Chelly Zhe

BREAKING: Introducing All Access from @every, our new membership tier for the best builders in AI All Access subs get the Builder Pack which includes $7,000 in credits and free usage to the models + tool stack we use @every. All Access subscribers get: - $1,000 in Codex / @ChatGPTapp for Work credits - 12 months free of @Cursor_AI Pro+ - $4,000 in @PostHog credits including self-driving to automatically fix bugs and identify issues in your production app - 1 year free of @Framer - 6 months free of @NotionHQ And much more! (Did I mention $1,000 in Codex credits? It's time to build!) Get all access: every.to/builder-pack Why All Access and the Builder Pack This is the best time in history to build something. For a long time, it’s been possible to one-shot impressive demos, but they’d fall flat the minute they hit production. But the release of GPT-5.6-Sol and Fable 5 heralds a new era: Everyone can build, launch, and maintain the software that they’ve always dreamed of. Everyone is a builder now. There’s just one catch: Building with AI is very expensive. (Ask me how I know.) (Alright, I’ll tell you. I accidentally used 2 billion tokens overnight this week on a big GPT-5.6-Sol run. Worth it.) This is unique in the history of technology. For most of the personal computing era, a billionaire and a solo builder could buy essentially the same top-of-the-line Mac. AI changes that: The more tokens you can afford, the more you can make. And we want to make that accessible to more people. That’s why the main feature of our new All Access plan is the Builder Pack: more than $7,000 in credits and discounts on the full stack we use to run Every, from idea to production—Codex, Claude, PostHog, Render, Gemini, FLORA, and more. Early-bird membership is only $500/year for the next 24 hours—and the Codex credits alone are worth $1,000. (I could’ve used it for my overnight run this week.) Now we’re handing it to you. Get all access: every.to/builder-pack Meet the Builder Pack It's got more than $7,000 in offers from 10 of the AI products we use to write, design, build, and run @Every: BUILD - $1,000 in Codex credits plus one month of ChatGPT for business - Twelve months free of Cursor Pro+ - One month free of @Claudeai Max - Three months free of @Google AI Pro DESIGN - One year free of @Framer Pro - One month free of @floraai Max HOST - $300 in @render credits IMPROVE - $4,000 in PostHog credits - Six months free of @Notion Business - Six months free of @AgentMail We rely on these every day, and we tried to put together a package that helps you comprehensively for each part of the process of building and running software in AI. What comes with All Access - Everything in an existing paid Every membership: our daily writing, guides, camps, and software like @usemonologue, @CoraComputer, @SparkleApp, and @TrySpiral - The Builder Pack, with more than $7,000 in partner offers - Unlimited email accounts use of Cora and unlimited Spiral usage - Members-only programming with me and the Every team and me Get All Access: every.to/builder-pack

Switching from Fable 5 to GPT-5.6 Sol was the best decision! Unbelievably fast and ridiculously affordable. An absolute game-changer. Threw a bug at it yesterday that I'd been avoiding all week. It traced the root cause and fixed a second bug I hadn't even asked about. Barely touched my weekly quota. Not gonna lie, didn't expect that. @OpenAI @thsottiaux

@typelessdotcom Your product's recent performance has been absolutely terrible!

Typeless 2.1.0 for Android is live! ✨ Keep speaking while you look around. Typeless remains active so you can gather your thoughts while you: 📮 Scroll through emails 📒 Review documents 🗨️ Check earlier messages 📲 Reference other apps for context Update to effortless. 🔗: android.typeless.com #Typeless

Is there a way to filter threads by Visibility (Private/Unlisted)? @AmpCode

@CommandCodeAI glm 5.2

GPT-5.6 vs GLM 5.2?

@sqs Where can I watch the video and audio?

This freedom of intelligence event was very special. It truly felt like citizens coming together to push for what we believe in, against a big opponent. The default in anything like this is failure, but I know we will succeed. Video and audio soon, illegal pamphlets in pic below

Typeless has been acting so stupid lately; I have no idea what your team is even doing. @typelessdotcom

@beyang Can't wait to try the fully tuned and optimized version of Grok 4.5 in Amp!

Grok 4.5 in Amp. It's not yet tuned and optimized, but we invite you to experiment with us. If you haven't yet installed Amp: curl -fsSL ampcode.com/install.sh | bash Then try it out: amp update amp plugins add @amp/grok-45-mode --auto-update amp --mode grok45

@pcstyle53 @AmpCode How do you get so many free Ampcode credits?

help me??? or @AmpCode team's wallets??

@thorstenball when gpt 5.6

Customer asked us whether Amp can't read files at root of current working directory if Amp is opened in subdir of a repo. I threw together a prompt (image 1) and kicked off an agent in orb. Did something else while it ran. Once done, I asked it a follow-up question, then asked it to test against the dev server. Did something else while it ran. Came back and, wow, it did exactly what I would've done in local dev environment. See image 2. And that was GPT-5.5.

By the way, I've always been a big fan of Factory.

Factory Router is unbelievable. It hits Opus-level intelligence while cutting costs significantly. It’s simply the best router out there. Factory Droid > Codex/Claude code

Freedom of Intelligence Anthropic has created a dangerous, destabilizing mess by lobbying for and getting US government restrictions on models like Mythos, Fable, and GPT-5.6. Now the US government is deciding who has access to which models, and the best models are accessible only to a very few and a very rich set of companies. Nobody wants that. Even Anthropic doesn’t like what happened. Now the rest of us need to clean up the mess. How? We need to fight for our freedom of intelligence, the freedom from government restrictions on who can use which AI models. If we allow government to decide what level of intelligence someone can access, no matter how well intended, we’ll be less safe and forever divided. What Freedom of Intelligence means Freedom of intelligence means the government may not restrict which AI models you can use. This means that the government must not require licensing of model labs, or approval of models prior to release. Otherwise government inevitably will use that power to restrict releases to certain favored individuals and companies (as we’ve just seen) and to introduce biases. Freedom of intelligence also means that the government may not prohibit you from downloading and running open models. If someone commits a crime with the use of AI, that already is illegal and should remain illegal. The government must not force a model lab to release a model against its wishes. If a model lab chooses to release their own model to only a few privileged people and companies (as Anthropic did with Mythos), or to keep it internal, that is their right. Other model labs can compete by serving the rest of the market. It shouldn’t be illegal to offer frontier intelligence to small businesses, startups, and individuals. Intelligence is fundamental When people argue against freedom of intelligence, they say: AI is powerful and sometimes dangerous, and we’ll be safer if the right people control AI the right way. They’re right about the first part and naive about the second part. For something as fundamental as intelligence, there is no such thing as the “right people” to control intelligence, nor the “right way” to control intelligence. People will disagree. People already disagree very, very strongly. In a democratic society, the only stable equilibrium for a bitterly divided realm is to grant individual freedom. Intelligence is not the same as speech or religion, but it is every bit as powerful and dear and deserving of freedom. There is no democratic way to regulate access to intelligence Nobody likes the current US government policy on model restrictions. Nobody really knows what it is, even, or knows what it will be next week. Today, Monday, June 29, 2026, the US government is choosing which people and companies can and can’t access Anthropic’s and OpenAI’s frontier intelligence. Who is deciding? Based on what criteria? Nobody knows. Maybe you think that the US government’s behavior in the last few weeks is a blip, and that the “right people” will control AI the “right way” soon. Maybe you hope, like Dario Amodei, that “qualified third-party”[1] regulators shielded from “political favoritism or arbitrary decisions” will swoop in and take control of AI policy. That’s just not how it works in our political system, certainly not for a high-salience, zero-sum issue like access to intelligence. We would never, ever, ever pass a regulatory apparatus where the most important national policy decisions are decided by unelected experts, free from accountability to the voters. Nor should it pass. (Ironically, the only way it might pass is if Anthropic is the politically favored one, which would violate Dario’s own stated proposal.) But suppose Dario gets lucky and his “Federal AI Control Administration” (my name for it) is created. And suppose on day 1, the Federal AI Control Administration approves the release of Claude Mythos 5, but only to ~100 of the biggest corporations in the US, in order to limit the risk. (Dario would support this government action, presumably, since it’s what Anthropic itself deemed optimal.) On day 2, the Federal AI Control Administration starts deciding which companies should get access to GPT-5.6. Suddenly, “AI safety” has turned into “picking winners and losers”, because it’s safer to not give frontier intelligence to everyone. Of course, this is the actual reality today. Does this sound like the kind of thing that voters in a democracy, already distrustful of AI and of corporate power, would support? No. Is this stable? No. Play it forward a bit. What do you think the 101st biggest company, denied frontier intelligence by the US government, does first: sue or curry political favor? What do you think the US executive branch does with this newfound power? What do you think Anthropic’s corporate rivals, like Amazon and Google and OpenAI, do with their newfound powers to summon arbitrary regulatory fury on each other? There’s no way to sustain a stable, democratic arrangement where government controls access to intelligence. The more powerful you think AI is, the less stable is any attempt to regulate access to intelligence. (By the way, I truly believe Dario and AI safety adherents are true believers with good intent. I am not arguing that they are evil or greedy.) Freedom is counterintuitively stable My biggest fear is that we’ll oscillate around bad AI regulation, with daily distractions and growing corruption, not realizing that the only stable equilibrium is freedom of intelligence. While intelligence is not exactly like speech, the analogy to freedom of speech is useful. Both speech and intelligence are powerful and sometimes dangerous. For thousands of years, kings and despots tried just banning bad speech, imposing probably well-intended “speech safety policies” (i.e., jailing and exiling and killing dissenters). This didn’t work. Our smartest minds, trying as hard as they could for thousands of years, having tamed fire, water, animals, wind, and space, never figured out a way to regulate truth. So, after trying literally every other speech policy, we arrived at freedom of speech: just let people speak, even if they’re wrong, even if their ideas are dangerous. This is, overall, the best policy. It’s counter-intuitive that allowing all the bad speech is better than just giving someone the power to decide what is “bad speech”. It’s so counter-intuitive that we call freedom of speech a human right, which is society’s way to say as strongly as possible, “we wrote this rule in blood, don’t mess with it.” I favor freedom of intelligence for the same reasons. Like speech, AI is powerful and sometimes dangerous. But it’s far more dangerous and unstable to give someone the power to decide what intelligence everyone else can use. Speak up now It feels risky to speak up. Friends and business partners share thoughts similar to mine here. I’ve talked to many of them in the past weeks. But these conversations happen in hushed tones, off the record. Why? Because Anthropic is a king and a kingmaker. We all use or have used their models, they’re great, and we’re scared of losing access or being shut out by them after criticizing them. Anthropic can unilaterally dictate the terms of their commercial relationships, including early access to new models, pricing, data retention, and much more. I have many friends at Anthropic. They’re great people and mean well. They don’t know what people truly think of Anthropic and its lobbying because everyone’s too afraid to speak up. But the more we speak up, the more Anthropic might be able to change from within. If you’re still afraid to speak up, feel free to reach out to me privately to chat (quinn@slack.org). If Anthropic retaliates against me or you for speaking up on this grave matter of national policy that they’re also lobbying on, that would do more than anything to prove our point. How to fight for freedom of intelligence First we need to change minds, then we need to change laws. To change minds, go and talk to people in the real world about freedom of intelligence. Use whatever you find memorable from this post, and figure out your own way to convince people. Share what works. If you’re in San Francisco, join us on Tue Jun 30, 2026, at 6:30pm (link [2] in reply) to start discussing and pushing for freedom of intelligence. Otherwise, organize in your own city, to spread the word and normalize this freedom before we lose it. Why I’m hopeful Nobody, nobody wants access to intelligence to be limited to a very few, and a few rich companies. Freedom of intelligence has broad appeal. Let’s build that big tent.

@Elsayy_a 通过不断复盘自己每天学到的知识，不断给自己积极的反馈，才能更长久的坚持。多数人在初期会高估自己的即时能力，同时低估长期刻意练习和积极反馈所能带来的进步。

没有任何反馈的情况下，还要继续吗？

@Elsayy_a 我不认同。首先，在长时间看不到反馈的情况下，即使是内心非常强大的人也很难坚持。这也是我认为学校老师的最大作用，他们更多的是提供了一个反馈和交流的窗口。而不是单纯传授知识。其次，反馈不一定是“外求”。每天自己学到的知识，完成的任务等都可以视为正反馈。

@Elsayy_a 多发照片，爱看

“liquidity”，流动性。 —深有体会的一个词。也是让我渐渐平静的一种状态。允许自己流动起来，不是说一定要处于一个恒定的维度亦或是一成不变的环境；允许世界流动起来，是让所有好与坏都流经自己。 —与所有共存，并细细体会自己的感受与变化。