Abraham Walker

I’m in the arena trying stuff. Some will work, some won’t. But always learning.

That will be one hell of a building!

We reject: kings, presidents, and voting. We believe in: rough consensus and running code. —David Clark, 1992

being a founder is weird. you become inherently unrelatible to 99.99% of the population

Someone just shilled me this meme coin: - 23 trillion supply - No supply cap - 1 node - 25% of supply minted in the last 3 years - 1% of holders own 30% - Backed by the U.S. government

Worth a listen podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/wha…

@mmealling @rookisaacman We are going to build a Moon base

"Make something people want" sounds obvious, but not doing it is the most common mistake founders make. I explained why I made it in the essay where I coined the term. I didn't understand the market I was building for, so I was wrong about what it wanted. paulgraham.com/bronze.html

the act of creation is the only thing that justifies existence

What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.

Earlier today, @NASAAdmin Jared Isaacman hosted an agencywide town hall to talk about his vision for the agency’s future and answer questions from members of the workforce. Watch: youtu.be/WdQiPJ6KmRc

Anyone who thinks Ilya is a genius should watch this interview. youtube.com/watch?v=aR20FW…

Ilya Sutskever: Humans aren’t AGI; they know little and learn constantly. Pretrained AGI on the other hand, overshoots by skipping that trial-and-error phase. Real intelligence comes from ongoing learning, not from starting out “finished.”

Qatar’s Talent visa (Golden) Uk’s innovation/founder visa Canada’s startup visa US Eb-1 visa

A number of people are talking about implications of AI to schools. I spoke about some of my thoughts to a school board earlier, some highlights: 1. You will never be able to detect the use of AI in homework. Full stop. All "detectors" of AI imo don't really work, can be defeated in various ways, and are in principle doomed to fail. You have to assume that any work done outside classroom has used AI. 2. Therefore, the majority of grading has to shift to in-class work (instead of at-home assignments), in settings where teachers can physically monitor students. The students remain motivated to learn how to solve problems without AI because they know they will be evaluated without it in class later. 3. We want students to be able to use AI, it is here to stay and it is extremely powerful, but we also don't want students to be naked in the world without it. Using the calculator as an example of a historically disruptive technology, school teaches you how to do all the basic math & arithmetic so that you can in principle do it by hand, even if calculators are pervasive and greatly speed up work in practical settings. In addition, you understand what it's doing for you, so should it give you a wrong answer (e.g. you mistyped "prompt"), you should be able to notice it, gut check it, verify it in some other way, etc. The verification ability is especially important in the case of AI, which is presently a lot more fallible in a great variety of ways compared to calculators. 4. A lot of the evaluation settings remain at teacher's discretion and involve a creative design space of no tools, cheatsheets, open book, provided AI responses, direct internet/AI access, etc. TLDR the goal is that the students are proficient in the use of AI, but can also exist without it, and imo the only way to get there is to flip classes around and move the majority of testing to in class settings.

@joelatwar new idea (fund me @garrytan): ping people ALREADY at costco and ask if they want to drive a couple mins out of their way to drop off a chicken

The entire US economy right now is 7 companies sending a trillion fake dollars back and forth to each other

Today, Bill Gates admitted that pushing climate doomerism was a mistake. @LLBiggers: “That shift to common sense is welcome, but it comes after decades of fearmongering that harmed young people, stalled development, and punished dissenting scientists.”