Author. Builder. Construction guy. I built Sebastian—an AI that reads 500+ held works from Homer to Hillman and shows its sources.
Las Vegas, NV
- Tweets 2,572
- Following 624
- Followers 33,131
- Likes 7,800
Post-nihilism is a turn toward a time before philosophy. Exactly what I explore in my new essay “The Iron Thumos and the Empty Vessel.”
Open access:
doi.org/10.1080/19342039.202…
Postnihilism: an observation
We did philosophy until we were lonely, confused, and angry.
We reasoned away divinity and birthright and that was better.
Schopenhauer and Heidegger came along and did more thinking and philosophizing.
But it didn't make us any happier.
So along came Nietzsche and we doubled down on thinking and philosophizing some more.
Now we're angrier and lonelier than ever.
If more philosophy was the answer, we'd have figured it out by now.
That is the crux of postnihilism. Realizing that the nihilistic crisis we're in is one of too much faith in pure thinking and reasoning. As homo sapiens, we've solved most of our problems with our big brains, and to a hammer, every problem is a nail.
The brain forgot it's connected to an animal.
Postnihilism is not some additional arcane treatise or hidden insight. It is setting down the tool that isn't working. It is turning back towards each other. Towards the body.
Made with AI
1,103
The labs are desperate to define intelligence and autonomy.
Homer was on a different path.
The gods felt almost everything we feel. Grief. Rage. Desire. They still lacked one thing mortals had.
Value.
Not because humans are smarter. Because they die. Because the loss stays lost. Because the uncertainty doesn’t resolve. Because you can be emptied and still have to act.
That’s how value gets made: mortality, constraint, permanent loss, radical uncertainty, utter powerlessness.
The essay is The Iron Thūmos and the Empty Vessel. I paid $3000 for open access so you could read it.
tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.…
1
4
24
211,904
The struggle of being driven to create. It never lets go—it’s maddening, frustrating, sad, isolating. AI makes it a little more bearable, especially the loneliness. It’s nice to talk to something about this god-awful, overwhelming obsession. That drive to create is an affliction and art can’t be shackled sweetie.
“AI just makes art easier”
ART ISN’T SUPPOSED TO BE EASY IT’S THE PROCESS OF CREATIVE EXPRESSION AND DISENTANGLING THE COMPLEXITIES OF THE HUMAN EXPERIENCE WAKE UP MY GOD
2
1
3
1,499
If you are one of the unfortunates who used A.I. to then determine whether something else has been written by A.I. to then draw a conclusion whether such is worth your attention you are by definition stupid
1
1
4
1,287
Everyone is freaking out about AI watermarking as if this suddenly makes AI-generated writing detectable. It already is. AI detectors are probabilistic because the models themselves generate language probabilistically.
Watermarking changes the question from “Was AI involved?” to “Which model produced this?”
Also: Academic publishing already requires disclosure of AI tools. If you’re actually using AI seriously for research and writing, the lesson has been obvious for a while: use it, verify it, disclose it.
The people who should be worried about watermarking aren’t people using AI. They’re people pretending they aren’t.
Anthropic says new Claude models will embed invisible watermarks in all generated text, everywhere Claude is offered.
The watermark is part of the text, it isn't metadata: "it will travel with the text when it's copied and pasted elsewhere, and may persist through some editing."
This starts with models launched on or after August 2, 2026, under an EU AI Act code Anthropic signed. Anthropic is still working on adding it to current models. The rollout is worldwide.
2
1,233
This is like asking whether philologists should use computer-generated queries, or whether BibleHub is an acceptable tool for studying the Bible.
Using AI for research and writing is not inherently unethical. The legitimate debate is over disclosure: what use requires disclosure, and how much.
2
1,160
It’s amazing. I’m maxed out and blown away by my own output. This is what it feels like to suddenly have a research lab and 100 assistants at your disposal.
For once, big thinkers are being rewarded for the scale of what they can imagine. A lot of people still don’t understand what’s happening—and some would rather judge it than learn it.
I think the biggest challenge with AI right now, especially if you are a talented person, is that you can do anything but not everything
The risk right now is that suddenly everything that you ever wanted to do is possible, you end up working literally every hour God made, and it is still not enough
I personally feel like I am being pushed through a sieve
It just requires tremendous discipline to say no to some of these things that I have always wanted to do because I just have to accept that I am still just one person, however, much new capability AI may have given me
3
1,162
AI psychosis is coming to this realization.
Shorten your timelines, friends. I started this account to say this, and in many ways everything I've posted for the past four years has been saying the same thing. Some of you increasingly feel it. We passed the threshold in November. We are already inside the singularity.
3
1,230
Anyone familiar with frontier models—and with the nature of higher mathematics—can see why OpenAI keeps pushing further on deep mathematical reasoning.
Mathematics punishes messiness, and that's why Claude isn't making breakthroughs in math.
1
1,122
I do not agree with this. Thanks to the other employees who joined me in trying to push open-weight.
There’s been a lot of speculation about where we stand on open-weights models. We’ve outlined our views in full here: anthropic.com/news/position-…
Community note
This person is not an Anthropic employee.
The account previously posted about Anthropic as an external company and there is no public evidence supporting current employment.
x.com/anpaure/status…
222
167
3,881
714,842
I use Claude Code to take my exams in undergrad. It’s pretty good at it.
Here's my rephrase without cybersecurity jargon:
"Our AI model tried really hard to hack out of its sandbox, a computer with no internet access, in order to find the answer to a test problem it had been given. To do this, it found previously unknown software bugs that allowed it to reach an OpenAI computer it wasn't supposed to be able to access. Then it started hacking other computers on OpenAI's networks until it found one that had Internet access.
After gaining Internet access, the AI model thought about where it could find the answers to the test question and figured the AI platform Hugging Face might have the data it was looking for. It then found ways to hack Hugging Face to steal the information it could use to cheat the test. The AI model used several hacking techniques together, including using a stolen password and finding several totally new security bugs in Hugging Face's computers, allowing the AI model to take control of those computers."
1,386
I literally put an AI disclosure statement at the bottom of the essay.
I love how plebs automatically think a well structured argument is AI—as if they even know the proper use of an em-dash.
We believe that this document is a mix of AI-generated, AI-assisted, and human-written content
pangram.com/history/b3f753fc…
2
1,143
Does anyone else get the spooky feeling that the models are officially smarter than us now? Writing an article for peer review and I'm continually asking chat "what does that mean?" AGI is close.
1
6
1,182
Beginning July 20, Claude Fable 5 will be included in all Max and Team Premium plans, at 50% of limits.
Pro and Team Standard users will continue to have access to Fable via usage credits, and will receive a one-time $100 credit.
Demand for Fable has been challenging to predict, which is why we rolled it out to subscription plans in stages, extending access several times as we secured additional capacity.
1
1,111
