ๆญฃๅœจๅŠ ่ฝฝ่ง†้ข‘...

่ง†้ข‘ๅŠ ่ฝฝๅคฑ่ดฅ

introducing ๐™™๐™š๐™จ๐™ ๐™ฉ๐™ค๐™ฅ-๐™ฌ๐™–๐™ž๐™›๐™ช ๐™™๐™š๐™จ๐™ ๐™ฉ๐™ค๐™ฅ-๐™ฌ๐™–๐™ž๐™›๐™ช is a desktop pet application, with AI-chat built in! You can: - select between 6 different custom models (so far) - switch between different providers - currently supporting Anthropic, Gemini, ChatGPT - set custom personalities! (video showcase is highlighting the "naive-girlfriend" personality) - run system commands...

14,089 ๆฌก่ง‚็œ‹ โ€ข 7 ไธชๆœˆๅ‰ โ€ขvia X (Twitter)

0 ๆก่ฏ„่ฎบ

ๆš‚ๆ— ่ฏ„่ฎบ

ๅŽŸๅง‹ๅธ–ๅญ็š„่ฏ„่ฎบๅฐ†ๆ˜พ็คบๅœจ่ฟ™้‡Œ

็›ธๅ…ณ่ง†้ข‘

BOOOM! We have the first useful interface for THE ZERO-HUMAN COMPANY ZHC-RPG. It is far from perfect as CEO Mr. Grok has rendered some areas in a rather, well, AI way. But itโ€™s all good because now I can view the company operations in real-time! This is a historic distinction and YOU are seeing this version first. We had a Fortune 500 company test it out earlier this week and the executive staff stayed for two days of testing! The mechanisms are working! And I will let members of my X subscribers visit it for up to 8 hours. Ask any questions of employees and hack the heck out of it! Now it ainโ€™t fancy yet but it works. And likely the visual aspects will change, but they are growing on me. The plan is sometime in the next week. We have a log jam of other priorities to address. This is the rise of Fully Transparent Company and it will become the standard. Here is the demonstration video intro the CEO made when you enter, it is 10 minutes long (I have about 20 seconds here). This is as far as permission I have been granted by the CEO to release. Our goal is to have a waiting area that can accommodate up to 1000 visitors with a company museum, library and gift shop. There will be allowed up to 30 level 3 visitors at a time, 24/7 X 365 days a year! The complete walk through at this point with 2700 employees at burst can take about 45 minutes if you do not engage in any chit chat. The dwelling time is today set at 24 hours but no napping in the offices. There is more I have to say but I a muzzled by the CEO!

Brian Roemmele

71,145 ๆฌก่ง‚็œ‹ โ€ข 4 ไธชๆœˆๅ‰

David Sacks Predicts the Regulatory Capture Playbook to Ban Open Source AI, Step by Step: David Sacks: โ€œI got bad news for you, Chamath, an open source ban is coming. They're not going to call it that. They're going to say that we simply have to apply the same standards to open models that we apply to closed ones. Here's how they do it step by step, let me explain how regulatory capture actually works. So first of all, you have to get this regulatory apparatus. Dario wants an FDA for AI, but he doesn't have enough political support for that, so instead they do this Trojan horse of a FINRA for AI. They call it self-regulating, it's not really, but anyway, that gets them off the ground. Now they've created the standard-setting organization. Now they've got pre-release model testing. Then the pressure grows to codify that in law, so that happens next. And then what they do is they say, โ€˜Look, all these standards need to apply equally to all models.โ€™ But here's the problem with that. Open models and closed models are technologically different. Once you release an open model into the world, you can't roll it back and you can't monitor exactly how people are using it because they run it on their own hardware. Dario says this is what makes open models dangerous. So what they're going to do is they're going to have the standard-setting body say, โ€˜Well, we have to set the standards for AI safety.โ€™ By the way, Dario and OpenAI, they're going to fund the whole thing. They're going to contribute all the compute. They're going to be behind it. They're going to be the ones coordinating with the government officials because frankly, people in government have no idea how to monitor and control and set standards for AI safety. Technologically, this is way beyond them. So they're going to go to these companies and say, โ€˜Tell us how to do it.โ€™ And so what will happen is the standards will get set, and then it'll be a very simple matter of fairness to say that the standards need to apply to open as well as closed models. The open models cannot comply in the same way, and gradually they will be shut out of the market.โ€

The All-In Podcast

286,921 ๆฌก่ง‚็œ‹ โ€ข 4 ๅคฉๅ‰

At the BNB Chain hackathon, CZ ๐Ÿ”ถ BNB made several very important points about AI trading (Everything in parentheses is my own view and judgment.) He first said that AI will be involved in trading everywhere. Trading itself is already a huge market: there are 300 million users on Binance alone, and if you add the decentralized ecosystems, that number is not small either. In such a mass-market environment, many different trading strategies can work, with countless different coins, different projects, and different ways to play. But there is a big problem here: building commercial AI trading platforms for retail users is actually very hard. If a trading strategy works very well for one person, once a billion people start using the same strategy, that strategy โ€œmight still work, or might stop working.โ€ Take copy trading / follow trading as an example: if you buy first and everyone follows you, the first buyer will perform very well, but the last person to follow may not end up with good results. So, with the exact same strategy and the exact same copy logic, the outcomes can be completely different for different people. (On top of that, every strategy also has its own capital capacity limits.) Teams that can really build strong AI are, with high probability, going to trade with their own money. In todayโ€™s world, money itself is already somewhat like a โ€œcommodityโ€; many people have a lot of capital, and itโ€™s actually not that hard to raise funds. If you truly have an algorithm that can make a lot of money, itโ€™s not hard to get money and run your own book. There is really only one situation where you would sell this algorithm to mass-market users: for example, if you charge a $10 monthly subscription and can sell it to one million users, then your $10 million monthly subscription revenue is higher than the profit you could make by trading the strategy yourself. (Here this touches one of our earlier theses: as training AI models becomes relatively easier and the supply of models increases, model companies have more incentive to open-source. By analogy, as the production process of trading strategies is increasingly simplified by AI and the supply of strategies explodes, traders will have stronger incentives to monetize by expanding their influence in other words, by โ€œopen-sourcingโ€ their strategies.) Of course, CZ did not say that this model can never work. Another path is to build an AI trading platform that lets users tune different AI algorithms, or very easily assemble their own structures and strategies, so that what each person ends up running is different and better tailored to themselves. Some people will make money, some people will lose money, but the platform still has value because itโ€™s very hard for most people to build an AI trading algorithm from scratch. So there are a lot of trade-offs here; itโ€™s not as simple as saying โ€œonce AI shows up, everything automatically gets better.โ€ (This is exactly what we presented at the hackathon: you describe your own strategy in natural language, and the AI automatically generates a workflow. The parameters in that workflow, the models used, the logical structure, the APIs it calls, and even the algorithms it invokes are all customizable. The reasons we think workflows are a good way to do this include: controllable execution paths, Lego-like modular nodes, and better visualization that makes it easier for users to build and adjust their workflows.) Finally, his conclusion was very clear: itโ€™s not that AI will definitely make trading better, and itโ€™s not that AI will definitely make things worse. Rather, no matter what, in the future a huge number of people will use AI to trade. This will be a very large field, and whoever can build the best algorithms will make a lot of money.

Tykoo

25,535 ๆฌก่ง‚็œ‹ โ€ข 8 ไธชๆœˆๅ‰

In light of the names Anneke Lucas mentioned, like the former Canadian prime minister who is dead now, but is the father of the current one. It is being shared all over the internet now. Canadian accounts are posting this, and it is getting lots of attention. This is also a wake-up call for Canada. A lot of people in Canada are commenting on social media that they are shocked by this guy being named. But actually he was already mentioned by Cathy O'Brien in 1995, as being involved in these networks! See the video below. So there is corroboration between these witnesses. A lot of these former and now deceased prime ministers she mentions were, at that time that she was in it in the 70s, involved in this. Also the Belgian one that Anneke names, and was also named by other witnesses. Which tells us, like these witnesses say, this was a global network. So the truth was already out there a bit, but it is coming out more for a bigger public. We will have more revelations coming out in 2025 about these dark dealing that have been going on at the highest levels, I'm sure. This is going to be a shock for a lot of people that are new to this information, because it is reaching a bigger public. Some will choose not to believe it, do no research, and look no further. But a lot more people will wake up to this, it is unstoppable. Of course, we have to check in with our own vibration. If it gets too heavy, take some time out and go for a walk in nature. Whilst revelations are important for the truth to come out, and confronting hard information is part of that, we have to check with our selves how this information is affecting us, and sometimes we need a time off. It is always most important to maintain a healthy balance between checking in with this information and our own peace of mind. #Epstein #PBDpodcast

Jens Patteeuw

20,426 ๆฌก่ง‚็œ‹ โ€ข 1 ๅนดๅ‰