operating a social network is a strange job because the feedback loop is also the product you ship something, people react, and then the reaction becomes part of what you have to work through some of it is useful. some of it is funny. some of it is people saying things because the internet rewards people saying things over time, have had to get a lot better at separating those categories in the end - good problems to have. back to shipping

24 replies

19 recasts

239 reactions

unfortunately lost every badge pretty much as soon as I got it this has been a consistent trait since childhood somehow, my teachers would always be annoyed coz we would go somewhere on a school trip and I would lose my entry badge immediately

7 replies

1 recast

56 reactions

farcaster casting heatmap! cc: @0xhohenheim

7 replies

7 recasts

67 reactions

what will the world look like when Claude is wired into our brains with neuralink

26 replies

9 recasts

206 reactions

i'm a sucker for good farming / tractor / rock content

2 replies

1 recast

43 reactions

April is the worst month in the North East

18 replies

5 recasts

91 reactions

AI will increase productivity by simply making you feel bad for when your agent isn't working in the background everyone will prompt more

9 replies

5 recasts

76 reactions

I think every weekend I have a moment where I am wowed all over again by where AI is today it's not like it gets smarter during the weekend or something. During the week, it's somehow become routine to use it for everything we do at work. During the weekend, I will think about doing something personal. First thought will be to use a more traditional tool and then the next second I'll be like "oh I can just give this to claude" There will soon be a generation of humans who don't know any other way the leverage : price ratio of AI is insane - probably at the level of transistors

14 replies

6 recasts

120 reactions

Seeing the 'harshest critics' as an essential ingredient for entertainment value is a great way to reframe the noise. It’s a reminder that if people aren't arguing about what you're building, you probably haven't built anything meaningful yet. Glad to be in the arena with you.

0 reply

0 recast

5 reactions

I am sympathetic to the "man in the arena" philosophy, I like being in the arena I also agree with this take that the audience makes the arena more fun https://farcaster.xyz/bleu.eth/0x8e841b21 To add on to this, the way any new thing is built is that the creator starts with no audience. They are in an empty arena and they are working on their thing. Over time, as their output takes shape, it attracts an audience - along the full spectrum i.e. fanboys on one end (creator can do nothing wrong) and haters (creator can do nothing right) and thoughtful critics in the middle. For the _entertainment_ value of the arena to be high, you actually do need the full spectrum, like all of it. The term "entertainment" in this case doesn't apply to products of a certain type. There are fans and haters of not just sports teams but simple things like a wifi router. "Entertainment" in this case refers to the entire force field around something - could be of any type. The force field itself is a thing that can watched for _entertainment_. The creator might not like all of such entertainment, but no one is really optimizing for what the creator likes. The universe pretty much always optimizes for entertainment. If the output can create no entertainment, the arena gets no audience. If the output can create true Entertainment, the audience grows enough to become part of the output itself. It becomes an input, the full spectrum becomes part of the story. In that sense, "haters" is somewhat of a negative term from the entertainment perspective. A detached narrator would likely call them "the harshest critics" (or something similar). Obviously the creator does not like that part of the spectrum and should learn how to move past (as PG rightly says) but for optimal entertainment value, it's essential. The harshest critics fuel the fans and vice versa. If a product just has one part of the spectrum, it just hasn't become truly entertaining yet. and so here we are - Farcaster became entertaining enough that we are both the input and the output. Even the harshest critics are here because there was entertainment value enough that it makes sense to be part of the spectrum. A big difference between the audience and creator is the level of risk and sacrifice (see more on my views on sacrifice in the quoted cast below). One of the reasons it made sense for Merkle and Neynar to go through this acquisition is because outside of Merkle, the next group of people who had taken the most risk on Farcaster was the Neynar team. There's really no right or wrong, high or low status between the audience and the arena. Everyone who's "in the arena" for something is in the audience for something else e.g. every SV founder watching a sports game, etc. It's kinda useful for both parties to remind each other that. When in the arena - take the risk, make the sacrifice, create that fork When in the audience - I want to say "be kind to those in the arena" but I guess what I have to say is: help create the best entertainment (alas) ps - re: forks - one might think I am against it but quite the opposite. when goals don't align, go do your own thing. Be in the arena. Godspeed

16 replies

12 recasts

90 reactions

I know the claude desktop app improved the interface for everyone but I still love the terminal interface ever since I started using claude code in the terminal, I even ask normal questions just in the terminal interface something about keyboard first interfaces on desktop is just so much better

5 replies

4 recasts

77 reactions

it's wild that we saw programming languages go from syntactical to plain english in 2 years I needed a niche slack plugin this morning - spent 30 mins and I have it now It takes a thread and exports it to markdown so you can feed it to an agent elsewhere - useful when you talk about something on slack, have an agent running and want to give it more context while it's already working on something ps - this only works for "threads" right now https://github.com/rishavmukherji/slack-thread-export

1 reply

2 recasts

75 reactions

just set up clawdbot on an old machine and it's working well personal assistant tasks usually require little compute so didn't really feel compelled to do the new Mac Mini setup that everyone on AI Twitter is pitching using an Anthropic API key, you can get quite far on old hardware

26 replies

5 recasts

108 reactions

Fun fact got interviewed by the agent that we built ourselves (aka @neynar) thanks to @gmfarcaster might be the first of its kind

7 replies

9 recasts

94 reactions

most people should be looking at prediction markets for news, not necessarily betting on them I read somewhere that @barmstrong said prediction markets benefit from insiders betting (not sure if he actually said that or was made up). If he did, I think he is right. - prediction markets aren’t securities; they’re event contracts where payouts depend on outcomes, not managerial effort - insiders betting on prediction markets exposes truth faster to the world than waiting on traditional announcements - information has a price, prediction markets allow insiders to monetize their information (whether you like it or not) unless you have insider information to know the outcome of the market, betting on prediction markets is the same as gambling. there's nothing wrong with it, gambling can be fun (people play poker with friends) but it's good to be honest about it. Without added info, there's no added edge. However, as truth seeking machines, it's great to observe them and know the future. They are essentially, and obviously, time machines. It's funny in the sense that if someone had decided to build a time machine 20 years ago, they would not have predicted gambling as a tradeoff on the other end. one can argue "they normalize gambling" etc. however I don't think there's any reason to blame prediction markets solely for it. they are just the type of new market that went mainstream recently. humans have consistently increased the number of markets they have access to and have gambled on them. Imagine not having equity or commodity markets. Someone in the 1500s might have resisted against them for the same reasons. Kids born today will not find prediction markets any weirder than we find equity markets. We still have to teach kids about the risk of gambling ofc. It's possible to gamble on equities and it's possible to gamble on predictions. The options available have increased but the fundamentals are the same. Time machines are cool. Worth being picky about which markets you bet on.

34 replies

34 recasts

299 reactions