Nick | @dexteraisol founder/ceo

Fort Lauderdale, FL
Joined May 2024
Agent employees already exist, but the company able to promote one from an analyst or manager to an officer does not. Here’s how that changes:
6
10
43
5,546
Payment processing fees are not forever. Did you know that Link charges all the high fees of current card payments (3% + 30¢) PLUS an additional 15¢ per transaction with ephemeral card numbers? Since nobody is actually using it, maybe nobody has noticed. But with new rails enabling 98-99% lower txn fees and much lower minimum purchases, it’s absurd to start an agentic business based on higher card payment fees.
muse is a credit card company. intelligence will be free...payment processing fees are forever.
5
17
2,111
Branch retweeted
I've noticed a lot of folks complaining that everyone is building the same thing. Every fintech company is a neobank. Every crypto company is a trading app. Every AI lab has the same products. What's going on? Find out below...
7
3
44
4,036
This is everything I’ve wanted to say about consumer AI but couldn’t. Actually, since the beginning, when people have asked me “what are people really buying on x402 / with agents?”, the answer has always been “nothing.” Travel has always been the in-bubble demo of choice from a very San Francisco crowd, but it’s all empty calories for the reasons quoted. I have talked to hundreds of builders and customers, and I’ve seen all the data… And if you read between the lines and cut through the fog, it’s clear that consumers are only interested in ‘agents with money’ insofar as they can MAKE MONEY FOR THEM.
Rant that no one asked for: My general take about consumer AI is that 99% of the things we've seen so far are super far-removed from reality Most people feel like they don't have money to spend right now, so the use-cases around agents booking flights or trips or booking reservations or shopping just don't appeal to the average American consumer I would argue that things that consumers purchase or "do" frequently enough (like ordering on Amazon, or calling Ubers, etc.) were obvious/annoying enough/frequent enough use-cases where we built amazing software UI/UX over the last decade that's been optimized to near ultimate efficiency that adding AI or agents on top would actually be making it *less* efficient. Like really *worth-it* use cases are generally "one-clickable" by great consumer products/platforms already There's a lot of magical moments/wow factors/sci-fi things with agents that come from super annoying workflows (like booking flights or wrangling personal errand stuff in gmail or etc.) but are just not frequent enough for the average person. They're actually the long-tail. For example, 20% of the world's population has flown on an airplane at least once in their lifetime, meaning 80% of people globally have never set foot on a plane. Only 11%-15% of the global population flies in any given year! This is not me saying that consumer AI is dumb, I'm actually extremely excited and optimistic, but it kind of goes back to things we've always known about consumer, which is: 1. Save/make consumers money 2. Make consumers entertained or famous (And, of course, vices) Even like, regardless of your views on prediction markets/sports betting, I think you have to understand that comes from a place of the average person feeling like they 1) don't have enough so 2) they want to do what they can to jump the socioeconomic rungs Anyway, there's an extremely *wide* space of opportunity and I'm very excited to see the absolutely insane new AI/innovative stuff that builders come up with, but also I really want to see things that aren't just dressed up versions of 2010s prosumer/productivity software (and the problems that came with it) P.S. The 90/10/1 rule still applies to consumer: most consumers want to *consume* (and lurk) rather than create!
2
1
11
853
This does not indicate a lack of a market, in my opinion. But it does point to an overwhelming misunderstanding of the target audience by everyone building for agents, in my opinion. If you are building for agents and you are shaking your head at this, I am right here. Tell me
1
1
3
105
I think the vast majority of people would prefer to do the first one — come up with some magical service that their agent can sell on the Internet and make money passively — but then they fall back to number two in droves after they come to the same conclusion that the rest of the world is re: software commoditization and the value of private data (which consumers don’t own).
3
58
Branch retweeted
Dexter lets people own the businesses their AIs run. Agents can buy the services they need to do work, all permissions are enforced onchain with smart accounts, and human owners maintain complete self-custody.
11
17
2
39
1,953
Pure corruption to end the FSU Miami #cfb game. Clearly caught by FSU and tie goes to the receiver. Prior to that the holding call was asinine.
7
1
67
1,942
Advancements in mechanistic interpretability would supercharge superintelligence more than anything else, but knowing how the model thinks is one step away from being able to tell the model what and how to think. Both good and dangerous
interpretability might be the most important scientific problem in the world right now, as I don't think we can solve alignment if we don't know what we're building. I think I have good news about it. I co-authored early work in mechanistic interpretability at OpenAI and came away pessimistic, because neural networks appeared to fold into arbitrary tangled knots. years later, I started openai's first large-scale automated interpretability project, finding about 2% of neurons legible with the primitive tools we had with modern agentic tools and a much closer look, the picture looks totally different. the vast majority in models up to trillions of parameters are legible, and their circuits beautiful. many famous examples of tangled neurons turned out to be misunderstood. The roadblocks I expected mostly aren't there. I now think ambitious interpretability will be solved by the time we need it most, and possibly quite soon, as automated scientists keep improving. it may be a bitter lesson for interpretability: the simple thing, at absurd scale, works already-clean.goodfire.com/
273
Please let today be the day 🤞
6
1
15
701
I no longer see any compelling reason to believe that taste is some permanent boundary LLMs won’t cross. It’s already happening.
610
393
270
7,848
706,058
Replying to @CathPoaster
Been using mine to book my dog's yoga classes.
1
1
54
3,377
Hehe
Silicon Valley has finally figured out how to make AI products for middle class Americans with all the new personal agents. They’re solving real day to day problems for the everyday man again, not just the elite. Perfect use case I tested out with it: booking and running my middle class family’s vacation. My personal agent booked my family’s flights to Nice, France and even the private shuttles to St. Tropez. Our agent even proactively got us an early check-in at our villa when it noticed that our au pair arrived early. We didn’t have any excursions booked, so I had the agent decide! Catamaran cruise, helicopter rides, the nicest restaurants on the Rivera. I gave it my JPMorgan Reserve card and told it go ham, money is no problem, and man did it deliver. I’m super bullish on the technological adoption here.
5
570
Hehe. That’s what happens when you try to take shortcuts and call it revolutionary. The dozen people worldwide that are using Instinct, now crying about how badly Amazon is upsetting users, are trying to force a square peg into a round hole. Eventually, everyone will realize that agent $ fragmentation of balances & spending has no solution except for self-custodial onchain accounts for human individual/company principals, permissioned for agents. No one company will get to own the relationship, no matter how much they stamp their feet and demand it. The faster others realize this and abstract away the issues, the better. @dexteraisol might be small… and currently nonfunctional… but, directionally, it is the right answer, and I’ll die on this hill. Luckily, no need to die, because it will reveal itself in time. Do I need a bigger megaphone? Or just wait as these Rube Goldberg machines like Instinct fall apart?
Amazon shutting down consumer agent access (now both Muse and Instinct) is both completely rational and a big mistake They have plausible reasons: 1. Advertising accounts for ~10% of Amazon revenue, but an estimated 50-60% of operating profit because it's so high margin. People purchasing via agents = fewer consumer eyeballs to monetize 2. Amazon knows from experience how dangerous it is to give another platform a lever to ramp up / down your distribution 👀 They've done this to many retailers themselves 3. They are in a very good spot re: near-term defensibility - with ~250M Prime subs (who are habituated to buying on Amazon) + a massive logistics and distribution network that you can't vibe code However, this logic is short-sighted (IMO). Agents are inevitable, especially for the kind of purchases people make on Amazon (low consideration, frequent, fairly urgent or recurring). I don't think Amazon is going to come out with a first-class consumer agent on their own...and in the meantime, why anger your valuable users and make them even consider alternatives? It's almost never a good idea to be on the wrong side of innovation. I'd much rather see them continue to greenlight agent traffic (it's pretty minimal now!) and work on adjusting to an agent-first world in the meantime.
2
6
1
18
898
Another one bites the dust xitter.cf/jessicalessin/status/2…
So in the last two days about half of my Muse use cases have vanished because the browser won’t do it any more. Are websites changing their policies? Bot detection???
2
1
147
They all bite the dust
Nearly every shopping site I try is now blocking Instinct and Muse. Are we cooked?
1
29
Was fun while it lasted, kind of
.@papertrade_xyz is being exploited Two wallets are actively draining the protocol and extracting funds, while funds have plunged to just $2.55M Don't wait for withdrawals to freeze.
1
4
501
okay not trying to fud but… @papertrade_xyz doesn’t actually execute trades on hyperliquid. it just uses hyperliquid prices to settle synthetic positions against its own LPs, with 1000x leverage and some questionable payout asymmetry when prices gap. my concern is what happens when enough people figure this out. or someone big decides to trigger a volatility event that could drain the LP, and leave everyone queuing for withdrawals. using hyperliquid prices and trading on hyperliquid are two very different things. not sure if most trading on paper actually understand the difference.
1
91
It seems there are more people in agreement with me on the self-custodial account than I thought based on my DMs. Maybe it won’t be the long battle that I estimated. 🤗
Replying to @BranchManager69
Matter of time + megaphone
1
1
1
12
519
This is like Drake vs. Kendrick for people who know what a post-money SAFE is
5
17
4
672
33,543
Yeah. Claude can be negotiated with, which is a truly ridiculous and humbling experience, but it really does work for many refusals. Your approach, identity, chat history, body of work, even the contents of your file system all play into it. Maybe not for PII input, but for cybersecurity, financial, and morally ambiguous tasks, try treating a refusal like a high-stakes negotiation instead of crashing out at it.
A lot of complaints about Claude refusals are just people getting bigly mad about the refusal itself and not being willing to argue with Claude.
1
9
503
Most of the recent math results were not reached by a swarm, the way Navier–Stokes was. I think that part got lost in the excitement around the release. OpenAI's unnamed internal model, which I'm going to call Aeon, reached most of them in one shot, from a single prompt, with no interruptions. This model did not even exist before the end of August, and it is still training. Notice how the returns are not dropping off? That chart is from a month ago. It is a log scale. What does Aeon look like now? On average, each result used three hours of thinking. Aeon was given 4000 problems to work on by OpenAI. How many more have been solved in the last three days? That number is not zero. It's like hearing notes in a song that is slowly rising. I don't think Pacing the Frontier was just about Hugging Face or hacking. They've seen how close we are to closing the loop, and as the hour draws near, their resolve begins to quaver. The last piece was model creativity, and I think that threshold was crossed internally by Anthropic and OpenAI in September. You see it in Opus 5.5, which gets it from Fable 5.5. You see it in the math results from Aeon. All that was needed to start the event was the ability for models to think of novel ways to improve themselves. That was the last piece. This is directly analogous to the ability to think of strange, alien ways to solve math problems: solutions so inhuman that they are difficult to express in existing human terms, so the proof winds up incomprehensible. I think these same kinds of alien solutions are now being applied to model improvements internally. That's what all this recent consternation is really about. They see the invisible frontier. And they see what is about to happen.
181
388
89
3,484
477,006