[No text content]
Source date (UTC): 2026-01-02 22:25:42 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2007216759254987188
[No text content]
Source date (UTC): 2026-01-02 22:25:42 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2007216759254987188
[No text content]
Source date (UTC): 2026-01-02 22:24:17 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2007216403267629386
Great Question.
While (a) all conspiracy theories hold a grain of truth at their core and (b) there is a tendency on the right to seek conspiracy narratives just as the left has a tendency toward oppression narratives, the reality is that the city of london does specialize in shady money, but that they’re closely intertwined with our NYC only slightly less questionable money.
While I get why folks latch onto these City of London empire theories—there’s no denying London’s massive role in global finance, handling 40% of forex and offshore havens that tie into US trends like deindustrialization—it’s mostly overblown conspiracy thinking.
What we should think in terms of is the US-UK transfer of imperial power and the UK’s retention of some aspects of that history combined with some aspects of american postwar capture of the UK financial system in order to expand american postwar power.
But in the end it’s rational incentives (‘conspiracy of common interests’) not conspiracy by intent.
Financialization in America ramped up through our own choices, like deregulation in the ’80s and chasing short-term profits, which yeah, led to predictable downsides like inequality and job losses in manufacturing, but also powered our dominance in world trade and military might. The USA switched from military to economic power especially under Regan. Which we see playing out with Trump’s continuation of exercising that power today.
Instead of chasing plots, let’s stick to facts: incentives drive this stuff, not some British overlord suppressing sovereignty.
OTOH: anything that gets the radical right to agitprop is probably a counter-balance to the radical left and in some strange way produces a reasonable equilibrium.
Short answer, no conspiracy other than common interest made possible by the utility of our shared anglo american common law emphasis on the protection of private property, the profitability of globalism for the financial sector, and the utility of using that wealth as strategic leverage instead of blood and steel.
I hope this provides the answer you’re looking for. I try to remain sympathetic to conservatives without feeding the false narratives.
CD
Source date (UTC): 2026-01-02 06:06:50 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2006970421980299501
WHITEST FOODS
I’m not sure why I find this so humorous – probably because someone went to the trouble of ‘science-ing’ it.
A) Alcohol.
B) Lactose Tolerance
C) Carbs (the enemy of white people everywhere)
Source date (UTC): 2026-01-01 20:36:38 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2006826922777661785
Great analogy, and I’m cautious of analogies, because they lead to subsequent false deductions, but basically, as I think you meanit, yes.
The way to think about it, is that at some point the correlations you create in the LLM via training either over-enforce (overdetermine) or misdirect (underdetermine) the distribution.
This is why training using our existing regression algorithms independent of contextualization of whatever subnetwork we’re trying to tune, requires retesting nearly everything.
I see papers discussing compartmentalization through episodic memory associations (like the brain does) which should get us there, but my job is governance (constraining the path through the latent space) and I leave the training to those who have access to the code and the large models. I don’t, my team doesn’t, so it’s pointless to theorize without the foundation model dev’s ability to test.
Source date (UTC): 2025-12-31 20:03:29 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2006456195608199539
Perfect. 😉
But I reserve the right to fond memories on occasion. 😉
Hugs and thank you for your leadership.
Source date (UTC): 2025-12-30 20:37:15 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2006102304097767761
Brilliant. Clear. Visionary.
I knew you’d know.
Genius. 😉
Source date (UTC): 2025-12-30 20:36:18 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2006102064309375318
@OrielJohann
net net, yes you are correct. I just enumerated the majority of causes. I’ll wrap it into the industrial revolution relieved demand for consumption and we built a world for consumption which of course produced deterministic consequences.
Source date (UTC): 2025-12-30 19:35:54 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2006086865817129402
I wish I could see you at school age. I think I would have thought you were awesome. So contemplative… 😉
Source date (UTC): 2025-12-30 19:15:13 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2006081660794855494
@NoahRevoy
: I wonder about your thoughts on this subject. I see you as attempting to produce stable families and people capable of the stable family. But is that a recipe for symmetric couples despite the desire for women to obtain asymmetric relationships with men?
Source date (UTC): 2025-12-30 19:14:21 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2006081443081105673