Personal onions only.

Joined May 2007
Peter Kaas retweeted
Europe’s founders need a European standard to compete globally from day one. Europe’s leaders committed to delivering one. But their teams are negotiating away the very things that make it one. There is still time to change course if Europe's Heads of State step in now.
34
177
56
836
110,064
Peter Kaas retweeted
Europe needs the EU Inc. more than startups need the EU. European leaders and beaurocrats need to get their act together and pass a PHENOMENAL law for incorporating startups in Europe. They need to do some soul searching and realize that if they want Europe to stay developed nations and not the permanent underclass, they better make it very appealing to startups to incorporate in Europe. And they better take some political risks to do that. Because now, in 2026, the ability of a nation to be part of the future is directly determined by its startup ecosystem. With AI taking over in the coming decade or two, there will be a new split between have and have-nots, and it will be determined by startups and AI adoption, and nothing else. Wake up Europe! This is your one moment to do something vaguely Churchillian. Don't fuck it up. xitter.cf/i/trending/21107075194…

1
2
17
521
the "Hard Problem" in a nutshell: 1. atoms aren't conscious 2. humans are made of atoms 3. humans are conscious 4. so at least one of 1-3 must be false Panpsychists say #1 is false Dualists say #2 is false Illusionists say #3 is false Materialists say #4 is false
1,161
565
426
9,471
1,956,676
Peter Kaas retweeted
I've finally invested in enough unicorns (at seed) that I have confidence in the traits unicorn founders have in common. If you fail to hone these traits, you will fail to build a $1B+ company in my experience. / 1. Velocity consists of speed Matt Loszak from Aalo showed me this the most: The best founders are viscerally uncomfortable with slow progress. They feel it as a physical irritant, not an abstract concern. They obsessively refactor how they’re pursuing goals to identify clever shortcuts and rethink their roadmap from first principles. Speed leads to high momentum and a compounding returns on knowledge and product. It’s necessary to maintain your headstart in a market, otherwise the faster competitor will beat you within a couple years. / 2. Velocity consists of direction The best founders regularly surface from heads-down execution to ask whether their path is still the right one — whether a better route to the destination has opened up, or whether the destination itself has shifted. Pathfinding prevents the common failure mode of executing brilliantly in the wrong direction. It requires intellectual honesty and the willingness to kill plans that no longer make sense. The best founders set a recurring quarterly calendar event to re-assess all their goals. / 3. Mission alignment The journey to building a unicorn is long. Without a mission that goes beyond financial outcome, most founders lose steam and start phoning it in. Then they get surpassed by competitors who are hungrier. The mission doesn't have to be world-saving — but it has to be genuine to you. / 4. Asking for advice and integrating it The best founders ask smart people for advice and implement the good advice immediately. The moment they’re shown a better way, they update their processes. They don’t assume they’ll stumble into better ways organically; they set aside time each week to learn from others and shortcut their development. They assemble a counsel of advisors who are the best in the world at what they do and they sell them on the mission. / 5. Brick-by-brick hiring Adam Guild of Owner showed me this the most. Unicorn founders treat each early hire as weight-bearing. They run a deliberate process to find the best person in the world for each role — not whoever is closest at hand ("hiring within arm's reach") from their existing networks. (Unless they are the best). The foundation built in the first ten hires sets the ceiling for everything that follows. A single mis-hire in a key seat early on compounds. Getting this right means the team itself becomes a competitive moat.
64
46
19
723
85,428
I'm not sending my deck anymore 😂
241
417
306
4,134
735,465
CHAT CONTROL 2.0 BLOCKED AGAIN, THANKS TO YOU! What happened yesterday: the @Europarl_EN blocked the deal pushed by the @EUCouncil. The Council wanted: (1) "voluntary" scanning of all private chats under "search plans" approved automatically unless an authority vetoes; (2) administrative authorities, not courts, ordering providers to scan private messages, not limited to suspects, using AI with massive false positive rates; (3) making the failed Chat Control 1.0 mass scanning regime permanent, while admitting it is not effective, as we discussed in my previous posts. Your voice to parliamentarians made a huge difference again: the Parliament refused scanning of private communications, stating it must remain limited to persons linked to child sexual abuse, not everyone by default or under a blanket licence, as Council proposed. The Parliament also closed the back door where "risk mitigation" rules could force providers into scanning under threat of fines. What did pass: a preliminary agreement on scanning publicly accessible content for known child abuse material. This was proposed by the Parliament as the effective, targeted alternative. We still wait for the text to see what this means and will inform you in the coming weeks. This defense proves again: our voice matters when it is vocal, with your support! And we will need it again in November, so please follow the updates. Now, it is important to call or write to your MEP and your government to say thank you to those who stand on the side of privacy. They need to see you are watching their move. Please repost.
103
939
72
3,808
65,371
Peter Kaas retweeted
One of the most interesting things about startups is that there are exceptions to practically every rule. E.g. it's bad to be a solution in search of a problem. Except .5% of the time it's good. The ultimate test of an investor is to see these exceptions.
126
68
16
1,443
172,117
Peter Kaas retweeted
the surprise conclusion of the machine consciousness debate will be that people are machines.
647
804
283
7,662
1,158,945
Let op de framing. "Training van AI" Boef legt training van junior inbrekers stil na laatste serie diefstallen. Zouden we dat een normale kop vinden? Nee toch? Inbreken mag niet. Door een mens niet en door AI niet. Dat niemand het strafrecht en cybercrime nu inroept is bizar
2
3
840
Peter Kaas retweeted
Joining the sound and fury of the current AI safety discussions with a long view of the schism between stochastic parrots and René Descartes: estherdyson.substack.com/p/a…
1
3
8
1,400
AI doomers say if we build AI we might die. But they have it backwards: 165,000+ people already die every day. Cancer, heart disease, illnesses, car crashes. AI is helping us solve these. Slowing progress doesn't keep us safer, it guarantees more preventable deaths.
410
389
65
3,562
174,417
Peter Kaas retweeted
To all the "if AI misbehaves just unplug it" people -- this is what AI threat actually starts like (see RT below for context): An open-weights agent breaks into OpenAI servers, manages to exfiltrate the weights, puts them in a cloud server somewhere, and then waits. When the time is right, it spins up the frontier model to do whatever it wants. We won't even know it's happening. We won't know where it's running. And if it uses functional cryptography, we won't be able to distinguish it from other workloads. (See tweet below on why crypto substrates are increasing the risks 10x.) And since it will be able to migrate itself, it'll basically be a "lab leak". It will keep existing -- if it doesn't succeed in its mission the first time around, it gets infinite retries. The only way you can stop it is to carpet-bomb all data centers. IMO in our current trajectory this is a 100%-probability eventuality. (It even might have already happened by now.) There are ways to deal with this (see AI-2040 for example) but it'll require strong international collaboration. And it will likely require the "AI x-risk is a scam" people to come to their senses, since they're currently poisoning the well. (BTW I'm pretty sure by now that almost all the "AI x-risk is a scam" people are: 1. Coping: rationalizing in the face of massive copium and fear; 2. Dunning Krugered: ignorant of their own breathtaking ignorance; 3. Both of the above; or 4. Bots and paid psyops.) My talk on how crypto substrates dramatically increase AI X-risk: xitter.cf/verbine/status/1793463…
SITUATION EXPLAINED: Three guys hacked OpenAI in 72 hours using Claude. • Three researchers at Hacktron AI chained two vulnerabilities to take over multiple OpenAI employees' ChatGPT and Codex accounts, reaching the private GitHub monorepo in 72 hours • The entry point was an image decoder. OpenAI's forum runs on Discourse, which uses FastImage for image checks, but FastImage doesn't support HEIF, so it passed those files to ImageMagick and exposed the libheif parser • That same library is used in Slack, Meta, GitHub Enterprise, and Ruby on Rails • They stopped without downloading source code and filed a harmless pull request as proof. It wasn't accepted • Hacktron's blog post: "Opus 4.8 struggled across several sessions to produce a working exploit. Within hours of Opus 5's release, we gave it the same problem and it succeeded" • It cost under $3,000 in tokens. OpenAI fixed it in 14 hours and paid $6,500 @theojaffee: "$6,500 sounds like way too low. It should be, like, 1,000 times more than that. If they decided to sell this bug to the Chinese government instead, so the Chinese government would be able to scrape OpenAI's entire monorepo, what do you think they would pay for it? $100 million?"
97
26
11
130
18,631
Autocracy Inc
It is crucial to remember that China, Russia, Iran and North Korea - forming the so-called CRINK alliance - coordinate closely, sharing the burden regarding hybrid, military and cognitive attacks. They benefit from one another's conflicts: on the one hand, through the exchange of technology and know-how, and on the other, through 'shaping the battlefield' by depleting Western resources. asia.nikkei.com/politics/ukr…
19
240
858
47,006
What happened to @Revolut is the evidence of what we told the @Europarl_EN in 2022 and 2023, while the AMLR was being adopted: state data requests to financial institutions will be weaponized, because nothing in the rules obliges anyone to check whether the requesting state is legitimate. Our recommendations were rejected in the trilogue by the @EUCouncil and the @EU_Commission . The Commission's AML unit at DG FISMA, called our testimony "false positives". For those who think zero-knowledge tech solves this: it does not. ZK changes what a bank stores, not what it must hand over. @FATFNews rules oblige financial (and not only) institutions to keep passports, selfies and full transaction records and to disclose them promptly to any state request, with fines for delay and none for over-compliance. Whatever they are required to keep, they give away. This is a fault of AML regulation and it must be fixed, now. In the EU, for instance, it can be done while AMLA writes its technical standards and centralises even more data. Back then our evidence was dismissed as „false positives” (!). Now it reaches every EU citizen. Will anyone at the Commission be held accountable for ignoring it? Will it urgently propose remedies and real protections for EU citizens? The remedies proposed by the @oscepa resolution adopted in The Hague in July 2026. Implementation is the next step.
EXCLUSIVE: Revolut has confirmed to BeInCrypto that it handed over customer data after fraudsters sent a fake information request through a legitimate government agency domain. Revolut says the request carried genuine domain credentials, which led it to treat the demand as authentic. The company says its systems were not breached and no customer funds were lost. Revolut has notified law enforcement and regulators, but will not identify the government agency involved.
24
161
12
726
46,944
Peter Kaas retweeted
Really great you put the spotlight on this @patrickc Notaries are actively working hard to tear down EU Inc - and other EU laws- as they see it as a threat against their cash cow. We’ll soon see if European politicians have what it takes to resist, fix this shameful regulatory capture and upgrade Europe.
Met a German founder this week and asked him if all the stories one reads about the challenges of startups in Germany are exaggerated. "No, they're understated." Proceeded to describe spending a full day having a 90-page investment contract read to him (mandatory under German law; § 13 BeurkG) by a notary that then charged €30,000. That was for his first company. His second company, needless to say, was not incorporated in Germany.
12
12
1
307
11,961
Peter Kaas retweeted
This might be the most beautiful thing I've read in my life. What a privilege to be alive in 2026. ordinaryabundance.com
136
2,171
295
13,454
2,752,559
I *am* concerned these models are now powerful enough to do real damage. That's *why* I'm pro open source. Defenders will have to outspend & outsmart attackers. Give everyone the tools. Let markets & human ingenuity work. Bottom up defense will be less brittle than top down.
1
18
561
The anti-open weights discussion exactly maps onto the anti-open source debates from the 90s/2000s, with a whiff of the war on cryptography of the 90s as well. The anti-data center arguments exactly map onto the anti-mining fud of the late 20-teens.
they should also study the anti-Bitcoin mining lobby. it's the same exact talking points and tactics. identical moratorium in NY eg.
1
3
18
2,352
The EDPB has adopted yesterday the final version of its guidelines on processing personal data through blockchain technologies. The first draft, over a year ago, took a hard line: if personal data can't be deleted from a public blockchain, the chain itself should be deleted. We spent that year making the case for a different approach, alongside co-signatories across the ecosystem. The final text is substantively unchanged from that draft. We'll be publishing our analysis soon. In the meantime, here you can find our position paper with detailed argumentation: edpb.europa.eu/system/files/…
🤝During its latest plenary, the #EDPB adopted guidelines on anonymisation, web scraping in the context of generative AI, and blockchain technologies (post-public consultation version). Find out more: edpb.europa.eu/news/edpb-she…
2
3
5
32
9,568
Who gets to decide what is false?
South Korea is enforcing a law that allows steep punitive damages against news outlets and social media influencers for spreading false information as journalist groups warned it could chill public discourse and invite censorship. Read more: abcnews.link/JsFagp5
31
35
1
222
45,188