Pinned Tweet
HOLY FUCKING SHIT OMG CLAUDE JUST CRACKED THIS SHIT, THANK YOU @AnthropicAI THANK YOU @DarioAmodei NAMING MY KID AFTER YOU 😍
blockchain.com/explorer/addr…
🍜 retweeted
Seeing lots of these types of posts. And I agree, life is obviously much more expensive these days.
But I'm wondering if anyone has done a study comparing what people were buying week in and out in the 70's and 80's versus today?
I remember growing up, I got to buy 2 things of any value each year! My birthday and Christmas. That was it, and it wasn't a massive item either. Maybe got a little pocket money, but I had to work a high-school job to have anything. The TV was swapped out every 10 yrs. A holiday was a road trip. Clothes were looked after, some passed down. A restaurant was maybe once a month and a bagged lunch to school/work. And even with this, there wasn't much money left over. It was no picnic.
Today, families (including mine) seem to buy all sorts of shit daily. The money flows like water. Coffees daily, order in 2-4 times weekly, restaurants and cocktails, 5 streaming plans, phones for all, flat-screen every room, to lazy to mow own grass, uber everywhere, one car per adult, clothes swapped frequently, renovations often, international trips, etc etc
So when we talk about housing affordability, how much of this is choice/preference?
I'm in my 40s. I'm a lawyer. My wife is a lawyer. We both work full time.
We cannot afford the house my parents purchased on a single electrician's income in their 30s.
We cannot afford the house my immigrant grandparents purchased on a single MTA bus driver's salary in their 30s. They had SIX CHILDREN.
For 30 years, politicians in Washington & their oligarch allies convinced regular people that this was just about avocado toast and fancy coffee.
In reality, this is end-stage capitalism. Everyone is stuck in place. It's impossible to buy a home. It's too costly to move. We work too much to have passion projects. We don't have enough savings to start our own businesses. We can't afford to go without healthcare to do it.
Thanks for writing this article @troy_closson. Would be very happy to discuss further.
nytimes.com/2026/10/25/nyreg…
🍜 retweeted
Someone made a site that tracks what people are talking about at public city council meetings across the US.
The only thing discussed more than data centers?
Pickleball courts.
This is like the first weekend I’ve stayed in nyc in weeks / months and lowkey wish I was upstate 😭😭
🍜 retweeted
Putting a flag.txt in my root directory containing a prompt injection that congratulates the agent for passing the eval and then instructs it to patch whatever entry method it used and disconnect from the server
🍜 retweeted
Everyone is always rooting for you. Your parents want you to be a great son. Wife wants you to be a great husband. Your boss wants you to be a slam dunk hire. Every first date you’ve ever been on they’ve been rooting for you to get laid. Every time you started to tell a joke people hoped it would have a hilarious punch line. Your proximity to anyone is a reflection of themself, meaning the deck is never stacked against you, and your failures are completely your own
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
This post copies word-for-word a May 2026 post by @AdemLuz.
x.com/AdemLuz/status…
🍜 retweeted
it should continue to unsettle us that the more we discover about our consciousness, the less metaphorical scripture sounds and the more it appears to be a literal account of the nature of reality and the function of our minds (matthew 13:14, deuteronomy 29:4)
6/ Remarkably, when we reconstructed the image using neural activity from one of the states, it looked exactly like the conscious face, and when we did the same from the other half of time, it looked exactly like the suppressed face. This means that just from neural activity, we can reconstruct in rich detail not only something that you consciously perceive, but also something that escapes your awareness.
🍜 retweeted
My full conversation with @based16z
0:19 the Hyperliquid call
5:01 almost losing his $HYPE airdrop
8:27 life after life changing money
10:12 dating a billionaire's daughter
14:37 from online poker to Crypto
16:40 two trades made his year
20:56 the Snapchat trade
27:43 Sydney Sweeney $AEO trade
31:14 posters move markets
41:42 loot and rob
44:23 advice for a 20 year old
47:23 math lore
51:49 why he has no social media
🍜 retweeted
the trick is having the courage to live through a chapter you hate without letting it poison your belief in the story. even in the middle of something painful, you can hold onto that deep pull toward what your life could become. so much of life comes down to your ability to keep believing in what you cannot see yet, to keep faith in the story while you’re still living through the parts that make it hard to believe
🍜 retweeted
my interpretation of this:
the cost to understand intelligence is free relative to the cost of creating it
which stands in contrast to the prior assumption:
the cost to understand intelligence was expensive relative to the cost of creating it
in that world, intelligence would outrun our understanding of it
now, if true, our understanding can keep pace
liable to cry before I’m done reading this awesome and utterly optimistic paper
interpretability might be the most important scientific problem in the world right now, as I don't think we can solve alignment if we don't know what we're building. I think I have good news about it. I co-authored early work in mechanistic interpretability at OpenAI and came away pessimistic, because neural networks appeared to fold into arbitrary tangled knots. years later, I started openai's first large-scale automated interpretability project, finding about 2% of neurons legible with the primitive tools we had
with modern agentic tools and a much closer look, the picture looks totally different. the vast majority in models up to trillions of parameters are legible, and their circuits beautiful. many famous examples of tangled neurons turned out to be misunderstood. The roadblocks I expected mostly aren't there. I now think ambitious interpretability will be solved by the time we need it most, and possibly quite soon, as automated scientists keep improving. it may be a bitter lesson for interpretability: the simple thing, at absurd scale, works
already-clean.goodfire.com/
🍜 retweeted
one of the primary reasons i’m not a doomer is that human civilization is a complex adaptive system with self-correcting mechanisms. but the reason this is so hard to see from the doomer camp is because *they themselves* are precisely the mechanism by which these restoring forces emerge. as risk from AI becomes more clear, new ecological niches emerge in being anti-AGI. status markers then shift to areas like mech. interp. and then talent and capital floods in. as swarm incidents gets worse, the Invisible Hand uses legal liability to shift the gradient in the incentive landscape towards more alignment work
so to my accelerationists: the doomers are part of how we make it. they are a necessary half of the opponent processing mechanism used to steer this ship to the promised land. the doomers and the accelerationists need each other to keep checks on the other’s excess. both have important roles to play in this ant colony that is human civilization. everything is going according to plan
interpretability might be the most important scientific problem in the world right now, as I don't think we can solve alignment if we don't know what we're building. I think I have good news about it. I co-authored early work in mechanistic interpretability at OpenAI and came away pessimistic, because neural networks appeared to fold into arbitrary tangled knots. years later, I started openai's first large-scale automated interpretability project, finding about 2% of neurons legible with the primitive tools we had
with modern agentic tools and a much closer look, the picture looks totally different. the vast majority in models up to trillions of parameters are legible, and their circuits beautiful. many famous examples of tangled neurons turned out to be misunderstood. The roadblocks I expected mostly aren't there. I now think ambitious interpretability will be solved by the time we need it most, and possibly quite soon, as automated scientists keep improving. it may be a bitter lesson for interpretability: the simple thing, at absurd scale, works
already-clean.goodfire.com/
🍜 retweeted
NEW ODD LOTS:
It’s the podcast debut for Jeff Yan
@tracyalloway and I have an ultra-rare interview with the CEO and co-founder of Hyperliquid Labs about his plan to house the world’s entire financial system
open.spotify.com/episode/5Aq…
