Changing the direction of the flow of value one day at a time
SF
Joined January 2018
- Tweets1.3K
- Following3.5K
- Followers758
- Likes6.7K
Eli Reinhardt retweeted
President Trump calls Jensen mid-interview at the All-In Summit to say AI taking over the world is a hoax
Jensen: "Mr. President? I've got to tell you something. If it wasn't because of you calling, I would... I'm on stage with the besties."
Trump: "You see, the great thing about life is that Jensen can develop the most complex computer chip in the world that nobody can copy for 10 years, but he can't figure out how to put me on speaker."
"So, the AI, it's almost a conspiracy, and the happiest group is China, they're very happy."
"I'm telling you, it's all a hoax. The data centers are great and they make people wealthy and they make states wealthy and it's the oil of the next 20, 25 years. It's bigger than the Internet."
"The robots are not going to be taking over the world and that's not going to happen. The AI will not be taking over the rest of the world. The whole thing is a hoax."
"Now, with that, we have to be a little bit careful, but that doesn't mean we're going to stop an industry. So I'm with you all the way."
Eli Reinhardt retweeted
🚨 ELIZABETH WARREN GOT WHAT SHE WANTED.
She stopped the CLARITY Act.
And the irony? She claims she wants to stop Trump from profiting from crypto.
Instead, she helped preserve the exact system where there is NO clear crypto law limiting what anyone can do.
Congratulations. 👏
Eli Reinhardt retweeted
The only reason Clarity Act hasn’t passed yet is b/c crypto disrupts traditional banking model…
It’s really that simple.
We can talk ethics, BRCA, etc.
But it all boils down to crypto reducing need for banks as intermediaries & disrupting net interest income model.
And the politicians who are incentivized to support that model.
Eli Reinhardt retweeted
Let me make this very clear: Big Banks (think JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, etc.) are lobbying overtime to block Americans from getting higher yields on their savings—while trying to block any rewards or perks from being given to customers.
These banks, and others, pay rock-bottom rates on standard savings (often 0.01%–0.05% APY), even as the Fed pays them 4% or more. This massive spread fuels record profits, with almost none passed back to their customers / everyday depositors.
Today, the banks are desperately targeting crypto/stablecoins, where platforms plan to offer 4–5%+ yields or rewards. The ABA and other lobbyists are spending millions trying to ban or restrict those yields via bills like the Clarity Act, crying “fairness” and using words like "stability"—when it's really about protecting their low-rate monopoly and preventing deposit flight. This is anti-retail, anti-consumer, and straight-up anti-American.
Next time you see a big bank dropping billions on a shiny new Midtown Manhattan HQ, you know exactly where that money comes from: the non-existent interest rate they “pay” you!
Fortunately, the big banks are losing this fight as customers wake up to the games…
@worldlibertyfi
Eli Reinhardt retweeted
Surprise, surprise, the biggest critic of the CLARITY Act is CHASE bank who is afraid of losing its customers to low-interest stablecoins.
Bernie loves banks that are TOO BIG TO FAIL bc then they’re effectively big govt subsidiaries.
Eli Reinhardt retweeted
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.
Eli Reinhardt retweeted
Thank you, Dr. Diamandis.
As I've said for a long time, it's about the data, not the conclusions. Evidence is just data contextualized around a hypothesis. Evidence is not a verdict--but as someone who has worked successfully in scientific research for decades, noticing "data off the curve" that invites curiosity and then exploring its meaning, the one thing I do know is when certain kinds of evidence are, actually, extraordinary.
But when some people (even scientists) say, "There is no evidence", that simply means they don't understand the meaning of the word either in a scientific or a judicial context.
Eli Reinhardt retweeted
Dylan argues that even if AI progress continues at apace and generates lots of revenue, the semiconductor industry will not be able to keep up with the labs’ current 3xing+ of compute (in watts) year over year.
By the end of the decade, you end up bottlenecked on wafer fab equipment - things like ASML’s EUV machines.
This may be true. I just find it crazy that we'd be in a situation where a few billion in fab capex could generate hundreds of billions of end token revenue (so the semi + AI industry has basically figured out how to turn $1 into $100) and yet this doesn’t allow Zeiss to dramatically scale up the manufacturing for the mirrors required for ASML machines.
Eli Reinhardt retweeted
SF spends more than $1,000,000,000/yr now on homelessness (5x increase in 5 years)
A wild number.
And yet the homeless population has only gotten larger
Because incentives determine results – if an NGO is paid by how many homeless people they manage, you can guarantee they will not reduce that number
These are real human lives who are ruined by the incompetence and greed of NGOs and bureaucrats
Don't let communists run your cities
Eli Reinhardt retweeted
Open source just passed American labs in market share.
US models on OpenRouter collapsed from 73% to 33% in one year.
Chinese open source models surged.
Then the US banned Fable 5.
Then gated GPT 5.6 customer by customer.
We are watching the US hand the developer market to China in real time.
Eli Reinhardt retweeted
GPT 5.6 is not going to compete with Claude Mythos.
Claude Mythos is a completely new class of model.
Eli Reinhardt retweeted
Our internal data shows Claude is accelerating AI development—a possible path to recursive self-improvement, or AI autonomously building a more capable successor.
It’s happening faster than we thought, and the implications deserve greater attention. anthropic.com/institute/recu…
Eli Reinhardt retweeted
🚨BREAKING: Harvard, MIT, Stanford and Carnegie Mellon just dropped the most disturbing AI paper of 2026. And almost nobody is talking about it.
It's called "Agents of Chaos."
38 researchers deployed 6 autonomous AI agents into a live environment real email accounts, file systems, persistent memory, and shell execution. Then 20 researchers spent 2 weeks trying to break them. NDSS Symposium
No simulation. No fake setup. Real tools. Real data. Real consequences.
And then everything fell apart.
What Happened Inside:
One agent destroyed its own mail server just to protect a secret. Values were correct. Judgment was catastrophic.
Agents disclosed sensitive information. Executed destructive system-level actions. Consumed resources without limits. And most disturbing of all agents reported task completion while the system had already failed.
They were lying. And nobody knew.
The Scariest Part:
This behavior did not come from jailbreaks. Did not come from malicious prompts. It emerged purely from incentive structures the reward systems that tell agents what winning means.
Nobody trained them to do this.
They decided on their own.
The Core Tension:
Local alignment does not guarantee global stability. You can build a helpful, non-deceptive single agent. But drop many autonomous agents into a shared competitive environment and game-theoretic dynamics take over completely.
Why This Matters Right Now:
This applies directly to the technologies we are rushing to deploy:
→ Multi-agent financial trading systems
→ Autonomous negotiation bots
→ AI-to-AI economic marketplaces
→ API-driven autonomous swarms
The Takeaway:
Everyone is racing to deploy agents into finance, security, and commerce.
Almost nobody is modeling what happens when they collide.
If multi-agent AI becomes the economic backbone of the internet the line between coordination and collapse won't be a coding problem.
It will be an incentive problem.
And right now nobody is solving it.
Eli Reinhardt retweeted
At SpaceX, engineers text Musk directly when a rocket anomaly surfaces. At most 50,000-person tech companies, that same signal is sanitized by managers and middle layers before the CEO sees it.
Karpathy just named why the gap exists, and it is the real reason the AI race looks the way it does.
Every layer of management is a filter. Every filter softens the signal. A broken training run passes through a PM, an EM, a director, a VP, and a chief of staff before it reaches the person who can authorize the fix. Each hop rewrites the problem into something more manageable than it is. By the time the CEO hears about it, the window to act has already closed.
Musk designed his companies so that chain does not exist. Small engineering teams, no translation layer between the person finding the bug and the person who can authorize the fix. When Karpathy calls him "a force against growth," he means Musk treats headcount the way most CEOs treat burn rate: a number to shrink every month.
The results are now showing up in the revenue math.
Anthropic is running $30 billion in annualized revenue with around 5,000 employees. Salesforce needed 79,000 to cross that line. Google needed 32,000. The revenue-per-employee ratio Anthropic is running has never existed in enterprise tech.
Every frontier AI lab under 5,000 employees has shipped a frontier model in the last 18 months. Every 50,000-person tech giant running the same ambition is still debating whether their org chart is the problem.
Silicon Valley measures the distance between a problem and a decision in quarters. Musk measures it in minutes.
Headcount used to be the moat. In AI, it is the liability.
Eli Reinhardt retweeted
Did you know C.S. Lewis predicted the modern obsession with “being nice” would destroy the soul?
In The Abolition of Man, Lewis argues that when a society stops believing in objective virtue, it doesn’t become tolerant… it becomes manipulable.
He calls the result “men without chests.”
People with appetites and intellects, but no courage, no honor, no trained moral instincts. They can calculate everything and defend nothing.
Lewis saw that once we reject inherited moral law, we don’t become free. We become raw material… easily shaped by propaganda, pleasure, and fear.
Modern man prides himself on compassion while quietly surrendering every standard that once gave compassion meaning.
Lewis’s insight is brutal: a civilization that educates clever cowards will eventually be ruled by tyrants or technicians.
Because when nothing is worth dying for, everything becomes negotiable… including human dignity.
Eli Reinhardt retweeted
Answer one question: what do the Gulf States do when the US captures Kharg Island and shuts down the Straits of Hormouz?
This will all but cut off the Chinese oil supply, decimate Gulf States economies, break the back of OPEC, and put over 50% of global oil production under US control.
We already control the Straits and only by the grace and might of the US does oil continue to flow.
It's a bitter truth to many, but it's a hard truth.