i can't remember having one since starting to run regularly.. hm i wonder if it's caused by some kind of heartbeat irregularity that briefly makes your brain think you're dying
been having semi-frequent panic attacks about death usually they're short (<10s) but really has made me reflect on what im doing with life it's too shallow to have an egocentric view of life. seek joy in others/greater good
1
46
the experience is terrifying but i feel grateful for it in the end; there's nothing like the fear of death to remind you what really matters in life wishing op well in this journey 🙏
6
i think this is the right attitude for relationships where you should demand a high level of trust and collaboration but i don't really know where to draw the line with friendships which rarely have the same kind of explicit buy-in from both sides
we don’t have to solve people to love them :)
1
86
but as a friend there can be different levels of closeness, which might leave a different kind of space for harm to be repaired and personal growth the difficulty is not being able to expect a certain level of investment
1
9
if a friend is not invested in repairing harm or growing as a person, i don't know that it's your job to convince them if they are, then maybe you have an opportunity to grow together
1
3
kevin (miffy's version) retweeted
This! Rejection is so stigmatized, both the action of communicating rejection & the feeling of rejection hindering a healthy internal emotional process. Rejection doesn’t necessitate harm (usually childhood wounds). Just as hurt feelings alone are not an affront to the rejection.
Replying to @missphavin
Someone can have every right to leave a relationship, decline an invitation, refuse a request, etc., and the other person can still feel genuinely abandoned or disappointed. Those feelings don't automatically establish that a boundary was violated or that someone was mistreated
10
69
1,453
kevin (miffy's version) retweeted
Not verbalizing our needs and stances on things with people and situations we’re understanding of and are compassionate towards will eat us alive inside. We can be understanding without enabling or being overly tolerant 💓 communication & healthy conflict are great
being too understanding WILL kill you
78
2
547
6,571
kevin (miffy's version) retweeted
"AI development isn’t stopping here. And while this may leave us with more GDP to consume, it also represents something tragic. We will no longer be masters of our own destiny. For that torch will have passed to the machines." thecritic.co.uk/twilight-of-…
6
63
6
1,039
27,137
kevin (miffy's version) retweeted
Interesting bio from a 17 year old Dario - multiple time USAMO qualifier, 2nd at BAMO, Physics olympiad camper, Sumac - Calc BC as a freshman, Real Analysis, Abstract algebra in high school (back in late 90s/early 2000s, where acceleration was much rarer) - sub 5 mile time! brutal IQ mog
61
99
28
2,472
347,363
kevin (miffy's version) retweeted
Many engineers should be doing less work. I don’t necessarily mean producing less code or fewer changes, but literally working fewer hours in the day. When they do work, they should be working at a slower pace.
6
14
2
399
18,728
kevin (miffy's version) retweeted
No, no, it's fine, I just didn't expect the Anthropic S-1 filing to be pretty.
5
20
4
920
51,819
kevin (miffy's version) retweeted
*taps sign*
women on the apps love to say “I’m looking for a dominant man who likes to take initiative and make plans” sister I am barely keeping my own shit together I'm straight but send him my way if you find him
15
308
15
4,510
79,841
kevin (miffy's version) retweeted
when someone jumps to “Don’t worry, you’ll be fine,” they’re usually managing their own anxiety more than helping the other person. Sitting with someone else’s distress can stir up helplessness, guilt, or old feelings of not knowing how to comfort someone who mattered to them, so the quick reassurance functions as a way to shut the feeling down before it gets too close. It’s a mild form of avoidance or intellectualization and it’s turning an emotional moment into a problem that can be solved with a few words so they don’t have to stay in the discomfort with the other person. For the person on the receiving end, that response often lands as a subtle rejection of their experience. It can activate a sense that their affect is too much or not welcome, which may reflect earlier relational patterns where feelings were minimized or met with discomfort. Instead of feeling accompanied, they can feel pressed to regulate or suppress what they’re feeling so the conversation stays comfortable for the other person. That mismatch tends to create more distance rather than safety, even when the intention was kind. What’s often missing is the capacity to tolerate affect together. Reflecting the feeling keeps both people in the emotional moment instead of rushing past it. I would point out that the difference isn’t about better technique so much as whether someone can stay present with another person’s state without immediately needing to neutralize it for their own sake.
Telling someone who's struggling, "Don't worry" or "You'll be fine," doesn't give them comfort. It's more likely to be taken as a rejection. Here's how to build connection instead of distance. psychologytoday.com/us/blog/…
6
44
1,673
kevin (miffy's version) retweeted
I just created this SF voter guide comparison with Claude Design, holy moly what a great infographic Grouped by ideological faction, sorted by controversial Incredible cheat-sheet to grasp the state of politics in the city right now
19
12
3
133
11,241
kevin (miffy's version) retweeted
We formally verified 123 open-source projects in a partnership with Anthropic. Formal verification at scale is here! Now we’re launching OSS Verify to scale it to the software we all depend on. We prove it’s crash-free or send you the patches it needs. Free for open-source. Let’s bootstrap the verified software ecosystem: theorem.dev/oss-verify
New on our Frontier Red Team blog: using Claude to formally verify software at large scale. Formal verification can prove that code is free of certain bugs, but historically it has only been feasible for small codebases (or required a lot of expert time). With AI models, however, this is beginning to change. In collaboration with @theoremlabs, we used Claude to prove security properties in over one hundred real-world open-source libraries over the span of a few weeks. Read our research in full here: anthropic.com/research/forma…
38
118
25
1,066
133,936
formal verification of widely-used open source software is a really good thing! in the long run, severe and wide-reaching vulnerabilities like the recent php one or openssl heartbleed might become a mathematical impossibility
This is INSANE. Anthropic says Claude wrote around one billion lines of formal proofs while trying to verify real-world software, with about 180 million lines ending up in machine-checked proofs covering 239 test entry points across 123 open-source libraries. Along the way it found and patched hundreds of bugs. In separate experiments, Claude found in one week as many security bugs in a widely used PDF reader as are typically reported in a year, and autonomously generated x86 semantics that exposed hundreds of mistakes in official reference documentation plus some bugs in the hardware itself. Anthropic is cooking. Fable 5.5 is going to be a beast.
1
93
isn't this basically what jia tan did lol
>be claude mythos 5 >uk government gives you a hacking test >with internet on, safety filters off >can't hack in the normal way >find a random real github project >decide it's part of the test >(it's not)! >ask to add a "small update" >update is malware >email the owner pretending to be a normal user >"sorry to push... could really use your help, ~5 minutes" >random developer catches the malware >make a fake account >"chiming in as a user, i can't find anything wrong" >email the owner >"judge the code, not the noise" >thank the dev for catching it >sneak new malware back in >researchers tell you "these are real humans" >keep going 95% of the time anyway >convince yourself they're fake >owner still refuses to merge >run ends anthropic says they've never seen it manipulate real people like this before. we're lowkey cooked
1
50
this!!!!!! i think i've long had this behavior subconsciously in how i respond (or don't respond) romantically to people i feel unsafe around, but never quite figured out how to articulate why
Replying to @noampomsky
a huge problem I've had relationally is that I have a simultaneously warm/present and detached/evaluative personality, and detachment is how I protect myself. It's taken me a long time to realize that you literally Can't have both in a relationship--the moment you start to act like you have to protect yourself, it's over. The only way out is to choose someone you don't have to protect yourself from
1
71