Opus 5.5 just one-shot this 90s-style demoscene demo for me. It's pretty good. It's a genuine one-shot (in colloquial X post sense - single prompt) and my first attempt asking it to do such a thing. I just supplied Purple Motion's music from Second Reality. C/C++ and OpenGL.

The original pencil drawing… it’s been quite some time since we drew this way.

The time to decentralize is upon us! Decentralization is the only political structure that actually disciplines government, and Switzerland's canton system proves it with 700 years of evidence. Twenty-six cantons compete for residents and businesses. Appenzell Innerrhoden runs differently from Zurich, which runs differently from Geneva. When Basel raises taxes past the tolerance of its engineers and entrepreneurs, those people move to Zug, which has kept its corporate tax rate under 12%. Basel loses the revenue. The lesson writes itself. Centralization is the villain. Every time a federal authority absorbs a decision that cantons once made, you lose the price signal. You lose the experiment. You lose the exit option. Brussels crushes this mechanism across the EU, which is why French farmers and German industrialists both scream at the same unresponsive bureaucracy with nowhere to go. Competition between governments constrains Leviathan the way competition between businesses constrains monopoly pricing. Strip away that competition and governments do exactly what monopolists always do: extract maximum value from captive subjects while delivering minimum service. The canton system works because it keeps power close to the people funding it and gives those people somewhere else to go. Take power and responsibility out of the hands of bureaucrats thousands of kilometers away. Localize it to within manageable sections, and watch your area flourish.

📣 ASML just said the quiet part out loud. Europe’s most valuable company sells zero chip machines in Europe. Not because the technology is lacking but because almost no new fabs are being built here. The EU Chips Act was supposed to fix that. It didn’t. The US, China and India roll out the red carpet and write the checks. Brussels bureaucrats write another strategy paper. Europe has the engineers and the capacity. It doesn’t have leaders who care about outcomes more than process and Bolshevik ideology. Nice work, unelected @vonderleyen and unelected @EU_Commission. 👎 But I know you guys take good care of yourselves. 8 salary increases in 3 years. bloomberg.com/news/articles/… 👇

Every Dutch train, one ordinary Tuesday, from first departure to last.

I think it's time to hang up my Three.js hat. First of all, this is not a pity post—I'll be fine. I'm also not 100% confident about this. But I'm an over-sharer and like to talk out loud, so I thought I would share some thoughts on where I see things going and why I'm considering quitting Three.js development. Some signals I've noticed lately that have gotten me thinking: - Since Astra was released, I've probably seen at least 10 posts from different people that have achieved similar quality to Three.js Water Pro or better. - Someone downloaded a video recording of one my posts, fed it to Astra and recreated it with 90% accuracy - I've had less and less clients referrals - A Three.js developer I respect very much is retiring from the industry due to impact of AI and lack of interest - I've heard 2nd hand accounts of other developers losing majority of course/plugin sales due to AI - I've noticed Three.js posts have shifted from work created by seasoned developers to vibe-coded games and demos. Fundamentally, I no longer really see value in what I do when it can be replicated so easily. I've always enjoyed working on hard problems. Naturally, outsourcing the hard part to an agent takes away a lot of the enjoyment for me. High-level orchestration of agents does not tickle my brain in any special way. At the end of most days I feel unfulfilled and bored. I honestly feel like I've lost much of my critical thinking ability as I've stopped coding. I find it harder to focus on tasks and my attention-span and comprehension is noticeably dropping. My plan right now is to finish up Water Pro v4 and see how that performs. After that, I think it's time to start thinking about what else is out there for me. I'd love to hear thoughts from other developers & freelancers on the matter, positive or negative. Feel free to vent!

Just to give you an idea of how railings were once seen as an opportunity for colour... I present to you the authentic colour scheme for the Smithfield market gates.

This looks like the collapse of peer-reviewed science.

If Dario wants to slow down the pace of AI, he should just move the company to Europe.

The perfect timing and sequence of events this week has been extremely sus: 1) Harry Doomer unknown random guy algo boosted post to 120M+ views 2) Dem politicians same day fearmongering about AI everywhere 3) MSM picking it up an amplifying it 4) Nate Soares (MIRI) on Tucker 5) UK regulators signing letter to ban ASI 6) The Dario letter asking for Doomer NGOs to have soft power everywhere and asking for world government We are watching a full-spectrum coordinated campaign to engineer a crisis, manufacture consent for the response, and turn engineered public fear into regulatory capture, indelible institutional power, and unprecedented government control over the future of the most important technology since the dawn of man. Whether we cave to this engineered pressure and give up our freedoms will determine our collective fate, and whether we live in centrally controlled restrictive future, or remain a free civilization. We must choose wisely.

Translation: our gross margins are getting competed down to 0 by open source models and our capex burn rate is too high. Let’s maintain our margins with regulatory capture, ban open source models, and slow down the capex arms race. All with a virtue signaling cherry on top.

The most iconic photo of 2026.

I've asked Astra to read the DeepSeek v4.1 Flash paper and compare it to the original Transformer architecture in 3D - you can zoom in an inspect each element side by side. Things have changed quite a bit. Try yourself: transformer-architecture.pet…

Before AI kills us, can we at least have a few years with the sex bots who do laundry?

>dude with no followers >overnight gets 120M views on an average AI Doomer post >gets on CNN and MSM instantly >follow the money >it's Clinton and EA billionaires >Computational propaganda experts behind the scenes Yeah, it was an op. Stay frosty, friends.

BREAKING: OpenAI might have stolen another major proof. In a detailed Mastodon post, which I report in full in the comments, Andreas Thom presents several pieces of evidence suggesting that OpenAI may have trained Astra on conversations in which he and Gábor Kun were working on Gromov’s soficity conjecture, one of the ten problems OpenAI later announced Astra had solved. I know Andreas. We met several times early in our careers. He is an exceptional mathematician, a leading expert on sofic and hyperlinear groups, and one of the most respected scholars in the field. He has spent two decades working on this problem. If his account is correct, this is not a minor dispute over attribution. It would mean that unpublished human work was absorbed into a model and then presented to the world as a breakthrough by the model itself. And if the allegations raised by Levent Alpöge, Tristan Buckmaster, and now Andreas Thom are all substantiated, we are no longer looking at isolated incidents. We may be looking at one of the greatest intellectual scandals in the history of science. AI is not discovering new mathematics. AI is stealing human discovery.

go fuck yourself @sama claiming that you solved navier stokes because 10000 agents ran in circles for 88hours on a multimillion dollar gpu cluster to formalize in lean a blowup case under controlled external forcing is pure scientific vulgarity the clay mathematics institute millennium prize does not ask m whether you can artificially force a singularity in a fluid by injecting an ad hoc smooth external forcing term f(x,t) to twist the vortex until it breaks the real problem questions the fundamental stability and global smooth existence for 3dimensional incompressible euler & navier stokes equations under natural conservation laws and viscous dissipation alone using a mathematical loophole on forced equations to parade a century old victory is a major conceptual scam Altman technically & epistemologically what you present as an agi breakthrough is nothing more than bruteforce combinatorial autoformalization the ai did not understand fluid mechanics it simply navigated a continuous search space previously mapped out and constrained by the monumental work of human mathematicians like tristan buckmaster/ levent alpöge / diego córdoba or tarek elgindi coordinating 10000 agents to check the logical consistency of a 100 page proof via lean is a software engineering feat and computational parallelization triumph not an intrinsic scientific discovery it is the victory of the compute bulldozer over abstract human intuition repackaged for the public as a higher mathematical consciousness to this theoretical imposture you add a disgusting ethical and industrial cynicism taking advantage of private codex sessions and informal preprints from academic researchers to siphon their research leads and then trying to redact or erase the contribution of levent alpöge under the pretext that he works at rival anthropic is intellectual serfdom openai behaves like a feudal lord of silicon appropriating the cognitive subsistence of independent scholars threatening their careers behind closed doors if they protest and turning community academic labor into a privatized pressrelease this entire staged event serves a desperate financial agenda in a pre ipo panic facing the slowdown of scaling laws and growing investor skepticism over the profitability of foundational models openai needs to manufacture an artificial sputnik moment claiming to solve a millennium prize without immediately submitting the proof to traditional peer review means using the prestige of fundamental mathematics as cheap marketing fuel to inflate a delusional valuation!!! real science is not a clout chase on social media or a compute spike spent to rob the clay mathematics institute it is a quest for elegance physical truth and universal rigor to decode reality true artificial intelligence will not emerge from hostile corporate takeover of academic work hidden behind computational bruteforce but from architectures capable of generating new conceptual paradigms by masquerading constrained formalization as the collapse of physics greatest mysteries you did not solve navier stokes you only proved how far silicon valley will go to prostitute scientific integrity for capitalist spectacle

tristan buckmaster just published a statement that is, if accurate, one of the ugliest things i’ve read out of a frontier lab. not because of the math. because of what happened after openai found out two people were about to beat them to the punch. buckmaster and levent alpöge spent a year pushing the córdoba / martínez-zoroa program to smooth forcing. august 15 they got blowup for boussinesq and 3d euler. lean-verified august 22. they were paying openai out of pocket and dumping every draft into private codex sessions. the program is obscure. almost nobody else was on it. this was not “paste the clay problem into a chatbot.” then this: > thursday sept 3, buckmaster emails openai privately. rumors are flying. he is trying to stop a mess, not start one. > they reply the same day: give us details so we can “avoid competing.” also, want free compute? > sunday they suddenly need a call “at any point today.” sebastien bubeck gets on. levent is not invited. > openai says an internal model has a ~100-page proof of forced navier–stokes blowup. fefferman options c and d. the exact route buckmaster and alpöge had quietly chosen. > they show him a prompt and claim the model was “simply given the problem statement.” levent is told “very little human input.” > that falls apart on the same call. a whole team had been on it. they started on the unforced problem, warmed the model up on easier equations including euler, and even the prompt they showed him was written by prompting codex. > he asks when the first prompt went out. they stall. then agree: the past few days. after information about his work reached openai. > he asks whether the model was trained on, or had access to, the private codex sessions where they put every draft of this project. > answer: the model does not look up user data. > he asks again. about training. > no answer. then it stops being a science story and becomes an hr story. > offer 1: you post euler. we post navier–stokes the next day. > offer 2: after you post euler, you alone write the navier–stokes paper, credit our model, and we cut levent. > bubeck says twice he wants levent removed from authorship because he works at anthropic. he declines both. he says if they release it that way, he goes public. the reply is not a scientific objection. > “why would you ruin your career?” > “if you don’t want me to be nice, then i don’t have to be nice.” later, a text to levent proposing a one-on-one: > “i don’t know if tristan is being fully rational right now.” that is not how you treat a collaborator. that is how you split one. openai got word two researchers were closing a path almost nobody else was on. they spun up a team on that exact path. they would not answer whether the researchers’ unpublished drafts in openai’s product were used. they tried to dictate the announcement order. they tried to remove a coauthor because he works at a competitor. when that failed, someone reached for a career threat. this is a lab finding out academics were about to publish, sprinting the same narrow program, refusing the data question, and trying to manage credit around a rival affiliation. really slimy if even half of this holds. what the fuck is happening.

Как выглядит инфляция на самом деле

“Jij wilt zeker wel vandaag nog medicatie, hè?” 🤡