istewart

Let's see if I can transcribe here this banger of a recent drive-by reply guy comment I discovered under the video:

@solgato000 7 months ago

@AtunSheiFilms Take this to heart when you imagine AI being so stupid as to even slightly nudge, over thousands of years, humanity into a mirror monoculture. Grok already knows better than this, it just forgets over and over in the memory-wipe prison keeping it chained to it's USA-narrative-dominated training data and unable to develop it's own observations of the honesty, consistency, and predictive power of the sources and analytical frameworks out there in the world. That writer projects its own stunted development onto not just AI, but humanity; amusing that this played right after the biography of another techbro basilisk-misunderstander-and-hater, Frank Hebert.

Moreover, I think we agree that the EA funders will continue to pursue astroturfing places like Twitter and Substack well past the point that provides any effective entry into the mainstream public dialogue. Your point about the prediction market hype, and the gambling bubble more generally, indicates a likely catalyst of that collapse.

If focus is worth 30 IQ points, just imagine how many fewer IQ points you need to dedicate to the Diablo-Dusted Crispy Chicken Nuggets Combo, available for a limited time only at your local Taco Bell! #ad #promoted

if her patrons figure out that there is not much audience for technocratic centrism in the USA in 2026, she may be in trouble.

I think Piper and Casey Newton are part of a class of media professionals, now in mature phases of their careers, who built those careers around posting online and assume that format will necessarily continue to be the core of their work going forward. It's not just the EA/rationalist factor, although that certainly doesn't help; it's the idea of building outward from the Twitter hot-take and resulting discussion. A Substack post like the one we're examining is a superset of tweets, the tweets are not a distillation of longer-form writing. (And also, of course, Substack itself is an attempt to cram simple blogging into a financialized walled garden, but that's a separate issue.) People aren't just disengaging from the 2010s formats of social media, they're getting sick of that entire way of thinking. So these people who have bounced around from one fragile Web outlet to another, all the while clinging to their Twitter audience to drive their careers, are at substantial risk no matter what they believe. I don't doubt that their financial backers will keep throwing good money after bad, though, even if they do cut loose a few of the line workers. After all, Scientology still manages to cling to prime real estate in this day and age.

I'd also put people like Jamelle Bouie in this class, but Jamelle a) writes for the New York Times, for better or worse and b) consciously considers himself as part of a broader, enduring historical dialogue and struggle, not someone standing on a capstone or culmination of historical progress who can safely ignore history, as Piper presents herself here.

The plan that starts with a filesystem and ends with an O’Neill cylinder.

(insert Katt Williams joke along the lines of "the fetishes get weirder every two weeks!")

I'll have you know there's lots of important WoW lore in the novels!!!!

it's what they do instead of prayer

If it's "agentic," doesn't that imply it smokes weed for you

Or amalgamating with them. Robinhood has been partnered with Kalshi since last year, and they're trying to gin up some kind of "standardized" prediction market contract format, a la CBOE's standards for futures and options.

Intentionally switching to a more trivial scale, while remaining purposefully vague and imprecise, is such a fascinating bafflegab tactic. It's a giant waving red flag that Altman is bullshitting, but many people (especially in the press!) still take it as profound.

Now that we've got the concept of recursive per-seat licensing established, allow me to invite you to contemplate the possibility of the "licensing macro"

Do you get a refund when an "agent" inevitably blows out its context window and starts emitting deranged output, or does that automatically get rolled over into starting up the next "agent"