Jay Shooster

1.1K posts

Jay Shooster banner
Jay Shooster

Jay Shooster

@JayShooster

Berkeley, CA Katılım Aralık 2011
2.6K Takip Edilen3.3K Takipçiler
Jay Shooster retweetledi
Nathan Calvin
Nathan Calvin@_NathanCalvin·
Why are so many of this AI Super PACs reposts here attacking Alex Bores so spammy looking? My guess is it seems like they paid X to promote this post and the engagement is mostly not from people who care about AI policy. Their history of astroturfing also seems relevant...
Nathan Calvin tweet media
Think Big PAC@thinkbig_pac

Can we please cut the BS here. @AnthropicAI, its dark money superPAC and its billionaire investors have spent MORE than us supporting your campaign. They have been backing you since before we even announced we would oppose you because you are a puppet for Anthropic. At some point, the hypocrisy has to stop. For anyone still wondering why we are opposing Alex Bores, this tweet is why.

English
1
7
48
4.2K
Jay Shooster retweetledi
Alex Bores
Alex Bores@AlexBores·
I’m deeply honored to be endorsed by @RepBillFoster, a personal inspiration of mine. He’s been sounding the alarm on AI longer and more seriously than just about anyone in Washington and he’s shown what it looks like when a real expert has a seat at the table. He helped write Dodd-Frank in the wake of the financial crisis, he's led the way on holding the tech industry accountable, and he's never been afraid to take on a fight that mattered.
Alex Bores tweet mediaAlex Bores tweet media
English
2
7
78
5.9K
Jay Shooster
Jay Shooster@JayShooster·
Just unbelievable whininess here from billionaires who started a fight that they're now losing. They wanted to make an example out of Alex and they got what they wished for.
English
0
1
11
539
Jay Shooster
Jay Shooster@JayShooster·
Incredible admission here from this Andreessen/OpenAI Super PAC: If you're an AI safety champion and Think Big comes for you, it will inspire so much backlash that will you net support for your campaign. Politicians should take note: AI safety is good policy and good politics!
Think Big PAC@thinkbig_pac

Can we please cut the BS here. @AnthropicAI, its dark money superPAC and its billionaire investors have spent MORE than us supporting your campaign. They have been backing you since before we even announced we would oppose you because you are a puppet for Anthropic. At some point, the hypocrisy has to stop. For anyone still wondering why we are opposing Alex Bores, this tweet is why.

English
1
5
36
3.9K
Jay Shooster
Jay Shooster@JayShooster·
@sScCrRaAbBLLeE @bri_guy_ny I think you're missing the point. A billionaire is funding a super pac that is spending millions against Alex and that same billionaire is supporting his opponent, Jack. The fact that the PAC is running anti-Alex ads, rather than pro-Jack ads is irrelevant. It's supporting Jack.
English
0
0
1
46
DellCurryComputer
DellCurryComputer@sScCrRaAbBLLeE·
@bri_guy_ny You are immeasurably dumb. Anyone can donate/max-out to any campaign and it is DISCLOSED. To compare $7,000 they give publicly to the millions being spent by Bloomberg (for Lasher) and Larsen (Anthropic, for Bores) is beyond dishonest, even for a hack like you
English
2
1
5
185
Millennial Dads for Alex Bores
Millennial Dads for Alex Bores@bri_guy_ny·
NO PAC JACK Schloosberg taking five-figure donations from... you guessed it... the people who fund and run the Trump-donor Super PAC opposed to Alex Bores and his attempts to regulate AI. I can't believe the legacy, establishment, nepo-baby could deceive us like this! 🤡🤡🤡
Shakeel@ShakeelHashim

Interesting nugget in @JBKSchlossberg's latest FEC filings: OpenAI investor, Sam Altman ally and AI super PAC donor Ron Conway and his wife Gayle both donated the max allowed to Jack Schlossberg's campaign. It's only $14,000 total ... but interesting, given that an AI super PAC Conway funds has spent $2.64m opposing Schlossberg's NY-12 rival, Alex Bores. Schlossberg has also presented himself as not taking money from AI companies.

English
3
4
30
3.7K
Jay Shooster retweetledi
Glenn Greenwald
Glenn Greenwald@ggreenwald·
Most decent people, by definition, view the liberation of these Ridglan beagles as a feel-good story. They were bred to live short lives of sadistic (and utterly gratuitous) government-funded experiments, then unceremoniously killed, and instead now are living as dogs should. But this is because activists spent years working for this outcome, often arrested and even investigated by industry-controlled FBI and state legislatures as terrorists. They deserve immense credit and respect for their success.
Wayne Hsiung@waynehhsiung

Running circles is way more fun when you're out of a Ridglan cage! And your new brother teaches you how to play! (Turn sound on for the squeak!)

English
215
2.1K
12.5K
298.1K
Jay Shooster retweetledi
Pod Save America
Pod Save America@PodSaveAmerica·
Jon Lovett and Bernie Sanders on working to prevent AI from destroying humanity.
English
22
32
166
40.3K
Jay Shooster retweetledi
jasmine sun
jasmine sun@jasminewsun·
Most people I know in AI think the median person is screwed, and they have no idea what to do about it. I spent the last 3 months talking to dozens of researchers, economists, and policy experts about AI's impact on work; including reps from every frontier lab and several Congressional offices. Unfortunately, I was not reassured. The AI industry is raising the alarm, but can't change course. These companies' core business model relies on the disruption they are warning about: their faith in full automation only makes them go faster. Policymakers are waking up, but still paralyzed by data and debates. Econ wonks disagree on plenty, but even the limited scenario looks like a "painful transition" that will disempower millions of workers. But an "underclass" is not inevitable, but rather a societal choice — and one we can and should stop. Instead of waiting for impact, we should start planning now to support workers through AI disruption. Whether policymakers can assuage concerns about economic security may determine if we get to reap AI's gains at all. New from me for @NYTOpinion. I put a ton into researching what I think may be the biggest topic of the year, so hope you read it (gift link here!) nytimes.com/2026/04/30/opi…
jasmine sun tweet media
English
198
394
2.7K
843.9K
Jay Shooster
Jay Shooster@JayShooster·
@NathanLeamerDC @FreeBeacon ICYMI, I've been trying to learn more about your position on export controls. Do you support the AI Overwatch Act, the Chip Security Act, or the MATCH Act? Do you support any current bills that would limit the sale of chips or chip manufacturing equipment to China?
English
0
0
1
74
Nathan Leamer
Nathan Leamer@NathanLeamerDC·
New @FreeBeacon report shows how Chinese propaganda joins the anti data center crusade with Bernie Sanders.
Nathan Leamer tweet media
English
3
5
18
1.8K
Jay Shooster
Jay Shooster@JayShooster·
One silver lining here is that every Congressperson is now in a rare situation where they're forced to show where they stand on gestation crates. And every one who votes to keep pigs in these torture cages will have to live with that legacy for the rest of their careers.
Lewis Bollard@Lewis_Bollard

Big vote for animals this week. On Thursday, the House will likely vote on whether to strike the Save Our Bacon Act from the farm bill. Rep. Luna (R-FL) is leading a bipartisan amendment to strike the Act, which would wipe out state laws banning the sale of pork from crated pigs. Pork industry lobbyists are already hard at work against her. They're counting on no one speaking up for the pigs. Prove them wrong. Call the House at 202-224-3121. Give them your zip code and they'll connect you to your member's office. Ask them to vote YES on the Luna Amendment to remove the Save Our Bacon Act from the farm bill.

English
0
6
18
640
Jay Shooster
Jay Shooster@JayShooster·
@NathanLeamerDC Do you support the AI Overwatch Act, the Chip Security Act, or the MATCH Act? Do you support any current bills that would limit the sale of chips or chip manufacturing equipment to China?
English
0
0
0
47
Jay Shooster
Jay Shooster@JayShooster·
We all know OpenAI/Brockman are acting in bad faith here, but just for the record, their super PAC has been very clear about why they're targeting Alex Bores: because "he wants Albany bureaucrats regulating AI." It's not because they think it's bad regulation. They don't want any state AI regulation, period.
Jay Shooster tweet media
English
1
0
4
138
Nathan Calvin
Nathan Calvin@_NathanCalvin·
I am having difficulty parsing this tweet (again, I thought $100,000,000 could buy better comms!) but it seems like Leading the Future is saying that OpenAI's president Greg Brockman *did* give $25 million to the "pro-regulation" side, i.e, because Leading the Future is pro regulation? The debut article in the WSJ announcing your Super Pac says it came out of conversations to create "industry-friendly policies" and "oppose strict AI regulations." Does anyone really think that a16z and OpenAI are backing a Super PAC to try to get MORE AI regulations rather than less? That was why you apparently spun up a fake AI astroturfed website to go after AI regulation advocates? Stuff like this is why people are losing faith in politics, do better.
Nathan Calvin tweet media
Think Big PAC@thinkbig_pac

He did. Stop lying about Leading the Future. We support smart and strong national regulation (see our op-ed below). You support bashing AI even though you are getting millions from @AnthropicAI and Public First, the dark money super pac they fund which has spent more than $1.3 million in backing your campaign. When are you going to call on them to disclose their donors and release their agenda? newsweek.com/how-america-ca… Cc: @ezraklein (who forgot to ask him about this)

English
3
3
66
4.5K
Jay Shooster retweetledi
Nathan Calvin
Nathan Calvin@_NathanCalvin·
@tedlieu is this true and would this bill preempt state AI protections? Why do you differ from these comments from Representative Liccardo on why he would not be signing onto Representative Obernolte’s bill? From Punchbowl: “Liccardo said on Thursday that he couldn’t endorse the bill because it didn’t meet the “critical requirements” he needed in place to support allowing the federal government to preempt state laws on AI. “If we’re going to preempt state regulation, we need to have clear conditions that ensure that there is a race to the top, to safety,” Liccardo said."
Rebecca Kern@rebeccamkern

Some news - @JayObernolte told me yesterday that he plans to introduce his bipartisan AI bill w/ Rep Ted Lieu. It'll largely cover the 85 recommendations in their 2024 bipartisan AI task force report - speaker.gov/wp-content/upl…

English
1
6
25
1K
Jay Shooster retweetledi
Peter Wildeford🇺🇸🚀
Peter Wildeford🇺🇸🚀@peterwildeford·
In a debate between Jensen Huang and Jensen Huang, who will win? It's honestly hard to tell...
English
12
30
271
17.1K
Jay Shooster
Jay Shooster@JayShooster·
@pmarca Good question, can you share more about the "500,000-person list of 'grassroots advocates'" who are allegedly part of your AI deregulation organization @BuildAmericanAI? How many of them do you think are real people?
English
0
0
0
89
Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸
Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸@pmarca·
We now know white nationalism is astroturfed. We now know AI doomerism is astroturfed. What else?
English
628
370
5.2K
309.8K
Jay Shooster
Jay Shooster@JayShooster·
@DavidSacks I just asked ChatGPT and Claude: "is affirmative action ever justified?" ChatGPT said it can be in some cases. Claude declined to say, laying out the pros and cons, and noting that it depends on your values. I encourage others to do the same and see how they actually compare!
English
0
0
1
152
David Sacks
David Sacks@DavidSacks·
Reverse discrimination does not undo historical injustices but rather perpetrates new ones against a different set of individuals. This foments social strife and undermines the ideal of America as a meritocracy. AI models should not be taught that this practice is justified.
David Sacks tweet media
English
379
1.1K
8.1K
206.5K

Keşfet

@RepBillFoster @LeadingFutureAI @OpenAI @sama @gdb @sScCrRaAbBLLeE @bri_guy_ny @NYTOpinion