sysls

@henryvzero couldnt have put it better myself

People who are highly numerate tend to be shocked that I frequently punt on negative EV, low probability games (e.g. lottery). There is a logical reason why. In games of negative EV, you "lose money" by playing an infinite amount of times, because your expected edge is negative. In systems that are ergodic - that is, you CAN reach the "infinite amount of times", then you SHOULD avoid games of negative EV. A good example my audience would understand is trading. In trading, you can trade hundreds of thousands of times in a single day. If every trade is negative EV, you are going to go bankrupt very soon. It does not take very long to reach "the long run". On the other hand, human lives are not ergodic. If I bought a lottery a million times, I would indeed lose money on average. If the multiverse existed, then yes, a million sysls would buy the same lottery, and as a whole, we would lose money. But this me, in this world, will never buy enough lotteries to reach the "long run". On the other hand, the amount to punt is insignificant whilst the amount on the infinitesimally small chance of winning is actually meaningful. I COULD bet a thousand times in this lifetime, lose it all, and not have it affect my utility in any material sense. On the other hand, I just need to win once to have a significant shift in my utility. You can extrapolate this to most games of extreme fat tails - like start-ups, for example.

this line of thinking is exactly wrong. it doesn't matter even if your chances of winning is infinitesimally small is my point. what matters is that YOU are the one among the trillions of realities that won. As long as the cost of lottery is ~0, the probability doesn't matter. you don't get to long run where it does.

@systematicls I don't buy it. Even with linear utility you'd have to be extremely (read: not rational) lucky, like top 0.001% quantile or something, before you expect to gain. Unless you factor in the joy of thrill into your utility. Ie our gambling addiction as the rational reason to punt.

@m_schouten Bingo

@systematicls The mistake is mixing ergodic systems (trading, compounding exposure) with non-ergodic utility spaces (life, startups). Negative EV is fatal in the first, but optionality can dominate in the second because outcomes are path-dependent, not frequency-based.

@icxcnika7 no lottery taxes in Singapore

@systematicls Aren't taxes the thing that make lotteries truly negative EV. No tax right off on losses, 40% tax on gains.

@othadoh ever ready

@systematicls i see that sysls is prepared for toto $S 10 bucks tonight

@boat460 No you see, if you are a lottery seller, its an ergodic system for you. The only thing that matters for a lottery buyer is if the amount is meaningful IF you win.

@systematicls Most Iotteries are a tax for people who don’t know statistics

@sama @official_taches Just increase the tiers on the max plan. E.g. 50x tokens for 2.5x cost of the current 20x tokens max plan. Probably 50x and 100x is enough. Then there’s no reason to get more plans

@official_taches what do you need for just one plan?

I’ve officially cancelled both Claude Max plans and have 2 x Codex Max plans. Codex - particular GPT5.5 is the best coding model.

@thsottiaux Codex doesn’t like (or can’t) to ask user questions - although it really should more. This would smooth out assumption surfaces greatly. There’s a balance between halting the entire workflow and waiting for an answer vs not asking at all. Maybe try something async like telegram?

What are we obviously not getting right with Codex?

If you haven't tried /goal in codex, you should! Mostly because it forces you to think in terms of goals rather than tasks. It's a step in the right direction where conversations are centered around outcomes rather than implementations. Natural progression with intelligence.

@Lilly7862 word!

@systematicls Single minded focus builds depth and long term advantage while distraction spreads you thin

Single mindedness is a virtue few understand. If you can harness it and be consumed by your endeavor of choice for years, you will be so far ahead of the game well beyond your age. It is astounding how much time people waste on things that don't matter. Excellence is a choice.

@arbgambit indeed!

@systematicls Absolutely. Everyone's free to choose their actions, and actions produce excellence.

Low-agency: “Can I do this?” High-agency: “I’m doing this unless someone stops me.” The high-agency person has realized that most permissions are granted retroactively. It’s easier to get forgiveness than permission because once something is already done, the default switches from “no” to “well, I guess it’s fine.”

@mert Shameless plug: x.com/systematicls/s…

it seems the main PMF of AI is mass hacking defi protocols this is like, what, the 10th one this month?

@pedma7 @openforage appreciate it

@systematicls @openforage looking good man.

We just pushed a facelift for @openforage More to come real soon! 👇

@openforage openforage.ai

@wallfaceer appreciate the shoutout!

@systematicls good writings you have sys

Don't talk about your ability to interact with the world in "can/can't" language; that vocabulary should not exist for you. The ONLY way to frame things is to ASSUME YOU COULD, and then ask yourself if you WANT TO, and if it's RIGHT to do. Never constrain yourself ex-ante.