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 read it and pictured yourself approving instead of watching approving what five agents, each on its own machine, handing work down the line, and what reaches you at the end is the last one's account of the four accounts before it the honest part of that piece says... show more

Lagosaur

3,004 subscribers

21,838 次观看 • 3 天前 •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

Agents vs. Graphs, clearly explained! spawning more agents is great, but it has a ceiling nobody says out loud: five agents is a count. a graph is a shape. only one of them changes the answer. point five agents at the same pile with the same window and they converge. the first one writes a finding, the rest read it, and all five reports centre on the same thing. you paid five times for one opinion with four echoes. Graph engineering fixes this by moving the decision up a layer: not how many agents, but who is allowed to look at what. you need both. here's how it works: ↳ the count buys you throughput. five things happening instead of one ↳ the shape buys you coverage. five different things happening instead of the same one five times Prompts → Context → Harness → Agents → Graphs the node that does this is the splitter, and it decides more than any other node in the system. cut a repository by folder and four workers audit the same three files. cut it by blast radius and each one sees something the others cannot. the trick is being selective about what each lane is allowed to see. separate contexts are not a nice-to-have, they are the mechanism. if two agents are meant to produce different things, they must not share a window. if they are meant to produce the same thing, you did not need two agents. one thing to know before you scale it. a branch that throws does not reject the batch. it resolves to null, and that is the containment. which means your merge quietly receives a short list. ↳ filter the nulls before the merge, or one dead lane poisons the whole result ↳ never index a merge by position. eight good branches and one failure will shift everything by one, silently skip that and the run looks like it worked. the output is just missing a lane, and nothing errored. and the one that eats whole nights: multi-agent setups can use up to fifteen times the total tokens of a single chat, because every lane reloads its own core. you are trading total tokens for a clean main window. usually the right trade, always a choice. below i have quoted my full guide on graph engineering. it covers the three topologies, the verifier patterns, and where the gate should actually open. save this and read it below ↓

Agents vs. Graphs, clearly explained! spawning more agents is great, but it has a ceiling nobody says out loud: five agents is a count. a graph is a shape. only one of them changes the answer. point five agents at the same pile with the same window and they converge. the first one writes a finding, the rest read it, and all five reports centre on the same thing. you paid five times for one opinion with four echoes. Graph engineering fixes this by moving the decision up a layer: not how many agents, but who is allowed to look at what. you need both. here's how it works: ↳ the count buys you throughput. five things happening instead of one ↳ the shape buys you coverage. five different things happening instead of the same one five times Prompts → Context → Harness → Agents → Graphs the node that does this is the splitter, and it decides more than any other node in the system. cut a repository by folder and four workers audit the same three files. cut it by blast radius and each one sees something the others cannot. the trick is being selective about what each lane is allowed to see. separate contexts are not a nice-to-have, they are the mechanism. if two agents are meant to produce different things, they must not share a window. if they are meant to produce the same thing, you did not need two agents. one thing to know before you scale it. a branch that throws does not reject the batch. it resolves to null, and that is the containment. which means your merge quietly receives a short list. ↳ filter the nulls before the merge, or one dead lane poisons the whole result ↳ never index a merge by position. eight good branches and one failure will shift everything by one, silently skip that and the run looks like it worked. the output is just missing a lane, and nothing errored. and the one that eats whole nights: multi-agent setups can use up to fifteen times the total tokens of a single chat, because every lane reloads its own core. you are trading total tokens for a clean main window. usually the right trade, always a choice. below i have quoted my full guide on graph engineering. it covers the three topologies, the verifier patterns, and where the gate should actually open. save this and read it below ↓

Hanako

95,369 次观看 • 6 天前

Rick Rubin’s idea of the ruthless edit: “Sometimes for the sake of the whole work, removing things about it that you really love is part of the process.” “If you think you have 30% too much instead of whittling down that 30% to get to 70%, I would say reduce it [down even further] to 40%. Force yourself to get to 40%. Then only add back what's needed.” “You have a better understanding of the work after the ruthless edit.” “We get it down to what do we think is the best thing that we can make? That's the ruthless editing process.” —— I love the way Rick Rubin described this on the Lex Fridman podcast: “If you made 25 songs and you only need 10, don’t pick 10. Ask what are the five I can’t live without, then ask what can I add to that that will make it better and not worse.”

Rick Rubin’s idea of the ruthless edit: “Sometimes for the sake of the whole work, removing things about it that you really love is part of the process.” “If you think you have 30% too much instead of whittling down that 30% to get to 70%, I would say reduce it [down even further] to 40%. Force yourself to get to 40%. Then only add back what's needed.” “You have a better understanding of the work after the ruthless edit.” “We get it down to what do we think is the best thing that we can make? That's the ruthless editing process.” —— I love the way Rick Rubin described this on the Lex Fridman podcast: “If you made 25 songs and you only need 10, don’t pick 10. Ask what are the five I can’t live without, then ask what can I add to that that will make it better and not worse.”

David Senra

23,972 次观看 • 3 个月前

Sam Altman just told you what OpenAI is actually building. Not a chatbot. Not a search tool. Not an assistant. Altman: “Go look around my computer… read my messages… listen to my meetings… intermediate my interactions for me.” That is not a product pitch. That is the CEO of the most valuable AI company on Earth describing what he personally wants. For himself. Every day. Read his messages. Listen to his meetings. Act on his behalf. Make decisions before he knows a decision needs making. Altman: “I don’t have to think. I don’t have to ask you questions.” Every model of AI ever built runs on the prompt. You ask. It responds. You direct. It executes. The human initiates. The machine follows. Altman is describing the death of that model. The agent does not wait. It already read the email. It already heard the meeting. It already knows what you need before you form the thought. You do not operate the machine. The machine operates around you. Then came the line that makes everything else real. Altman: “You can know everything about my life. Start suggesting more things I should build.” He is not asking the AI to execute his ideas. He is asking it to generate them. From his files. His history. His patterns. His entire context. The agent does not just remove friction. It removes the blank page. You never stall. You never run dry. You never sit wondering what to build next. The machine already mapped your market, your gaps, your momentum. It tells you what comes next before you think to ask. But the individual product is not the story. Altman went further. Altman: “Automated companies… where the AI can do not just coding work, but huge amounts of what it takes to run and operate a company.” Not fully automated. He was precise about that. But accelerated to the point where one person with the right stack does what used to take departments. The billion-dollar company did not reach that valuation because the product was worth a billion. It got there because it took a thousand people to deliver it. When an agent absorbs the work of a hundred of those people, the math of every industry rewrites itself. The startup that needed fifty employees and three years of runway now needs five people and six months. The company that took a decade to scale now compounds in quarters. The person holding the line between their data and their tools is not protecting their privacy. They are protecting their ceiling. Because the cost of this leverage is total transparency. You do not get the agent that acts without being asked unless you give it everything. Your messages. Your calendar. Your files. Your patterns. Your life. Altman is not hiding that tradeoff. He is building it as the product. The people who accept it will operate at a speed the people who refuse cannot touch. Right now, two versions of the future are separating. One where you direct the machine. One where the machine already knows. Altman chose. He is building it. The question is not whether this happens. The question is which side of it finds you.

Sam Altman just told you what OpenAI is actually building. Not a chatbot. Not a search tool. Not an assistant. Altman: “Go look around my computer… read my messages… listen to my meetings… intermediate my interactions for me.” That is not a product pitch. That is the CEO of the most valuable AI company on Earth describing what he personally wants. For himself. Every day. Read his messages. Listen to his meetings. Act on his behalf. Make decisions before he knows a decision needs making. Altman: “I don’t have to think. I don’t have to ask you questions.” Every model of AI ever built runs on the prompt. You ask. It responds. You direct. It executes. The human initiates. The machine follows. Altman is describing the death of that model. The agent does not wait. It already read the email. It already heard the meeting. It already knows what you need before you form the thought. You do not operate the machine. The machine operates around you. Then came the line that makes everything else real. Altman: “You can know everything about my life. Start suggesting more things I should build.” He is not asking the AI to execute his ideas. He is asking it to generate them. From his files. His history. His patterns. His entire context. The agent does not just remove friction. It removes the blank page. You never stall. You never run dry. You never sit wondering what to build next. The machine already mapped your market, your gaps, your momentum. It tells you what comes next before you think to ask. But the individual product is not the story. Altman went further. Altman: “Automated companies… where the AI can do not just coding work, but huge amounts of what it takes to run and operate a company.” Not fully automated. He was precise about that. But accelerated to the point where one person with the right stack does what used to take departments. The billion-dollar company did not reach that valuation because the product was worth a billion. It got there because it took a thousand people to deliver it. When an agent absorbs the work of a hundred of those people, the math of every industry rewrites itself. The startup that needed fifty employees and three years of runway now needs five people and six months. The company that took a decade to scale now compounds in quarters. The person holding the line between their data and their tools is not protecting their privacy. They are protecting their ceiling. Because the cost of this leverage is total transparency. You do not get the agent that acts without being asked unless you give it everything. Your messages. Your calendar. Your files. Your patterns. Your life. Altman is not hiding that tradeoff. He is building it as the product. The people who accept it will operate at a speed the people who refuse cannot touch. Right now, two versions of the future are separating. One where you direct the machine. One where the machine already knows. Altman chose. He is building it. The question is not whether this happens. The question is which side of it finds you.

Dustin

87,680 次观看 • 4 个月前

You are not the first person to be cheated on and you are not the last person, cheating is part of life. It happens to the best of the best, move on and know that you don’t own anyone, abantu abakaNkulunkulu. Calm down!

You are not the first person to be cheated on and you are not the last person, cheating is part of life. It happens to the best of the best, move on and know that you don’t own anyone, abantu abakaNkulunkulu. Calm down!

Mbali Mashinini

391,861 次观看 • 2 年前

Jordan Peterson on why you should never sacrifice what you could be for what you are: 1. The deepest lesson under the Buddha's enlightenment is not "deny the world." It is that you should never let what you are stop you from being what you could be. The material world only becomes worth abandoning if your attachment to it is making you less than you could become. 2. What you identify with determines what you become. If you identify with what you already are, clinging to order, you become a tyrant. If you identify with chaos, the opposite of order, you become nihilistic. Both are traps. The way through is to identify with neither. 3. Identify instead with the capacity to continually transcend what you are. Not with any fixed state, but with the process of becoming more. That single shift changes how you relate to everything, including your own failures. 4. Seeking out your own errors on purpose is what humility actually is. You put yourself in situations where you can discover where you are wrong, where your limits are, where there is not yet enough of you, ideally in a way that challenges you without knocking you out of the game. 5. But you can exhaust yourself fighting dragons. Challenge is necessary, but unlimited challenge burns you out. Peterson coached lawyers with infinite workloads who worked flat out and were destroying themselves, because there was always more work to do. 6. The counterintuitive fix was to work less and rest on a schedule. He had them block off four days every three months, planned so far ahead the calendar protected it. They tracked billable hours to test it, and the hours went up. You can have the vacation and the productivity at once. 7. You are not optimizing this week, you are building a 30-year career. The goal is a game you can play today and still play next month and next decade, one that does not make you bitter or worn to a frazzle. burn off a feather at a time instead of letting the whole thing burst into flames. 8. To be renewed, you have to drink the water of life, and water is chaos. It washes away too much order. Staying refreshed means taking on exactly the right amount of chaos to keep your garden nourished, no more and no less. 9. Meaning is the marker that you have the balance right. Peterson calls this one of the only ideas he has ever found that he believes to be rock solid. You can use your own sense of meaning to calibrate your progress through life. 10. It starts with two decisions. The first is a decision of love, that being is worthwhile, and you will work to better it. The second is a decision of truth, that you will play a straight game. Aim at the highest good you can currently conceive, and update it as you learn. 11. It is better to be engaged in a hard problem than to have no problem at all. You do not escape the problem of being. You find one worth solving and become so engaged that the engagement justifies the problem's existence. You get the problem and the solution at the same time.

Jordan Peterson on why you should never sacrifice what you could be for what you are: 1. The deepest lesson under the Buddha's enlightenment is not "deny the world." It is that you should never let what you are stop you from being what you could be. The material world only becomes worth abandoning if your attachment to it is making you less than you could become. 2. What you identify with determines what you become. If you identify with what you already are, clinging to order, you become a tyrant. If you identify with chaos, the opposite of order, you become nihilistic. Both are traps. The way through is to identify with neither. 3. Identify instead with the capacity to continually transcend what you are. Not with any fixed state, but with the process of becoming more. That single shift changes how you relate to everything, including your own failures. 4. Seeking out your own errors on purpose is what humility actually is. You put yourself in situations where you can discover where you are wrong, where your limits are, where there is not yet enough of you, ideally in a way that challenges you without knocking you out of the game. 5. But you can exhaust yourself fighting dragons. Challenge is necessary, but unlimited challenge burns you out. Peterson coached lawyers with infinite workloads who worked flat out and were destroying themselves, because there was always more work to do. 6. The counterintuitive fix was to work less and rest on a schedule. He had them block off four days every three months, planned so far ahead the calendar protected it. They tracked billable hours to test it, and the hours went up. You can have the vacation and the productivity at once. 7. You are not optimizing this week, you are building a 30-year career. The goal is a game you can play today and still play next month and next decade, one that does not make you bitter or worn to a frazzle. burn off a feather at a time instead of letting the whole thing burst into flames. 8. To be renewed, you have to drink the water of life, and water is chaos. It washes away too much order. Staying refreshed means taking on exactly the right amount of chaos to keep your garden nourished, no more and no less. 9. Meaning is the marker that you have the balance right. Peterson calls this one of the only ideas he has ever found that he believes to be rock solid. You can use your own sense of meaning to calibrate your progress through life. 10. It starts with two decisions. The first is a decision of love, that being is worthwhile, and you will work to better it. The second is a decision of truth, that you will play a straight game. Aim at the highest good you can currently conceive, and update it as you learn. 11. It is better to be engaged in a hard problem than to have no problem at all. You do not escape the problem of being. You find one worth solving and become so engaged that the engagement justifies the problem's existence. You get the problem and the solution at the same time.

Jaynit

29,199 次观看 • 1 个月前

#workoutoftheday If you don’t get excited about all of the hard work you have in front of you, you must ask yourself if you truly deserve what it is that you “say” you desire. - Walk On. - See you at the top!

#workoutoftheday If you don’t get excited about all of the hard work you have in front of you, you must ask yourself if you truly deserve what it is that you “say” you desire. - Walk On. - See you at the top!

Michael Chandler

46,626 次观看 • 3 年前

Elon Musk, absolute leader of the AI race with Grok Bot, and it's not a joke anymore. Ultimate guide on god-mode setup of Grok Bot, the org chart that runs while you sleep, step by step: A Chief of Staff sits in the middle with no tools of its own, BUT it reads the outcome you gave it, picks who does what, and never does the work itself. That one rule is why it never turns into the bottleneck you hired it to remove. → Researcher pulls real sources and tracks what's actually moving, not what sounds true → Writer turns that into finished copy while the research is still in the room → Visualiser gets three reference visuals once, then ships everything in that style forever → Analyst reads what performed and tells the rest of the team what to stop doing → Scheduler owns timing and holds the queue → Publisher actually ships What makes it different from every AI tool you've used: each bot gets its own computer in the cloud, its own browser, its own files, and they all share one memory. So the research is already sitting inside the draft before the draft starts. Nothing gets copy-pasted between tabs, nothing waits on you to approve step four of nine. And you never write a workflow for it. You hit record, do the job once the way you actually do it, stop. It pulls out the steps, saves them as a skill, and puts it on a schedule. The shape you're aiming for on every bot: everything reversible finished, nothing sent. 36 drafts queued, 0 published. It does all the work and stops dead at the one line only you can cross. You stop prompting. You start assigning. Full charter blocks, the approval line and the routines are in the article below ↓

Elon Musk, absolute leader of the AI race with Grok Bot, and it's not a joke anymore. Ultimate guide on god-mode setup of Grok Bot, the org chart that runs while you sleep, step by step: A Chief of Staff sits in the middle with no tools of its own, BUT it reads the outcome you gave it, picks who does what, and never does the work itself. That one rule is why it never turns into the bottleneck you hired it to remove. → Researcher pulls real sources and tracks what's actually moving, not what sounds true → Writer turns that into finished copy while the research is still in the room → Visualiser gets three reference visuals once, then ships everything in that style forever → Analyst reads what performed and tells the rest of the team what to stop doing → Scheduler owns timing and holds the queue → Publisher actually ships What makes it different from every AI tool you've used: each bot gets its own computer in the cloud, its own browser, its own files, and they all share one memory. So the research is already sitting inside the draft before the draft starts. Nothing gets copy-pasted between tabs, nothing waits on you to approve step four of nine. And you never write a workflow for it. You hit record, do the job once the way you actually do it, stop. It pulls out the steps, saves them as a skill, and puts it on a schedule. The shape you're aiming for on every bot: everything reversible finished, nothing sent. 36 drafts queued, 0 published. It does all the work and stops dead at the one line only you can cross. You stop prompting. You start assigning. Full charter blocks, the approval line and the routines are in the article below ↓

Miraqle

85,476 次观看 • 9 天前

An entire empire was overthrown over a two percent tax on a breakfast beverage. Look at what you tolerate now. You are taxed when you earn it. Taxed when you spend it. Taxed when you save it. Taxed when you invest it. And when you die, they tax whatever is left. That is not a system. That is a harvest. You commute in a car you paid sales tax to buy. You drive it on roads you were already taxed to build. You fill it with gas taxed by the gallon. When you sell that car, the next buyer pays sales tax on it again. The same car. Taxed every time it changes hands. You arrive at a job where your salary is cut before it ever touches your hands. If you work for yourself, you pay both sides. Two people on paper. Neither one keeps what they earned. Then you go home. Every bill you open has a government standing behind it with its hand out. You buy a house with money they already took their share of. Then they charge you property tax on it every year for the rest of your life. You want to renovate your own kitchen. You need a permit. You want to build a deck on your own land. You need a permit. You pay for the property. Then you pay for permission to use it. Stop paying property tax and they seize your home. Not because you missed a mortgage payment. Because you missed a payment to the government for the privilege of keeping what is already yours. You do not own your home. You rent it from the state. If you leave something behind for your children, they are taxed on what you were already taxed to earn. The same wealth. Taxed at every stage of your life. Then taxed one final time because you had the audacity to die. They found a way to monetize your absence. We are told this is the price of civilization. It is not. It is architecture. The most effective prison ever built is the one where the inmates believe they are free. They did not take your freedom. They priced you out of it. If you kept the full value of your labor, you would be free within years. Not decades. Years. The system cannot allow that. A machine built on consumption needs a consumer that never stops. You did not sign a social contract. You were assigned one. Now pay attention. They spent decades perfecting the extraction of your productivity. Now they are building the technology to replace you. AI is not coming for your job because corporations are greedy. It is coming because a system that already takes half your output just realized it can take all of it. Without needing you in the equation. You were never the point of this arrangement. You were the input. And the moment they engineer a cheaper one, you become a rounding error on a quarterly earnings call. They did not build AI to free you. They built it to finish what the tax code started. It was never about the tea. It was about the precedent. Today we hand over half our waking lives and thank them for the potholes. You do not live in a free economy. You live in a subscription you never signed up for. And the penalty for canceling is everything you have.

An entire empire was overthrown over a two percent tax on a breakfast beverage. Look at what you tolerate now. You are taxed when you earn it. Taxed when you spend it. Taxed when you save it. Taxed when you invest it. And when you die, they tax whatever is left. That is not a system. That is a harvest. You commute in a car you paid sales tax to buy. You drive it on roads you were already taxed to build. You fill it with gas taxed by the gallon. When you sell that car, the next buyer pays sales tax on it again. The same car. Taxed every time it changes hands. You arrive at a job where your salary is cut before it ever touches your hands. If you work for yourself, you pay both sides. Two people on paper. Neither one keeps what they earned. Then you go home. Every bill you open has a government standing behind it with its hand out. You buy a house with money they already took their share of. Then they charge you property tax on it every year for the rest of your life. You want to renovate your own kitchen. You need a permit. You want to build a deck on your own land. You need a permit. You pay for the property. Then you pay for permission to use it. Stop paying property tax and they seize your home. Not because you missed a mortgage payment. Because you missed a payment to the government for the privilege of keeping what is already yours. You do not own your home. You rent it from the state. If you leave something behind for your children, they are taxed on what you were already taxed to earn. The same wealth. Taxed at every stage of your life. Then taxed one final time because you had the audacity to die. They found a way to monetize your absence. We are told this is the price of civilization. It is not. It is architecture. The most effective prison ever built is the one where the inmates believe they are free. They did not take your freedom. They priced you out of it. If you kept the full value of your labor, you would be free within years. Not decades. Years. The system cannot allow that. A machine built on consumption needs a consumer that never stops. You did not sign a social contract. You were assigned one. Now pay attention. They spent decades perfecting the extraction of your productivity. Now they are building the technology to replace you. AI is not coming for your job because corporations are greedy. It is coming because a system that already takes half your output just realized it can take all of it. Without needing you in the equation. You were never the point of this arrangement. You were the input. And the moment they engineer a cheaper one, you become a rounding error on a quarterly earnings call. They did not build AI to free you. They built it to finish what the tax code started. It was never about the tea. It was about the precedent. Today we hand over half our waking lives and thank them for the potholes. You do not live in a free economy. You live in a subscription you never signed up for. And the penalty for canceling is everything you have.

Dustin

27,864 次观看 • 4 个月前

Elon Musk just told you the job is dying. Most people heard a prediction. A few heard a prison door opening. Musk: “In less than 20 years, working at all will be optional.” That is not a policy suggestion. That is a countdown. For three hundred years, the human blueprint has been identical. You are born. You move to the city. You rent a box near the office. You trade your body and your hours for the right to exist. You do this until you are old. Then you stop. Then you die. The entire model runs on one assumption. That human labor is the only engine. AI and robotics delete that assumption. When the machine handles production at a scale no human crew can match, the forced migration to the city evaporates. The commute evaporates. The cubicle evaporates. The alarm clock that owns your nervous system for forty years evaporates. Musk: “I think it won’t be the case that you have to be in a city for a job.” The city was never a choice. It was a requirement disguised as ambition. You moved to the noise and the concrete and the $4,000 rent because the paycheck lived there. Remove the paycheck from the equation and the geography changes overnight. You can live in the mountains. On the coast. In the silence of a town most people have never heard of. You can wake up to nothing but trees and cold air and the complete absence of anyone else’s schedule. That is not a fantasy. That is the math resolving. But here is where most people break. They hear “work is optional” and they see emptiness. A species with nothing to do. Billions of people staring at screens until their minds dissolve. That fear tells you everything about what the system has already done to us. We confused labor with purpose. The grind with meaning. The paycheck with proof that we matter. Musk: “In the same way that you could grow your own vegetables in your garden.” The analogy is precise. You do not grow tomatoes because the economy demands it. You grow them because something in you wants to build a thing with your hands and watch it come alive. That instinct does not disappear when the job does. It gets unleashed. The artist who spent twenty years doing accounting finally paints. The engineer who always wanted to build something of her own finally builds it. The kid in a small town who could never afford to take the risk finally takes it. Work does not vanish. Forced work vanishes. What replaces it is creation without a gun to your head. This is the part that keeps me up at night. We are standing at the edge of the largest liberation in human history. And the loudest voices in the room are begging to stay in the cell. They want the commute. They want the boss. They want the structure that tells them when to eat and when to sleep and when they are allowed to think about their own life. Because freedom without a template is terrifying. The next twenty years will not test our technology. The technology is already ahead of schedule. They will test whether the species can handle what it has been asking for since the beginning of civilization. Time. Space. Silence. And the unbearable weight of choosing what your life actually means when no one is forcing the answer. That is not a prediction. That is the final exam. And nobody is ready.

Elon Musk just told you the job is dying. Most people heard a prediction. A few heard a prison door opening. Musk: “In less than 20 years, working at all will be optional.” That is not a policy suggestion. That is a countdown. For three hundred years, the human blueprint has been identical. You are born. You move to the city. You rent a box near the office. You trade your body and your hours for the right to exist. You do this until you are old. Then you stop. Then you die. The entire model runs on one assumption. That human labor is the only engine. AI and robotics delete that assumption. When the machine handles production at a scale no human crew can match, the forced migration to the city evaporates. The commute evaporates. The cubicle evaporates. The alarm clock that owns your nervous system for forty years evaporates. Musk: “I think it won’t be the case that you have to be in a city for a job.” The city was never a choice. It was a requirement disguised as ambition. You moved to the noise and the concrete and the $4,000 rent because the paycheck lived there. Remove the paycheck from the equation and the geography changes overnight. You can live in the mountains. On the coast. In the silence of a town most people have never heard of. You can wake up to nothing but trees and cold air and the complete absence of anyone else’s schedule. That is not a fantasy. That is the math resolving. But here is where most people break. They hear “work is optional” and they see emptiness. A species with nothing to do. Billions of people staring at screens until their minds dissolve. That fear tells you everything about what the system has already done to us. We confused labor with purpose. The grind with meaning. The paycheck with proof that we matter. Musk: “In the same way that you could grow your own vegetables in your garden.” The analogy is precise. You do not grow tomatoes because the economy demands it. You grow them because something in you wants to build a thing with your hands and watch it come alive. That instinct does not disappear when the job does. It gets unleashed. The artist who spent twenty years doing accounting finally paints. The engineer who always wanted to build something of her own finally builds it. The kid in a small town who could never afford to take the risk finally takes it. Work does not vanish. Forced work vanishes. What replaces it is creation without a gun to your head. This is the part that keeps me up at night. We are standing at the edge of the largest liberation in human history. And the loudest voices in the room are begging to stay in the cell. They want the commute. They want the boss. They want the structure that tells them when to eat and when to sleep and when they are allowed to think about their own life. Because freedom without a template is terrifying. The next twenty years will not test our technology. The technology is already ahead of schedule. They will test whether the species can handle what it has been asking for since the beginning of civilization. Time. Space. Silence. And the unbearable weight of choosing what your life actually means when no one is forcing the answer. That is not a prediction. That is the final exam. And nobody is ready.

Dustin

111,803 次观看 • 4 个月前

“Every work of art is a product of an intuition, because the artist saw something that everyone else had seen a million times before, but saw something new in it. So, when you're looking at an artwork, surrender yourself to not getting an explanation from it, but seeing what is unique, new, or surprising about it. That challenging, because most people seek to understand a work of art, but instead you want to experience it the way you would as a child; that is, you embrace the fact that you don't understand what's happening. Then you can lean into the parts that you understand the least.” -Angus Fletcher, Professor of Story Science

“Every work of art is a product of an intuition, because the artist saw something that everyone else had seen a million times before, but saw something new in it. So, when you're looking at an artwork, surrender yourself to not getting an explanation from it, but seeing what is unique, new, or surprising about it. That challenging, because most people seek to understand a work of art, but instead you want to experience it the way you would as a child; that is, you embrace the fact that you don't understand what's happening. Then you can lean into the parts that you understand the least.” -Angus Fletcher, Professor of Story Science

Tetragrammaton

61,227 次观看 • 1 个月前

Brian Tracy on his million-dollar sales lesson: "People don't care what your product is. They don't care about you. They don't care about your company. They don't even care what the product is." What do they care about? "The only thing people care about is what this product or service does for them." Brian explains that what customers really want is a change, an improvement, or a result in their life. "15% of buying behavior is determined by the past. 85% of buying behavior is determined by the anticipated future. What is going to happen as a result of me buying?" He illustrates this with a powerful analogy: "If you are selling a tour to the Canary Islands, spend 90% of your time talking about the destination and only 10% talking about the plane that you fly to the Canary Islands in." The problem? Most salespeople do the opposite. "Customers only buy improvement. The reason they buy is that they feel that the quality and quantity of the improvement will be greater than the cost and the trouble of using it." Sell the life they want, not the thing you made.

Brian Tracy on his million-dollar sales lesson: "People don't care what your product is. They don't care about you. They don't care about your company. They don't even care what the product is." What do they care about? "The only thing people care about is what this product or service does for them." Brian explains that what customers really want is a change, an improvement, or a result in their life. "15% of buying behavior is determined by the past. 85% of buying behavior is determined by the anticipated future. What is going to happen as a result of me buying?" He illustrates this with a powerful analogy: "If you are selling a tour to the Canary Islands, spend 90% of your time talking about the destination and only 10% talking about the plane that you fly to the Canary Islands in." The problem? Most salespeople do the opposite. "Customers only buy improvement. The reason they buy is that they feel that the quality and quantity of the improvement will be greater than the cost and the trouble of using it." Sell the life they want, not the thing you made.

Big Brain Business

124,260 次观看 • 7 个月前

You already know the story of the bullet holes on the planes. You have heard it a dozen times. And you are still making the exact mistake it warns about, probably today. The man behind it was Abraham Wald, 1943. You know how it goes. Bombers came home covered in bullet holes, wings and fuselage riddled, engines almost clean. The officers said armor the holes. Wald said armor everywhere else. Because the data was only the planes that came back. The ones hit in the engines never returned to be counted. The clean spots on the survivors were the deadly spots on the dead. That part you remember. Here is the part you skip. You repeat this story, then you open a list of the best investments of the last ten years, and every name on it is a plane that made it home. The winners survived. The ones that blew up are not on the list. They never come back to be counted. You know the bias by name and you buy the survivors anyway. Every track record you are shown was selected for coming home. The failures are silent, and the silence is not empty. It is the whole answer. Your eyes read the bullet holes as danger. The real danger is always the plane that is not on the chart. Wald saw it with pen and paper because he counted what was missing instead of what was in front of him. That is the entire skill. Not knowing the story. Doing what it tells you, which almost nobody does. The idea is free. It has been famous for 80 years. Most people still armor the bullet holes with their own money.

You already know the story of the bullet holes on the planes. You have heard it a dozen times. And you are still making the exact mistake it warns about, probably today. The man behind it was Abraham Wald, 1943. You know how it goes. Bombers came home covered in bullet holes, wings and fuselage riddled, engines almost clean. The officers said armor the holes. Wald said armor everywhere else. Because the data was only the planes that came back. The ones hit in the engines never returned to be counted. The clean spots on the survivors were the deadly spots on the dead. That part you remember. Here is the part you skip. You repeat this story, then you open a list of the best investments of the last ten years, and every name on it is a plane that made it home. The winners survived. The ones that blew up are not on the list. They never come back to be counted. You know the bias by name and you buy the survivors anyway. Every track record you are shown was selected for coming home. The failures are silent, and the silence is not empty. It is the whole answer. Your eyes read the bullet holes as danger. The real danger is always the plane that is not on the chart. Wald saw it with pen and paper because he counted what was missing instead of what was in front of him. That is the entire skill. Not knowing the story. Doing what it tells you, which almost nobody does. The idea is free. It has been famous for 80 years. Most people still armor the bullet holes with their own money.

Zyron

71,727 次观看 • 1 个月前

you told it to double check its work that is the line making it worse current models verify without being asked, so your instruction lands on top of behaviour that already happened, and what you get is the same task run twice, billed twice, reported at twice the length it reads like diligence it is a model doing a lap it had already finished every prompting guide ever written tells you to add that line on this generation you improve the output by deleting it

you told it to double check its work that is the line making it worse current models verify without being asked, so your instruction lands on top of behaviour that already happened, and what you get is the same task run twice, billed twice, reported at twice the length it reads like diligence it is a model doing a lap it had already finished every prompting guide ever written tells you to add that line on this generation you improve the output by deleting it

Lagosaur

14,673 次观看 • 9 天前

The emcee at the No Kings rally in Minnesota, Lizz Winstead, says the quiet part out loud, reminding everyone that the so-called “No Kings” movement is a communist movement. "I want people to know that if you want to act like Minnesota, or you think Minnesota is a model, what can I do? Well, you can check your ego about what you want to do and listen to the leadership, and when they tell you what they need done, you do that. And you pay enough attention to the amazing organizers who have been on the ground, who actually have the information, who have already done the work, instead of starting your own [group]... you need to be the pack mule."

The emcee at the No Kings rally in Minnesota, Lizz Winstead, says the quiet part out loud, reminding everyone that the so-called “No Kings” movement is a communist movement. "I want people to know that if you want to act like Minnesota, or you think Minnesota is a model, what can I do? Well, you can check your ego about what you want to do and listen to the leadership, and when they tell you what they need done, you do that. And you pay enough attention to the amazing organizers who have been on the ground, who actually have the information, who have already done the work, instead of starting your own [group]... you need to be the pack mule."

Steve Guest

270,094 次观看 • 5 个月前

Warm wishes to all of you on the English New Year. Today is not just about changing a date on the calendar; it is a day to ask yourself an honest question. What has passed will not return, but the lessons you gained from it will always stay with you. The mistakes of the past year were not signs of weakness; they were part of the process that made you stronger. In this new year, try not to run away from yourself. Instead, understand yourself and work on improving. Complain less and make more effort. Show less and practice more self-discipline. Because the day you truly decide to change yourself is the day that becomes your real New Year. May this English New Year be meaningful and auspicious for you.

Warm wishes to all of you on the English New Year. Today is not just about changing a date on the calendar; it is a day to ask yourself an honest question. What has passed will not return, but the lessons you gained from it will always stay with you. The mistakes of the past year were not signs of weakness; they were part of the process that made you stronger. In this new year, try not to run away from yourself. Instead, understand yourself and work on improving. Complain less and make more effort. Show less and practice more self-discipline. Because the day you truly decide to change yourself is the day that becomes your real New Year. May this English New Year be meaningful and auspicious for you.

Bhagavad Gita 🪷

40,755 次观看 • 8 个月前

What the hell does firebombing a childcare centre that OUR children go to in Sydney have to do with the plight of the Palestinians? Nothing. There is a ceasefire?! You NEVER cared about them - you just hate everything that is good and pure and decent in the world. Oh… and it won’t work… by the way… you are wasting your time.

What the hell does firebombing a childcare centre that OUR children go to in Sydney have to do with the plight of the Palestinians? Nothing. There is a ceasefire?! You NEVER cared about them - you just hate everything that is good and pure and decent in the world. Oh… and it won’t work… by the way… you are wasting your time.

Erin Molan

297,694 次观看 • 1 年前

Viola Davis says action movies are seen as "just commercial" despite her training five hours a day, six days a week "When you do an action movie, for instance, and the word action is in front of it, there is something that brings it down a peg from artistic merit" "I did the weight training five hours a day, six days a week for three months at 56. I did all the training for five months on the ground in the jungles of Africa" "And then you'd have to do the dialect work, and then you have to do the emotional work, but somehow that is seen as just commercial"

Viola Davis says action movies are seen as "just commercial" despite her training five hours a day, six days a week "When you do an action movie, for instance, and the word action is in front of it, there is something that brings it down a peg from artistic merit" "I did the weight training five hours a day, six days a week for three months at 56. I did all the training for five months on the ground in the jungles of Africa" "And then you'd have to do the dialect work, and then you have to do the emotional work, but somehow that is seen as just commercial"

sara

68,612 次观看 • 1 个月前

Crypto isn't about the shitty coin you bought. That's the mistake many people make… lose money on a token, decide the whole thing is a scam, and walk away angry. All while the story keeps playing out around them. Blockchain is the coordination layer for the digital economy. It's how AI agents make payments at machine speed. It's how identity, privacy, and value move across the internet when humans aren't the primary users anymore. AI and blockchain are married at the hip. Every agent, autonomous transaction, piece of the machine economy that's arriving now needs a programmable layer to run on. That's what the layer 1s actually are. Own a piece of it, and you own a piece of the agent economy.

Crypto isn't about the shitty coin you bought. That's the mistake many people make… lose money on a token, decide the whole thing is a scam, and walk away angry. All while the story keeps playing out around them. Blockchain is the coordination layer for the digital economy. It's how AI agents make payments at machine speed. It's how identity, privacy, and value move across the internet when humans aren't the primary users anymore. AI and blockchain are married at the hip. Every agent, autonomous transaction, piece of the machine economy that's arriving now needs a programmable layer to run on. That's what the layer 1s actually are. Own a piece of it, and you own a piece of the agent economy.

Raoul Pal

110,909 次观看 • 1 个月前

🚨 JUST IN: Vice President JD Vance says it FLAWLESSLY "The Democrats are anti-EVERYTHING THAT IS GOOD. Antisemitic, anti-Christian, anti-WHITE!" "What I love about the Republican party is whether you're black or white, whether you're a Jew, a Christian, or a person of no faith. The thing about the Republican party is that if you work hard, you play by the rules, and you love this country, you are welcome on our team!"

🚨 JUST IN: Vice President JD Vance says it FLAWLESSLY "The Democrats are anti-EVERYTHING THAT IS GOOD. Antisemitic, anti-Christian, anti-WHITE!" "What I love about the Republican party is whether you're black or white, whether you're a Jew, a Christian, or a person of no faith. The thing about the Republican party is that if you work hard, you play by the rules, and you love this country, you are welcome on our team!"

Eric Daugherty

544,381 次观看 • 2 个月前