Jacques Bosch

Shaping the world through #software.
Founder at:

[Matjaz Mihelj @Cashmat02]

$ADA

The biggest edge in Cardano? Most people only watch the price while the infrastructure upgrades right in front of them.

Leios is targeting greater parallelization and efficiency, Hydra is paving the way for a 10x+ better user experience in specific use cases, and Mithril reduces friction in network operation and synchronization. Add Voltaire, Midnight, and Lace and you get an ecosystem where $ADA is building asymmetric upside before the market fully prices it in.

Research driven. Community governed.
Built for the long term.

#Cardano
$ADA
#CardanoCommunity
#Leios
#Mithril

[Patrick Tobler @Padierfind]

Yesterday the maybe most unexpected moment of my professional career so far happened.

I was invited to the German Parliament to speak at a panel about Agent-To-Agent Payments using Blockchain.

An absolutely unreal moment.

The room was packed with politician & businesses. I spoke about our work with Masumi, the work with Serviceplan, how companies are hiring & selling agents on our agent marketplace today already and why we chose to build on Cardano.

Big shout-out and thanks to Bundesblock and Member of Parliament Marvin Schulz.

[Jacques Bosch @_jfbosch]

Just noticing something.

The people still showing up after a rough week are probably more important than the people who were here during the hype.

Bull markets tell you who likes making money.

Periods like this tell you who actually cares about the ecosystem.

Those are very different groups.
#cardano

[Ihtesham Ali @ihteshamali]

A Russian psychologist spent 10 years proving that the act of talking to yourself out loud is one of the most powerful cognitive tools the human brain has, and almost nobody outside his field has read the work.

His name was Lev Vygotsky.

He worked in Moscow in the 1920s and died of tuberculosis in 1934 at the age of 37. He had no laboratory, no funding, almost no English readers, and a body of work that the Soviet government suppressed for two decades after he died.

He produced the foundational theory of how human cognition actually develops, and the central piece of that theory was a behavior almost every adult is faintly embarrassed about.

Vygotsky noticed that young children talk to themselves constantly. They narrate their own actions, they argue with imaginary opponents, they instruct themselves through tasks out loud.

The dominant theory at the time, from the Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget, said this was a sign of cognitive immaturity that children would eventually grow out of as they learned to think properly.

Vygotsky said the exact opposite.

He argued that this self-directed speech was the most important cognitive event in the entire developmental window, because it was the moment a child first started to use language as a tool to control their own mind. The child was not failing to think. The child was learning how to think by externalizing the process and listening to themselves do it.

He predicted that as children matured, this out-loud self-talk would not disappear. It would go underground. It would become silent inner speech, which is the running monologue every adult has inside their own head for the rest of their life.

The voice you hear when you read this sentence is the direct descendant of a four-year-old narrating their own block tower.

For 50 years almost nobody outside Russia had access to his work, and the few researchers who did pick it up could not get funding to test it. Then in the early 2000s the experiments finally started to pile up, and what they found was that Vygotsky had been right about something even more important than he knew.

The first major study came from Gary Lupyan at the University of Wisconsin and Daniel Swingley at the University of Pennsylvania in 2012. They ran a simple visual search experiment. Participants were shown 20 images at once and asked to find a specific object, like a banana or a chair. In one condition they searched silently. In the other condition they were told to say the name of the object out loud to themselves while looking for it.

The participants who spoke the target name out loud found the object significantly faster, with higher accuracy, than the participants who searched in silence. The effect was strongest when the spoken word matched a familiar object the brain already had a strong category for.

Saying the word out loud literally tuned the visual system to detect that thing better. The researchers called it the label feedback effect, and the implication was that the act of vocalizing a goal physically changes how the brain processes the world while pursuing it.

The second major study came out of the University of Michigan and Michigan State in 2017. The lead researchers were Ethan Kross and Jason Moser, and they used both EEG and fMRI to record what happens inside the brain when people talk to themselves while emotionally upset.

They asked participants to recall painful autobiographical memories and reflect on them in two different ways. Some used the first person, saying things like "why am I feeling this way." Others used the third person, referring to themselves by their own name, saying things like "why is John feeling this way."

The brain scans showed that the simple act of switching from first person to third person, even silently, decreased activity in the medial prefrontal cortex, the region responsible for rumination and self-referential pain. Within a single second of using their own name instead of the word I, participants showed measurably lower emotional reactivity. The shift required no extra cognitive effort. It cost the brain nothing. And it worked.

Kross described the mechanism in his interviews. Talking to yourself by name creates a small amount of psychological distance from your own experience. Your brain processes the situation more like a problem belonging to someone else, which means it can analyze it instead of drowning in it.

What Vygotsky had intuited in 1934 turned out to be even more powerful than the developmental theory he built it into. The voice you use to talk to yourself is not background noise. It is one of the most precise cognitive tools the brain has, and you can change how it works just by changing the pronoun you use.

People who talk through problems out loud are not anxious or unstable. They are running an externalized version of a process the rest of us are running silently and worse. The kindergartener narrating their block tower, the surgeon muttering through a procedure, the engineer pacing a hallway describing a bug to nobody, the athlete repeating a cue to themselves before a free throw, they are all using the same ancient mechanism that builds and steers human thought.

You can run the experiment yourself the next time you are stuck on something hard. Stop trying to solve it silently in your head. Say it out loud. Describe what you are seeing. Walk yourself through the steps as if you were explaining it to a colleague who is not in the room.

And when something genuinely upsets you, switch to your own name. Ask why this person is feeling this way, instead of why I am feeling this way.

The voice you have been told to keep quiet your entire life is one of the oldest pieces of cognitive technology you own.

Most people are still embarrassed to use it.

[NightSwap @NightSwapLabs]

Cardano Community.
Midnight Community.

How many times did they call us dead?

Yet here we are.

Still building.
Still shipping.
Still showing up.

Charles takes a break for 24 hours and the entire crypto space can’t stop talking about Cardano.

That’s not what a dead ecosystem looks like.

If you’re still here, like, repost, and drop a 💙 or 🌓 below.

Let’s show everyone we’re more than alive.

[Cardano₳fterDark @CardanoAftrDark]

Charles Hoskinson just poured his heart out on Spaces.
He has no power to unilaterally fix Cardano, gets zero love, catches every single blame for failures, and watches his funding proposals get rejected by the same people who then complain nothing improves.
This man is getting crushed under undeserved hate while carrying the weight of the entire project he built from nothing.
Cardano community it’s time to wake up.
Unify, support the founder and the team whose vision created this entire foundation, or watch it slowly die.
No more toxicity.
#Cardano $ADA @IOHK_Charles

[Jacques Bosch @_jfbosch]

@CraigBrockie Restore

[Jacques Bosch @_jfbosch]

@Afrihost @Aasif_Patel My site on Afrihost is still not loading.
Any updates?

[Jacques Bosch @_jfbosch]

Check out my latest article: Life after Cancer https://t.co/UTFFEfAE3g via @LinkedIn

[Jacques Bosch @_jfbosch]

@EMKA85Z @MakisMedicine @redpilldispensr Yes, it can. It’s also better for brain metastasis as it can pass the blood brain barrier.

[Jacques Bosch @_jfbosch]

@yogi39484204 @KurtSupeCPA Bitwarden or keepass

[Kurt Supe, CPA & Retirement Planner @KurtSupeCPA]

In most marriages, one person handles the money.
The other has no clue where anything is.

Then the "money person" dies.

And the surviving spouse is left in the dark during the worst moment of their life.

I've watched this nightmare unfold dozens of times.

Here's what you need in your Family Financial Roadmap:

Critical Access:

All passwords (use a password manager)
Every account number (banks, investments, insurance)
Safe deposit box location and key

Key Contacts:

Your CPA (with their direct number)
Your financial advisor
Your attorney
Insurance agents

Legal Documents:

Where to find your will
Trust documents location
Business succession plans
Life insurance policies

The Stuff Nobody Thinks About:

Digital assets and crypto wallets
Recurring bills on autopay
Business partner agreements
Safe combinations

Put it in a secure location (fireproof safe, secure file, password manager).

Make sure your spouse AND adult kids know how to access it.

Update it every year on your birthday.

I've watched surviving spouses spend MONTHS trying to find accounts worth hundreds of thousands.

If you're the "money person" in your relationship, do this TODAY.

[Jacques Bosch @_jfbosch]

@R1chardMaur1ce @IOHK_Charles In my humble opinion, a lot of the economists are part of the problem. Not all but a lot.

[Quantumplation | Pi Lanningham @Quantumplation]

846 block rollback as the network self repaired. I don't want to shy away from how serious this was, because it was. But so many things about this point to an amazing resiliency under essentially worst case scenario.

Genuinely, *genuinely* so impressed with Cardano right now.

Give me a few days to do my independent post mortem, all details will be included there!

[Jure @JureKaramarko]

This is music to my ears! 🥂 Books, music, video, it’s all coming to the blockchain soon… And all of it built on Cardano.
When someone tells you nothing is being built on #Cardano, show them Stuff_io, the project that will change history across several industries! Today, @IOHK_Charles briefly talked about @Stuff_io 🥂🩵

#CardanoNews @Touring_Tiki @OneBillian @joshualeestone @CryptoWatcherOG @book_io $STUFF $ADA

[Alex @Alex_ADA_]

I’ve seen the posts about creators leaving Cardano.
Some are tired. Some want faster numbers. Some are chasing bigger markets.

We built TapTools on Cardano knowing we could make more money somewhere else.
More users somewhere else.
More attention somewhere else.

We chose Cardano anyway.

Because decentralization is not a slogan.
Because building fair systems matters.
Because the vision is bigger than a market cycle.

I worked for years without pay to move this ecosystem forward.
Not because it was easy, but because it was right.

People will come and go.
What cannot leave is the plot.

Cardano is about durability.
Uptime, security, and governance you can trust.

If your only scoreboard is price, you’ll always feel late.
If it’s impact, you’ll never run out of reasons to build.

TapTools is staying.
I’m staying.

[Robert Youssef @rryssf]

Market research firms are cooked 😳

PyMC Labs + Colgate just published something wild. They got GPT-4o and Gemini to predict purchase intent at 90% reliability compared to actual human surveys.

Zero focus groups. No survey panels. Just prompting.

The method is called Semantic Similarity Rating (SSR). Instead of the usual "rate this 1-5" they ask open ended questions like "why would you buy this" and then use embeddings to map the text back to a numerical scale.

Which is honestly kind of obvious in hindsight but nobody bothered trying it until now.

Results match human demographic patterns, capture the same distribution shapes, include actual reasoning. The stuff McKinsey charges $50K+ for and delivers in 6 weeks.

Except this runs in 3 minutes for under a buck.

I've been watching consulting firms tell everyone AI is coming for their industry. Turns out their own $1M market entry decks just became a GPT-4o call.

Bad week to be charging enterprise clients for "proprietary research methodologies."

[Sebastien Bubeck @SebastienBubeck]

My posts last week created a lot of unnecessary confusion*, so today I would like to do a deep dive on one example to explain why I was so excited. In short, it’s not about AIs discovering new results on their own, but rather how tools like GPT-5 can help researchers navigate, connect, and understand our existing body of knowledge in ways that were never possible before (or at least much much more time consuming).

Note that I did not pick the most impressive example (we will discuss that one at a later time), but rather one that illustrates many points at play that might have eluded people who see literature search as an embarrassingly trivial activity.

Meet Erdős' problem #1043 https://t.co/4vBjq85SBT. This problem appeared in a paper by Erdős, Herzog, and Piranian in 1958 [EHP58]. It asks the following beautiful question: consider a set in the complex plane defined by being the pre-image of the unit ball under a complex polynomial with leading coefficient 1. Is there at least one direction in which the width of this set is smaller than 2? (2 is of course the best one can hope for, if the polynomial is a monomial then this set is the unit ball and so the width is 2 in all directions.)

This problem didn't stand for very long: just three years later, Pommerenke wrote a paper [Po61] solving problem #1043 (with a counterexample), and that's what GPT-5 surfaced when asked this question. So what's the big deal? Well, a couple of things:

1) [EHP58] does not contain a single problem, but in fact sixteen. [Po61] says in the introduction that it will solve a few problems from [EHP58] but does NOT discuss problem #1043. In fact my understanding is that experts (at least in combinatorics) who knew both about [Po61] and problem #1043 did not know that the solution to the latter could be found in the former. This is quite clear on https://t.co/ZmyO0X3B6D itself since problems (1038, 1039, 1045, 1047) all have a reference to [Po61], yet #1043 was not listed as having any connection to [Po61]. Another evidence that this had been at least partially forgotten is that on Mathscinet (MR0151580) the review of [Po61] attempts to give all the problems that are solved there and does not mention #1043 either.

2) The solution to #1043 can actually be found in the middle of the paper, sandwiched between the proof of Theorem 6 and the statement Theorem 7, as an off-hand comment, see picture. To find this you need to know this paper really well, and read it fully and carefully. I'm sure many people in the 1960s knew about it, but it seems like 60 years later there is a much smaller set of people that were aware of this brief comment in the middle of a 1961 paper. That's where the power of a "super-human search" lies, and this is way way beyond any search index capability (obviously; in fact it’s beyond the capabilities of the previous generation of LLMs). You need to read and understand the paper.

3) But there is more: the paper says that the proof follows by invoking [10, p. 73]. This is very important, because in math it's not so much about the result itself but rather about the understanding that comes with it (and with its proof). So what is [10]? Well it's the previous paper by the author, which was written in German ... and here again something truly accelerating happens: GPT-5 translated the paper and explained the proof in modern language. I believe that this is indeed very much accelerating.

This is just one example, and each example has its own interesting story. I have seen similar moments where GPT-5 makes connections between very different fields, where the same results were proven in completely different languages (e.g., game theory versus high-dimensional geometry), sometimes 20 years apart. This is not about AI discovering new knowledge, this is about AI making all of the scientific literature come ALIVE — linking proofs, translations, and partially forgotten results so existing ideas can be understood and built upon more easily. When that happens, science moves forward with greater context and continuity. In my view it's a game changer for the scientific community.

*About the confusion, which I again apologize for, I made three mistakes:

i) I assumed full context from the reader, in the sense that I was quoting a tweet that was itself quoting my tweet from October 11, and that latter tweet was clearly stating that this is only about literature search; but it is totally understandable that this nested quoting could lead to lots of misreadings and I should have realized that.

ii) The original (deleted) tweet was seriously lacking content, and this is probably the biggest problem. By trying to tell a complex story in just a few characters I missed the mark. I will not do that again, and rather, like I have always done, explain as many details as I can. This is vital given the stakes of the AI debate at the moment.

iii) When I said in the October 11 tweet that “it solved [a problem] by realizing that it had actually been solved 20 years ago”, this was obviously meant as tongue-in-cheek. However, I now recognize that this moment calls for a more serious tone.

[Ray Dalio @RayDalio]

Being open-minded is much more important than being bright or smart. No matter how much they know, closed-minded people will waste your time. If you must deal with them, recognize that there can be no helping them until they open their minds. #principleoftheday

[James Clear @JamesClear]

Habits that have a high rate of return in life:

- sleeping 8+ hours each day
- lifting weights 3x week
- going for a walk each day
- saving at least 10 percent of your income
- reading every day
- drinking more water and less of everything else
- leaving your phone in another room while you work