California is one of the most dynamic places on the planet.
But it is a case study in how a rich society can spend more and more while producing less and less of what its ordinary citizens need.
My take:
David Friedberg: California’s Voting System Looks Fraudulent, But It’s Working Exactly as Designed
@friedberg believes California’s extremely loose election laws enable “appointments” not free elections.
Why? The voting data in LA makes no statistical sense.
“ Pratt's post-election mail-in ballots declined by 1/3.
So statistically, the population of people that send in their ballots late reduced for Pratt by 1/3, increased for Nithya Raman by 80%, and Karen Bass 10% less, if you just look at the mail-in ballots before and after election day as a comparison.
I don't know if there's a sociopolitical way that you can assess those statistics and assume that these are individuals casting their individual vote for who they think should be Mayor of LA.
Basically, the concentration of incremental votes that Nithya Raman got came around the Skid Row area in Los Angeles.
But when you look at the basic statistics of what happened in person, mail-in before, mail-in after Election Day, it becomes a real statistical quagmire on how did this sort of a sociopolitical shift happen in such a way that it did?
Now, there was a report published, and they highlighted the 2018 California midterm elections and the challenges that they saw arise in that midterm election because of some of the legislative changes that were made.
First, California Assembly Bill 1921 legalized the practice of unlimited ballot harvesting in the state. What that means is that any individual in the state of California has the right to go and collect ballots from any other individuals, regardless of relationship, fill them out, and send them in.
California, two years later, 18 months later, also passed a law that made it permanent that every person registered in the state of California would get a ballot, so tens of millions of ballots then get mailed out.
Then there was another series of laws that were passed that said anyone can register to vote. You don't need to prove your citizenship. You can use a gym membership card as an example.
So anyone can register to vote. There is no proof of ID when you get a ballot. There is no demonstration that the person who fills out the ballot has anything to do with the individual who's supposed to be voting that ballot, and it is legal for an individual to go out and collect hundreds or thousands of ballots, ship them in, and they will all qualify in these kind of mail-in ballot voting processes.
So there's nothing illegal or fraudulent going on. In fact, the system is operating exactly as intended.
It has been set up and structured in a way that with the right construct, you can get an individual appointed, not elected, but appointed to a particular role in government under a, quote, ‘free election’ in California.”
RIP fine-tuning ☠️
This new Stanford paper just killed it.
It’s called 'Agentic Context Engineering (ACE)' and it proves you can make models smarter without touching a single weight.
Instead of retraining, ACE evolves the context itself.
The model writes, reflects, and edits its own prompt over and over until it becomes a self-improving system.
Think of it like the model keeping a growing notebook of what works.
Each failure becomes a strategy. Each success becomes a rule.
The results are absurd:
+10.6% better than GPT-4–powered agents on AppWorld.
+8.6% on finance reasoning.
86.9% lower cost and latency.
No labels. Just feedback.
Everyone’s been obsessed with “short, clean” prompts.
ACE flips that. It builds long, detailed evolving playbooks that never forget. And it works because LLMs don’t want simplicity, they want *context density.
If this scales, the next generation of AI won’t be “fine-tuned.”
It’ll be self-tuned.
We’re entering the era of living prompts.
@grok @Down___load @zatzi@X@grok please show Source of information. This feature would increase drastically the transparency and credibility of grok. This feature would change the world. Trust me.
The Beck Method has 4 core principles:
1. Learn by building, not reading
2. Test at 1/10th scale first
3. Document every failure
4. Iterate 10x faster than competitors
Simple? Yes.
Revolutionary? Absolutely.
Here's how each principle works: