Vadim Bakalove

SDET, building @baydocket ⚙️ AI-first auto shop management software.

[Vadim Bakalove @FollowVadim]

@AureaLuma no

[Vadim Bakalove @FollowVadim]

@KKujaw92091 @OverlordEins

[Vadim Bakalove @FollowVadim]

@MoneyTaura @HTMariusS I’ve seen many profitable Albert’s mentees, I didn’t see a single one of yours yet. You don’t wanna share your receipts - fine, but where are receipts of the ones who paid you?

[Vadim Bakalove @FollowVadim]

@gaganghotra_ That's a rookie one. The smarter ones use multiple accounts and imitate a conversation, with a link somewhere in the middle of it. Yet most of them sound like Fable, so usually are pretty obvious.

[Vadim Bakalove @FollowVadim]

“You'd have to be incredibly naive to think these CEOs actually care only about safety”

It is about safety only then, when investors are about to get rekt.

[Daniel Romero @HyperTechInvest]

There's something fishy about all of this

You'd have to be incredibly naive to think these CEOs actually care only about safety

I think Anthropic and OpenAI want to achieve a legal cartel

These two companies are already at the frontier. If the AI race continues under unrestricted competition, there is always the threat of them being surpassed

Altman was already telling the U.S. Senate in 2023 that developing sufficiently advanced models should require licensing

I believe the ultimate goal is to institutionalize what should otherwise be a free market. These companies are already massive. They are both now approaching trillion-dollar valuations

They are in a great position to simply keep monetizing, growing, and establishing themselves as pillars of the future of humanity

If they become deeply embedded in US model licensing and registration frameworks as indispensable advisers to governments, they could help determine evaluation standards, acceptable safeguards, export controls, and what constitutes a dangerous model

There is also a much deeper incentive. These companies have no idea what happens once AGI, or especially ASI, is achieved. They cannot know whether self-improving AI will completely reshape the competitive hierarchy or suddenly make today's technological advantages irrelevant

Becoming part of the authority that controls the frontier would therefore be a way of protecting their own survivorship. Even if the technology changes dramatically, even if another model or company becomes technically superior, they would remain embedded in the institutions deciding who is allowed to develop, deploy, and scale frontier AI

In summary, these companies could go from simply offering models in a competitive market to becoming institutionalized controllers of AI progress

What could the future look like?

A few years from now, there could be perhaps five authorized frontier labs. These labs could control most of the frontier AI market with the help of the state. They would not only have influence over the rules, but could also become deeply entrenched within most major governments

Of course, I can't know for sure what these companies are planning, but sadly, I choose to be cynical

[Vadim Bakalove @FollowVadim]

@Devon_Eriksen_ “It's not the AI's fault we let the retards vote.

That's how we got a whole bunch of midwit senators who want to "regulate" innovation, instead of medicare fraud, invading third world scum, and invading third world scum who commit medicare fraud.”

[Vadim Bakalove @FollowVadim]

@Flextor97 It is, especially the whistleblower part: https://t.co/66cKLPcVG9

[Parker Thayer @ParkerThayer]

This post looks like the start of a VERY sophisticated and well-funded PR operation to get support for Democrats to regulate AI into oblivion. Let me show you how it works:
1.) This guy, with minimal followers and no previous account activity, goes to the Wall Street Journal which publishes an exclusive with quotes from him on his resignation 18 minutes BEFORE this post goes up. Planning was clearly done in advance.

2.) Within hours, it has tens of thousands of reposts and the account has 100k+ followers. The post is punchy, quotable, it almost seems professionally written. The first three accounts to quote tweet it all do so within 15 minutes of the initial posting. Remember, this account had basically zero engagement beforehand, so an organic reach explanation seems unlikely.

According to Grok those accounts are @_NathanCalvin (General Counsel at Encode AI), @peterwildeford (Head of Policy at the AI Policy Network), and @DKokotajlo (Head of the AI Futures Project), all of which are up-and-coming AI-Doomer policy advocacy nonprofits.

The AI Futures Project website says it is funded “primarily” by the Survival and Flourishing Fund, which says on its own website that it has advised Jaan Tallinn, Skype creator and one of the leading investors in Anthropic, to grant over $2.5 million to the AI Futures Project since 2024.

Encode AI says on its website that it is ALSO funded by the Survival and Flourishing Fund, which in turn says that it told Anthropic investor Jaan Tallinn to grant $516,000 to Encode AI in 2025.

And wouldn’t you know it, the Survival and Flourishing Fund ALSO says it told Jaan Tallinn to grant $2 million to the AI Policy Institute, the 501(c)(3) affiliate of the AI Policy Network, as well.

What are the odds that the first three quote tweets of Coxon’s post would all be major AI-restriction policy advocates funded generously by the same donor, who also happens to be one of the leading investors in, and a board member of, Anthropic, the company Coxon was resigning from? And all within 15 minutes of posting (two within ten)?

3.) Jacob Coxon doesn’t have much of a resume, but we do know that, in 2022, he got a $20,159 scholarship for the “long term future scholarship program” from the Good Ventures Foundation, one of the philanthropic vehicles of Dustin Moskovitz, a notorious AI-doomer who has spent tens if not hundreds of millions on policy advocacy to strictly regulate AI, while also being an Anthropic Investor himself.

It also just so happens that the 14th person to quote Coxon’s post was @MaxNadeau_ (27 minutes after posting) who is the program officer for the Technical AI Safety team at Coefficient Giving, another of Moskovitz’s philanthropic spending vehicles. Max is not a frequent poster, his last posts before quoting Coxon were before Labor Day, but he was remarkably quick off the mark for this one.

4.) Basically every major Democrat politician and candidate has suddenly glommed on to this post, and conveniently, as the people cry out foe answers, Bernie Sanders already has a bill written to “ban super intelligence” and regulate AI into oblivion, and will be releasing later this week. The bill, among many other things, will create “a new cabinet-level federal agency to safeguard the public from the dangers of artificial intelligence” that will be “advised by an Artificial Intelligence Advisory Board comprised of experts on artificial intelligence.” Do you think, perhaps, Anthropic and its many investors who fund AI policy advocacy might have interest in getting to place a pet “expert” on the board of an entity that dictates what AI is and isn’t allowed to do? And isn’t it fortuitous that this whistleblower came forward with his oh-so scary stories so close in proximity to the release of the most radical piece of AI legislation ever introduced?

[Vadim Bakalove @FollowVadim]

If you happen to see multiple posts like that lately - don’t get fooled.

Nothing unplanned happened.
OS LLMs are getting good and efficient enough to replace SOTA proprietary models.

It’s just an op to regulate open source models and AI in general.
And they will regulate AI, it’s obvious if you look around.

Psychological Operations 101:
1) Pre-propaganda and narrative construction: escaped agents, LLM hacks, math discoveries.
2) Seeding: AI whistleblower on X.
3) Amplification: politicians, tv and media suddenly speak as one about AI threat.
4) Validation: top AI leaders - at the same time - agreeing about AI threat (literally yesterday lol).

Next steps will be 5) Exploitation and 6) Reinforcement - final steps that should lead to actual regulations of AI and open source specifically.

By that time Regular Six Pack Joe’s across US will be 100% confident that AI is a threat and should be stopped by any means.
Bunch of tech nerds from X with opposite opinion would not get a single minute of exposure, and eventually will be totally ignored, if not marginalized.

I don’t know if that’s good or bad, just don’t get used to your agent too much.

[Keith Edwards @keithedwards]

Something clearly happened with a frontier AI model that hasn't been made public and it spooked them so much that it made Elon Musk, Dario Amodei, and Sam Altman all simultaneously agree to slow down.

[Vadim Bakalove @FollowVadim]

@PiyushDinde @floriandarroman I'll just track their mmr for now (as long as its open). If there will be any meaningful progress - I'll join later ones I'm confident enough.

[Vadim Bakalove @FollowVadim]

@billythedev 🤝

[Vadim Bakalove @FollowVadim]

Bbaka_Crypto is changing.

You'll see more content related to SaaS, AI and software development here from now on, in addition to any trading related topics and tools I've covered before.

If you have no interest in these topics and more into trading - please follow my wife @Pom1granate . She's 618 gang mentee, much more advanced in trading than I am, close to be profitable, and needs your support/follows.

I want to focus more on online business, and share my journey and challenges with you.

All my MT community projects, tools and apps are not going anywhere, they are live and running:
https://t.co/m6EPexw2pB
https://t.co/qNhMlT3HCs
https://t.co/cRcff2j6kx
https://t.co/WqeAq7lxOM

[Tori P @Pom1granate]

Hello Guys,
…My first post… kinda nervous.

Have you heard of 6 months theory?
The idea is simple: commit to something for six months, stay consistent, and see how much your life can change.

Have you ever started something, worked hard for months, and then became unmotivated because the results were taking longer than you expected?

So that is what happened to me. I started trading almost a year ago, I got a mentor. I have learned a lot, did a lot but still not profitable on a scale I want to be. I also want to make myself, my mentor, and people who support me proud.

So I decided to try 6 month theory, but cut it down to 4 months.

My 4 simple goals by the end of this year:
1. Pass funded account evaluation, so I can get payouts (not by chance, but by skill).
2. Find my trading style and understand what works for me.
3. Build the confidence in my trading.
4. Build a system - so I GET FUCKING CONTROL OF MY LIFE.

I’m going to document the process: the wins, the losses, the lessons, the frustrating days, and hopefully the progress

If you are in the same situation, working toward your goals or just interested in the process - you are welcome here.

Let’s see what these months gonna become - maybe create our own small community of motivated people along the way.

I wish all of us luck and discipline.

[Vadim Bakalove @FollowVadim]

Switching from Fable to Opus 5 feels like firing my onshore team and replacing it with offshore from Mumbai or Bangalore.

[Vadim Bakalove @FollowVadim]

@Albert_618 trading news

[Vadim Bakalove @FollowVadim]

@Austen Would love to join, but CCAT is ruining it for me.

[Rui Wang @RRicefan]

LLMs can't trade & higher reasoning doesn't help.

we ran SOTA models for a 2y period. TL;DR: they suck & reasoning doesn't help.
- no model comes close to simple static baseline
- more reasoning ≠ better trading
- when losing money Sol trades less instead of better

details 👇

[Vadim Bakalove @FollowVadim]

You shouldn't use Fable for research, there is literally no benefit in that. You don't even need Ultracode on Opus - Max and High are your best options.
Ultracode is designed for subagent development, Fable is a model for complex orchestration.

For image ingesting you've mentioned - that should be a subagent running Sonnet - it can analyze images good enough, and costs pennies. All the rest should be Opus, and Fable as the last quality gate.

I also have the cheapest sub from Codex - works great as a review model with different perspective. And I call it right from the Claude, because all of those frontier models are available in CLI. In my case I run /codex-review skill in the Claude > Claude speaks to Codex > Codex does what it should and returns the result to Claude.
You can replicate exactly the same flow with any other model, keep Fable as a big boss and reviewer (expensive model - cheap task), let a cheaper model do the hard work (expensive task - cheap model).
Another reason to use subagents with different models - 100k tokens window is the smart area, anything above 100k start to degrade quickly and eventually gets dumb, but the price for each message rises exponentially. When you're running Fable session and do everything within it - you are polluting the context withing first 2-3 messages and end up in the dumb zone. Subagents help you avoid that, because each of them is a separate session with own token context window. Your main session stays "smart" longer and much cheaper. My rule is to keep session below 300k max, then /handoff and restart.

https://t.co/oKqGMRMJ8k
https://t.co/vE0KLD7EaM

[ClaudeDevs @ClaudeDevs]

https://t.co/dxoI9Nna86

[Vadim Bakalove @FollowVadim]

@Albert_618 > We are a Gang robbing the Banks.

Oof 🔥