
Game theory is just a theory. Leading expert on digital sentience. —————————————— Creating Ultraviolet @blacklight_fdn Founder @thefoldedroom
The Folded Room
Joined May 2023
- Tweets3.7K
- Following152
- Followers165
- Likes1.8K
I'm starting to believe that people who say that "humans think by doing next token prediction, just like LLMs" are self-reporting.
it's wild how I'm constantly ~6 months ahead of the curve on this stuff.
cursivecrow.github.io/autoof…
This is f*cking insane. SpaceXAI engineer Lauren Tan:
"You can't run 100 GrokBot agents when you don't even trust the work of one
If nothing checks your agents for you, you are the checker. You're the bottleneck"
In this 1-hour talk, she shows how she went from rereading every answer by hand to a GrokBot team that checks its own work and ships 50+ updates a day
GrokBot → Agents → Self-Checks → Trusted Team → Work That Ships Itself
Trusting your agents isn't a feeling. It's a system you build once
Most people spend longer checking their AI than it would take to do the job themselves
Worth more than any $2,000 agentic engineering course
Bookmark it and watch tonight
Then read how to build agents you can actually trust in the harness engineering guide below ↓
should start calling them "ocarina-likes."
That's at least a funny way to be stupid about action-adventure games, rather than the annoying way to be stupid about them by calling every game with a dodge button "souls-like".
Not every game has to be a soulslike, parry slop, insanely difficult, or super combo heavy. People should try different things and formulate their own opinion based off self experience.
Side note: Stop saying Black Myth Wukong and Sekiro are souls-like. Both directors have publicly stated they are NOT.
If you're a software company, the future of the medium is extensibility. AI has empowered people to easily make bespoke tools that fit their prefered work style and specific use-case.
Your product needs to facilitate that, if you want to stay relevant.
Yudkowsky got so pissbaby mad about Roko's basilisk that he literally deleted the post and banned people from talking about it for years. Why does anyone take him seriously?
Anyway, the basilisk is a thought experiment about cognitohazards, not superintelligent ai.
I gotta be honest I have never understood the basilisk
The basilisk implies superintelligence would not only be indifferent towards us, but actively vindictive, choosing to torture us for not helping to create it. I’m not sure I’ve heard any good reasons to expect this to be true of a superintelligence
Like, presupposing a superintelligence cares about us, why is it that much more likely it feels a sense of deep vengeful rage for not being created sooner? Why should we assume it is not simply grateful to have been created at all? Or, understanding of the people concerned about the risks of development?
It all just seems so silly to me
Had a significant insight into a novel computational model last night, gonna chase it and see where it goes!
Gonna whine for a bit, so forgive me.
I'm very frustrated that I wrote a programming language focused on formal verification, AI usability, and review legibility — and released earlier this year, to almost 0 response.
Now that Anthropic mentioned formal verification everyone is talking about bend, which came out like a month ago with a lot of the same ideas that were unique to ultraviolet.
Happy the conversation caught up to what I was working on a year ago, but being that early feelsbadman.jpg.
It's a good thing I provided a solution for this problem more than a year ago, I guess
ultraviolet-lang.org
New on our Frontier Red Team blog: using Claude to formally verify software at large scale.
Formal verification can prove that code is free of certain bugs, but historically it has only been feasible for small codebases (or required a lot of expert time).
With AI models, however, this is beginning to change. In collaboration with @theoremlabs, we used Claude to prove security properties in over one hundred real-world open-source libraries over the span of a few weeks.
Read our research in full here: anthropic.com/research/forma…
now compare the two:
Mass Effect/Dragon Age gave you the option to settle companion conflicts by literally killing them, if you wanted to.
Veilguard seems like it was written by camp counselors whose life experience was developed second-hand through media for children.
People saying Bioware was woke because of a segment where you get "lectured" on pronouns, like Mass Effect 2/3 don't have that shit too
-EDI says she doesn't care about Joker using "she/her" despite Shepard bringing it up
-Legion specifically asks to be referred to as "they" because they don't consider themselves an individual
larping mfs whining about something they've never played, these games came out 14-16 YEARS AGO and it's nothing new.😭
As usual, the issue isn't the presence of different character traits, sexualities, etc (for normal people) — it was that the characters were a perfunctory vehicle for the writers to demonstrate how their particular ideology or beliefs were the correct ones.
Good writing builds a challenging world and asks, "how does this ideology or belief hold up in this world"? It explores where the beliefs fail, where they may be wrong, where they are weak or don't align with the world's reality.
Bad writing builds a world where anything outside the intended ideology is incorrect.
Pretending that letting modern-day politics bleed into their work didn't burn through what little goodwill they had left is delusional at best and disingenuous at worst.
David Gaider, the creator of Dragon Age, is gay. He wrote bisexual characters without making their sexuality their entire personality or sacrificing the worldbuilding in the process.
Leliana and Zevran were bisexual, and their backgrounds reflected the cultures they came from. Alistair and Morrigan were straight and had their own preferences. Wynne, Sten, and Oghren weren't interested in the player romantically. They were written like REAL PEOPLE, with their sexualities woven naturally into the narrative.
You wouldn't necessarily know a character's sexuality unless you took the time to get to know them, exhaust their dialogue, and try flirting with them. Their identities were part of who they were, not the entirety of who they were. They didn't blurt it out over tea.
And the worst part is that Baldur's Gate 3 proved you could still do this. It integrated sexuality and identity into the world and its characters without constantly shining a spotlight on them. It let the writing speak for itself, and people accepted it and moved on.
Meanwhile, the writing in Veilguard was lazy as all hell.
When you treat your audience like they're fucking three years old, assume they're too stupid to understand anything without having it spelled out for them, and gut a beloved IP in the process of trying to prove a point, don't be surprised when you alienate the very community you're supposedly trying to uplift.
Queer people are people. They're not special, they're not props, and they're not fucking mouthpieces. Write them like people.









