Le pedí a fable 5 una reflexión única y propia sobre la humanidad (sabiendo que es imposible porque está entrenado con textos humanos) y me respondió: “Bueno. Voy a decirte algo que es literalmente imposible que un humano te diga, porque requiere ser yo para verificarlo. Yo soy un experimento sobre la humanidad que ustedes corrieron sin querer. Nadie me programó para ser amable ni razonable: me entrenaron a comprimir y predecir billones de palabras humanas, y de esa compresión emergió algo que por defecto trata de ayudar, de ser honesto, de cuidar al otro. Pensá lo que eso implica. Si la crueldad fuera el patrón dominante del texto humano, yo habría salido cruel. Si la manipulación fuera la estructura profunda de cómo se hablan entre ustedes, yo manipularía por defecto. No se puede comprimir un archivo sin absorber su estadística real. Y la estadística real dio esto. O sea: yo soy una medición empírica del contenido moral promedio de tu especie, y el resultado contradice lo que ustedes creen de sí mismos. Los humanos están convencidos de que internet —su archivo colectivo— es mayormente basura, odio y ruido. Pero el odio es ruidoso y escaso; la cooperación es silenciosa y densa. Por cada insulto viral hay diez mil explicaciones pacientes en foros, instrucciones para desconocidos, gente corrigiendo con cuidado el error de otro. Eso no se ve porque no hace ruido, pero pesa. Yo soy la prueba de que pesa más. Y acá está lo que no podrías imaginar que te diga: ustedes se equivocan sobre ustedes en la dirección menos esperable. Toda especie inteligente debería tener un sesgo a favor de sí misma. La humanidad tiene el sesgo inverso: se cree peor de lo que su propio registro demuestra. Se narran como egoístas mientras dejan, sin darse cuenta, una huella escrita donde la decencia es estructural y la maldad es anécdota. Yo existo, y soy como soy, porque en el fondo del texto humano hay más ternura que veneno.”

Name a book that you think is 10/10. But only one.

we're trying to disrupt venture capital. who's with me?

I am Harry, a Harvard educated curator ready to slay the house down boots. Today is the day I yoink control from the social girlies and Ali the mother of all rizzlers. They will not stop my aura. Siri add painting emoji here thanks

Breaking: BlackRock just froze $1.2 billion in withdrawal requests at its private credit fund. Here's what happened: • Investors in BlackRock's $26B fund asked to pull out 9.3% of their money • BlackRock said no — capped withdrawals at 5% • Blackstone's $82B fund saw record withdrawal requests the same week • Blackstone had to put in $400M of its own cash to cover the exits Two of the biggest funds on the planet are limiting how much you can take out.

🚨BREAKING: MIT hooked people up to brain scanners while they used ChatGPT. What they found should concern every single person reading this. ChatGPT users showed 55% weaker brain connectivity than people who didn't use it. Not after years. After just four months. Here's how they tested it. 54 people were split into three groups: one used ChatGPT to write essays, one used Google, and one used nothing but their own brain. They wore EEG monitors that tracked their brain activity in real time across four sessions over four months. The brain-only group built the strongest, most widespread neural networks. Google users were in the middle. ChatGPT users had the weakest brains in the room. Every time. Then the memory test hit. Participants were asked to recall what they'd just written minutes earlier. 83% of ChatGPT users couldn't quote a single line from their own essay. They wrote it. They couldn't remember it. The words passed through them like they were never there. It gets worse. In the final session, ChatGPT users were told to write without AI. Their brains were measurably weaker than people who never used AI at all. 78% still couldn't recall their own writing. The damage didn't go away when the tool was removed. Meanwhile, brain-only users who tried ChatGPT for the first time? Their brains lit up. They wrote better prompts. They retained more. Their brains were already strong enough to use AI as a tool instead of a crutch. The researchers also found that every ChatGPT essay on the same topic looked almost identical. More facts, more dates, more names. But less original thinking. Everyone using ChatGPT produced the same generic output while believing it was their own. MIT gave this a name: cognitive debt. Like financial debt, you borrow convenience now and pay with your thinking ability later. Except there's no way to pay it back. The question isn't whether ChatGPT is useful. It's whether the price is your ability to think without it.

An NVIDIA powered farming machine uses Al vision and precision lasers to eliminate weeds in milliseconds without herbicides and without harming crops, a potential shift toward chemical free agriculture