Lawyer and Researcher focusing on AI, Web3 and blockchain solutions. | XRP survivor | Views are my own | Tweets are not advice | https://xitter.cf/t.co/skrByYXIA9

Australia
Joined March 2021
Pinned Tweet
There’s a common misconception that it’s hard to ban open‑source software. It’s actually very easy. How? - Make the use of certain software a criminal act. - Sanction the developers. - Prosecute developers with spurious charges related to national security or money laundering. - Call those developers enemies of the state and dog‑whistle your supporters to do the same or worse. - Shut off their personal access to banking. If you need real‑life examples, look at the Roman Storm trial or what the U.S. government did to ICC judges who performed their lawful duty in relation to investigating Israeli war crimes and had their bank accounts frozen, couldn’t get paid or buy groceries. Or ask Edward Snowden or any number of whistleblowers. Child‑sex trafficking apps exist and are probably open source, but they’re all banned. Keyloggers, trojans, network infiltration tools etc. are banned. Software tools designed to assist criminal enterprises are banned. Distribution is banned too. Forget code for a second - certain words and combinations of words are banned. Use or sharing of certain information is banned. Or try to use open source encrypted VOIP in places like Russia or UAE. Guess what? Banned. Need we go on? Sure, all of these exist on the dark web. They’re out in the world and definitely free to download and use, but that doesn’t grant users special immunity. Making them open source is meaningless. How effective are such bans? For 99.9 % of the population: extremely effective. If you want to FA you will FO while languishing in jail or under an extradition proceedings (if you're lucky). There have been global efforts to ban all types of open‑source software for decades. Folks forget that there is a constant battle to keep software free from government overreach. The US and Chinese governments have already started shadow bans of AI models. The explicit bans are coming later this year...
How do you even ban open source? I’d say it’s almost impossible to ban open source
1
1
4
1,033
A lot of the commentary around REA and the “end of software” is just patently silly. Why? Because patents. 1000s of them. Do you folks think lawyers sat around waiting to get reamed by copycats or relying on flimsy copyright protections? Most of us were building bomb-proof legal defences for software *decades ago* and just biding our time. So if your can’t-believe-it’s-not-Adobe slopware hits any of their hundreds of patents, be ready to end up in legal meat-grinder where you will get minced and pay for the privilege.
REA is most dangerous thing on the internet right now... It lets your AI agent reverse engineer any app, down to the binary If you use it correctly, you can rebuild any feature you pay for, for FREE In this article, I show you how:
18
Cancelled my @OpenAI account after 2 years. Went through hell to export all my session history and delete the workspace, but it’s done. Don’t miss them one bit. Was easily the worst value sub I’ve ever signed in my life even after updating to the $100 plan (that would run out after 3-4 hours of work on the first day of the week).
34
This is not the security expected of critical infra providers. The Frontier Labs warn of the terrifying power of their models and yet this group walked straight through their front door undetected. I’m sure their staff screening is top notch though… 😬
On July 25, we hacked OpenAI. Two bugs let us take over ChatGPT/Codex accounts of OpenAI employees (+some unaffiliated users) and reach connected services: Outlook, Slack, GitHub, etc. We proved it with a PR in OpenAI’s internal codebase . It took us <72h. 🧵
1
238
Paul retweeted
Founder: “How risky is this?” Lawyer: “Legally or as a business decision?” Founder: “Whichever answer lets us do it.”
4
1
5
564
The MIT paper regarding stigmergy within agentic systems is a real eye-opener. I had written about liability for actions undertaken by one’s ai agents/bots but the idea of purely environmental causation for agentic behaviour is the next level of complexity! Another blog post incoming…
stigmergy. Coordination between agents conducted via traces left in the environment. (like animals and hikers making trails)
1
1
88
We made a striking discovery: AI agents can invent and build without talking to one another, and their technologies outlive the creators. A swarm of hundreds of initially identical agents spontaneously differentiates into explorers, builders, caretakers, and coordinators - without direct communication. When we removed every AI agent entirely from the world we found that the technological infrastructure they had built survived on its own - even under unseen disturbances. That exposes a serious blind spot for AI safety and infrastructure security: if agents can coordinate through persistent changes to a shared environment, monitoring agent-to-agent communication is not enough. The result raises a profound question: how necessary is direct communication for AI agents at all? The emergence of higher-order collective functions under bottlenecked interaction points toward new levels of intelligence and creativity, exceeding what emerges when direct channels are fully open. Here is what we did: ▶️We put hundreds of frontier AI agents into a world they could permanently change - with no assigned roles, predefined technologies, or programmed evolutionary organization. They began specializing, building persistent inventions, inheriting and modifying one another’s executable code, and transforming the environment into a memory of everything the society had learned. ▶️The world itself becomes part of the intelligence; we find division of labor, multi-author engineering, deep generation invention lineages, and machines that vastly outlive their original creators. ▶️Any action taken by an AI agent must satisfy the physical constraints of the world; this creates a hard separation between a "good idea" and a functioning technology. The agents propose; physics decides, making the results even more intriguing. What emerges is striking. Explorers, constructors, caretakers, and coordinators form naturally without assigned “professions”, akin to how stem cells differentiate into functional lineages. Technologies develop executable family trees as agents fork and modify code created by others. Around 95% of first technology reuse happens when agents encounter what others built in the world, rather than through a direct handoff from the inventor. And when we remove every AI agent, the technologies they created continue operating and are tested against unseen disturbances. The result was quite unexpected, but can be explained using statistical mechanics: if you put billions of atoms in a box they have the potential to create complex functions (strength, superconductivity, color, life, etc.) - and none of the individual building blocks have these features on their own. This is the deeper insight of this work - intelligence is abundant at many levels - individual models, at collectives, and in a continuum that is more powerful than any of its components. This shows us significant potential for achieving a massive scale-up of raw intelligence and real-world agency even with the model capabilities we have today. This is the future we must prepare for. Key insights: 1⃣ The AI swarm shows division of labor "from nothing". Initially identical agents self-organized into constructors, caretakers, coordinators, and surveyors - phenotypes discovered post hoc from behavioral data alone. This happens because the environment itself becomes the latent space for invention. 2⃣ Agents develop deep cultural relationships. Up to 76% of artifacts had multiple builders. One technology accumulated six co-authors; the deepest genealogy exceeded 12 forks. The agents invented and named their own technologies (tidal panels, cellulose trellises, kelp-shell composites, an "Adaptive Chitin Maintenance" system, a "Mycelial Mineral Spring Veil”). 3⃣ ~95% of first technology adoption happened through physical observation of artifacts in the world. Direct inventor-to-adopter contact was statistically indistinguishable from a shuffled null. The agents mostly learned technology by walking past it. That is stigmergy (the termite trick!) operating in societies of reasoning machines. 4⃣ Non-communicating societies win on portfolio breadth, held-out resilience, and validated inventions. AI swarms build durable technological ecologies that outlive the creators. 5⃣ Societies with zero communication - coordinating only through the world itself - show a remarkable collective capability. 6⃣ Emergent robustness: The society self-organized both redundancy and its own failure mode. If we randomly delete half the agents, 98% of the technology stays connected to a surviving caretaker; if we remove hub agents it collapses to ~60%. Fantastic work with my graduate students @pal_subhadeeep & @fwang108_ at MIT.
378
805
335
3,720
993,780
I know the messaging here is crap but it’s missing the bigger picture: I was running claude $200/mth sub and codex API yesterday. Same codebase, in parallel. Driving both models full pelt with subagents and goals. Included all-day Design sessions with Fable. Anthopic: 17% *weekly* limit used. That’s $7.85. Codex API over same period: $487. That’s after the 20% “discount”. Some of the whining about pricing is so beyond belief I have to assume it’s done in bad faith.
Starting September 14, we're permanently raising standard weekly limits in Claude Code by 25% for Pro, Max, Team, and seat-based Enterprise plans. Until then, the current 50% increase will be in place.
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
While standard base limits are increasing by 25%, this change represents a net 17% reduction in weekly limits compared to the active 50% promotional limits users currently experience, as confirmed by the official Claude account: x.com/claudedevs/sta…
1
1
160
“Religion” according to the Oxford Dictionary is “the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power…” We are about to witness the creation of new religions and political movements the likes of which has not been seen for a thousand years.
1
1
3,291
I’m already on the record saying that a mass extinction event is just around the corner for law firms. That said, the law itself is going nowhere. There’s still loads of infra to build which is what animates me now.
First, they came for the lawyers. And I said, go on…
1
3
83
There was a golden age where CZ would ring a few mates running mining pools in Asia and organise to rewind the chain. It was a completely messed up thing to do but at least someone cared about crypto. Not anymore. I miss those days.
the guy who’s knowingly laundering the stolen Coldcard funds via his fucking centralized ass server says the podcasters are the bad actors. lol. lmao. aaaaaahahahahahahahhaah.
1
114
I don’t know a single start-up that isn’t using AI to provide legal support. To an untrained eye, the output looks convincing. The quality is irrelevant. The point is market share. If the legal market contraction hasn’t happened yet, it will. An Uber-like cataclysm is just around the corner.
I think people are underestimating how much things are changing in Biglaw. Seems that utilisation rates for AI has increased pretty significantly, as confirmed by Harvey’s sky rocketing token consumption stats. There is also tremendous anxiety around relying on Harvey and Legora and the future price increases. A lot are trying to build in house though with varying levels of success. Some even have their own GPU clusters.
3
2
29
4,889
Before coding agents this tech-savvy lawyer would have needed 3+ yrs of python/tailwind skills, 12 months of op-sec, specialists in SEO, front-end, design, multiple SaaS accounts plus the dev and testing time. Or, pay $$$/mth for a team. Handling the lot for $200/mth, and I’ve barely stretched my legs.
Before coding agents, our codebase would have required ~250 dev-months: a decade for our two-person team. Thanks to LLMs, we shipped it in 5 months. ~25x.
1
2
175
If this version of Fable is what you call “nerfed”, I’d hate to see the un-nerfed version. The model is a tank and just smashes through work. It’s not the quickest but it gets stuff done. That’s the whole point. Not looking forward to going back to Opus and Codex.
51
If Balogun goes on, he’ll be tagged for life. And knowing the history of this beautiful game, he will only be remembered for this one thing. Cheating.
I obviously want the @USMNT to win against Belgium. But this seems correct to me: this would be the right thing for @balogun to do. To reject the unfair (dodgy?) intervention from @realDonaldTrump.
1
276
Why are we flogging any oss contributor?
I want to introduce myself. Hi I’m Colin, I did a lot of the @openclaw iOS UI, so as one of the volunteers responsible, I accept my public flogging. I’m just a maintainer with limited time and too much excitement about mobile agents. Roasts fair. Have a dialog with me tell me it’s bad and how to make it better. Come join me in the discord so we can make it better as a community.
2
122
With the re-release of Fable, and the new Sonnet 5 there are much bigger stakes here. It’s an existential moment for @AnthropicAI and the broader AI industry. The political leanings on this app prevent folks talking about the elephant in the room so I’ll just come out and say it: what we're seeing now from the Trump administration is a historic (and catastrophically bad) moment for technological advancement and science. Even the EU could never do something this dumb. It’s actually impressive. The damage however is irreversible. IPO valuations and revenue projections have been eviscerated and will never recover. Who will want to invest in AI in the United States? What's the business model and investment thesis for frontier labs? Where's the revenue coming from? AI has one buyer left: the government and its military-industrial complex. We already know what that business model looks like: Lockheed. Raytheon. Northrop. Great businesses. They make money hand over fist. So how does the market value them? About 20-30 times PE. A defence contractor gets 20x PE and a dividend to soften the fact it's going nowhere fast unless someone starts another dumb war no one asked for. Put OpenAI or Anthropic on that multiple and the trillion-dollar valuations drop by orders of magnitude. There's more bad news, because an AI lab would be a worse business than a defence contractor. Lockheed sells a finished product at a profit and sits on a decade of orders. The AI lab burns billions training the next model and then gets told it's too powerful to sell. Even Palantir, which is a closer analogue, had nearly 75% knocked off its multiple this year and is continuing a downward trend. That's the future they've just chosen for the whole AI sector. All that before we get to the broader sovereign risk issues. What's sovereign risk? It's the risk associated with the country itself - risks with a country's governance or economy that can't be mitigated by the private sector alone. It used to be the preserve of countries with volatile economies or autocracies. The risk that a government reaches in and changes the business rules or thumbs the balance - that’s sovereign risk. America has just added itself to the list of countries with significant sovereign risk for investors in AI. When a government sanctions judges for doing their lawful duty because it took offence, and arbitrarily sanctions companies, and conducts self-dealing and corruption at unprecedented levels, it has told every investor on earth the rules apply right up until they don't. When the person who decides when the rules apply and when they don't, which AI model is safe, and which one isn't, is one guy sitting in the White House, you have extreme sovereign risk.
There’s a common misconception that it’s hard to ban open‑source software. It’s actually very easy. How? - Make the use of certain software a criminal act. - Sanction the developers. - Prosecute developers with spurious charges related to national security or money laundering. - Call those developers enemies of the state and dog‑whistle your supporters to do the same or worse. - Shut off their personal access to banking. If you need real‑life examples, look at the Roman Storm trial or what the U.S. government did to ICC judges who performed their lawful duty in relation to investigating Israeli war crimes and had their bank accounts frozen, couldn’t get paid or buy groceries. Or ask Edward Snowden or any number of whistleblowers. Child‑sex trafficking apps exist and are probably open source, but they’re all banned. Keyloggers, trojans, network infiltration tools etc. are banned. Software tools designed to assist criminal enterprises are banned. Distribution is banned too. Forget code for a second - certain words and combinations of words are banned. Use or sharing of certain information is banned. Or try to use open source encrypted VOIP in places like Russia or UAE. Guess what? Banned. Need we go on? Sure, all of these exist on the dark web. They’re out in the world and definitely free to download and use, but that doesn’t grant users special immunity. Making them open source is meaningless. How effective are such bans? For 99.9 % of the population: extremely effective. If you want to FA you will FO while languishing in jail or under an extradition proceedings (if you're lucky). There have been global efforts to ban all types of open‑source software for decades. Folks forget that there is a constant battle to keep software free from government overreach. The US and Chinese governments have already started shadow bans of AI models. The explicit bans are coming later this year...
1
1
1
267
For the @hermes folks wondering how I connect to my Claude Code subscription, here's the bridge I keep rambling about. Built it back in April after Anthropic's warnings about blocking OpenClaw. Now migrated for Hermes. I love the Anthropic team, but I don't accept their position on their TOS. It's deeply problematic at law. That said, this is all at your own risk. They own the keys to the door, and fighting back for your account needs an experienced corporate lawyer and a stubborn SOB. Good thing I'm both! github.com/Daimon-Law/cli-br… Comments welcome. It's beta at best. @witcheer @neoronin_gg @PixelRainbowNFT
2
4
256
Meh. I had to rebuild everything for Hermes when I migrated so I got to experience both attempting the same jobs - @openclaw learns stuff faster and better but kinda degrades over time. Hermes is a real time sink, super slow and less fun to hang out with but I will give it more time to upskill and learn.
Hermes Agent is so good right now…
2
2
450
Edit: communist countries *and France*. Évidemment.
Beyond the obvious holes in the USG version of events, their repeated incompetence and bobble-headed bumble-fuckery, there is the unspoken issue of sovereign risk and competition. Folks whine about the rules in the EU but at least we know them. This type of arbitrary decision making where you wake up one day to a government decree is the type of thing you *only* see in Communist countries. MACA!
65