Leo Toff

@ICannot_Enough Elon didn't destroy no brands, he was solving issues that he cared about such as government waste and fraud. The fraudsters are the ones who tried to destroy the Tesla brand.

2 years ago: "Elon destroyed the Tesla brand globally! It'll never recover!" Today: #1 selling EV in California: Tesla Model Y #1 selling EV in the U.S.: Tesla Model Y #1 selling EV in Europe: Tesla Model Y #1 selling EV in China: Tesla Model Y

@Guramitsingh01 Thank you for reporting on this. I always thought Sikhs would promote peace, but this incident forced me to reconsider.

Statement from the Sikh community regarding the scum bag that stabbed an innocent man in Southampton. #predhunter

@JohnLeFevre They look healthy and likely feel much better. Ozempic is awesome!

Now that they have Ozempic, they're admitting 'Big is Beautiful' was always a lie.

@JFPuget I think the task is well defined in this case, but the robot's hands are just not dexterous enough. I still enjoyed the demo though!

What is the task? It looks like the label has to be put downside. But the very first one stays on the side, and there are other examples errors. Is that error rate comparable to humans or worse? It reminds me of METR where people compare 50% success rate to perfect human performance.

@mark_k When your ad dollars evaporate, one has to promote their funder's agenda.

Every time I see these painfully unfunny propaganda puppets, I puke a little in my mouth. They took the "late night show" as a concept and turned it into political indoctrination TV. Disgusting. 🤮

@JFPuget Is that the only thing that comes to your mind?

@alec_helbling @EMostaque @EMostaque applied this to economics in an accessible way in his book. First, Emad models the economy as a vector field. Then, he interprets both curls and gradients in it using his MIND framework. I'll have to re-read it, the model is compelling.

The Helmholtz decomposition is one of the fundamental results of vector calculus. It says any well-behaved vector field can be split into two parts, one capturing sources and sinks through divergence, and one capturing rotation through curl.

@CattardSlim X is the place to experience ignorant and evil people yourself.

There's only one way to find out 👍

@TomSteyer @SteveHiltonx @XavierBecerra Let's focus on reducing prices instead of taxing people and companies which increase prices. Tom's rhetoric here feels like destructive populism.

There's no room in California for fossil fuel apologists like @SteveHiltonx and @XavierBecerra . While they defend polluters, I'll make polluters pay.

@Atlas_VD This reminded me of the public's reaction to Charlie's assassination. There are people like this, aka "...phobes", on both sides. If you see only homophobes, you implicitly enable members of your group to act the same way.

This is itself an excellent satirical video mocking homophobes, but you have to admire the ability of so many bigots to completely twist the video's original intent. 1.Misrepresenting the video to instead stigmatize the lesbian community. 2.Denying the existence of facts. Yet any member of the LGBT community knows how accurately this video satirizes homophobic behavior. 3.Blaming everything on immigration. But the reality is that bigots like this exist in every ethnic group. 4.Taking a hypothetical satire at face value and concluding that humanity will go extinct, as if it were a policy proposal. The video was satire. They just proved its point by reacting exactly like the homophobes it was mocking.

What if heterosexuality was the minority? 👫🔄

@LizzieMarbach Well put! It's ok to game a little, but just be aware of how you are perceived by quality women.

This is the male equivalent to dressing up as handmaids. I’m sorry but it is. Melodramatic, over emotional, irrational nonsense. Men (and women) today have more downtime than any other time in human history. No one is telling men they can’t relax or have rest & downtime. But overall, men (and women) should live a lifestyle of productivity. This is just true. And it is what women biologically seek out in a spouse. We’re hard wired for it, just like men are hard wired to seek out fertility. So, no. Women are not trying to make men their slaves. lol we just want men to be the builders that our ancestors once were. Just like how many men want the women to be the wholesome homemakers our ancestors once were, not baby-murdering bossbabes. Both are good & natural desires.

@BrianRoemmele Is this open source? What is their repo?

The zip-tie skill has been achieved. Skill upon skill is being layered until you have all skills mastered in a free and open source local robotics world AI model.

@realCarola2Hope It looks incredibly complex. However, if it was designed by a conscious being, who designed that conscious being? There must be the base reality that designs itself and the conscious beings within it. Perhaps, that's our world that can simply design itself.

The more science advances, the more difficult it becomes to be an atheist. Look at this: the most detailed image ever of a single human cell. Your body contains 37 trillion of them. This is divine engineering. God’s masterpiece.

@AiwithYasir @bensen Right, and the laid off workers stay unemployed until the end of times. How about we look into their productivity improvement numbers?

🚨BREAKING: Two researchers from UPenn and Boston University just published a paper that should be uncomfortable reading for every CEO automating their workforce right now. The argument is straightforward. Every company replacing workers with AI is also eliminating its own future customers. Laid off workers stop spending. Enough of them stop spending and nobody can afford to buy anything. The companies that fired everyone end up selling into an economy with no purchasing power left. Every executive can see this. The math is not complicated. But here is why nobody stops. If you do not automate, your competitor does. They cut costs, lower prices, take your market share, and you collapse anyway. So every company automates knowing it is collectively destructive because the alternative is dying alone while everyone else survives. The researchers proved this is a Prisoner's Dilemma playing out in real time. The numbers are already moving. Block cut nearly half its 10,000 employees this year. Jack Dorsey said AI made those roles unnecessary and that within the next year the majority of companies will reach the same conclusion. Salesforce replaced 4,000 customer support agents with AI. Goldman Sachs deployed a coding tool that lets one engineer do the work of five. Over 100,000 tech workers were laid off in 2025 and AI was cited as the primary driver in more than half those cases. 80% of US workers hold jobs with tasks susceptible to AI automation. The researchers tested every proposed solution. Universal basic income does not change a single company's incentive to automate. Capital income taxes adjust profit levels but not the per-task decision to replace a human. Collective bargaining cannot hold because automating is always the dominant strategy. They also identified what they call a Red Queen effect. Better AI does not solve the problem, it accelerates it. Every company chases faster automation to gain market share over rivals but at the end everyone has automated equally, the gains cancel out, and the only thing left is more destroyed demand. The one thing the math says could work is a Pigouvian automation tax. A per-task charge that forces companies to account for the demand they destroy each time they replace a worker. The conclusion is that this is not a transfer of wealth from workers to owners. Both sides lose. Workers lose income. Companies lose customers. It is a deadweight loss with no market mechanism to stop it on its own. (Link in the comment)

@unclebobmartin Human brain is non-deterministic, but we all write deterministic code. AI does the exact same thing.

I've seen a lot of posts complaining that AI is non-deterministic. This is true, but my experience is that AIs can be constrained to be very nearly deterministic. Some might say "very nearly" is not good enough. My response is that I believe I can crank up the constraints to reduce the uncertainty to below any given threshold. I'd also like to point out that the functioning of your body is based on the statistical non-deterministic behavior of random molecular motion. The second law of thermodynamics is statistical in nature and only approximately deterministic above a certain threshold. Indeed, our muscles and nerves would not function correctly if the second law was entirely deterministic. So, your heart beats, and your neurons fire, because of non-determinism. Non-determinism, properly constrained, is something we can all live with.

@sooyoon_eth @pvergadia Agreed, firms should instead get a tax break for each human they employ. Eventually though, human labor could actually become a liability for firms rather than a resource. At that point, UBI/UHI would be inevitable.

@pvergadia this assumes the economy is a closed system and we won't invent entirely new sectors. still, a 'robot tax' sounds like an absolute nightmare to audit. how do you even quantify what counts as automation vs just software?

🤯BREAKING: Researchers just mathematically proved that AI layoffs will collapse the economy: and every CEO already knows it. The AI Layoff Trap. A game theory paper from UPenn + Boston University is glaringly important! 100K+ tech layoffs in 2025. 80% of US workers exposed. And no market force can stop it. → Every company fires workers to cut costs → Every fired worker stops buying products → Revenue collapses across every sector → The companies that fired everyone go bankrupt It's a Prisoner's Dilemma with math behind it. Automate and you survive short-term. Don't automate and your competitor kills you. But everyone automating destroys the demand that makes all companies viable. UBI (universal basic income) won't fix it. Profit taxes won't fix it. The researchers found only one solution: a Pigouvian automation tax "robot tax" The AI trap on the economy is here!

@Phil_Holland @tomshardware We need to cope with ASI's gradual arrival somehow

@tomshardware Skepticism remains the last and best hope of mankind.

Anthropic's Claude Mythos isn't a sentient super-hacker, it's a sales pitch — claims of 'thousands' of severe zero-days rely on just 198 manual reviews tomshardware.com/tech-industry/…

@ksorbs It's "not productive" for the purposes of promoting their worldview and hiding the consequences of it.

It's only "not productive" because it's Democrat policies that took her life.

@Heyhassan @minchoi You should be the one! I want to make a few shorts in the steampunk universe of Frostpunk, but I'm too f*** lazy...

@HackingDave @stevesi Wait, so how are you addressing the cyber risks posed by the next generation of AI models like Mythos? I think it's safe to assume that everyone would have access to them in a few months including your adversaries.

Alright, I've stayed away from the Mythos stuff for a little bit. Going to comment on that, but AI as a whole. First, this AI industry is absolutely insane. I feel like I'm back in the 90s/2000s with innovation, but it's not tempered or methodical - it's pure chaos. Everyday there is some AI-dude-bro (or gal) clawing for followers claiming end of cybersecurity, end of software engineering, or this breakthrough changes everything. We're seeing the "streamer" effect of video games now exploding in every industry that hasn't been in whatever industry, but is now a AI-expert thus an expert in anything AI touches because they can prompt. Largely it's not, but what it is doing is requiring us to understand what AI will do to virtually every industry in the future. I'm sitting here right now at a conference I'm presenting at, and I spoke with an individual which was like man... I'm just trying to get through this SAP implementation at my company, I don't even know where to start with AI at the moment. We are still in the extreme early stages of what AI can do, and I think that's really the exciting part - we are at the infancy stages of this. Most enterprise can't handle AI, as most companies couldn't handle agile workflow when it came out either, it took time, but eventually adopted. I won't dive deep into the scalability of releasing AI to the masses based on compute, power, or subsidies because these are real hurdles we need to solve. As you can see with Claude's spike in popularity is causing them to have to dumb the model down upwards of 65% just to stay afloat (Claude is absolutely awful right now for coding - beware). Mythos is cool, really cool - but it's not earth shattering as claimed. The potential here we are seeing a glimpse of what can actually happen though. The ability to do extremely complex tasks, with insane context windows, and high-end reasoning. But, what we saw from other current frontier models including open LLMs, they were able to find the same issues, but had to be specifically targeted towards those code sections because of context limitations and complex task reasoning which was drastically improved in Mythos. What does this mean? Basically. Nothing. It's a lot of marketing hype - but it does prove out that as these models become smarter, it will inevitably produce much better code, be able to work in mind blowing fashions that we haven't seen before - but it will all come down to cost. Right now Mythos is extremely expensive because of the compute needed, and we may solve that over time, but it's not there yet. The subsidies right now means AI is not ready. Scale is our biggest bottleneck right now and until that's solved, the industry will not move as fast as it could. What's particularly impressive is how the open models are starting to perform on par (or better) with the frontier models and become way more efficient without restrictions (turboquant) as an example. Our ability to use near parity models on our own hardware will only continue to get better which is a huge threat for these companies. I at first looked at Cursor's implementation of Kimi as they were falling behind because it wasn't "their own model". That wasn't accurate, its that the open models are performing substantially better than from 6 months ago, and will soon be leading the charge or close to it. What does this mean for cybersecurity? The industry is changing rapidly, and I absolutely freaking love it. We needed a swift kick in the ass in this industry that was largely stagnant for the past 10-15 years. What used to be a handful of incredibly talented security researchers that knew systems internals, savants at reverse engineering and reading through millions of lines of ASM is now being afforded to the masses, but still has a long way to go. The reason AI is so good at doing this stuff is because they paved the way, and will continue to do so in different ways. Not eliminated or removed, enhanced and better than ever. AI is single handedly the largest theft of plagiarism that has ever happened in human history. I just got a 10K check from Claude for ripping off my Metasploit book to train its model to be smarter actually :P I am all for things that make the world a safer place. Our goal in cybersecurity is to fix the world, make it less harmful when using technology - we should be adopting this. Note that it's going to come with a ton of fluff, hype, doomsday predictions, people that are now AI exports or coding experts but have never written a line of code themselves. That's all to be expected if you have ever been to an RSA conference. AI will product meaningful change in an industry that needed it. Cybersecurity is much more than bugs or defects, it's protecting against risk. AI is a new emerging risk, it's going to keep us insanely busy right now, and for the foreseeable future.