Ron ܪܵܢ

Technical founder. Got 2 accounts. This is the dirty one (semi-anon) with which I free myself of professional bearing.

#biohacking #entrepreneurship #tech

[Ron ܪܵܢ @ron_personal]

@TrueAIHound @PhysInHistory Interesting. I'm lost at the foundation of the particle – what drives/induces it, if you will.

But yeah, I've noticed about distance. I haven't gotten around to frameworking it. Just one form, but it still uses some distance for ease of modeling. Sounds like you're much further.

[Ron ܪܵܢ @ron_personal]

@TrueAIHound @PhysInHistory You seem like the type who'd have an idea on this. So, let's say a particle is a wave. What's there driving this thing? What's the foundation? (Is it accessible to us?)

[Ron ܪܵܢ @ron_personal]

@Jonas_Haraldson @TheRealVerbz @forallcurious I understand. You've raised the matter of alchemy never having worked, bar the recent accelerator experiment. So I'm pondering whether alchemy has failed more due to a lack of broader experiments in targeting matter other than gold or something less structured than diamonds.

[Ron ܪܵܢ @ron_personal]

Do you remember why you joined X? #MyXAnniversary

fml... I like this account more. It's like a semi-journal. My "professional" one is so cursed that it shows X must have lost the network effect (prior to acquisition).

But I'm in a rough community... (Entrepreneurs... Oof...)

[Ron ܪܵܢ @ron_personal]

@thisguyjack @PhysInHistory I came to say shapeless, too. Where you write "void," do you mean to indicate, with the quotation marks, that you have a different idea of it?

The question comes from the fact that I can't believe many think there's such a thing as emptiness. Interested in your thoughts on that.

[Ron ܪܵܢ @ron_personal]

@Hassellbladder @TheRealVerbz @forallcurious In that frame, it's true! Although, I'd say Earth may have a special thing to offer. The cell membrane seems to be an Earth thing. Hydrothermal vents and all. Not saying it can't happen elsewhere, but maybe not like this.

[Ron ܪܵܢ @ron_personal]

@Jonas_Haraldson @TheRealVerbz @forallcurious What if it's due to everyone always trying to turn everything into gold and diamonds? I wonder whether anyone has tried water to carbon conversion.

[Ron ܪܵܢ @ron_personal]

@TakoTreba I bet! 😆

Especially 'cause it's AI-based. 🔥

[Ron ܪܵܢ @ron_personal]

To all the people who were oh-so impressed by DeepSeek R1:

I call it zeroday-impressed – when you allow yourself to be impressed before you even give yourself a chance to know about what you're impressed.

Next time you're zeroday-impressed, maybe refrain from posting about it.

[Ron ܪܵܢ @ron_personal]

It's the end of text-dominant social platforms (I suppose voice-based and photography-based to some level, as well).

AI accounts are doing the human thing fairly well now. But they produce negative value in user experience.

This makes video-based platforms even more attractive.

[Ron ܪܵܢ @ron_personal]

@Anthony_Bonato Discovered within the bounds of our invented systems and tools.

[Ron ܪܵܢ @ron_personal]

Trust the dinosaurs. Use base 60.

[Ron ܪܵܢ @ron_personal]

This is why we should go back to base 60.

So, activity over time should be counted in time-relative units.

What's 100x one's agency? We don't know. We'd have to think about it.

It might mean doing something in 1 minute, where one might do it in 1 hour and 40 minutes.

[Sam Altman @sama]

why not 100x?

[Ron ܪܵܢ @ron_personal]

"Do it in 1 minute versus 16 hours and 40 minutes – roughly 2 regular business days' worth of work." (So specific in base 10...)

https://t.co/ozRdjo0Fr9

[⚪️ sierra catalina @sierracatalina]

@sama why not 1000x?

[Ron ܪܵܢ @ron_personal]

@Anthony_Bonato That is annoying, but these things aren't really invented, rather discovered. We can invent notation and stuff, but we're kind of locked into the finite space of the tools that we use and pass on to others.

[Ron ܪܵܢ @ron_personal]

@lmldias @burkov I suppose so. People do tend to adapt by doing more of other things, as much as will fit into their time.

You're right. I'd adapt to that timescale.

(Although, hope everyone does get the sarcasm that was intended. I have a theory that LLMs tend to max out at ~90% accuracy.)

[Ron ܪܵܢ @ron_personal]

@lmldias @burkov Well, why not? Without the technical aspect of the technical part, much of it is just in the head. (I'm a big fan of pen and paper, but that's in the planning phase.)

[Ron ܪܵܢ @ron_personal]

@lmldias @burkov I missed this. My bad. I'm [employed], because my companies don't have their own brains, and they need mine to plan and execute, and stuff.

But there's an answer for the other scenario too: someone still needs to design, plan, validate, drive, execute, reshape, polish, etc.

[Ron ܪܵܢ @ron_personal]

They need to do a #SouthPark episode about the whole DeepSeek R1 hype in the West...