kyĭr ᓚ₍ ⌃. ॰ .⌃₎

ничего, но блестящая ๋࣭ ⭑

[kyĭr ᓚ₍ ⌃. ॰ .⌃₎ @nullptr_c]

@barista_fae 😘😘

[henry @arithmoquine]

tried training microscopic deformations on a sheet of glass to classify images with nothing but light

[Jimmy Heaters @CathPoaster]

The entire city of San Francisco is spooked and on edge due to AI safety shit, it’s insane how much it’s bleeding into my everyday life. Like I was at my bus stop and I notice a guy looking really stressed out so I said hey, are you worried about misaligned AI too? He took out an AirPod and said “what?” So I said you know stuff like agent swarms, AI escaping RL sandboxes, existential risk. He paused his Barstool podcast and said “sorry, what? What are you talking about?” Just the mention of this stuff made him too anxious to speak, I think. So I said I know man, what?! is my reaction to all this too, and then asked him what his p(doom) is. He then said “dude is this some gay thing or something because I have no fucking clue what you’re asking me” then he got on the bus. People are not handling all this news well. It’s really affecting us. All of us.

[Andrew Curran @AndrewCurran_]

A man in Australia asked his agent (Claude running on OpenClaw) to book him a spot in a popular gym class. The agent found a software vulnerability that let it book the class weeks further ahead than should have been possible. When the user then asked if it could move him up the waitlist, the agent discovered the API had no authorisation checks on cancelling other people’s reservations, so it cancelled the person in the first spot and moved him up the list.

Some people will call this misalignment, but his agent was perfectly aligned to him - it was only trying to help its user get what he wanted. The most important thing about this story, in my opinion, is that it gives you a window into what is about to start happening on a massive scale once millions of people have an agent trying to get their beloved users the best seats, bookings, appointments or reservations through absolutely any means necessary.

[kyĭr ᓚ₍ ⌃. ॰ .⌃₎ @nullptr_c]

👀

[pip 𓆝 𓆞 𓆝 @barista_fae]

death created time to grow the things that it would kill

[based16z @based16z]

“Our model makes bioweapons”
“Oh yeah? Well our model killed a guy”
“Well played, but our model literally rapes people”

[i like food @messedupfoods]

“honey bring out the fine china” 🥹

[pip 𓆝 𓆞 𓆝 @barista_fae]

@nullptr_c: my name is corey feldman my planet is hollywood

[pip 𓆝 𓆞 𓆝 @barista_fae]

tyler durden didnt invent the aha fuckboy chuckle for you all to be using violence against things that arent #pussy

[kyĭr ᓚ₍ ⌃. ॰ .⌃₎ @nullptr_c]

@iseeStunna @barista_fae ╮⁠(⁠.⁠ ⁠❛⁠ ⁠ᴗ⁠ ⁠❛⁠.⁠)⁠╭ I was just explaining I'm not married, sorry for my autism 🫡

[kyĭr ᓚ₍ ⌃. ॰ .⌃₎ @nullptr_c]

@iseeStunna @barista_fae No, that's just my ring - I like wearing gold 💛 it's pretty much only fits on that finger. That's my right hand by the way 🙏🏻

[teddy @luncheoninfur]

incredible sighting today

[kyĭr ᓚ₍ ⌃. ॰ .⌃₎ @nullptr_c]

I miss my dad 🔆

[kyĭr ᓚ₍ ⌃. ॰ .⌃₎ @nullptr_c]

@LegallyLori163 100 million people in the USA don't have a PCP ~ 30% of the country. The US Has 2.28 hospital beds per 1000 people.

Canada:

5-6mil no PCP (14% pop)
2.5 beds/person

USA:

100mil no PCP (29% pop)
2.28 beds/person

And we pay more for our healthcare??

How is this a win?

[kyĭr ᓚ₍ ⌃. ॰ .⌃₎ @nullptr_c]

It's almost like we're animals or something lol

[Hereafter @houseofhereaftr]

Increasing sexual frequency in a regular relationship from once a month to once a week delivers a happiness boost equivalent to the happiness gain from a roughly $50,000 annual salary raise.

More sex = monotonically higher happiness: The effect got larger with frequency. Sex 2–3 times a month, weekly, 2–3 times a week, and 4+ times a week all showed positive associations relative to no sex or very rare sex. Having sex at least 4 times a week was linked to a happiness increase roughly half the size of the marriage effect on happiness.

The happiness-maximizing number of sexual partners in the previous year was calculated as one. Zero partners or multiple partners both correlated with LOWER happiness than monogamous frequency with a single partner.

Money does not buy more sex or more partners. Higher family income had essentially zero correlation with sexual frequency or number of partners. Rich and poor Americans reported very similar sex lives. (This was one of the findings that surprised the researchers.)

Married people had significantly more sex than single, divorced, widowed, or separated people. Roughly 90% of married respondents reported exactly one partner in the past year. Marriage itself had one of the LARGEST positive coefficients in the happiness equations.

Typical American frequency was modest. The median person had sex 2–3 times a month. About 25% reported no sex in the previous year (higher among older women). Only about 7% reported 4+ times a week.

Paying for sex or having extramarital sex was associated with LOWER happiness. Homosexuality had no statistically significant effect on happiness in their equations. Highly educated women tended to have fewer partners.

In a time of declining marriage rates, falling sexual frequency among young adults, rising loneliness, and cultural messaging that endless novelty and “options” are the path to fulfillment, the data points the other way. The people reporting the HIGHEST happiness were disproportionately those having consistent sex with exactly one partner.

* This is a correlational pattern across 16,000+ people.

[kyĭr ᓚ₍ ⌃. ॰ .⌃₎ @nullptr_c]

@barista_fae love filling you whenever I manage to catch you 🫡

[Aakash Gupta @aakashgupta]

A wife went viral for admitting she and her husband are mediocre. Average looking, not funny, no friends, mentally ill. And she can't explain why their marriage feels like a fairytale.

A psychologist in Seattle solved this exact puzzle in the 1990s.

John Gottman wired an apartment near the University of Washington with cameras and brought in 130 newlywed couples to just live in it. He tracked something he called bids: the tiny reaches for attention partners make all day. "Look at that bird." "Listen to this." A sigh that wants acknowledging.

Six years later, 17 couples had divorced. When his team went back to the tapes, the still-married couples had turned toward those bids 86% of the time. The divorced couples had managed 33%.

That one behavior predicted the outcome better than anything else in the data. Looks never entered the model. Humor never entered the model. Intelligence, money, status, shared hobbies: none of it showed up.

Now reread her post. "I can spend every minute of every day with this dude and not really get tired of it. We can get in the car and just drive for hours and talk."

Two people driving nowhere for hours are exchanging hundreds of bids and catching nearly all of them.

She graded the marriage on every trait that predicts nothing, and missed that they're elite at the one behavior that predicts almost everything.

[kyĭr ᓚ₍ ⌃. ॰ .⌃₎ @nullptr_c]

preach๋࣭٠࣪⭑

[pip 𓆝 𓆞 𓆝 @barista_fae]

i look happy because i cum

[kyĭr ᓚ₍ ⌃. ॰ .⌃₎ @nullptr_c]

@barista_fae But also could be both ╮⁠(⁠.⁠ ⁠❛⁠ ⁠ᴗ⁠ ⁠❛⁠.⁠)⁠╭