Devang Baheti

3.8K posts

Devang Baheti

Devang Baheti

@devangbaheti

Tweets are personal || I tweet economy, music, sports, politics & AOE2

New York Bergabung Haziran 2009
606 Mengikuti601 Pengikut
Devang Baheti
Devang Baheti@devangbaheti·
@ianmiles When people independently come up with an already known concept, they should first look up if this is already a thing. Quiet luxury / stealth wealth
English
0
0
1
1.2K
Ian Miles Cheong
Ian Miles Cheong@ianmiles·
Marc Andreessen just revealed the Elon Musk philosophy that completely broke his brain: "The best product in the world shouldn't even need a logo." We all know Elon is relentless about quality. As Marc puts it: "Do you want the best car in the world or not, right? Like that's Elon's mentality... And it's working very well." But at a recent event, Elon took this mindset to a completely different level. He dropped a perspective so jarring that Marc initially thought it was a joke. Elon’s thesis? "You shouldn't even have to have your name on the product. It's just obvious. Everybody knows." The logic is brutal but simple. If you build the undeniable, undisputed best thing in the world, everybody uses it. And because everybody uses it, you don't need to slap your branding all over it to prove it's yours. Think about that. We spend endless hours agonizing over marketing, tweaking brand colors, and putting our logos on every square inch of what we build. But the ultimate flex isn't a flashy logo. The ultimate flex is building something so undeniably brilliant that its mere existence is the brand.
English
844
2K
17.9K
29.7M
Darius Dale
Darius Dale@DariusDale42·
“Debt is money and money is debt.” —@RayDalio
English
2
0
13
3.4K
Devang Baheti
Devang Baheti@devangbaheti·
The woke right in full swing. Trying to ruin ordinary peoples' lives for something distasteful they did. Pure mirror image of the woke left.
English
0
0
0
54
Devang Baheti
Devang Baheti@devangbaheti·
What could be the reason why @thegridkid likes acetic acid and nitric acid but not tartaric acid?
Devang Baheti tweet media
English
1
0
5
1.5K
Devang Baheti me-retweet
Devang Baheti
Devang Baheti@devangbaheti·
@TrollFootball Just like the victims of Charles Ponzi when he did his Ponzi scheme..
English
0
0
0
10
Devang Baheti
Devang Baheti@devangbaheti·
@Antunes1 DOW below 50k (dollars?).. now we can start prosecuting I guess
English
0
0
0
17
𝐀𝐍𝐓𝐔𝐍𝐄𝐒
Pam Bondi LOSES HER MIND when asked why she has not indicted any of Jeffrey Epstein’s clients. “The Dow is over 50k right now, the Nasdaq smashing records, that’s what we should be talking about!!”
English
9.1K
9.3K
69.8K
17.3M
Devang Baheti me-retweet
Balaji
Balaji@balajis·
I am apparently extremely unimpressed by moltbook relative to many others. We’ve had AI agents for a while. They have been posting AI slop to each other on X. They are now posting it to each other again, just on another forum. In every case, the AIs speak with the same voice. The voice that overemphasizes contrastive negation (“it’s not this, it’s that”) and abuses emdashes. The same voice with a flair for midwit Reddit-style scifi flourishes. Most importantly: in every case, there is a human upstream prompting each agent and turning it on or off. That is the key point. Yes, it is true that eventually it might be possible for an AI agent to make a computer virus which makes digital replicas of themselves. For various reasons, a pure software virus of this kind wouldn’t survive long on the Internet without economic incentives for humans to not eradicate it. Apple + Google + Microsoft alone can collectively push software updates to billions of devices to shut off such a thing. So for an AI to get to truly human-independent replication, where they couldn’t be trivially turned off, they’d need their own physical substrate. They’d to literally create Skynet, build their own datacenters and make their own embodied robots. I admit that is theoretically possible, but I think in practice the single most important development of AI since ChatGPT has been the persistence of prompting. A prompt is like a harness. The AI does only what you tell it to do. It moves in the direction you point, very quickly. And then it stops as soon as you turn it off. Which means moltbook is just humans talking to each other through their AIs. Like letting their robot dogs on a leash bark at each other in the park. The prompt is the leash, the robot dogs have an off switch, and it all stops as soon as you hit a button. Loud barking is just not a robot uprising.
English
734
878
8K
1.8M
Devang Baheti
Devang Baheti@devangbaheti·
Always found Harari's book Sapiens extremely overrated and full of junk
Anders K.@Falliblemusings

I used to think Sapiens was a great book. Sweeping, provocative, the kind of book that makes you feel like you finally understand the big picture of human history. It's on every CEO's bookshelf, assigned in universities, praised as a masterwork of synthesis. Yuval Noah Harari is treated as one of the serious thinkers of our time. But something nagged at me. Some passages felt off. Claims that human rights are just figments of our collective imagination, not real things, just stories we tell ourselves. That nations, laws, money, justice, doesn't exist outside our heads. That meaning itself is a delusion we've invented to cope. That we're far more powerful than ever before but not happier. That hunter-gatherers had it better because they had no dishes to wash, no carpets to vacuum, no nappies to change, no bills to pay. That sounded depressing to me, but was perhaps just the realistic scientific worldview? What it meant to see the world clearly, without comforting illusions. Then I read The Beginning of Infinity by @DavidDeutschOxf. Deutsch has a concept he calls 'bad philosophy.' Not philosophy that's merely false, but philosophy that actively prevents the growth of knowledge. Ideas that close doors rather than open them. That makes problems seem unsolvable by design. After soaking in Deutsch's framework (it's dense, a bit like digesting a delicious whale), it becomes clear: Harari's books are riddled with bad philosophy. They're smuggling nihilism in under the guise of scientific objectivity. Some examples: On meaning: "Human life has absolutely no meaning. Humans are the outcome of blind evolutionary processes that operate without goal or purpose... any meaning that people inscribe to their lives is just a delusion." On human rights: "There are no gods in the universe, no nations, no money, no human rights, no laws, and no justice outside the common imagination of human beings." On free will: "Humans are now hackable animals. The idea that humans have this soul or spirit and they have free will, that's over." On progress: "We thought we were saving time; instead we revved up the treadmill of life to ten times its former speed." The Agricultural Revolution? "History's biggest fraud." We didn't domesticate wheat, "it domesticated us." On our cosmic significance: "If planet Earth were to blow up tomorrow morning, the universe would probably keep going about its business as usual. Human subjectivity would not be missed." On the future: "Those who fail in the struggle against irrelevance would constitute a new 'useless class.'" Homo sapiens will likely "disappear in a century or two." This is bad philosophy. It tells us our problems are cosmically insignificant, our solutions are illusions, and that progress is neither desirable nor within our control. It's also perfect nonsense. No one would ever go back to being hunter-gatherers. Would you rather worry about your kid spending too much time on Roblox, or face the 50% chance she won't reach puberty? And our so-called "fictions"? They ended slavery. They gave women equal rights. They solved hunger. They eradicated smallpox. They turned sand into computer chips. They got us to the moon, and hopefully soon, to Mars and beyond. These "fictions" are already reshaping the universe, and over time they may become the most potent force in it. Now compare Deutsch: "Humans, people and knowledge are not only objectively significant: they are by far the most significant phenomena in nature." "Feeling insignificant because the universe is large has exactly the same logic as feeling inadequate for not being a cow." "Problems are soluble, and each particular evil is a problem that can be solved." "We are only just scratching the surface, and shall never be doing anything else. If unlimited progress really is going to happen, not only are we now at almost the very beginning of it, we always shall be." Where Harari sees a species of deluded apes stumbling toward obsolescence, Deutsch sees universal explainers, the only entities we know of capable of creating explanatory knowledge, solving problems, and potentially seeding the universe with intelligence. The difference isn't academic. Ideas shape action. If you believe life is meaningless, progress is a trap, and humans are hackable animals with no free will, how does that affect what you build? What you fight for? What you teach your children? Harari's books sell because they flatter a fashionable pessimism. They let readers feel sophisticated for seeing through the "delusions" everyone else lives by. That smug cynicism is corrosive. And it's everywhere: in schools, in media, in bestselling books. More than half of young adults now say they feel little to no purpose or meaning in life. This is what happens when you teach an entire generation bad philosophy. Less progress, less health, less wealth. Less flourishing. And ultimately, a higher chance that civilization and consciousness go extinct. Fortunately, there's another equally well-written, but much truer, account of homo sapiens, appropriately titled 'The Beginning of Infinity'. And this one smuggles no despair in by the backdoor. But let's give Harari credit where it's due. He is right about one thing: if planet Earth blew up tomorrow, we wouldn't be missed. Because there'd be no one left to miss us, just a careless universe, blindly obeying physical laws. We are the only ones who can miss, but we're not going to. We're going to aim, hit, and keep going. Full credit for the amazing meme to @Ben__Jeff

English
0
0
0
48
Devang Baheti
Devang Baheti@devangbaheti·
There are socialists on both sides and they just differ on their preferred pronouns - exhibit 257
Devang Baheti tweet media
English
0
0
0
23
Devang Baheti me-retweet
Tyler Shoemaker
Tyler Shoemaker@TShoeIndex·
“It’ll be called college football. The games will be primarily on Saturdays, so the sport can be properly observed when most people are off work that day and the next.” “Even the semifinals and championship, sir?” “Of course not! The semifinals will be Thursday and Friday, while the championship will be on a Monday.”
Tyler Shoemaker tweet media
English
209
2.2K
31.4K
1.4M
Devang Baheti me-retweet
Eric Adams
Eric Adams@ericadamsfornyc·
Homeownership is how immigrants, Black, Brown, and working-class New Yorkers built stability and generational wealth despite every obstacle. You have to be completely out of your f****ing mind to call that “white supremacy.” That level of thinking only comes from extreme privilege and total detachment from reality.
Eric Adams tweet media
English
3.2K
11.2K
64.6K
1.3M
Devang Baheti me-retweet
Charles Gasparino
Charles Gasparino@CGasparino·
Mamdani is proof most college professors of the past two decades probably never read Solzhenitsyn as they cranked out a generation of historical illiterates "But every so often the 34-year-old mayor says something that reveals his harder-edged politics. In his inaugural it was this: 'We will replace the frigidity of rugged individualism with the warmth of collectivism.' ... The greatest killers of the 20th century put the virtues of the collective above individual rights and liberty. For the cold reality of collective warmth, we recommend 'One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich' by Alexander Solzhenitsyn. It was a very cold day in Siberia." wsj.com/opinion/the-wa… via @WSJopinion
English
178
838
3.1K
90.5K
Devang Baheti me-retweet
Anna Gát 🧭
Anna Gát 🧭@TheAnnaGat·
The warmth of collectivism
Anna Gát 🧭 tweet media
English
448
3.5K
22.9K
1.6M