arch-e

Yours boos mean nothing, I’ve seen what makes you cheer. Also building @joblanders_es

[arch-e @JamesArchibal]

@seanlinehan @MattMickiewicz A lot of big words you clearly using your own app. The reality is that even he says run rate in the forbes article which is already different than arr.. he also clarified in 20vc and its clearly not recurring and also not revenue but gmv.. no biggie anyway. But no need to lie

[Matt Mickiewicz @MattMickiewicz]

Unpopular Opinion: The CEO of a $10b+ unicorn should know the difference between marketplace GMV and ARR.

[Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸 @pmarca]

We start from scratch and beat you.

[Palantir @PalantirTech]

Our thoughts on the importance of AI sovereignty.

1. Your AI sovereignty dictates your institution’s future. Sovereignty is the precondition for choice. Relinquishing sovereignty transfers the future choices of your institution to others, who are likely to exploit it for their gain and your loss.

2. Data retention is your treasure. Transfer it at your own peril. Your ability to win is dictated by your ability to recognize and use your unique edges, and you keep winning by compounding the underlying data to generate new insights. Transferring that data hands over access to your pre-existing winning plays and yields the means of production for new ones.

3. Tokenmaxxing hijacks your value orientation and decreases your institutional fortitude and intelligence. The pursuit of high token usage incentivizes disposable scripts over robust software — with the addictive feeling of false progress. There is a reason why those selling tokens refuse to charge based on value.

4. Controlling your weights is controlling your fate. Weights are the distilled form of hard-won, accumulated institutional knowledge. If you let others control your weights, you are allowing them to migrate the alpha of your business to theirs.

5. There is no contradiction between sovereignty and alpha. The architecture that maximally preserves sovereignty is one that enables institutions to own their tribal knowledge, and to compound it as alpha.

6. Politicizing the technical issues involving sovereignty is what your adversary wants. Techno-politicization is the wellspring of false sovereignty. Techno-politicization drives decisions that seem to reduce dependency, but ultimately limit agency — especially on the battlefield in the West.

7. Real expertise is existential. Allowing politics or favoritism to determine your technical decisions rewards whoever is best at politics, not whoever is right. Listen to those closest to the problems, not those speaking most compellingly about them.

8. Learn from institutions that are winning or that have consistently delivered. Institutions facing existential threats do not have the luxury of making technical decisions based on political preferences.

9. Only listen to institutions, countries, and people who have a proven record of being right. A track record of correctness is the best and only signal for future correctness. Judging something as right or wrong based on who you like is exceedingly misguided.

[Antonio García Martínez (agm.eth) @antoniogm]

The new business model that pays for the Internet in a world of AI agents instead of humans browsing.

Will take a while as most humans are still using AI as a siloed browser experience, but as soon as they start using AI like everyone in tech, the model will flip and quickly.

[Ara Kharazian @arakharazian]

We can finally say AI isn't killing jobs.

A new paper from me, @tryramp, and @RevelioLabs uses firm-level spend and workforce data across 21K U.S. businesses to measure AI's impact on jobs.

Firms that adopt AI heavily grow headcount 10% over two years following adoption. Low adopters see no statistically significant change.

[Brian Armstrong @brian_armstrong]

So awesome to see after all the hard work by the Conception team. Congrats!

[David Sacks @DavidSacks]

Narrative violation: A new study of 21,559 firms in the U.S. finds that “companies that adopt AI tend to grow faster following adoption”.

“Firms making the largest AI investments grow employment by roughly 10% following adoption, while low-intensity adopters see no statistically significant change.”

“Entry-level headcount rises 12% for high-intensity adopters.”

“Gains emerge gradually and are broad across roles, including engineering, sales, administration, and customer service.”

“The results counter predictions that AI adoption will lead to broad job loss.”

The study is based on observed AI spending from Ramp card and bill pay data linked to Revelio Labs workforce records.

[Gergely Orosz @GergelyOrosz]

I talked with a few folks inside Anthropic and I am starting to understand what @karpathy is saying (and what lots of people are misunderstanding)

It's not about Slack, but about a cloud AI, hooked up to ALL internal company systems, that "just works." THIS is the breakthrough

[arch-e @JamesArchibal]

@BrendanFoody So if agents become smarter and smarter, doesnt that mean we wont be able to teach them much in just a few years and not the opposite? Your logic doesnt make sense if the journey to agu is real

[Seth Cohen @OverReactor1776]

Now that I’m out of government, I can finally respond for myself: Get bent, soyboy. We didn’t do this for “Silicon Valley . . . companies.” We did this for you, for your family, your community, your state, your nation, and your species.

Nuclear energy provides the safest, highest density, reliable power available on our planet. My career colleagues at DOE and NRC inspired me to think about nuclear as a way to forge American steel and electrolyze aluminum without releasing particulate matter, to desalinate water in the Middle East and save humanity from resource wars. By rejecting the false narratives and Cold War hysteria, we can secure the next American century while raising whole countries out of poverty.

Do you really think I left an incredible career at Kirkland, paid out of pocket for an apartment in DC and dozens of cross-country trips, and left my family on the west coast because I wanted to enrich people I never met before taking this job? I came to D.C. to do something that mattered, to satisfy a driving curiosity (more on that later), and, most importantly, to serve.

As I learned more about nuclear energy and its history, I developed a conviction that one nuclear’s biggest issues was a culture of cynicism: nothing new or exciting could happen because it would end in disappointment, and that militated against rocking the boat even a tiny bit. The career staff in government and their industry counterparts lived through dark winters before and stopped believing that warm springs could bloom into summers.

I have two core philosophies. First, I believe in ruthless optimism. Rational decision making requires detached risk analysis. But we also cannot win if we believe we can lose. Merging the two requires orienting teams around driving missions. That way, when a real opportunity presents itself, you can take a huge swing.

If I take credit for anything—honestly, almost all of the success belongs to the incredible and dedicated people at @ENERGY and @NRCgov—it’s countering the cultural rot and morass that risked forfeiting American excellence. My colleagues and I gave cover to the scientists and engineers, which freed them up to focus on delivering safe power. And, as success materialized, they started to dream again. That’s why the pilot program succeeded, and why I feel confident about the future of NLICs and NRC reform. Nobody needs me anymore because they can innovate on their own.

My second core philosophy is to assume positive intent. Avi, I know that you heard about my real motivations from multiple people you interviewed when preparing your hit piece on me. Rather than telling that story, one which could help inspire another generation of people to use their talents for the greater good, you ignored them. Instead, you implied that Peter Thiel recruited me for nefarious purposes. (I’ve never met him, but, @peterthiel, if you’re reading this, I’m a huge fan!)

Nuclear regulation starts and ends with safety. I promised everyone I worked with that I would resign before doing or pushing for anything that could compromise public safety. But I also distinguished between real safety and performative bullshit. That’s what the careers came to embrace, too. We love nuclear, why would we do anything that could risk threatening its future?

America faces a crossroads. We can either trod a road of cultural decay or hike our way back to the peak of global innovation. Join me on the latter path. Correct the fear mongering and conspiracies and tell the story of America’s great reindustrialization. Tell the story of our public servants, our great entrepreneurs, our scientific dominance. Tell the real story about how DOGE went nuclear.

[David Sacks @DavidSacks]

This brilliant lesson on communication by @rabois is why the AI leaders are failing. It’s not sufficient just to “speak your truth.” You have to communicate in a way that elucidates your audience. Convincing the public that your company is a menace obviously fails that test.

[bodila @51bodila]

Andrej Karpathy told Elon Musk that Tesla will grow from $45B to $1.5T using AI - while competitors spent billions doing it the old way

after this presentation Tesla's stock dropped 3.9%

Karpathy stood up and explained why every competitor will lose

"lidar is a crutch - it sidesteps the fundamental problem "

Musk: "every mile driven is training the network - whether autopilot is on or off "

simply because every single driver was training Tesla's model for free

that $45B company is now worth $1.5T

Waymo spent $27 billion. Tesla spent $0 on data collection

then Andrej left Tesla and joined Anthropic - to build their competitor

bookmark and watch today ↓

[arch-e @JamesArchibal]

@paulg @grok summarise the article and strive to make the writing unsummarizable, in the sense that it has so little fluff left in it that if you take any words out, as summaries by definition do, you lose a lot of interesting ideas

[Matan Grinberg @matanSF]

If you need FDEs to make your product work, you have a shit product

[Paul Graham @paulg]

"... the political left has long had a remarkable lack of interest in how wealth is created. As far as they are concerned, wealth exists somehow and the only interesting question is how to redistribute it."

— Thomas Sowell

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

Peter’s eternal optimism is cool

[Anthony Pompliano 🌪 @APompliano]

This post by @DavidSacks about the Anthropic/Fable situation is noteworthy, but not for the reason most people think.

Put the details aside for a second.

Anthropic released a blog post with their side of the story a few hours ago. David is responding with a bullet point list in a tweet about a different side of the story.

Years ago both sides would be jockeying to get mainstream reporters to tell their version of the truth and the American public would be fed some edited narrative that was filtered through a bureaucratic media organization.

That world doesn't exist anymore.

Now both sides share their versions publicly so the American people can hear directly from them. It is up to the individual citizens to make up their mind who they believe.

I haven't read a single article about the situation, but rather just read the various players' statements.

Fascinating how fast the world has changed.

[arch-e @JamesArchibal]

@kobyjconrad What are the costs roughly?

[@jason @Jason]

Image dump for may 1st 2026