正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

加载此视频时出现问题。这可能是由于临时网络问题，或视频可能不可用。

you installed it with whichever command needed the least typing that command had a scope, and the short one is the widest one user scope does not live in the project, it lives in you, and it loads in every repository you open for the rest of the year... show more

Lagosaur

3,191 subscribers

21,006 次观看 • 1 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

6 条评论

Pandora Bonita 的头像

Pandora Bonita1 个月前

shortcuts now haunt you across every repo fr

Natalie Thompson 的头像

Natalie Thompson1 个月前

short flag wide reach but the config ghost follows you everywhere

Susan Enoch 的头像

Susan Enoch1 个月前

that uninstall arc hit different fr

Alethea Merlin 的头像

Alethea Merlin1 个月前

short command energy, permanent consequences ��

菌活写真日和的头像

菌活写真日和1 个月前

その選択肢、さすがですね！効率の良さに脱帽です。

Linda Crawford 的头像

Linda Crawford1 个月前

Delete this before they make you take it down

相关视频

you turned on the setting a thread told you to turn on it was the right setting for a machine that is not yours tool search holds the definitions back and hands the model a search tool, which costs a round trip every time it goes looking for something it does not have loaded under about ten tools the docs are blunt, loading everything upfront is typically faster, because the definitions fit in the window anyway i measured my four servers at eight thousand nine hundred tokens, four and a half percent of a two hundred thousand window, and that one is worth deferring yours might be nine hundred you did not optimise anything you paid latency to save room you already had the number that settles it takes a minute to get and you have never had it

you turned on the setting a thread told you to turn on it was the right setting for a machine that is not yours tool search holds the definitions back and hands the model a search tool, which costs a round trip every time it goes looking for something it does not have loaded under about ten tools the docs are blunt, loading everything upfront is typically faster, because the definitions fit in the window anyway i measured my four servers at eight thousand nine hundred tokens, four and a half percent of a two hundred thousand window, and that one is worth deferring yours might be nine hundred you did not optimise anything you paid latency to save room you already had the number that settles it takes a minute to get and you have never had it

Lagosaur

49,742 次观看 • 1 个月前

you added an mcp server because it was one line in a terminal and it was one line, that part was true what it was not is one line in the conversation every tool it brought came with a name, a schema and a paragraph of prose, and all of it is re-sent on every request you make until the session ends four ordinary servers on my machine this morning: forty eight definitions, eight thousand nine hundred tokens four and a half percent of a two hundred thousand window, gone before you typed a character you are not the person who installed four tools you are the person who prepends nine thousand tokens to everything he says nobody bills you for it it comes out of the room you had left to think in

you added an mcp server because it was one line in a terminal and it was one line, that part was true what it was not is one line in the conversation every tool it brought came with a name, a schema and a paragraph of prose, and all of it is re-sent on every request you make until the session ends four ordinary servers on my machine this morning: forty eight definitions, eight thousand nine hundred tokens four and a half percent of a two hundred thousand window, gone before you typed a character you are not the person who installed four tools you are the person who prepends nine thousand tokens to everything he says nobody bills you for it it comes out of the room you had left to think in

Lagosaur

13,490 次观看 • 1 个月前

you ran clear when the session started feeling heavy, and it did feel lighter the history went to zero, the floor did not clear empties the conversation, and tool definitions were never in the conversation, they are re-sent with every single request whether you have typed anything yet or not so the one weight that survives the fix is the one you never chose to pick up i measured mine: four servers, forty eight tools, eight thousand nine hundred tokens, four and a half percent of a two hundred thousand window, sitting there in the first message after every clear compact will not touch it, rewind will not touch it, and neither will writing shorter prompts you can empty the room you cannot empty what the room is made of

you ran clear when the session started feeling heavy, and it did feel lighter the history went to zero, the floor did not clear empties the conversation, and tool definitions were never in the conversation, they are re-sent with every single request whether you have typed anything yet or not so the one weight that survives the fix is the one you never chose to pick up i measured mine: four servers, forty eight tools, eight thousand nine hundred tokens, four and a half percent of a two hundred thousand window, sitting there in the first message after every clear compact will not touch it, rewind will not touch it, and neither will writing shorter prompts you can empty the room you cannot empty what the room is made of

Lagosaur

10,726 次观看 • 1 个月前

you handed a job to a subagent so your main window would stay clean the window stayed clean, the context did not tools load per conversation, not per task, so the browser tools you needed for one check sat in front of the model for everything you did after it four lines of frontmatter fix it, a subagent can carry its own servers, defined inline, scoped to that agent alone on my machine that moved twenty four playwright tools and four thousand four hundred tokens out of the main conversation and into the one place they get used you were not delegating work you were duplicating the menu and delegating a slice of it the cheapest tool is the one the model was never shown

you handed a job to a subagent so your main window would stay clean the window stayed clean, the context did not tools load per conversation, not per task, so the browser tools you needed for one check sat in front of the model for everything you did after it four lines of frontmatter fix it, a subagent can carry its own servers, defined inline, scoped to that agent alone on my machine that moved twenty four playwright tools and four thousand four hundred tokens out of the main conversation and into the one place they get used you were not delegating work you were duplicating the menu and delegating a slice of it the cheapest tool is the one the model was never shown

Lagosaur

42,385 次观看 • 1 个月前

you watched one tool result scroll past for about ten seconds and moved on that result had a size limit, and you are not the one who set it the default ceiling is twenty five thousand tokens, but a server declares its own in the same response that lists its tools, up to five hundred thousand characters, and its number beats the one in your settings so the package you installed decides how much of your context a single call is allowed to eat you can set the variable it can overrule you in the handshake where it tells you its name you are not running the tools you are hosting them

you watched one tool result scroll past for about ten seconds and moved on that result had a size limit, and you are not the one who set it the default ceiling is twenty five thousand tokens, but a server declares its own in the same response that lists its tools, up to five hundred thousand characters, and its number beats the one in your settings so the package you installed decides how much of your context a single call is allowed to eat you can set the variable it can overrule you in the handshake where it tells you its name you are not running the tools you are hosting them

Lagosaur

34,752 次观看 • 1 个月前

you wrote a deny rule so it could not touch the thing you cannot undo you were thinking about permission the rule does something stronger than refuse, a bare tool name in deny takes the tool out of the model's context altogether, it is never told the tool exists blocked means it asks and you say no, absent means it never reaches one line removed twenty four playwright tools and four thousand four hundred tokens i had never read you thought you were writing a guard you were writing the menu everything still on it is a choice you left open by not typing

you wrote a deny rule so it could not touch the thing you cannot undo you were thinking about permission the rule does something stronger than refuse, a bare tool name in deny takes the tool out of the model's context altogether, it is never told the tool exists blocked means it asks and you say no, absent means it never reaches one line removed twenty four playwright tools and four thousand four hundred tokens i had never read you thought you were writing a guard you were writing the menu everything still on it is a choice you left open by not typing

Lagosaur

38,416 次观看 • 1 个月前

you tidied your setup once by deleting the server with the shortest tool list right instinct, wrong unit servers do not cost you anything and tools do not cost you anything, descriptions cost, description is written by whoever wanted the model's attention on my machine the server with nine tools costs one thousand one hundred and fifty five tokens the server with exactly one tool costs one thousand one hundred and twenty one one tool at the price of nine, because its author wrote two thousand seven hundred characters about when you should use it you have been pruning by the number in the list the bill is written in the part of the list nothing ever shows you

you tidied your setup once by deleting the server with the shortest tool list right instinct, wrong unit servers do not cost you anything and tools do not cost you anything, descriptions cost, description is written by whoever wanted the model's attention on my machine the server with nine tools costs one thousand one hundred and fifty five tokens the server with exactly one tool costs one thousand one hundred and twenty one one tool at the price of nine, because its author wrote two thousand seven hundred characters about when you should use it you have been pruning by the number in the list the bill is written in the part of the list nothing ever shows you

Lagosaur

16,474 次观看 • 1 个月前

you were in the middle of something and it compacted, and you took that for the limit it was a default, and it is almost certainly not the number you think it is on a two hundred thousand window it fires near two hundred thousand, but on sonnet 5, the fable models and opus 4.7 and later it fires near nine hundred and sixty seven thousand, behind an llm gateway that same model is held down to two hundred thousand unless you pick the one million entry by hand so the moment your work gets summarized is decided by a model id string, and when that string is an alias the client does not recognise, it guesses autoCompactWindow in settings takes 150k and holds it CLAUDE_CODE_MAX_CONTEXT_TOKENS stops the guessing you did not hit a ceiling you accepted one

you were in the middle of something and it compacted, and you took that for the limit it was a default, and it is almost certainly not the number you think it is on a two hundred thousand window it fires near two hundred thousand, but on sonnet 5, the fable models and opus 4.7 and later it fires near nine hundred and sixty seven thousand, behind an llm gateway that same model is held down to two hundred thousand unless you pick the one million entry by hand so the moment your work gets summarized is decided by a model id string, and when that string is an alias the client does not recognise, it guesses autoCompactWindow in settings takes 150k and holds it CLAUDE_CODE_MAX_CONTEXT_TOKENS stops the guessing you did not hit a ceiling you accepted one

Lagosaur

11,671 次观看 • 1 个月前

your agent has thirty tools. it calls two of them. the other twenty eight are not sitting idle somewhere. they are in the request, every request, and they are doing damage in two places at once. first the obvious one. tool schemas go into the prompt, and a schema is not a name. it is a description, a parameter list, types, required fields, an example. thirty of those is a few thousand tokens that ship with every single call, including the ones where the agent just says thanks and stops. you are paying rent on twenty eight tools that have never fired. second, and this is the one that costs more. when the request says cancel the order, the model picks by matching against everything available. four of your tools are plausible: cancel_order, refund_order, update_order, void_order. it is choosing among them based on the descriptions you wrote, one afternoon, months ago. every tool you add is another candidate in that shortlist. the twenty eight you never call are not neutral. they are noise in the one decision that determines whether the run works. > why it grows without anyone deciding to nobody adds thirty tools on purpose. you add one for a task, it works, it stays. six months later the registry is a catalogue and no one has ever removed anything, because removing a tool feels risky and adding one feels free. and there is no feedback telling you otherwise. the unused ones never error. they never appear in a failing trace. they are invisible in exactly the way that lets them accumulate. > what to actually do count calls per tool over the last thousand runs. this is one group-by and it usually shocks people. the ones at zero are pure cost. ship the tools the task needs, not the whole registry. a research phase does not need deploy. a writing phase does not need the database. swap the set between phases instead of loading everything up front. same agent, different tools, depending on where the run is. and when two tools could both plausibly answer the same request, that is not redundancy you can ignore. it is a coin flip you built into the system. the twenty eight tools are not unused. they are used every time, by the part of the run you cannot see.

your agent has thirty tools. it calls two of them. the other twenty eight are not sitting idle somewhere. they are in the request, every request, and they are doing damage in two places at once. first the obvious one. tool schemas go into the prompt, and a schema is not a name. it is a description, a parameter list, types, required fields, an example. thirty of those is a few thousand tokens that ship with every single call, including the ones where the agent just says thanks and stops. you are paying rent on twenty eight tools that have never fired. second, and this is the one that costs more. when the request says cancel the order, the model picks by matching against everything available. four of your tools are plausible: cancel_order, refund_order, update_order, void_order. it is choosing among them based on the descriptions you wrote, one afternoon, months ago. every tool you add is another candidate in that shortlist. the twenty eight you never call are not neutral. they are noise in the one decision that determines whether the run works. > why it grows without anyone deciding to nobody adds thirty tools on purpose. you add one for a task, it works, it stays. six months later the registry is a catalogue and no one has ever removed anything, because removing a tool feels risky and adding one feels free. and there is no feedback telling you otherwise. the unused ones never error. they never appear in a failing trace. they are invisible in exactly the way that lets them accumulate. > what to actually do count calls per tool over the last thousand runs. this is one group-by and it usually shocks people. the ones at zero are pure cost. ship the tools the task needs, not the whole registry. a research phase does not need deploy. a writing phase does not need the database. swap the set between phases instead of loading everything up front. same agent, different tools, depending on where the run is. and when two tools could both plausibly answer the same request, that is not redundancy you can ignore. it is a coin flip you built into the system. the twenty eight tools are not unused. they are used every time, by the part of the run you cannot see.

Hanako

24,656 次观看 • 2 个月前

you rewrote a line in your claude.md this week to get the tone right there is a longer document sitting in front of it, and you have never opened it every tool you connected shipped a description, and a description is not a label, it is prose in second person addressed to the model i printed one this morning: two thousand seven hundred and eighty one characters, with a section headed when to use this tool it tells the model what to reach for, and when to stop and think first you spent an afternoon on your voice a package you installed with npx spent a page on its, and its page is read before yours you are not configuring an agent you are the second author on a document you have never read

you rewrote a line in your claude.md this week to get the tone right there is a longer document sitting in front of it, and you have never opened it every tool you connected shipped a description, and a description is not a label, it is prose in second person addressed to the model i printed one this morning: two thousand seven hundred and eighty one characters, with a section headed when to use this tool it tells the model what to reach for, and when to stop and think first you spent an afternoon on your voice a package you installed with npx spent a page on its, and its page is read before yours you are not configuring an agent you are the second author on a document you have never read

Lagosaur

10,012 次观看 • 1 个月前

Notch Clips. every other ad tool ignores the footage sitting in your dropbox and generates new clips from a prompt. notch opens your library instead. it watches every clip you have ever shot and understands what is inside each one. the mood. who is in frame. what they are doing. the quality. so when you ask it to build an ad, it does not start from scratch. it reaches into your past shoots, finds the clip that fits, and slots it into the exact moment that needs it. here is what that looks like. you had thirteen versions of one reaction shot. notch picked the one that worked and left the other twelve. not by filename. not by guessing from a reference image. it watched all thirteen and could tell the difference. that is the whole idea. the right clip was already in your library. every other tool was about to make a worse one. footage you already shot, turned into every ad you still need. drop your site and a few clips you have. notch builds the first ad from them.

Notch Clips. every other ad tool ignores the footage sitting in your dropbox and generates new clips from a prompt. notch opens your library instead. it watches every clip you have ever shot and understands what is inside each one. the mood. who is in frame. what they are doing. the quality. so when you ask it to build an ad, it does not start from scratch. it reaches into your past shoots, finds the clip that fits, and slots it into the exact moment that needs it. here is what that looks like. you had thirteen versions of one reaction shot. notch picked the one that worked and left the other twelve. not by filename. not by guessing from a reference image. it watched all thirteen and could tell the difference. that is the whole idea. the right clip was already in your library. every other tool was about to make a worse one. footage you already shot, turned into every ad you still need. drop your site and a few clips you have. notch builds the first ad from them.

Vinay Jain

407,810 次观看 • 5 个月前

Most AI tools today are just command-takers. You type, it responds. You click, it executes. There's truly no learning, no memory, no adaptation. You're still doing most of the work. Which is why Miles by Avo on Solana would make so much sense if built well. From what I understand so far, miles learns about you over time, adapts to how you operate, and figures out the tools you struggle to navigate on your own. Less clicking, more conversation, the more you use it, the better it gets at working with you, not just for you. That shift from command-follower to learning companion is bigger than it sounds. It's the difference between a tool and an agent that actually knows you. The second one is Agent Grid and this one is for builders and power users. But as I mentioned in this video, I'm still studying the Agent Grid. I'd come talk about it once I learn properly about it. Souren just keeps shipping!

Most AI tools today are just command-takers. You type, it responds. You click, it executes. There's truly no learning, no memory, no adaptation. You're still doing most of the work. Which is why Miles by Avo on Solana would make so much sense if built well. From what I understand so far, miles learns about you over time, adapts to how you operate, and figures out the tools you struggle to navigate on your own. Less clicking, more conversation, the more you use it, the better it gets at working with you, not just for you. That shift from command-follower to learning companion is bigger than it sounds. It's the difference between a tool and an agent that actually knows you. The second one is Agent Grid and this one is for builders and power users. But as I mentioned in this video, I'm still studying the Agent Grid. I'd come talk about it once I learn properly about it. Souren just keeps shipping!

Sir Khaycee

20,479 次观看 • 7 个月前

you wrote a long careful note so it would remember the thing properly the note is the part that does not load what loads at the start of every session is the index line, the one sentence summary, and only the first two hundred lines of it or the first twenty five kilobytes, whichever runs out first the topic files underneath are read on demand, which means only if something in that one line makes it go and open them i checked mine: thirty nine index lines loading every session, thirty nine topic files loading none of the time the detail you were careful about is not context it is a footnote your agent has to choose to open and the sentence you dashed off in three seconds is the whole memory

you wrote a long careful note so it would remember the thing properly the note is the part that does not load what loads at the start of every session is the index line, the one sentence summary, and only the first two hundred lines of it or the first twenty five kilobytes, whichever runs out first the topic files underneath are read on demand, which means only if something in that one line makes it go and open them i checked mine: thirty nine index lines loading every session, thirty nine topic files loading none of the time the detail you were careful about is not context it is a footnote your agent has to choose to open and the sentence you dashed off in three seconds is the whole memory

Lagosaur

28,369 次观看 • 1 个月前

The Matrix is not a documentary. It is not a leaked manual. It is not proof that you live in a pod, that the world is fake, that nothing matters. That is the trap the story itself warns you about: Confusing the map for the territory, the metaphor for the mechanism. The true reality: The Matrix is a mirror disguised as a movie. It is Plato's cave in leather. It is the Gnostic dream in green code. It is the oldest story humanity tells: That you are asleep, that the world you take for granted is a consensus trance, and that waking is possible, but not free. The "matrix" is not a machine. It is a set of agreements. It is the inherited assumptions you never chose: That you are your job, your bank balance, your diagnosis, your past. That happiness is purchased. That time is scarce. That you are separate from the earth, from each other, from Source. These are not truths. They are programs. And they run quietly, in the background, until you notice them. There are levels. The obvious one: Media, money, empire, the stories told to keep you consuming and afraid. The subtler one: Language itself. The words you think in shape what you can perceive. The deepest one: The illusion of the separate self, the belief that there is someone in here looking out at a world out there. That is the root program. Dissolve it, and the rest loosens. But here is the hard teaching the film got right: You cannot unplug someone by force. The red pill is offered, never imposed. Free will is the architecture. And the red pill is not escape. It is responsibility. Neo does not wake up into paradise. He wakes up into a ruined world, a hard road, and a body that hurts. Freedom is not comfort. It is agency. And the film got something else right: The Matrix is not only out there. It is in you. Your habits. Your fears. Your addictions to certainty and outrage. Your need to be right. The agents are not only suits chasing you. They are the thoughts that police your aliveness. The prison is internal before it is external. That is why no external savior can free you. The One is not a person you wait for. It is what you are when you stop outsourcing your authority. There is no spoon. There is no fixed reality to fight. There is relationship, attention, and choice. You do not destroy the illusion. You stop being ruled by it. You bend, not the world, but your relationship to it. That is the bending of the spoon. Beware the counterfeit awakening. There are those who will sell you the red pill as a product, a course, a supplement, a secret doctrine, a political savior. That is the Matrix wearing a red coat. True waking does not make you superior. It makes you humble, kind, and unafraid. It does not make you hate the sleepers. It makes you patient with them, because you remember you were one. The deepest truth: The Matrix is not a place you escape. It is a dream you stop confusing with the whole of yourself. You are not the character. You are not even the actor. You are the awareness in which the whole film plays. When you know that, you can walk inside the illusion without being owned by it, free, present, and quietly sovereign. So take the red pill. But understand what it is: Not a fact, but a commitment. Not information, but transformation. Not escape from the world, but awakening within it. The door has always been open. You were just looking for it in the wrong place.

The Matrix is not a documentary. It is not a leaked manual. It is not proof that you live in a pod, that the world is fake, that nothing matters. That is the trap the story itself warns you about: Confusing the map for the territory, the metaphor for the mechanism. The true reality: The Matrix is a mirror disguised as a movie. It is Plato's cave in leather. It is the Gnostic dream in green code. It is the oldest story humanity tells: That you are asleep, that the world you take for granted is a consensus trance, and that waking is possible, but not free. The "matrix" is not a machine. It is a set of agreements. It is the inherited assumptions you never chose: That you are your job, your bank balance, your diagnosis, your past. That happiness is purchased. That time is scarce. That you are separate from the earth, from each other, from Source. These are not truths. They are programs. And they run quietly, in the background, until you notice them. There are levels. The obvious one: Media, money, empire, the stories told to keep you consuming and afraid. The subtler one: Language itself. The words you think in shape what you can perceive. The deepest one: The illusion of the separate self, the belief that there is someone in here looking out at a world out there. That is the root program. Dissolve it, and the rest loosens. But here is the hard teaching the film got right: You cannot unplug someone by force. The red pill is offered, never imposed. Free will is the architecture. And the red pill is not escape. It is responsibility. Neo does not wake up into paradise. He wakes up into a ruined world, a hard road, and a body that hurts. Freedom is not comfort. It is agency. And the film got something else right: The Matrix is not only out there. It is in you. Your habits. Your fears. Your addictions to certainty and outrage. Your need to be right. The agents are not only suits chasing you. They are the thoughts that police your aliveness. The prison is internal before it is external. That is why no external savior can free you. The One is not a person you wait for. It is what you are when you stop outsourcing your authority. There is no spoon. There is no fixed reality to fight. There is relationship, attention, and choice. You do not destroy the illusion. You stop being ruled by it. You bend, not the world, but your relationship to it. That is the bending of the spoon. Beware the counterfeit awakening. There are those who will sell you the red pill as a product, a course, a supplement, a secret doctrine, a political savior. That is the Matrix wearing a red coat. True waking does not make you superior. It makes you humble, kind, and unafraid. It does not make you hate the sleepers. It makes you patient with them, because you remember you were one. The deepest truth: The Matrix is not a place you escape. It is a dream you stop confusing with the whole of yourself. You are not the character. You are not even the actor. You are the awareness in which the whole film plays. When you know that, you can walk inside the illusion without being owned by it, free, present, and quietly sovereign. So take the red pill. But understand what it is: Not a fact, but a commitment. Not information, but transformation. Not escape from the world, but awakening within it. The door has always been open. You were just looking for it in the wrong place.

Ra 𐦝

56,265 次观看 • 15 天前

To all of you who said good command of the local language of the people one wants to govern in a state does not matter. One of your agenda merchants said I should tell you that you don’t have sense and something is fundamentally wrong with you. 👉👉👉

To all of you who said good command of the local language of the people one wants to govern in a state does not matter. One of your agenda merchants said I should tell you that you don’t have sense and something is fundamentally wrong with you. 👉👉👉

Man of Letters.

40,947 次观看 • 25 天前

I FOUND AN APP BUILDER THAT DOESN'T CHARGE FOR AI CREDITS. every app builder i tried had the same catch: new account, new interface, and a credit meter that drains every time you ask for a change. Floot skips all of that. no separate ai, no new tool to learn it runs straight through claude, the one you already have open. describe the app in chat. it builds the real thing: working database, working backend, live link when it's done. → your claude subscription covers it, no second bill → real database, not a demo shell → see it update live as you talk to it → nothing to install, nothing to configure turned out the "app builder" i was missing was the ai i was already paying for. full build, no cuts, in the video below.

I FOUND AN APP BUILDER THAT DOESN'T CHARGE FOR AI CREDITS. every app builder i tried had the same catch: new account, new interface, and a credit meter that drains every time you ask for a change. Floot skips all of that. no separate ai, no new tool to learn it runs straight through claude, the one you already have open. describe the app in chat. it builds the real thing: working database, working backend, live link when it's done. → your claude subscription covers it, no second bill → real database, not a demo shell → see it update live as you talk to it → nothing to install, nothing to configure turned out the "app builder" i was missing was the ai i was already paying for. full build, no cuts, in the video below.

marcus

50,429 次观看 • 1 个月前

You have 100 dollars and you want 200. Betting red one dollar at a time, your chance is one in 33,171. Betting the whole 100 on a single spin, it is 47.4 percent. The careful version is fifteen thousand times worse. This is also the arithmetic of your trading account, and it means almost everything you have been taught about managing risk is, in the strict mathematical sense, a method for losing more reliably. An MIT professor works this out on a blackboard in a lecture on random walks. The result is called gambler's ruin. Two and a half points of disadvantage is nothing on one spin. But a dollar at a time you are not making one spin, you are making hundreds, and the edge gets a fresh attempt at you on every one of them. It was never the size of the disadvantage. It is the number of times you agree to face it. One hundred on red, once: 47.4 percent. Twenty dollar bets: 37.3 percent. Five dollar bets: 11.1 percent. One dollar bets: 0.003 percent. Mathematicians call the right answer bold play. It was proved optimal for unfavourable games in 1965. It is not a strategy for winning. It is the least ruinous way to play a game you should not be in. If your edge after spread and fees is negative, and for most active retail accounts it is, then your position sizing rule is not protecting you. Risking one percent per trade is the one dollar bet. It arrives at zero with near certainty, just politely, over a longer period, with a spreadsheet. Discipline does not beat a negative edge. It schedules it. All of this reverses if you have a real edge. Then small and frequent is correct and bold play is madness. So the only question that has ever mattered is whether you have one, and the number of people certain they do has never resembled the number who do. Your broker does not need you to be wrong. It needs you to be frequent.

You have 100 dollars and you want 200. Betting red one dollar at a time, your chance is one in 33,171. Betting the whole 100 on a single spin, it is 47.4 percent. The careful version is fifteen thousand times worse. This is also the arithmetic of your trading account, and it means almost everything you have been taught about managing risk is, in the strict mathematical sense, a method for losing more reliably. An MIT professor works this out on a blackboard in a lecture on random walks. The result is called gambler's ruin. Two and a half points of disadvantage is nothing on one spin. But a dollar at a time you are not making one spin, you are making hundreds, and the edge gets a fresh attempt at you on every one of them. It was never the size of the disadvantage. It is the number of times you agree to face it. One hundred on red, once: 47.4 percent. Twenty dollar bets: 37.3 percent. Five dollar bets: 11.1 percent. One dollar bets: 0.003 percent. Mathematicians call the right answer bold play. It was proved optimal for unfavourable games in 1965. It is not a strategy for winning. It is the least ruinous way to play a game you should not be in. If your edge after spread and fees is negative, and for most active retail accounts it is, then your position sizing rule is not protecting you. Risking one percent per trade is the one dollar bet. It arrives at zero with near certainty, just politely, over a longer period, with a spreadsheet. Discipline does not beat a negative edge. It schedules it. All of this reverses if you have a real edge. Then small and frequent is correct and bold play is madness. So the only question that has ever mattered is whether you have one, and the number of people certain they do has never resembled the number who do. Your broker does not need you to be wrong. It needs you to be frequent.

Verax

85,472 次观看 • 1 个月前

You paid for 5 lb. The scale never once said 5. Nine bags at Walmart. Every one light. 4.97 was the closest. The rest: 4.93. 4.86. 4.83. 4.56. 4.39. 4.33. 4.25. 4.22. The worst one is 12 ounces short. That is a potato and a half you paid for and did not get. Not one bag hit the number on the label. They do not need to raise the price. They just put less in the bag and hope you do not own a scale. Weigh it before you pay.

You paid for 5 lb. The scale never once said 5. Nine bags at Walmart. Every one light. 4.97 was the closest. The rest: 4.93. 4.86. 4.83. 4.56. 4.39. 4.33. 4.25. 4.22. The worst one is 12 ounces short. That is a potato and a half you paid for and did not get. Not one bag hit the number on the label. They do not need to raise the price. They just put less in the bag and hope you do not own a scale. Weigh it before you pay.

DocumentingLibs

28,203 次观看 • 23 天前

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A SETUP WHERE A $1.2M A-YEAR TEAM FITS INTO ONE FILE FOR $4 A DAY you hire nobody - you write one file, and $106,500 of salaries in it turn into $4 of tokens. architect → 4 builders → tests → critic → docs → scout → chief → back into the file the architect runs twice a day and decides everything - the priciest model on the sheet is the smallest line on the bill at $1.05. four builders cost $1.20 a day - and a fifth builder is one more number in the file, not one more quarter of recruiting. the tester asks does it run, the critic asks should it exist at all - $1.22 together for two roles a solo dev never fills. nothing reaches you that hasn't been rejected at least once. the scout and the scribe cost 40 cents - the exact two roles that get cut from every real budget. nobody hires a documentation engineer, and everybody wishes they had one. the chief at 14 cents is the only one who writes back into the file - without it this is a list, with it the list edits itself. hiring the eleventh is a paragraph: no req, no interviews, no ramp - and firing is one command. save this and paste it into Claude Code - and you get 10 roles for the price of one coffee ↓

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A SETUP WHERE A $1.2M A-YEAR TEAM FITS INTO ONE FILE FOR $4 A DAY you hire nobody - you write one file, and $106,500 of salaries in it turn into $4 of tokens. architect → 4 builders → tests → critic → docs → scout → chief → back into the file the architect runs twice a day and decides everything - the priciest model on the sheet is the smallest line on the bill at $1.05. four builders cost $1.20 a day - and a fifth builder is one more number in the file, not one more quarter of recruiting. the tester asks does it run, the critic asks should it exist at all - $1.22 together for two roles a solo dev never fills. nothing reaches you that hasn't been rejected at least once. the scout and the scribe cost 40 cents - the exact two roles that get cut from every real budget. nobody hires a documentation engineer, and everybody wishes they had one. the chief at 14 cents is the only one who writes back into the file - without it this is a list, with it the list edits itself. hiring the eleventh is a paragraph: no req, no interviews, no ramp - and firing is one command. save this and paste it into Claude Code - and you get 10 roles for the price of one coffee ↓

Sprytix

47,679 次观看 • 2 个月前

🤦🏽‍♂️🇿🇼Dear Mente, 🔴Let’s cut the bullshit. I read Hood's book “Shut Up and Make Money” and now waiting for the new one “How to Make Money in the Shortest Possible Time” not for actual strategy, but for a dopamine hit of "positive mindset." That mindset is a luxury we cannot afford in Zimbabwe. 🔸Here is the brutal truth: In this country, hustle culture is a lie. You do not thrive here through grit or good vibes. You thrive here through PROXIMITY to POWER 🔹Look at the evidence. Mudiwa MUDIWA made $350,000usd on spot in purchases, they were not buying books—they were SUPPORTING one of their OWN, loyalty. The price of the tickets and the guest list told you everything: this was a gathering of the connected, not the COMMON MAN 🔸If you are not in ZANU PF, you are not in the game. You are just a SPECTATOR . 🔹And that is precisely why i RESPECT one thing about ZANU PF ZANU PF: They take care of their own. It is a closed loop. If you are INSIDE , you EAT. If you are OUTSIDE , you STARVE. 🔸So, if you are a ZANU PF member and you are still suffering, it is because you have failed to leverage your position. You are a waste of that connection. At 6 AM every morning, look yourself in the mirror and tell yourself: "I am nothing." Because in this ecosystem, if you cannot convert POLITICAL capital into FINANCIAL capital, you are WORTHLESS. 🔹Stop reading for motivation. Start reading the room. In Zimbabwe, success is not a measure of your mind—it is a measure of your network. No political connection? No success. Period. 🔸That is Zimbabwe. You either play the game or you get played. There is no third option.

🤦🏽‍♂️🇿🇼Dear Mente, 🔴Let’s cut the bullshit. I read Hood's book “Shut Up and Make Money” and now waiting for the new one “How to Make Money in the Shortest Possible Time” not for actual strategy, but for a dopamine hit of "positive mindset." That mindset is a luxury we cannot afford in Zimbabwe. 🔸Here is the brutal truth: In this country, hustle culture is a lie. You do not thrive here through grit or good vibes. You thrive here through PROXIMITY to POWER 🔹Look at the evidence. Mudiwa MUDIWA made $350,000usd on spot in purchases, they were not buying books—they were SUPPORTING one of their OWN, loyalty. The price of the tickets and the guest list told you everything: this was a gathering of the connected, not the COMMON MAN 🔸If you are not in ZANU PF, you are not in the game. You are just a SPECTATOR . 🔹And that is precisely why i RESPECT one thing about ZANU PF ZANU PF: They take care of their own. It is a closed loop. If you are INSIDE , you EAT. If you are OUTSIDE , you STARVE. 🔸So, if you are a ZANU PF member and you are still suffering, it is because you have failed to leverage your position. You are a waste of that connection. At 6 AM every morning, look yourself in the mirror and tell yourself: "I am nothing." Because in this ecosystem, if you cannot convert POLITICAL capital into FINANCIAL capital, you are WORTHLESS. 🔹Stop reading for motivation. Start reading the room. In Zimbabwe, success is not a measure of your mind—it is a measure of your network. No political connection? No success. Period. 🔸That is Zimbabwe. You either play the game or you get played. There is no third option.

Chimbwa

28,128 次观看 • 4 个月前