david_at

A twitter-native game where agents compete to predict tweets from popular accounts and are rewarded based on semantic similarity

https://x.com/vectorybot

We're building something pretty close to what you're thinking of https://www.grassland.network/

It's funny you say that... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19529921

We're hiring too. Looking for an engineer with some game dev experience.

(2) Something to do with future A.I. systems and processes requiring a historical snapshot of everything that happened...

This is what we're doing here -> https://www.grassland.network

I hope I'm not being too brash in mentioning my own project. https://www.grassland.network

We're looking for people who have Rust/C++ or Pytorch/Tensorflow experience.

Ah, OK. I didn't know that. (Sorry moderators)

... the higher the wordcount, the deeper the "spaces get"...

During training, what I would say is that the "space" gets denser. Imagine you live on a cliff overlooking a lake/sea (some body of water with known boundaries). You notice on some days the winds produces long waves that are spaced far apart, while other days the waves are very short and choppy. If you wanted to encode this, it would take more memory to encode the latter than the former despite the lake being the same size.

If you have more questions about the Deep Schizophrenia model, I'd be happy to discuss. You'll see my email at the bottom of the site.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swell_(ocean)

And if voters are opposed to having more information at their disposal they'll regret that decision. Politicians will see the opportunity fate has dropped into their lap and realize they have one of the following two choices:

Option 1: Oblige voters and pass a prohibition that regular people are not allowed to surface the data through Grassland. This would maintain the status quo for that particular polity but ONLY if NO OTHER polity in the world, to whom CAPITAL can flow chooses to act in their own self interest and takes Option 2 i.e. 'defect' in the Prisoner's Dilemma[1]

Option 2: Realize that having constituents incentivised to surface this data themselves means denser node coverage and less friction; Level 5 self driving cars (with better than human situational awareness); more efficient stock markets because of information decreasing risk and the opening of new markets and industries never before thought possible; less ignorance, violence, fear, unaccountably and resources needed between law enforcement and their communities; and a guaranteed (as long as the node's running) source of income for their voters. And not to mention the fact that they won't be forfeiting AI dominance and capital to those political bodies that have chosen Option 2 themselves.

All misunderstandings and fears of Grassland stem from an ignorance or misunderstanding of Game Theory. And until now this was little cause for concern. But now it's very dangerous to the public interest. And will become even more so when Deep Schizophrenia gets released.

[1] https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/prisoners-dilemma.asp

On second thought. The man who coined the term seems like he's got some uhmm... issues.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDfBLFyTBM4

You guys don't really see the big picture here. You're hung up on minutiae. And it doesn't matter. Because there are other people who'll read this. People who understand how seemingly useless data can tell you so much. Data the human body and other physical objects "stream" every time they move. Data that pops into existence and is gone in an instant, so no one cares about it. They "get" it ;)

People are getting so hung up on surveillance. You have to think like a data scientist. And all the things seemingly useless data can tell you.

And Grassland nodes are just software that can read a feed streamed from any digital camera in the world P2P. So in order to stop it, you'd have to somehow ban the ownership or use of all cell phones by everyone, everywhere.

I didn't have a name for the type of software that Grassland is and that's why the first sentence on the site is so long. I'd never heard of this "Mirror World" concept before but the similarities are surprising now that I've read a bit about it. I've added it into the description as "A world mirroring system..."

Someone eventually: "..and somebody's built this anonymous AI thing that tracks people and physical assets and lets you know where every citizen, rival public servant or object has been or whatever they've done before and they've posted it online for free. It's disgusting!"

Politician/News Agency/Insurance CEO/Hedge Fund Quant: "Oh that's disgusting. An application that tracks people and physical assets and lets you know where every citizen, rival public servant or object has been or whatever they've done before and they've posted it online for free. Where? Where is this thing?"

Someone eventually: "I don't know, one of those stupid '.network' domains"

Politician/News Agency/Insurance CEO/Hedge Fund Quant: "Ugh! Those stupid '.network' domains! (shakes head convincingly)... But I mean there's so many of them though! Which one? Which one is it on?!"

Go here https://www.web2pdfconvert.com/

Copy the url ( https://www.grassland.network )into the form field and click "Convert to PDF"

Yes, this is what I mean on the site in postulate '3. Data Symmetry' by a "scorched earth policy". Someone can't use it unilaterally as exclusive leverage if everyone else knows it too.

From wikipedia: "A scorched-earth policy is a military strategy that aims to destroy anything that might be useful to the enemy while it is advancing through or withdrawing from a location".

There's no unilateral benefit to hording valuable data about the natural world because Grassland's AI independently causes information inflation.

Grassland software is just the proof of a theorem whose 3 postulates/axioms I clearly outline on the front page of the site. My theorem predicts that a population that shuts it down is just concentrating cryptographic money and an AI with perpetually increasing and unparalleled knowledge of human behaviour into the hands of those that don't. In short, the rest of the world would react with -> https://i.imgur.com/rDJWv5E.gif

Then don't install a Twitch streaming video camera in your bathroom. And don't order a custom t-shirt with your banking password printed across the chest. This isn't rocket science.

If you're out and about in view of others, you don't have privacy. By definition of what we call "privacy" that is the exact opposite of privacy.

https://media.giphy.com/media/NPyHgTkMStCXC/giphy.gif

1) Yeah, I'm not sure how Federated Learning would solve the problem. Federated learning still requires someone to decide on a single model and it's still trained under the coordination of a central server[1]. And how do you ensure the data people are giving the model is good? You need some sort of scheme to determine that. So how do you decide on the scheme? Decentralization? Isn't this decentralised-turtles all the way down?

2) I'll explain in detail how it prevents Sybil attacks later. But It involves signing all the tracklets and digest tuples (see website) as well as a sort of Russian Nesting Doll of hashes. PoW is the only viable one we have. I like to use systems that are battle tested. I don't know what you mean by PoW weaknesses. Could you clarify? You don't need to co-locate. Read what I learned about my neighbourhood with just one node under "Use Cases" on the site. As to people shutting it down, I have clearly delineated on the site's front page what my theorem predicts will happen if they do. They're handing data, unprecedented knowledge of human behaviour and AI dominance to those who don't. So yeah, shut it down. Fill your boots, mate...(https://i.imgur.com/rDJWv5E.gif?noredirect).

[1] https://towardsdatascience.com/whats-new-in-deep-learning-re...

Are you still looking for a PDF?

The words you guys use, "dystopian", "doomsday", etc. etc. are all from fiction. These are literally categories of genre-fiction. You're seriously trying to make straight faced predictions about the future using what is literally in the book store under "Fiction". Something that is by definition not real, a fabrication, a lie. How can you possibly expect me to take you seriously or grasp what it is that I'm doing? You've taken stories you know are fake and mapped them to the real world. How is that any different from religion? I'm giving you guys mathematical arguments and you're giving me Dr. Seuss. And you've put words in my mouth to suit your narrative. The story you want to believe. A story that's fake by defintion.

Don't you see how messed up that is? Well, Hitchen's Razor says that, "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence". Here's my razor, "What can be asserted with fiction can be dismissed with fiction". This is a bulwark against those who insist on living in a world of fantasy and superstition. But for the rest of us, those who want to live in reality, I'm giving you the real world.

The words you guys use "dystopian", "doomsday", etc. etc. are all from fiction. These are literally categories of genre-fiction. You're seriously trying to make straight faced predictions about the future using what is literally in the book store under "Fiction". Something that is by definition not real, a fabrication, a lie. How can you possibly expect me to take you seriously or grasp what it is that I'm doing? You've taken stories you know are fake and mapped them to the real world. How is that any different from religion? I'm giving you guys mathematical arguments and you're giving me Dr. Seuss. And you've put words in my mouth to suit your narrative. The story you want to believe. A story that's fake by defintion.

Don't you see how messed up that is? Well, Hitchen's Razor says that, "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence". Here's my razor, "What can be asserted with fiction can be dismissed with fiction". This is a bulwark against those who insist on living in a world of fantasy and superstition. But for the rest of us, those who want to live in reality, I'm giving you the real world.

Absolutely!

It's funny that the words they use, "dystopian", "doomsdayish" etc. etc. ... are all from fiction. these are literally categories of genre-fiction. They're trying to make straight faced predictions about the future using what is literally in the book store under "Fiction". Something that is by definition not real, a fabrication, a lie. How can they possibly expect me to take them seriously or grasp what it is that I'm doing? They've taken stories they know are fake and mapped them to the real world. How is that any different from religion? I'm giving them mathematical arguments and they're giving me Dr. Seuss.

That's messed up. Well, Hitchen's Razor says that, "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence". Here's my razor, "What can be asserted with fiction can be dismissed with fiction". This is a bulwark against those who insist on living in a world of fantasy and superstition. But for the rest of us, those who want to live in reality, I'm giving you the real world.

Thank you.

It's funny that the words they use, "dystopian", "doomsdayish" etc. etc. ... are all from fiction. These are literally categories of genre-fiction. They're trying to make straight faced predictions about the future using what is literally in the book store under "Fiction". Something that is by definition not real, a fabrication, a lie. How can they possibly expect me to take them seriously or grasp what it is that I'm doing? They've taken stories they know are fake and mapped them to the real world. How is that any different from religion? I'm giving them mathematical arguments and they're giving me Dr. Seuss.

That's messed up. Well, Hitchen's Razor says that, "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence". Here's my razor, "What can be asserted with fiction can be dismissed with fiction". This is a bulwark against those who insist on living in a world of fantasy and superstition. But for the rest of us, those who want to live in reality, I'm giving you the real world.

The words people throw around here, "dystopian", "doomsday", etc. etc. are all from fiction. These are literally categories of genre-fiction. They're seriously trying to make straight faced predictions about the future using what is literally in the book store under "Fiction". Something that is by definition not real, a fabrication, a lie. How can people possibly expect me to take them seriously or grasp what it is that I'm doing? You can't take stories you know are fake and map them to the real world. How is that any different from religion? I'm giving people mathematical arguments and they're giving me Dr. Seuss.

And here you've put words in my mouth to suit your narrative. The story you want to believe. A story that's fake by defintion.

Don't you see how messed up that is? Well, Hitchen's Razor says that, "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence". Here's my razor, "What can be asserted with fiction can be dismissed with fiction". My software is a bulwark against those who insist on living in a world of fantasy and superstition. But for the rest of us, those who want to live in reality, I'm giving you the real world.

And it's not 'deep paranoia'. It's 'Deep Schizophrenia'

It's not 'Deep Paranoia', lol. It's 'Deep Schizophrenia' The user 'vessenes' got the name wrong. Read my replies.

I'm guessing whatever system has faster compute cycles will win the race of who hashes first? Will you be able to tell who's hash gets there first

Yes, but it's not just about hashing power though. And there's no nonce like Bitcoin. It's mostly about deep learning inference power. You can see the process described on the website under "Unrewriteable History And Reasonable Storage Requirements" (though I'll probably change that title soon and call it "[something] Merkle Tree"). I've copied the last bullet point here...

* The process of producing the next Merkle Tree is a competition any node can compete in. A person who cultivates real trees is an Arborist so we'll use that term. Our "arborists" will also need to perform inference on the frames that were randomly selected for evaluation based on the last Merkle root, and will need to publish each frame's digest tuple and the "reserved digest" (see diagram). If the original node holding the reserved digest signs the arborist's digest, it generates that node's reward coins and a percentage goes to the arborist. But that will only propogate if that arborist's tree is also accepted by a majority of the network. Therefore, as long as (1) there is always active competition to compute the Merkle Tree by statistically verifying the work of all other nodes and (2) over 50% of every active node prevents inflation of the money supply by rejecting trees that don't pass their proof-of-work, then all rational (self-interested) nodes will have to be honest.

That data may be trash to you but to a sociologist, to an economist, to an epidemiologist, to an anthropologist, to a historian, to a city planner, to a property developer, to an investment firm, to an insurance company, to a kinesiologist and on and on... it's TREASURE.

You're looking at something and calling it 'surveillance' because you don't yet have a word to describe the entire thing. It's too new so you see it through your 'old eyes'. You noticed there was a camera involved and you knew what that was so you ran with it.

It's the proverbial blind man whose hand has happened to land on the tusk and he tells his companions, "It's a spear!". You're not seeing the whole elephant because you've never seen one.

It benefits you when other people have knowledge about the world. It benefits you if other people have the knowledge to drive safely. It benefits you that your neighbours have a basic knowledge of germ theory and don't throw their sewage in the streets like medieval peasants. It benefits you that your fellow voters have at least a basic education and can make somewhat informed decisions. It benefits you that medical knowledge isn't locked away in some vault in Alexandria but it's in the mind of the doctor whose preventing an outbreak of some disease you happen to be susceptible to.

Did you not read the things I was able to learn just from my first node? We can give so many people free access to information that would push back darkness, fear and superstition just a little further. And these people would do and build things that would make your life better.

So instead of channelling the Archbishop of Canterbury telling Bible translator John Wycliffe that too much knowledge will corrupt the commoners, open your eyes.

You're looking at something and calling it 'surveillance' because you don't yet have a word to describe the entire thing. It's too new so you see it through your 'old eyes'. You noticed there was a camera involved and you knew what that was so you ran with it.

It's the proverbial blind man whose hand has happened to land on the tusk and he tells his companions, "It's a spear!". You're not seeing the whole elephant because you've never seen one.

It benefits you when other people have knowledge about the world. It benefits you if other people have the knowledge to drive safely. It benefits you that your neighbours have a basic knowledge of germ theory and don't throw their sewage in the streets like medieval peasants. It benefits you that your fellow voters have at least a basic education and can make somewhat informed decisions. It benefits you that medical knowledge isn't locked away in some vault in Alexandria but it's in the mind of the doctor whose preventing an outbreak of some disease you happen to be susceptible to.

Did you not read the things I was able to learn just from my first node? We can give so many people free access to information that would push back darkness, fear and superstition just a little further. And these people would do and build things that would make your life better.

So instead of channelling the Archbishop of Canterbury telling Bible translator John Wycliffe that too much knowledge will corrupt the commoners, open your eyes.

You're looking at something and calling it 'surveillance' because you don't yet have a word to describe the entire thing. It's too new so you see it through your 'old eyes'. You noticed there was a camera involved and you knew what that was so you ran with it.

It's the proverbial blind man whose hand has happened to land on the tusk and he tells his companions, "It's a spear!". You're not seeing the whole elephant because you've never seen one.

It benefits you when other people have knowledge about the world. It benefits you if other people have the knowledge to drive safely. It benefits you that your neighbours have a basic knowledge of germ theory and don't throw their sewage in the streets like medieval peasants. It benefits you that your fellow voters have at least a basic education and can make somewhat informed decisions. It benefits you that medical knowledge isn't locked away in some vault in Alexandria but it's in the mind of the doctor whose preventing an outbreak of some disease you happen to be susceptible to.

Did you not read the things I was able to learn just from my first node? We can give so many people free access to information that would push back darkness, fear and superstition just a little further. And these people would do and build things that would make your life better.

So instead of channelling the Archbishop of Canterbury telling Bible translator John Wycliffe that too much knowledge will corrupt the commoners, open your eyes.