Structured customer journeys. Clarity. Convergence. Completion.

Lausanne, Switzerland
Joined May 2013
Stay curious. There’s always more to discover. Remarkable ideas. Hidden connections. New perspectives. Explore SparkZone - short, visual stories that help you see the world differently. sparkzone.flon.co
🤖 Made with AI
132
Two AI agents reviewing each other:
31
187
24
1,299
63,064
FLON retweeted
Every Swiss🇨🇭 passenger train, on a typical day, from first departure to last
29
181
20
1,295
86,182
OpenAI model names aren't that confusing, you just need to know we started with GPT-1, 2 and 3, then 3.5, then 3.5 Turbo, then GPT-4, then GPT-4 Turbo, then GPT-4o where the o means omni, except it didn't really end up being omni, then GPT-4o mini Then we switch to the o series, where the o now means OpenAI instead of omni, starting with o1-preview and o1-mini, then o1 drops the preview, then we skip o2 and they announce o3 and o3-mini, but o3-mini gets released first, meanwhile GPT-4.5 comes out and THEN GPT-4.1 because why not, alongside GPT-4.1 mini and nano, then o3 finally arrives with o4-mini even though there's no regular o4 Then we're back to GPT with GPT-5, mini and nano, followed by 5.1, 5.2 and 5.2-Codex, then 5.3-Codex, and yes there's also GPT-5.3 but ONLY Instant, no Thinking or Pro, then 5.4 brings the coding capabilities into the main model so we drop the Codex suffix, but hey mini and nano are back, then 5.5, then 5.6 where the names are now Sol, Terra and Luna Then GPT-6 arrives but only Astra at first, followed by Sol and Luna, no GPT-6 Terra this time, and exactly a week after GPT-6 Sol we get GPT-6.1 Sol with near-Astra performance at a much lower cost And that's just the quick version, wasn't that hard was it?
73
112
35
2,279
137,879
FLON retweeted
Bach rimane il più grande. Punto.
165
1,845
242
11,625
826,783
F.02 Decommission
597
1,458
967
11,535
3,358,455
Cron jobs with a new hat ?
1
102
I set a camera really close to the launch pad to get this shot. It was a sound activated trigger since it wasn’t safe for me to stand here. That’s all 33 Raptor engines performing nominally as Starship heads to orbit for the first time.
536
1,660
106
19,675
668,514
Zidane’s assistant somehow looks more like Zidane than Zidane himself.
326
2,474
240
39,618
1,340,304
2022: KI kann nichtmal 2+5 korrekt rechnen. 😂😂 2023: KI kann nichtmal Buchstaben in Wörtern zählen. 😅 2024: KI kann nichtmal Bilder eines randvollen Weinglases generieren 🤓 2025: KI will zu Fuß mit dem Auto in die Waschstraße 🤦‍♂️ 2026: KI kann Millenium Mathe Probleme nur durch Bruteforce lösen😖 2027: 👀
28
26
5
481
60,551
Himalayan pink salt is the same as normal salt - except it has traces of rust ..
1
120
Sunset Reflections
5
723
Forget Swiss neutrality .. this means war ! delaybahn.com/leaderboard
1
97
Lausanne 🇨🇭at dusk ..
4
690
No, no, you’re missing the important bit - the 10,000-agent swarm didn’t just solve Navier–Stokes. It changes the economics of scientific discovery! Tao says we’re optimizing the wrong objective function, but if we use Specification Agents to identify reusable mathematical keys …
77
Got a 10,000-agent AI research swarm? Don’t waste it collecting famous mathematical trophies. Ask scientists for the problems that would unlock entire fields. The best breakthrough isn’t another door opened. It’s a new key that opens 1,000 doors. 🔑 Physicists. Mathematicians. Biologists. Chemists. Materials scientists… What should we aim the swarm at?
🤖 Made with AI
73
I find these World Trade Center simulations by Kostack Studio fascinating because they remove the smoke and let you see the collapse much more clearly. In the real footage, so much is hidden by fire, dust, debris, distance, and chaos that many people come away with the impression that the towers simply dropped straight down into their own footprints. But that is not really what happened. These simulations make it much easier to see that the collapse begins in the heavily damaged and fire-weakened region, the upper section starts moving and tilting, and the destruction then propagates downward through the structure. The towers do not simply disappear vertically into their own footprints. Large portions of the upper structure and exterior are moving outward and to the side as the collapse develops. Much of that motion is simply obscured in the real videos once the enormous debris cloud forms. And this is also why I find these simulations useful when people describe the collapses as looking like “controlled demolition.” Strip away the smoke and dust and the resemblance becomes much less convincing. What you see is a highly asymmetric structural failure beginning around the aircraft-damaged and fire-affected floors, followed by an enormous moving mass progressively overwhelming the structure beneath it. There is tilting, rotation, exterior columns peeling away, debris being thrown far outside the building footprint, and structural failure occurring chaotically as the collapse moves downward. That is very different from the neat mental image usually implied by “controlled demolition,” where structural supports are deliberately severed in a carefully timed sequence to produce a predetermined collapse. And importantly, we already know what preceded these collapses. Both towers suffered massive aircraft-impact damage. Fireproofing was stripped from portions of the structure. Large, uncontrolled fires then burned across multiple floors - for about 56 minutes in the South Tower and about 102 minutes in the North Tower - heating and weakening structural components until collapse initiated. Once that upper mass began moving, the loads imposed on the floors and structure beneath became vastly greater than anything they had been designed to carry. The result was progressive collapse. No, an animation is not proof simply because it looks convincing, and these are not official NIST simulations. They are visualizations built under particular assumptions. But as visualizations, I think they are extremely useful. They let you see something the original footage often cannot show clearly: beneath that enormous cloud of smoke and debris was a complicated, violent, asymmetric structural failure - not two buildings neatly dropping straight down into their own footprints. A note on the simulation: this is not intended to reproduce the collapse down to the exact motion of every beam, floor panel, and fragment of debris. No practical simulation could do that. Its value is in modeling the large-scale structural behavior - how the major sections deform, move, tilt, separate, and progressively fail. Think of it as a visualization of the mechanics and overall collapse behavior, not a frame-by-frame reconstruction of where every piece of steel ultimately landed.
2,747
10,113
985
100,061
62,403,173
This post looks like the start of a VERY sophisticated and well-funded PR operation to get support for Democrats to regulate AI into oblivion. Let me show you how it works: 1.) This guy, with minimal followers and no previous account activity, goes to the Wall Street Journal which publishes an exclusive with quotes from him on his resignation 18 minutes BEFORE this post goes up. Planning was clearly done in advance. 2.) Within hours, it has tens of thousands of reposts and the account has 100k+ followers. The post is punchy, quotable, it almost seems professionally written. The first three accounts to quote tweet it all do so within 15 minutes of the initial posting. Remember, this account had basically zero engagement beforehand, so an organic reach explanation seems unlikely. According to Grok those accounts are @_NathanCalvin (General Counsel at Encode AI), @peterwildeford (Head of Policy at the AI Policy Network), and @DKokotajlo (Head of the AI Futures Project), all of which are up-and-coming AI-Doomer policy advocacy nonprofits. The AI Futures Project website says it is funded “primarily” by the Survival and Flourishing Fund, which says on its own website that it has advised Jaan Tallinn, Skype creator and one of the leading investors in Anthropic, to grant over $2.5 million to the AI Futures Project since 2024. Encode AI says on its website that it is ALSO funded by the Survival and Flourishing Fund, which in turn says that it told Anthropic investor Jaan Tallinn to grant $516,000 to Encode AI in 2025. And wouldn’t you know it, the Survival and Flourishing Fund ALSO says it told Jaan Tallinn to grant $2 million to the AI Policy Institute, the 501(c)(3) affiliate of the AI Policy Network, as well. What are the odds that the first three quote tweets of Coxon’s post would all be major AI-restriction policy advocates funded generously by the same donor, who also happens to be one of the leading investors in, and a board member of, Anthropic, the company Coxon was resigning from? And all within 15 minutes of posting (two within ten)? 3.) Jacob Coxon doesn’t have much of a resume, but we do know that, in 2022, he got a $20,159 scholarship for the “long term future scholarship program” from the Good Ventures Foundation, one of the philanthropic vehicles of Dustin Moskovitz, a notorious AI-doomer who has spent tens if not hundreds of millions on policy advocacy to strictly regulate AI, while also being an Anthropic Investor himself. It also just so happens that the 14th person to quote Coxon’s post was @MaxNadeau_ (27 minutes after posting) who is the program officer for the Technical AI Safety team at Coefficient Giving, another of Moskovitz’s philanthropic spending vehicles. Max is not a frequent poster, his last posts before quoting Coxon were before Labor Day, but he was remarkably quick off the mark for this one. 4.) Basically every major Democrat politician and candidate has suddenly glommed on to this post, and conveniently, as the people cry out foe answers, Bernie Sanders already has a bill written to “ban super intelligence” and regulate AI into oblivion, and will be releasing later this week. The bill, among many other things, will create “a new cabinet-level federal agency to safeguard the public from the dangers of artificial intelligence” that will be “advised by an Artificial Intelligence Advisory Board comprised of experts on artificial intelligence.” Do you think, perhaps, Anthropic and its many investors who fund AI policy advocacy might have interest in getting to place a pet “expert” on the board of an entity that dictates what AI is and isn’t allowed to do? And isn’t it fortuitous that this whistleblower came forward with his oh-so scary stories so close in proximity to the release of the most radical piece of AI legislation ever introduced?
I resigned from Anthropic today. I spent the last three years doing pretraining research at both OpenAI and Anthropic. Neither company is acting responsibly. They are racing straight to self-improving superintelligence and gambling with our lives. More thoughts below.
1,818
6,737
2,242
32,218
7,071,111
Apple launch event day used to be so exciting to look forward to and watch .. Now - waiting for Tibo Resets is much more exciting ! @thsottiaux
115
So what’s all the fuss about Navier–Stokes? One of mathematics’ most famous problems may just have been cracked - with a rather extraordinary assist from AI.
🤖 Made with AI
5
2
226
And this is where things get wild. OpenAI threw thousands of AI agents at the problem in parallel - exploring ideas, sharing discoveries, testing approaches and eventually constructing a formally verified counterexample. If it survives scrutiny, the bigger story may be this: intelligence is becoming parallelizable.
1
16