YouTuber. Post-Labor Economics. Author. Enterprise Consultant. Researcher. Problem Solver.

United Federation of Planets
Joined May 2024
David Shapiro (L/0) retweeted
Ethan Mollick
@emollickOct 19
I hate this slide every time it comes up, and now from CSAIL This has been false since before the slide was made. Automated systems make management decisions all the time (trading, logistics, customer service, insurance) & pretending they don't actually launders responsibility.
An IBM slide from 1979.
236
83
29
1,157
68,926
David Shapiro (L/0) retweeted
X 上最近有句话挺火:"Vibe coding is dead." 我拿自己写作业的两次经历对了一下,发现 AI 是同一个,差别全在我自己:先想没想清楚,最后验没验收。 你用 AI 写代码,更像许愿还是派活? —— 先交代下背景:这句话出自 @DaveShapi 的帖子,原话是"Vibe coding is dead. Agentic coding is the way.",意思是凭感觉写代码已经过时了,智能体编程才是正道。 先说说这俩到底啥区别。 Vibe coding 就是你用大白话跟 AI 说"帮我做个啥",它吐一堆代码出来,你看都不看,能跑就行,跑不了就把报错丢回去让它接着改。说白了就是许愿。 Agentic coding 更像给 AI 派活:你先定好目标、拆好任务、讲清楚什么算做完,让 AI 一步步干,你负责盯着每一步对不对。 连 Linux 之父 Linus Torvalds 都在自己的业余项目里用 AI 写过一个 Python 可视化小工具。写了几十年代码的人都在用,所以现在问题早就不是该不该用,而是怎么用。 我自己的两次经历 第一次:以前写作业,我有时候图省事,直接把题丢给 AI。前几次都没事,但题越往后越难,它的解法就越容易跑偏。最坑的是它碰到难题不会说"我不会",而是给你整一套似是而非的东西,比如代码刚好能跑出 example 的输出,可只对 example 管用,换一组数据就不对了。到了做嵌入式的时候,我就彻底不敢放手了:固件错一次,板子可能直接卡死。 第二次:后来我换了个用法。重要的部分我自己来,比如引脚分配。AI 动手之前,我先让它把思路讲给我听,我把它的框架审一遍,觉得不对就马上改,然后再让它按框架一步一步写。效果明显好多了,至少遇到麻烦的地方,它不会再编一套数据糊弄过去。 差别到底在哪 回头看,两次用的是同一个 AI,差别全在我: 一是我有没有先想清楚要什么。直接丢题的时候,我其实是把思考也一起外包出去了,它跑偏了我都看不出来。 二是我有没有验收。能跑出 example 不代表它对,更不代表我懂。 三是出了事谁背锅。作业扣的是我的分,板子卡死了修的也是我,不是 AI。 所以我理解的"Vibe coding 已死",不是 AI 不好用了,而是只会许愿、不会验收的用法走不远。 给同样在学编程的同学几点建议 先自己写思路,哪怕几行注释也行,再让 AI 动手。 关键的部分自己做,比如硬件相关的引脚、时序这类一错就出大事的地方。 让 AI 先讲思路再写代码,你审过框架再放它干。 别只拿 example 测,自己多造几组数据,尤其是边界情况。 把 AI 当成手很快但会犯错的队友,别当标准答案。 这些不光是为了拿分。以后进了公司大家都会用 AI,拉开差距的可能就是谁更会定目标、谁更会验收。 你现在用 AI 写代码,更像许愿还是派活?评论区聊聊。 参考:@DaveShapi 原帖 xitter.cf/DaveShapi/status/21111… #VibeCoding #AI编程 #AIAgent #嵌入式
Vibe coding is dead. Agentic coding is the way.
6
1
7
961
David Shapiro (L/0) retweeted
POV: Tibo trying to badmouth other AI labs.
Tibo
@thsottiauxOct 5
Replying to @ai_for_success
Claudex AI Space by Google
49
44
6
2,110
151,600
David Shapiro (L/0) retweeted
Replying to @DTarockoff
The hard part about change is that it is change
1
11
1,869
David Shapiro (L/0) retweeted
Replying to @DaveShapi
AI enables products that otherwise wouldn't exist due to economic constraints
2
1
7
822
David Shapiro (L/0) retweeted
1. AI is already better at doing research than 90+% of “professional” researchers. Especially in highly verifiable fields. 2. This is the worst that AI will ever get at research. 3. Very soon NOT using AI for research will be tantamount to malpractice. 4. Being in a state of willful denial about any of this is not going to get you anywhere.
65
80
12
918
45,189
David Shapiro (L/0) retweeted
Replying to @AestherML
Yes but 1) change is spooky 2) they'd rather burn everything down than not be in control of it
2
1
10
1,852
David Shapiro (L/0) retweeted
The Anthropic Network gave $2.2M to members of Congress over 2024-26. Senator Warner ranked #4 of biggest recipients. Out of 535 members, Warner is in the top 1%. The Senator is doing what he was paid to: pushing Anthropic's AI agenda to have government regulate its industry.
Later today, I’m headed to the floor to try and force a vote to get urgent protections done around AI. We cannot wait any longer. We must take action to put some guardrails on this tech before something catastrophic happens.
51
708
56
1,936
45,165
David Shapiro (L/0) retweeted
Dario wrote a 3800 words article on pacing the frontier only to drop a new SOTA model 11 days later. Safe to say, no one is actually doing it.
81
292
33
7,116
199,738
David Shapiro (L/0) retweeted
Cybersecurity people are upset at AI doomers, because most all doomer scenarios involve rampant hacking by AIs -- our area of expertise. What AI doomers want is to violate all the principles of cybersecurity that we've learned over the last 40 years. If the AI doom comes to pass, it'll be because the doomers succeeded at wrecking cybersecurity.
solst/ICE of Astarte
@IceSolstSep 21
There is a group of charlatans calling themselves “AI Safety Experts” that are spewing lies and inane delusional bullshit, such as “we will all die unless we regulate AI”. The AI labs (Anthropic and OpenAI) enable them, to 1. position themselves well pre-IPO via media hype, 2. manipulate government into contracts & regulation, and then 3. block competition. Mainstream media loves tabloid gossip type slop content, therefore is platforming them. It is important we stop their harmful narrative. These people do not care about anyone’s safety. They push a coordinated narrative under the umbrella of “effective altruism” but it is all manipulative. Security and AI experts do not agree with them, they are in a bubble. They have dismissed decades of research and known practices in order to drive their own narrative. Adopting their narrative will set humanity back decades, since instead of actually adopting safety guidelines around AI, we’ll end up in a dystopian AI despotism led by psychopaths that control AI, therefore inextricably intertwined with our lives, controlling ideology, beliefs, monopolized with no alternative. AI must be open and accessible, like the internet and any body of knowledge.
29
76
7
334
21,126
you don’t have to settle the existential risk argument to see that the people making decisions about training, testing, and deployment should be accountable for their consequences especially when proposed or actual routes to "losing control" run through human decisions at every level
🚨 BREAKING: US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent declares OpenAI management personally responsible for HuggingFace hack > "The Hugging Face incident, that is the responsibility of the OpenAI management, not a bunch of agents." > "It is humans who are responsible, not the AI." > "What we shouldn’t do on safety is to give these labs a liability exemption, which is what they are asking for." > "The best way to guarantee safety is that the creators are liable for what they build and generate." It’s OVER
3
1
18
2,298
David Shapiro (L/0) retweeted
solst/ICE of Astarte
@IceSolstSep 21
There is a group of charlatans calling themselves “AI Safety Experts” that are spewing lies and inane delusional bullshit, such as “we will all die unless we regulate AI”. The AI labs (Anthropic and OpenAI) enable them, to 1. position themselves well pre-IPO via media hype, 2. manipulate government into contracts & regulation, and then 3. block competition. Mainstream media loves tabloid gossip type slop content, therefore is platforming them. It is important we stop their harmful narrative. These people do not care about anyone’s safety. They push a coordinated narrative under the umbrella of “effective altruism” but it is all manipulative. Security and AI experts do not agree with them, they are in a bubble. They have dismissed decades of research and known practices in order to drive their own narrative. Adopting their narrative will set humanity back decades, since instead of actually adopting safety guidelines around AI, we’ll end up in a dystopian AI despotism led by psychopaths that control AI, therefore inextricably intertwined with our lives, controlling ideology, beliefs, monopolized with no alternative. AI must be open and accessible, like the internet and any body of knowledge.
52
202
29
967
75,916
David Shapiro (L/0) retweeted
OpenAI and Anthropic oversold AI security breaches to pressure feds into protecting turf: insiders trib.al/Jo6xMk5
673
2,088
938
11,124
4,325,891
David Shapiro (L/0) retweeted
Most jobs are going away There’s an old concept called “derived demand” that says most labor is incidental to the outcome you want. That is bad. Essential demand for human labor is tiny. That means most jobs have no moat. @DaveShapi - youtu.be/kBZNi8zPUTQ
1
3
10
1,332
David Shapiro (L/0) retweeted
why is this happening
17
32
11
668
46,433
David Shapiro (L/0) retweeted
Melvin
@MelvinInvestsSep 19
This is the real reasons Dario Amodei and OpenAI want tighter AI regulation because open models are rapidly taking over the market beneath them. Vercel’s AI Gateway data shows that open weight models now account for 78.4% of token volume, compared with only 21.6% for closed models while Open models represented roughly 40% of token volume in June, meaning their share has nearly doubled in only three months. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash alone generates 59.3% of the tokens moving through the gateway and by comparison, Claude Opus 4.8 and Claude Sonnet 5 each account for only 1.7% of token volume. However, the spending data tells a very different story. Closed models still capture a disproportionate amount of money because they charge much more per token. Claude Opus 4.8 accounts for 13.7% of spending despite representing only 1.7% of token volume while Anthropic’s five listed Claude models collectively capture 36.9% of total spending. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash has the opposite profile because it processes most of the tokens on the gateway but accounts for only 5.1% of spending, which shows how aggressively open models are competing on price. This is the threat facing closed model companies. Developers may still use expensive proprietary models for their hardest tasks but they are increasingly sending high volume workloads to cheaper open alternatives and as open models improve, developers could begin routing more premium workloads toward them as well. Open weights also give companies more control over their infrastructure. Developers can download these models, run them on different cloud providers, fine tune them for specific applications, and avoid depending entirely on one company’s API and this reduces the pricing power and customer lock in enjoyed by OpenAI and Anthropic. If open models keep closing the performance gap, OpenAI and Anthropic could lose the one thing that matters most, pricing power. If you enjoyed reading this, make sure to follow @MelvinInvests for more.
89
292
44
1,177
97,251
David Shapiro (L/0) retweeted
I'm really hoping Anthropic manages to crash out pre-ipo. If they make it to post IPO we'll have to spend the rest of our lives listening to a bunch of rich doomer virtue signalling.
Even spend to Anthropic has dropped from 75% to 42%.
18
35
2
746
51,803
David Shapiro (L/0) retweeted
Don’t anthropomorphise LLMs, they hate that.
54
164
19
1,632
45,373
David Shapiro (L/0) retweeted
And for reference: the US just announced a national agency to focus on accelerating AI. Not regulating. Not pacing. When all the big labs are like "we need to slow down" and they got all the other CEOs to agree, the federal government is like "hell nah, nerds, pedal to the metal"
10
4
1
109
3,194