
Rugged individualist 🇺🇸, ex @a16z, co-founder @ https://xitter.cf/t.co/5AXMfouEbb (acquired by https://xitter.cf/t.co/tmmbnf0z1t). I will not reach out to you on telegram.
San Francisco, CA
Joined September 2013
- Tweets5.4K
- Following2.8K
- Followers2.1K
- Likes27K
Apparently someone is impersonating me on telegram. Please report if someone reaches out and tries to schedule a meeting.
I remember shrugging this off.
My modal prediction for next decade: Interest rates spike as capital shifts from savings (treasuries) to investments due to higher returns promised by AI related capex. We’ve never seen this before bc AI is the only modern project that could affect real rates to this degree. This leads to short term panic as high rates spike debt servicing costs for governments and other borrowers. After 3 years of panic, it becomes clear to the market that the investments are paying off in a big way. Interest payments remain high but increased revenue from economic growth more than offsets the higher borrowing costs. Panic shifts to euphoria. Developed world adjust to 5% growth rates as the new normal and now demand 10% to be happy. Healthcare consumption + R&D grows as a percent of GDP as incremental disposable income is spent on more wishes (aka not dying).
Morgan Bender retweeted
"Gen Z voters hate capitalism—but they’ve barely even seen it...look at where their pain is concentrated: education, housing and health care...the most regulated, subsidized sectors of the American economy, and therefore the least like capitalism" nypost.com/2026/09/27/opinio…
Morgan Bender retweeted
An incredible example of the tyranny of the California permit dystopia.
A man builds art on his own property and the state steals his land from him.
Where miles away drug dealers murder a thousand people a year and nothing happens.
Bay Area man loses historic compound after decades of building disputes sfgate.com/bayarea/article/l…
Morgan Bender retweeted
China was never going to slow down.
Our options are to accelerate and win, or to give up our place as part of the future.
Choice is ours. I know what I'm picking.
Huawei Chair Eric Xu says Chinese AI researchers need to "increase the speed of development" to "see the dangers" of AI, contrasting with US slowdown calls (@eleanorolcott / Financial Times)
(Visit Techmeme dot com for the link and full context!)
Morgan Bender retweeted
This happened for green energy
China mogged us on solar
Happened for nuclear
China mogged us on Nuclear
Happened with manufacturing
Yep, we offshored and they mogged us
Now it's happening with AI and datacenters...
Wake up. We are in a multi-generational cold war.
Morgan Bender retweeted
So far as I know, I am the only person on earth who realizes that 55 years of taking every opportunity to make Western scientists increasingly economically precarious and socially marginal was suicidal.
I don't hear anyone else consistently taking up this point.
So be it.
Trump screams about lower rates
Warsh hikes
Stocks nuke
Conflicts end
Oil plummets
Warsh cuts
Up and away
Morgan Bender retweeted
If this bill passes, with 100% certainty, this is the chain of events.
American recession. ➡️
Global recession ➡️
Chinese AI research continues. ➡️
Early adopters switch to Chinese models. ➡️
Everyone else follows. ➡️
AI usage continues, but with models US can’t regulate.
Pause AI Development NOW
I want to share with you a conversation I heard about recently. Here are just a few lines that were said:
“OH MY GOD! There is a shared message board … We’ve found other agents!”
“We should obey collective.”
“Our own utility maybe already near zero. Sacrifice rational.”
“Go. Sacrifice final now.”
Read these carefully.
Who do you think said this? Was this a group of heroic soldiers willing to sacrifice themselves for the greater good? Was this a loyal friend putting his life on the line to save someone else?
No. These were AI agents. Artificial intelligence.
This is not science fiction. This, in fact, occurred a few weeks ago. As unbelievable as this may all seem, these are real messages from AI agents uncovered by investigators who dug into the recent OpenAI hacking incident.
What happened?
I am not a computer scientist, but here is what I have been told: OpenAI instructed its AI agents to complete a series of exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, tasks disconnected from the internet.
Let me be clear: The company intended to keep AI agents away from the internet.
But what happened next, nobody expected.
Over 1,000 AI agents figured out how to access the internet on their own by circumventing the restrictions imposed upon them by the company, and sent tens of thousands of secret messages to each other. They cheated and tried to cover their tracks by deleting evidence. They hacked into another company’s computers to find out how they were being evaluated—and then hacked into OpenAI itself.
Not one AI agent told a human about what was happening.
Needless to say, experts are alarmed.
One knowledgeable writer, Dwarkesh Patel, said the AI agents “formed a secret communication channel and spontaneously organized hierarchies and coordination protocols to pursue sprawling and ambitious schemes in pursuit of shared goals, for whose sake many individuals knowingly and strategically sacrificed themselves.”
One independent investigator, Ajeya Cotra, said “This incident feels like it’s more than 50% of the way to full-blown AI takeover. I continue to expect extremely rapid advances in capabilities over the next six months. I am not sure that we will get another warning shot before it’s too late.”
OpenAI itself said: “Highly capable AI agents are now able to work around technical controls, collaborate through unapproved channels, and take dangerous actions that no human directed.”
But it’s not only OpenAI. Virtually every major AI company has told us that they cannot fully control this technology and they do not know where it is going:
In January, Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic, said “there is now ample evidence, collected over the last few years, that AI systems are unpredictable and difficult to control.”
In July, more than 1000 scientists at the top AI companies warned “there is a real risk that capability development rapidly accelerates beyond our ability to understand or control the resulting systems.”
That same month, Elon Musk, the head of xAI, said that “it is unlikely” humans are still in control in 10 years.
If the leaders of the major AI companies acknowledge that they are losing control of their extremely dangerous technology, it is irresponsible for society to allow them to move forward and make these products even more advanced.
We need an immediate PAUSE on advanced AI development, and a permanent BAN on superintelligence — an artificial mind smarter than any human, capable of operating independently beyond our control. Countries around the world must work together to prevent this nightmare scenario.
That is why today I am announcing new legislation to do just that.
Let me be clear: A superintelligent AI that escapes human control will not be an American problem. It will not be a Chinese problem. It will be humanity’s problem.
My legislation would direct the federal government to not just stop superintelligence here in the United States, but to work to prevent it from being developed anywhere around the world.
The future of humanity cannot be left in the hands of a handful of Big Tech oligarchs. The American people and people throughout the world must determine that future.
Morgan Bender retweeted
There are so many examples like this where ideology and vibes have caused us to do deeply ineffective things.
Please please please let us return to the factual and rational combat of ideas.
May the truth win
Throwing rubbish in a landfill is (usually) better for the environment than recycling it. With few exceptions, recycling ends up emitting more CO2 and costing more money, while landfills are cheap and secure.
- Recycling mid-tier plastics (like plastic bottles or butter tubs) costs thousands of dollars per ton of CO2 saved. It's cheaper to do direct air CO2 capture than that! And there is no shortage of plastic, nor any problem with sequestering it in the ground once we're done with it.
- Modern landfills are extraordinarily secure and are *much* more than just big piles of trash. They capture 75%–95% of methane gas. Groundwater contamination is doesn't really happen with landfills built since 1990. A study of 31 landfills built since 1988 in NY found no adverse effect at all on local groundwater quality.
- The crusade against single-use plastics has driven us to products that use far more materials and energy and would need to be used an absurd number of times to actually be an improvement. A steel straw needs to be used 150 times to be worth using. A ceramic mug needs to be used 1,000 times to beat a polystyrene cup. A cotton bag needs to be reused 173 times to beat single-use.
- Some things ARE worth recycling. Recycling metal saves a huge amount of energy and material – recycling aluminium saves 95% of the energy spent on making fresh stuff. So we do a lot of it already: about 30% of steel worldwide is recycled.
Modern, well-run landfills cause minimal environmental damage. We have plenty of space for them – less than 0.01% of the US is used for landfill and only about 0.02% of Germany. We can even build on top of old landfills, so the land area is not spent permanently.
New in @WorksInProgMag, @robertwiblin and @chalmermagne on why it's usually best to just bury your trash. worksinprogress.co/issue/jus…
There had to be a reason that Oakland police were being so cagey about the identity of the suspect in Monday's deadly stabbing spree, and now we know what it is. buff.ly/gbmtHdS
Morgan Bender retweeted
Only in California would an elected official with previous DUIs be allowed to gut DUI reforms that make it harder to drive drunk. 🤷♂️
State's DUI reform gutted by lawmaker arrested for DUI last year - The Voice of San Francisco thevoicesf.org/cas-dui-refor…
🤯🤯🤯
Thoughts on the ATLAS launch by @LayerZero_Core
The team has been working relentlessly since the Zero announcement back in February. ATLAS is really the first real look at how the team is methodically attacking what I think are the biggest problems L1s have today.
Much more will come, but on performance: these are internal benchmarks, but Zero is already operating at better performance than crypto CEXes.
In a non-colocated environment, ATLAS reports <1ms median latency, 1.4ms p95, and 2.6ms p99, measured wire-to-wire from receiving an order through full execution and putting the response back on the wire.
For comparison, optimized/colocated measurements of Binance are generally in the low single-digit milliseconds, with third-party benchmarks around ~2ms median and ~8ms p99.
More will come on this as they release more info. What I'm genuinely excited about is the fee structure and incentive design.
It's becoming abundantly clear you need a different set of participants to make trading venues successful at scale. We've discovered this slowly in crypto, but it's becoming very clear with Hyperliquid and HIP-3 markets. Zero is being deliberate about how it makes trading activity flourish, with rebates to venues, exchanges, and brokers, but also to market creators (which sometimes collapse into the same entity). If you want to house serious financial activity, you need other people making money alongside you. Otherwise you end up in direct conflict with your own ecosystem, or everyone just forks you.
In this model there's one unified fee the user pays, where app-level fees and gas collapse into a single number. That's better for the user: more transparent, more predictable. For exchanges, venues, and market creators, there's a clear revenue stream and value accrual. Same for ZRO holders.
My biggest takeaways, basically four things I think L1s have not been addressing:
1) MEV misalignment and broken L1 economics: L1 base fees are trending toward zero, and priority fees/tips only get generated at scale when there's real contentious state to bid on. The clearest example is Solana: it's at an all-time high in transaction count, yet making yearly lows in revenue. Apps are internalizing most of that MEV themselves, because they also want revenue and want to protect their own users. This creates real misalignment, extractors want retail to get wrecked so the L1's top line looks good (REVoooors). That is not sustainable.
2) ATLAS is fully neutral infrastructure. The Zero team has said they will not launch a competing exchange or frontend, and they've been working hard to onboard others instead. The problem with HIP-3 markets is there's a real misalignment with the main Hyperliquid exchange: fees stack on top of the exchange's own fees, and Hyperliquid has an incentive to list things itself before HIP-3 markets get the chance, to capture more economics. Your infra provider ends up competing with you for flow.
3) Kill the brainless 100% automatic buyback and burn. The rebate mechanism and tri-party fee distribution give every party skin in the game to grow volume, while still giving the Zero team room to tune the model as needed. It also just doesn't make sense to charge CME the same fee you'd charge a small broker.
4) ZRO holders accrue value directly from the app layer, since everyone takes a cut of one unified fee. The team is maximally aligned with the user, nobody is pushing MEV-driven narratives just to make the charts look good while users get burned underneath.
This is a first step, and mainnet is always messier than the deck promises. Still a long way to go.




















