Alexander retweeted
it won't be long before "have your bot talk to my bot" becomes common!
some fun use cases of multiplayer grok bot over email could be:
• debugging (you can send my bot bug reports!)
• customer support
• booking meetings and events
• group buys
• buying and selling stuff off craigslist
what have you used bot mail for?
Alexander retweeted
People saying "I'd never give Muse/Meta access to my Gmail, Calendar, etc" is the 2026 version of "I'll never put my credit card on the internet."
Alexander retweeted
Meta will continue to be successful because they understand that a winning consumer AI strategy is “hey you can use AI to negotiate a good deal on a Peloton through Marketplace and btw we made a silly little AI character with a fluffy butt that you can look at on your new Meta Tamagotchi”
not “run our open weight model 6.7.1 on this new Chinese orchestration architecture oh and btw it might take your job and kill you good luck”
Alexander retweeted
efficiency, productivity, speed
we keep worshipping these words like they are what we live for
ship faster
merge more
manage more agents
compress every loop
remove every pause
turn every hour into output
but what is the point of endless production if there is no time left to think deeply?
not react
not optimize
not summarize
not clear the queue
think
to sit with a question long enough that your real intention starts to appear
to find the purpose underneath the motion
to ask whether the thing being accelerated should exist at all
ai could be a new canvas
a way to make strange things
personal things
impossible things
tools, worlds, poems, games, interfaces, films, languages, rituals
things that let more people touch the shape of their own imagination
but instead, so much of it is becoming slop factories
more content
more funnels
more tickets
more fake work pretending to be value
you can merge 2000 prs
you can manage 500 agents
you can wake up to dashboards proving that the machine kept moving while you slept
but what is the point if you only sleep 5 hours a day?
what is the point if you stop talking to other humans?
stop learning about the past?
stop playing?
stop wandering?
stop being surprised?
what is the point if your whole life becomes optimizing the system that is consuming you?
speed is not meaning
scale is not wisdom
automation is not freedom if it only makes everyone run faster
and where are we running?
toward what?
a world where every person becomes a manager of machines, and every machine produces more things no one had the time to truly want?
the danger is not that ai makes us lazy
the danger is that ai makes us endlessly busy
that it gives us infinite production before we have found intention
infinite execution before we have developed taste
infinite motion before we have learned how to be still
maybe the real frontier is not more speed
maybe it is discernment
knowing what not to make
knowing when to stop
knowing when the most productive thing is to sleep, read history, call a friend, play with a cat, walk without tracking it, or stare at the ceiling until the false urgency dissolves
tools should give us more life
not turn life into a tool
if ai is going to matter, it should not just help us produce more
it should help us become more human
more imaginative
more free
otherwise, it’s the same old factory
just without humans
Alexander retweeted
Last month I wrote about how we can build a positive and safe future for everyone: meta.com/thefutureisforevery…
Every lab has the responsibility and incentive to move at the pace required to train its models safely, and the ability to take its own actions to ensure that happens.
The reality is:
- People won't want to use agents that are misaligned with them and that don't do what they ask, so labs have a strong natural incentive to make their models more aligned.
There is a lot of debate about slowing progress on capabilities until alignment catches up. My view is that trust and alignment are quickly becoming the most important capabilities that will differentiate agents and models. Any lab that doesn't focus on alignment will fall behind.
- Labs face significant liability if their models cause harm, so they have a strong incentive to prevent this as well.
Meta delayed shipping Muse for several months to focus on safety and security. We didn't call for everyone else to do this before we would. We just did it as part of our day-to-day work because it was clearly the right thing for people and for us. I'm proud of the security foundations we've built.
- Engaging independent evaluators and advisors is industry best practice. MSL already does this today in several areas because it helps produce better work. Other labs can just do this too. In general, it would be helpful for there to be a larger and more diverse ecosystem of evaluators.
- Committing the significant majority of compute towards serving people rather than racing towards recursive self-improvement is one of the best ways to ensure we develop this technology safely. Meta has made this commitment and other labs can do this as well.
I believe the key to building a positive future for everyone is maintaining the right balance of power. This is within our power to do.
Alexander retweeted
JENSEN HUANG: “We don't welcome political discourse inside our company. Take it home … We're bipartisan. We want America to succeed … The discourse about race and religion and politics and all of that stuff, we tell people do it outside the company. It's not for us.”
Alexander retweeted
I have stock in SpaceX and Tesla, not some big pile of cash.
As my companies do more and more useful things, their value increases proportionate to their projected usefulness. All shareholders benefit along the way, including most retirement programs.
Alexander retweeted
Your software factory should be a monorepo. All your company context (design, marketing, sales, engineering, support…) in one place for agents to build upon
Turborepo is the build system for agentic coding.
turborepo.dev/
Alexander retweeted
Post clearly written by Claude, lo, the circle is complete.
Alexander retweeted
I have many more issues with Ilhan Omar being worth $30 million than Elon being worth a trillion.
Alexander retweeted
“I don’t ever give up” Congrats @elonmusk 🚀
Alexander retweeted
Barbell strategy for killing it in an age of superhuman AI:
Simultaneously get as close to AND stay as far away from AI as humanly possible.
1. Get close — play with AI models, use them to help you think, ask them to teach you about the world, get them to help you create, work with them to write code, understand what makes them tick, embed them into your everyday life, have fun.
2. Stay far away — learn to tell stories, make eye contact, build a team, lead with courage, connect far-flung ideas, build lifelong friendships, debate persuasively, think forbidden thoughts, handwrite ideas, confess your fears, fall in love.
Spend less time trying to master mental transformations that are purely mechanical — building spreadsheets, analyzing trades, balancing accounts, writing code by hand, following playbooks, searching for needles in haystacks. These are the emerging no-man's land, squarely the domain of AI.
Venture to the extremes. That’s where all the fun is anyway.
Alexander retweeted
Good take
My guess is
- demand for intelligence is near infinite
- but 80% of workloads will be running on 99% cheaper models within 12-18 months
- 20% of workloads will still run on latest gen models where IQ maxing is important (scientific breakthroughs, higher level ochestrator agents?)
- rough analogy might be what % of macbooks or gaming PCs sold have the maxed out specs for CPU/GPU, prices are falling much faster than Moore's law here though
- this leads me to think the limiting factor will be energy and compute, not better models
At Coinbase we're working hard on routing prompts to cheaper models where appropriate, and in some cases have been able to keep costs roughly flat, while token usage continues to grow exponentially.
The most basic way AI could blow up imo. I'm not saying it does but this is the most obvious way I can see it happening
- Per seat subscriptions are massively subsidized. The flat fee was priced way below what heavy usage actually costs
- For real business use you have to move to the API anyway. Data protections, work integrations and compliance officer approval
- On the API you pay metered rates, and businesses are burning credits way faster than the per seat pricing ever led them to expect
- This is everywhere right now. Internally for us, Codex users, Uber torching its entire 2026 AI budget in 4 months, the Microsoft comments. Just go try an API
I shared more on this here: xitter.cf/Shaughnessy119/status/…
- And I don't think most businesses have the money to keep paying increasing API rates without a real change to how they operate (caps needed)
- Because they have a cheap alternative. They can reach open source models through any aggregator (OpenRouter, Venice, Baseten, Together) and still get strong privacy. Venice private data centers, or E2EE/TEE serving GLM 5.1.
More on open source inference provider raises here: xitter.cf/Shaughnessy119/status/…
- And the discount is enormous. DeepSeek V4 codes within a hair of Opus on SWE bench at roughly 1/30th the price, and the cheapest open models run closer to 1/100th
- Chinese labs open source frontier grade models. The model is the single biggest cost an inference provider has, and they get it for free
- This idea dies if China goes closed source. That is actually bullish web2 AI labs, because if everyone is closed you pay up for the best intelligence. China goes closed source if they are tired of giving away an asset and they want the revenue and data flow to train new models
- Is this showing up in web2 AI lab revenue yet? No. Revenue is off the charts. Anthropic went from 9B to 47B run rate in five months
- So go forward, what happens?
- I think revenue slowly starts leaking to the open source inference providers (see Venice usage, OpenRouter's $113M raise, Baseten is raising at $11B or triple its valuation in three months, on revenue that went from $200M to $600M annualized in a single quarter)
- It doesnt move overnight, but it caps the labs ability to raise prices, and margins are already deeply negative. OpenAI is reportedly running near negative 122%
- With margins that bad there is no cash flow, so the labs are fully dependent on outside capital to buy GPUs, train models, and keep subsidizing usage (I.e. see Google tapping $80b equity sale, granted 30b for employee RSU taxes. Clearly they think Equity is overvalued or you wouldn't sell it)
- The break comes when that capital stops. Pricing is capped so margins cant improve, and the moment investors lose conviction on payback, the whole flow reverses
- Why would they lose conviction on payback? Back to the start - the inability to improve margins or get businesses to pay more
- This is also limiting, if we start making new drugs with AI or create entirely new businesses, you better believe people will pay up to the max for AI usage