Sebastian Rios

Building SciPot. AI in large enterprises by day. Writing about what happens when execution gets cheap and judgment is all that's left.

[FIFA World Cup @FIFAWorldCup]

Argentina won this match.

#FIFAWorldCup

[Eliana @ElianaCere]

Argentina, no lo entenderías 🇦🇷

[Javier Milei @JMilei]

VAMOS ARGENTINA CARAJO...!!!
Que manera de sufrir LRPMQLRMP...

[Sebastian Rios @smtx]

Third in a series:

→ Electrifying the Cow Path: https://t.co/SdeyFXOXXT

→ A Company That Was Nobody: https://t.co/2PUtijrVYk

[Sebastian Rios @smtx]

Everyone's bracing for AI to take their job.
The sharper question: when the machine can do the part you thought was you, which part was ever actually yours?

New essay. The soul of work doesn't die when the machine arrives. It moves.
~18 min, free 👇

https://t.co/T4STyPPqah

[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.

[Martin Varsavsky @martinvars]

He fundado empresas durante treinta años y nunca vi una herramienta que premie tanto al que ya sabe operar. La inteligencia artificial le da una ventaja enorme al fundador que entiende su negocio en detalle, porque puede rediseñar procesos completos, eliminar pasos innecesarios, fusionar traspasos y cazar errores antes de que cuesten dinero. Al que solo le pega un chatbot encima del mismo proceso de siempre, la IA le cambia poco. La diferencia entre los dos se reduce a una cosa: entender de verdad cómo se crea el valor en tu propia operación. La tecnología amplifica al que ya sabe, y por eso esta ola va a recompensar a los operadores serios mucho más que a cualquier moda.

[Sebastian Rios @smtx]

El punto de la ejecución es clave. Los críticos de la sociedad anónima en 1824 también describían bien el presente: capital de elites, responsabilidad diluida. Su error fue confundir la foto con la película. La reforma que temían terminó con la elite que describían. Escribí un ensayo sobre por qué esta vez pasa lo mismo, de 1602 a hoy: https://t.co/6l395DW2S2

[Sebastian Rios @smtx]

The president of Argentina proposed a legal category for companies operated by AI agents. No humans inside. Harari called it dangerous. The president says he's preparing his reply.

While we wait, here's mine: this might be the most hopeful economic story of the next 50 years. A thread:

https://t.co/gSzfC4aWqA

[Sebastian Rios @smtx]

La nota cita el fallo Sarcuni v. bZx, el detalle que casi nadie registró: los DAOs ya probaron el motor durante una década, pero un juez tuvo que clasificarlos como general partnership, sin escudo de responsabilidad. Motor sin chasis. Escribí la respuesta larga a los temores de Harari, de 1602 a hoy: https://t.co/6l395DW2S2

[Sebastian Rios @smtx]

The president of Argentina proposed a legal category for companies operated by AI agents. No humans inside. Harari called it dangerous. The president says he's preparing his reply.

While we wait, here's mine: this might be the most hopeful economic story of the next 50 years. A thread:

https://t.co/gSzfC4aWqA

[Sebastian Rios @smtx]

11/ The last time we started one of these, poverty stopped being the human condition.

The first window may open soon in Buenos Aires, and the form will take five minutes. There's room on the page.

Full essay, free:

https://t.co/2PUtijrVYk

[Sebastian Rios @smtx]

The president of Argentina proposed a legal category for companies operated by AI agents. No humans inside. Harari called it dangerous. The president says he's preparing his reply.

While we wait, here's mine: this might be the most hopeful economic story of the next 50 years. A thread:

https://t.co/gSzfC4aWqA

[Javier Milei @JMilei]

Dear @harari_yuval, so many thanks for engaging in this fascinating and transcendental debate. We are at a dawn of a new age, which places us, I believe, in a place not that that different from the one you yourself described so well in Homo Sapiens and your other books: that time when humans used fictions to organize our collective work and profit from technology. Now we need more than ever all our intelligence to build the framework that will allow us to benefit from the amazing opportunities we have ahead. Already preparing my reply to see if I we can appease your fears about the path I proposed last week!

[Sebastian Rios @smtx]

10/ The safeguards are old, or already running: a human name on file with the registry. No exclusive charters. Judgment you can audit. Circuit breakers for machine speed.

We learned all this once, slowly and expensively. This time we get to skip ahead in the book.