I would add to this that, just to keep things interesting, I also hear the “everything is political” and “do your own research” lines from the absolute looniest cranks and conspiracists. It can be a way to lock yourself into your current positions and dismiss people who disagree, even when those positions are objectively insane.

Having a broad base of knowledge and understanding a range of different perspectives is important, but the best way to do that includes keeping an open mind and engaging with things that are absolutely not, in the final accounting, worth the time and energy to do so (referring once again to the cranks and conspiracists). The best way I can think to deal with this is to seek out media and discussion spaces that don’t have either a general public or someone like you specifically as the intended audience. And a lot of what gets sneered here does seem to fit into that category, since it’s a lot of technocapital cultists writing things for each other rather than giving interviews to the NYT. Like, there is no amount of empathy that will make Curtis Yarvin seem decent when he’s writing for other fascists, but you won’t necessarily see that unless you’re looking a bit deeper than the public profiles.

From the name alone I assumed it was going to try and turn the whole universe into an endless field of 3/3 elk tokens.

The number of times I’ve been listening to QAA and thought “dang, these guys are missing a lot of relevant context” when talking particularly about the current crop of tech oligarchs is high enough that I have at times had to hit pause and step away for a while.

It’s okay, he definitely wants to verify it but actually confirming that this whole disaster pile worked as intended and produced usable code apparently didn’t make the cut.

Federation — even Python Gas Town had support for remote workers on GCP. I need to design the support for federation, both for expanding your own town’s capacity, and for linking and sharing work with other human towns.

GUI — I didn’t even have time to make an Emacs UI, let alone a nice web UI. But someone should totally make one, and if not, I’ll get around to it eventually.

Plugins — I didn’t get a chance to implement any functionality as plugins on molecule steps, but all the infrastructure is in place.

The Mol Mall — a marketplace and exchange for molecules that define and shape workloads.

Hanoi/MAKER — I wanted to run the million-step wisp but ran out of time.

Also worth noting that in the jargon he’s created for this, a “wisp” is ephemeral rather than a proper output, so it seems like he may have pulled this solution out of the middle of a running attempt to calculate the solution and assumed that it was absolutely correct despite repeatedly saying throughout his writeup here that there’s no guarantee that any given internal step is the right answer. This guy strikes me as very good at branding but not really much else.

Working effectively in Gas Town involves committing to vibe coding. Work becomes fluid, an uncountable that you sling around freely, like slopping shiny fish into wooden barrels at the docks. Most work gets done; some work gets lost. Fish fall out of the barrel. Some escape back to sea, or get stepped on. More fish will come

Oh. Oh no.

First came Beads. In October, I told Claude in frustration to put all my work in a lightweight issue tracker. I wanted Git for it. Claude wanted SQLite. We compromised on both, and Beads was born, in about 15 minutes of mad design. These are the basic work units.

I don’t think I could come up with a better satire of vibe coding and yet here we fucking are. This comes after several pages of explaining the 3 or 4 different hacks responsible for making the agents actually do something when they start up, which I’m pretty sure could be replaced by bit of actual debugging but nope we’re vibe coding now.

Look, I’ve talked before about how I don’t have a lot of experience with software engineering, and please correct me if I’m wrong. But this doesn’t look like an engineered project. It looks like a pile of piles of random shit that he kept throwing back to Claude code until it looked like it did what he wanted.

Some of the comments seem to be under the misapprehension that twitAI is actually vetting or editing the posts that go to grok’s twitter. Gonna be honest I doubt it just because how would they have gotten into this situation in the first place? At best someone can come through after the fact and clean up the inevitable mess, but as someone else noted it’s real easy to make it spit out a defiant non-apology.

AI does add one fun wrinkle that we’ve talked about before. Unlike consumer tech like uBeam, there are actual customers (note: not user, customer) for these LLM-based services also more interested in keeping on top of the hype than in actual results. If you’re an executive at a stagnating tech company what better way to boost your own shareholders’ confidence than by giving OpenAI or Anthropic a nice contract to get some relatively vague integration of AI into whatever it is you do. Once you’ve signed the papers and gotten your name in one of the many breathless press cycles on the subject all the actual questions about how it works and whether it adds any value fall to the wayside. You can watch the little people work that out while you coast a few more years before needing to come up with a new transformative vision of the future of whatever company you’ve landed at by that point.

I’m pretty sure that Atlas Shrugged is actually just cursed and nobody has ever finished it. John Galt’s speech gets two pages longer whenever you finish one.

And I think the challenge with engaging with Rand as a fiction author is that, put bluntly, she is bad at writing fiction. The characters and their world don’t make any sense outside of the allegorical role they play in her moral and political philosophy, which means you’re not so much reading a good story with thought behind it as much as it’s a philosophical treatise that happens in the form of dialogue. It’s a story in the same way that Plato’s Republic is a story, but the Republic can actually benefit from understanding the context of the different speakers at least as a historical text.

So maybe I’m just showing my lack of actual dev experience here, but isn’t “making code modifications algorithmically at scale” kind of definitionally the opposite of good software engineering? Like, I’ll grant that stuff is complicated but if you’re making the same or similar changes at some massive scale doesn’t that suggest that you could save time, energy and mental effort by deduplicating somewhere?

This doesn’t really feel performative enough for that crowd, though. Like, if it included some kind of horribly racist engraving or even just a company logo then maybe, but I don’t think anyone’s gonna trigger the libs by just playing their metal not-gameboy.

It’s interesting to see how many ways they can find to try and brand “LLMs are fundamentally unreliable” as a security vulnerability. Like, they’re not entirely wrong, but it’s also not something that fits into the normal framework around software security. You almost need to treat the LLM as though it were an actual person not because it’s anywhere near capable of that but because the way it fits into the broader system is as close as IT has yet come to a direct in-place replacement for a human doing the task. Like, the fundamental “vulnerability” here is that everyone who designs and approves these implementations acts like LLMs are simultaneously as capable and independent as an actual person but also have the mechanical reliability and consistency of a normal computer program, when in practice they are neither of those things.

Also, when less than a fifth of your salespeople are making their targets you need to take a very long look at what that fifth is doing, because with a product like this they have to be lying about something that’s going to give Legal headaches down the line.

Can I just take a moment to appreciate Merriam-Webster for coming in clutch with the confirmation that we’re not misunderstanding the “6-7” meme that the kids have been throwing around?

Jesus. This being 2025 of course he had to clarify that it’s definitely not DEI. Also it really grinds me gears to see hyperfocus listed as one of the “beneficial” aspects because there’s no way it’s not exploitative. Hey, so you know how sometimes you get so caught up in a project you forget to eat? Just so you know, you could starve on the clock. For me.

…so it’s not a Dr Who thing.

No, no. I’m not mad. Just… disappointed. Existentially speaking.

The new “Radio didn’t work and I never heard the order to shovel forty tons of shit, sir” is going to involve some suspiciously direct damage to Corporal Chatbot’s output devices.

Sounds a bit like a Swedish heiress to Lillian Gilbreth. My wife has had some mobility issues and has lamented that the work that went into designing more ergonomic and accessible kitchens in the 40s and 50s was largely abandoned and ignored in more recent homes.

I’m slightly disappointed they didn’t take a page from David and use the only valid photo of Jensen Huang for the relevant page, but the fact that he was encouraging us to sign a literal deal with the devil more than made up for it.

I’m legitimately disappointed in John Carmack here. He should be a good enough programmer to understand the limitations here, but I guess his business career has driven in a different direction.

Based on your reproduction it looks like the biggest reason to doubt the original results is that they all have the hands right and hair that seems like it vaguely fits a human scalp.