dylerturden

@Ihartitz Be ready to delete it or repost it for confirmation in 2-3 years. 🤝

One of the worst drafts in a long time. Unless we find out in a few years that this draft was in fact awesome. In that case I simply won’t bring this thought up again.

@karbonbased how sure are we this isn't just a new Anthropic release?

Bullish

@SleeperNFL Jets fans

nobody has it worse than Browns fans man

@claudeai @WClemente Yeah but can it not burn through my entire subscription limit in 5 tasks?

Computer use is now in Claude Code. Claude can open your apps, click through your UI, and test what it built, right from the CLI. Now in research preview on Pro and Max plans.

@Outdoctrination @grok what are some high lithium foods to make sure you have in your diet

A groundbreaking new study shows that a mineral deficiency can drive Alzheimer's, and consuming it can reverse it. (🧵1/10)

I’m in love with this sentence: “The degree to which a person can grow is directly proportional to the amount of truth he can accept about himself without running away.”

@rohanpaul_ai @grok how long till we can api this into our products?

The whole TTS industry has been optimizing for how well a voice reads text, while voice agents live or die on how well a voice talks in real time. Smallest AI just launched Lightning v3.1 to solve that problem, speaking naturally when the model is still figuring out what it wants to say. Brilliant benchmark numbers. MOS (Mean Opinion Score) 3.89. Outscoring OpenAI, ElevenLabs, Cartesia. 1,177 samples, 15 seconds to clone, 15 languages A real conversational voice has to do four things at once: sound like it is thinking, sound like it is listening, handle the way people actually speak, and keep the user engaged. That is a much more useful test for customer support, healthcare, banking, and scheduling agents than just checking whether a model can read a clean paragraph out loud.

@altryne yes, nuked in 3 code commands. simple code adjustments, no pushes

My feed is showing me a bunch of folks who tapped out their whole usage limits on Mon/Tue. Is this your experience? Please comment, I want to understand how widespread this is

@akoratana @matei_zaharia @pbailis @rauchg @zoink @drewhouston @akoratana I’m a hobbyist creating products and would love to use this to audit and debug the code. Are there any options for individuals or is it only on the enterprise level?

Introducing: PlayerZero The world's first Engineering World Model that puts debugging, fixing, and testing your code on autopilot. We've raised $20M from Foundation Capital, @matei_zaharia (Databricks), @pbailis (Workday), @rauchg (Vercel), @zoink (Figma), @drewhouston (Dropbox), and more PlayerZero frees up 30% of your engineering bandwidth by: 1.⁠ ⁠Finding the root cause for bugs & incidents in minutes that engineering teams take days to identify. 2.⁠ ⁠Predicting in minutes, edge case issues that a 300-person QA team would take weeks to find. ------ Here's why this matters: No one in your org has a complete picture of how your production software actually behaves. Support sees tickets. SRE sees infra. Dev sees code. Each team builds their own fragmented view - and none of these systems talk to each other. When something breaks, everyone scrambles to stitch the picture together by hand. PlayerZero connects all of it into a single context graph - → The Slack thread where your lead said "we went with X because Y fell apart in prod last time" → The PR review where an engineer explained the tradeoff → The lifetime history of your CI/CD pipeline, observability stack, incidents, and support tickets So you can trace any problem to its root cause across every silo. And it compounds. Every incident diagnosed teaches the model something new. The longer it runs, the deeper it understands - which code paths are high-risk, which configurations are fragile, which changes tend to break which customer flows. So when you sit down to debug a live issue, you have your entire org's collective reasoning and production memory behind you - instantly. ------ Zuora, Georgia-Pacific, and Nylas have reduced resolution time by 90% and caught 95% of breaking changes and freeing an average of $30M in engineering bandwidth. ------ Our guarantee: If we can't increase your engineering bandwidth by at least 20% within one week, we'll donate $10,000 to an open-source project of your choice. Book a demo - bit.ly/3NlLMeN

@elliotrades Lol, Vitalik with the 2 years too late alpha. Thanks big guy! Good looking out!

Vitalik with a truth bomb

@felixrieseberg Will it work with voice?

We're shipping a new feature in Claude Cowork as a research preview that I'm excited about: Dispatch! One persistent conversation with Claude that runs on your computer. Message it from your phone. Come back to finished work. To try it out, download Claude Desktop, then pair your phone.

@paoloanzn @grok turn this into a prompt for Claude Code to take care of all these things.

vibecoder asks claude code to build a chat app, gets a working prototype in 20 minutes, immediately tweets "just killed slack and discord"… brother you don't even know what a distributed system is. you don't know what database replication means. you have no idea how websocket connections behave at scale or what happens when 50k people are online at once and someone's message needs to show up in 200ms across 3 continents slack has engineers making $300k+ who have spent a decade solving problems you don't even know exist yet. race conditions, eventual consistency, message ordering, presence systems, file storage at scale, search indexing across billions of messages your app works on localhost with 2 connections. that's not the same thing as "killing slack" that's a college homework assignment the prototype is maybe 0.5% of what makes these products actually work in production. the remaining 99.5% is infrastructure, reliability, edge cases, and years of iteration on problems that only surface when real humans use your thing at scale and the worst part is the confidence. "yeah its not perfect but ai one-shotted it, just need to adjust a few things and deploy" - the few things you need to adjust IS the entire product. thats like pouring a foundation and saying you basically built a skyscraper, just need to adjust a few things ai is genuinely incredible for building tools and prototypes. i use it every day. but there's this weird thing happening where people who have never shipped anything to real users at scale now think the hard part of software is writing the first 200 lines of code it never was bro

The Internet never forgets

@heynavtoor @grok dis true for ais in general or just openai being doo doo?

🚨BREAKING: OpenAI published a paper proving that ChatGPT will always make things up. Not sometimes. Not until the next update. Always. They proved it with math. Even with perfect training data and unlimited computing power, AI models will still confidently tell you things that are completely false. This isn't a bug they're working on. It's baked into how these systems work at a fundamental level. And their own numbers are brutal. OpenAI's o1 reasoning model hallucinates 16% of the time. Their newer o3 model? 33%. Their newest o4-mini? 48%. Nearly half of what their most recent model tells you could be fabricated. The "smarter" models are actually getting worse at telling the truth. Here's why it can't be fixed. Language models work by predicting the next word based on probability. When they hit something uncertain, they don't pause. They don't flag it. They guess. And they guess with complete confidence, because that's exactly what they were trained to do. The researchers looked at the 10 biggest AI benchmarks used to measure how good these models are. 9 out of 10 give the same score for saying "I don't know" as for giving a completely wrong answer: zero points. The entire testing system literally punishes honesty and rewards guessing. So the AI learned the optimal strategy: always guess. Never admit uncertainty. Sound confident even when you're making it up. OpenAI's proposed fix? Have ChatGPT say "I don't know" when it's unsure. Their own math shows this would mean roughly 30% of your questions get no answer. Imagine asking ChatGPT something three times out of ten and getting "I'm not confident enough to respond." Users would leave overnight. So the fix exists, but it would kill the product. This isn't just OpenAI's problem. DeepMind and Tsinghua University independently reached the same conclusion. Three of the world's top AI labs, working separately, all agree: this is permanent. Every time ChatGPT gives you an answer, ask yourself: is this real, or is it just a confident guess?

@JackCulpan Ily.

Here's the prompt: ## Workflow Orchestration ### 1. Plan Mode Default - Enter plan mode for ANY non-trivial task (3+ steps or architectural decisions) - If something goes sideways, STOP and re-plan immediately – don't keep pushing - Use plan mode for verification steps, not just building - Write detailed specs upfront to reduce ambiguity ### 2. Subagent Strategy - Use subagents liberally to keep main context window clean - Offload research, exploration, and parallel analysis to subagents - For complex problems, throw more compute at it via subagents - One task per subagent for focused execution ### 3. Self-Improvement Loop - After ANY correction from the user: update `tasks/lessons.md` with the pattern - Write rules for yourself that prevent the same mistake - Ruthlessly iterate on these lessons until mistake rate drops - Review lessons at session start for relevant project ### 4. Verification Before Done - Never mark a task complete without proving it works - Diff your behavior between main and your changes when relevant - Ask yourself: "Would a staff engineer approve this?" - Run tests, check logs, demonstrate correctness ### 5. Demand Elegance (Balanced) - For non-trivial changes: pause and ask "is there a more elegant way?" - If a fix feels hacky: "Knowing everything I know now, implement the elegant solution" - Skip this for simple, obvious fixes – don't over-engineer - Challenge your own work before presenting it ### 6. Autonomous Bug Fixing - When given a bug report: just fix it. Don't ask for hand-holding - Point at logs, errors, failing tests – then resolve them - Zero context switching required from the user - Go fix failing CI tests without being told how ### 7. Task Management 1. **Plan First**: Write plan to `tasks/todo.md` with checkable items 2. **Verify Plan**: Check in before starting implementation 3. **Track Progress**: Mark items complete as you go 4. **Explain Changes**: High-level summary at each step 5. **Document Results**: Add review section to `tasks/todo.md` 6. **Capture Lessons**: Update `tasks/lessons.md` after corrections ### Core Principles - **Simplicity First**: Make every change as simple as possible. Impact minimal code. - **No Laziness**: Find root causes. No temporary fixes. Senior developer standards. - **Minimal Impact**: Changes should only touch what's necessary. Avoid introducing bugs.

@impactfbdata Tre Harris hype. I like it.

The only P4 wide receiver prospects since 2018 with a YPRR vs. man > 4.25 and a contested catch rate > 50.0% in at least one college season. Sorted by career best missed tackle rate after the catch.. 🔘 Garrett Wilson, Ohio State 🔘 Ja'Marr Chase, LSU 🔘 Xavier Worthy, Texas 🔘 Mike Williams, Clemson 🔘 DeVonta Smith, Alabama 🔘 Tee Higgins, Clemson 🔘 Jaxon Smith-Njigba, Ohio State 🔘 Jaylen Waddle, Alabama 🔘 Tre Harris, Ole Miss 🔘 Jordyn Tyson, Arizona State

He will live in forever in this masterpiece

A Letter to the Left To those who still believe, from someone who once did too. I need to tell you something, and I need you to hear me out before you decide what I am. I was one of you. Not in some distant, theoretical way. I was deeply one of you. I marched. I shared the posts. I believed, with total conviction, that the progressive vision of the world was not only morally correct but self-evidently so. Anyone who disagreed was ignorant or malicious. I had Trump Derangement Syndrome, but then, I complained about all politicians. I couldn’t see it was a case of choosing ‘the best of’. I had no middle ground. And that’s what finally shook me awake: the realisation that I had stopped allowing for middle ground. My thinking had become entirely black and white. I had radicalised—slowly, invisibly—without even noticing it was happening to me. The moment of clarity didn’t arrive dramatically. It crept in through the small, uncomfortable questions I started asking myself. Why was I so certain? Why did I feel such fury toward anyone who hesitated, even slightly, on positions I held? When had I stopped thinking and started simply reacting? When I tried to share these doubts with friends and family—people I loved, people on my side—I wasn’t met with conversation. I was met with a wall. A similar wall to what I had previously put up for anyone daring to question me and my positions. “No discussion.” “You’ve gone right-wing.” Lies were constructed about my motives. It didn’t matter that I was asking questions in good faith. The act of questioning was itself the crime. That is not normal. A political movement that forbids its own members from thinking critically is not a movement for justice. It’s something else entirely. And it worried me then. It worries me more now. Do you remember the 1980s and 1990s? I do. We had done real, meaningful work on race relations. Most people in the West genuinely did not care about the colour of your skin. Were things perfect? Of course not. But we were heading somewhere good. We were building something. And then we pulled it apart. We decided that every small, clumsy human interaction was a “microaggression.” We reframed the past as one hundred percent negative, as though nothing decent had ever been achieved. We became so obsessed with naming every tiny slight that we forgot what real progress looked like. We unstitched the good work and called it enlightenment. Once I began looking with honest eyes, the contradictions were everywhere. We decided blackface was a mortal sin. But woman face? That was brave and fabulous. We insisted entire societies must be restructured to accommodate the preferences of fractions of a percent of the population, and if you questioned the pace or method, you were a bigot, evil or fascist. We pursued reckonings for the crimes of Western civilisation—slavery, church child abuse, colonisation—and those reckonings were important. But we stopped there. Only the West was held to account. The trans-Atlantic slave trade was a horror, yes. But it was the British who ended it. Meanwhile, the Islamic slave trade ran for centuries, and pockets of it persist to this day. Where is that reckoning? Who is demanding it? We created a world in which nobody is allowed to simply settle and build a life. Indigenous people must perpetually identify as victims. Everyone of European descent must perpetually identify as perpetrators—for events centuries old. Yet nobody seems interested in acknowledging that white Westerners were not history’s only colonisers, or that colonisation, in softer forms, is happening right now. Mass immigration into Western countries is a form of soft colonisation. That sentence will make some of you furious. But consider: why is it only European and other Western nations being pressured to “diversify”? No one bags Nigeria or China or Latin American nations for a lack of diversity and not promoting the idea of multiculturalism. Only white-majority countries are told their cultures must be diluted or they are racist. Wanting to preserve the native peoples and cultures of European nations is not xenophobia. It is a right that in the 21st century we wish to grant to every non-white culture on earth. But apparently it’s a sin to want it or expect it for ourselves. And when it comes specifically to Islamic immigration into Western democracies, there are countless videos—not propaganda, but Muslims speaking plainly—describing a vision in which the world becomes Islamic, in which Sharia law replaces secular governance, in which their growing numbers translate to growing power. These are not conspiracy theories. These are now publicly stated intentions. History tells us what happens when these numbers reach a tipping point: the freedoms we take for granted begin to erode. Some know this because they are ex-Muslims. Some know because they are Westerners who converted to Islam and found it wanting. Frightening, even. Expressing that concern is not Islamophobia. It is pattern recognition. Being concerned about how trans medicine affects young people is not transphobic. Asking how trans ideology impacts women’s rights and the gay and lesbian community is not bigotry. These are legitimate questions that deserve honest answers, not silencing. So much of what I had taken for granted on the left collapsed under the lightest touch of common sense. I had to accept something I’d been resisting for years: the world will never be perfect. It won’t. And if you spend your one and only life railing against the world because it refuses to become your utopia, you will lose. Worse, you will drag the rest of us down with you. Constantly tearing society apart because it cannot meet an impossible standard doesn’t make you righteous. It makes you destructive. What I did instead was start asking a different question: ‘What’s the optimal way to improve this?’ Not achieve perfection (#impossible). Not burn it all down and rebuild a utopia from the ashes (also impossible). Just better. What specifically needs improving, and how do we do it? That shift—from ideological fury to practical problem-solving—changed everything for me. So those are the things that drove me away from the left. Not toward the right, but away from what the left has become: reactive, unquestioning, hostile to dissent, and increasingly detached from reality. I wasn’t changed by the right, I was changed by the left. My left. If the West is going to survive—and I think it’s that serious at this point—the left has to start thinking again. Questioning again. Demanding evidence instead of demanding obedience. So I’m asking you—begging you, really—to think. Consider that an alternate view might not be hatred. Consider that you may have been wrong about some things. I was. That’s not a confession of weakness. Admitting a mistake and choosing a different path is braver than marching further down a road you already suspect is leading somewhere dark. You are not a bad person for questioning. You are not a traitor for thinking. The people who tell you otherwise are not protecting you. They are controlling you. That’s all I ask. Just think. Please.

@TMurph207S @thorku

Hire @thorku 😏

@theblockspot Herbert not on the list makes this list just rage bait

My Updated NFL QB Rankings: 1. Patrick Mahomes 2. Joe Burrow 3. Josh Allen 4. Matthew Stafford 5. Lamar Jackson 6. Jayden Daniels 7. Drake Maye 8. Caleb Williams 9. Jordan Love 10. Jalen Hurts 11. Jared Goff 12. Bo Nix 13. CJ Stroud 14. Dak Prescott 15. Trevor Lawrence