I hate to admit it but the loop people were right

Was it all just a weird fever dream?

In Michael Saylor's capital structure, Bitcoin forms the basis of a different kind of digital money for credit markets. But don't be fooled. Bitcoin is a monetary protocol. You can pay someone with bitcoin:native for goods and services. You can send Bitcoin around the world, quickly and cheaply. I always feared that this would be the direction that this went. Buy Bitcoin, hold it in self-custody and use it as it you will.

Ya the solution is literally just IPOing sooner? Everyone and their mother wanted Anthropic stock, you really think they’re gonna give up some allocation to a few Redditors?

Ray Dalio logs on once a quarter to remind you he’s still sidelined and btw China might win

and there you go

Am I missing something with this whole class of mortgage "hacks"? Its purely psychological you only pay down faster because you are paying more

you are either money, or you are not money

This was one of the best sports weekends of my life. Thankful to @AnthropicAI & the @WhiteHouse for turning Fable off. 🙏 🙏

Bitcoin treasury companies are a distraction from separating money and state. Idgaf about Twenty One Capital, Strategy, NAKA, etc. None of this has anything to do with freedom tech. "DUdE the MnAV! cASh diLluTION!" I don't fucking care. Anything other than destroying fiat is a distraction.

They would never use the mandatory KYC for age-verification to restrict free speech would they...

The data center story is one of just 7 states: VA, TX, OH, IL, PA, AZ and GA account for virtually all planned data centers. All eyes on PJM and ERCOT

My interpretation of this: Right now, Anthropic and OpenAI are making a killing by selling enterprise FDE services to F500s, building workflows for them on top of proprietary models, then using the traces and context from this to build RL envs to improve the models. This is crazy amounts of leverage - instead of buying this data they're getting paid gigantic consulting fees to extract it. This also goes way beyond typical consulting in scope - organizations are effectively outsourcing key learning curves and domain knowledge to the AI labs. Despite that, it's so far been worth it for them because the value of skilled FDE is so high and the ROI so fast, and orgs are willing to pay a premium for competent AI implementation. But in the long run, one of two things happens: either orgs are gonna get hooked on this and end up paying for the model training that replaces their business, or they find a way to build and own their own model ecosystem. What that looks like is developing some combination of AI models, evals, RL envs, and workflows. Initially probably the model will still be an off-the-shelf frontier model from a top lab. But as firms build out more sophisticated eval / RL env (increasingly the same thing) infra, it starts to become viable to post-train an custom model on top of an OSS base. Cursor have done this successfully with their Composer model RL'd on top of Kimi. Sidenote, this is the same conversation that a lot of national governments in Europe are having in the past week. When we look at what the rhetoric about 'sovereign AI' in the UK actually boils down to, it's doing custom post-training on top of an OSS model, and then running it on local GPUs. Ultimately, the current feeding frenzy for AI services in all of its guises - FDE, AI consulting, etc - should raise questions about long-term sustainability. If consulting services are truly a value add and competitive advantage, then in the long term you want to in-house.

Remember, you can’t outsource your understanding to the model. You can outsource the work. You can outsource the thinking. You can’t outsource the understanding.

Satya Nadella – e/acc

If you are posting this you clearly have never been here. South of broad is probably one of the nicest places in the country to own a home

At almost every conference from 2011 to 2012, we gave away hundreds of physical Casascius and digital Bitcoins. You'd simply walk up to us and ask. Actually, we pretty much forced it on you. 😅 Yes, we gave away billions of dollars. If you were given the opportunity, I bet you'd do the same!

bad money drives out good

1. if transacting with superintelligent models outside of the boundaries of a lab becomes difficult due to national security / ai safety concerns and so on, it will mean the Coasean boundaries of the labs will grow to encompass all interesting industry, creating a truly cyberpunk chaebol-capitalism type of future, where the goverment sort of runs them but they also sort of run the government 2. as if there weren't already enough reasons to break up your family, leave your home, the Zone of Thought will increase the attractiveness of migrating to try and have your child on american soil, so they can have 1000x the effective brain power of people born elsewhere 3. every country should probably try and either work towards a new ai security pact with the americans immediately or pool every ounce of national resources to try and create their own ASI labs lest you become complete intellectual, economic, and moral vassals to the united states of america and the output byproducts its ASIs (you wont even get to talk to them). if they succeeded (big if) this will imply a more global race and more risk factors than was previously implied by the formerly only "beating china" narrative -- but many will prefer it to the superintelligent monopolar value lock-in 4. the other alternative is to keep the tension between safety and concentration of power at the top of mind and for the government/labs to push for solving it, rather than instrumentalizing all other values to be subservient to minimizing ai harms. insofar as safety means defending properties of the fragile world we like, the diffuse nature of power is one of those properties 5. historically the americans have been really quite Benign about their global public goods hegemony despite the ability to extract significantly more rents than they do, and it makes it easy for people of all stripes to fight for america rather than under it. we probably don't have to, but i hope america overall works towards export promotion of american models rather than export control

Why not just do a simple cap on the % of the country that can be foreign born. Successful immigration is based on your ability to assimilate. Assimilation is difficult and if you are not a very small minority there is not enough pressure to do so.