Great article, thanks!

The only thing I disagree with somewhat is:

This is because the chatbot interface is used. But what if the "tool call" is/includes the LLM? I've found specific programmatic calls to LLMs, including post-call cleanup and processing, much more efficient than the generic chatbot interface for process automation. The user input can still be a prompt and the LLM can still have access to tool calls if needed, but for each token of instructions that is about tooling or context, i.e. anything other than just solving the problem at hand, is "distracting" and diminishes results.

This is what Grok said when the author asked: "what now?" based on the article.

However, since that comes from an LLM, you'll probably have to be a little more creative, because someone likely made an INSTRUCTIONS.md out of that.

I don't aspire to own a jet, at all! But it's kind of becoming a thing of principles now? Tickets are KYC'd for security - which I get though not necessarily agree with, but whatevs. Maybe I'm wrong about that. However, corpos that abuse their access to that information for profits are awful assgoblins that do not deserve my hard earned sats. I'm not wrong about that.

Maybe I should get a flotilla w/ Starlink instead of a jet though... it would mean I only need to 10x my effort, not 100x.

Unescapable KYC too because you can't fly without ID. Note to self: work harder, stack harder, get that jet.

I tried real hard to watch the Laura Loomer report where they "expose" Microsoft but it started to get on my nerves because there is literally zero substance coming from the guy she invited. There is more relevant information in the ProPublica article (#1041170) than in the first hour of that "expose".

What am I missing? Why is this resonating with people so much that I even had someone taking the time to point me to this in a private signal chat? Just because video > text? I'm lost.

I don't think I'm well understood, but that's on me.

The former.

You don't want these sats?

I think that the rewards skew it a bit, because of the distribution mechanism (and the daily 50k sats subsidy.) On top, as I said, I'm not sure if territory revenue should be counted under stacking revenue, as this is - at least how I see it - a distinct money flow.

So I turn up in "top stackers" now not because of the content I contribute, but because of the sats I receive to make up for what I spend on maintaining territory. To me, this makes it feel as if the top stackers list isn't apples-to-apples, after all, you can't run sports or bitcoin or asksn, because those are monopolized.

Also since the top stackers' list includes rewards, if I were posting a lot of half-great content on Monday when there was a big boost, but you were posting a lot of really-great content on Tuesday when there wasn't, then I will, despite stacking less than you on my actual content, have a very good chance to be ranked above you.

Therefore something feels off, but I guess I should just not be lazy and read the code.

Agreed. The best thing for everyone is if they just dump it as soon as possible. No one needs sats in the hands of governments.

I guess the question that I'm asking is: are rewards really "revenue"? Maybe I should formulate my question better.

If the public seizes a criminal's car, do they keep the car?

Okay... let's not assume that my use-case is the same as yours.

You don't know what I need?

Ever since reviving ~ai I've bumped up 3-4 places in the top stacker list, but this seems to be mostly due to territory rewards? In fact, I feel that the main contributor my "top stacker" status comes from being active and getting rewards for activity rather than for great content; after all, I often rank higher than @denlillaapan, who provides more and higher quality content than I do, and gets more upzaps - the discrepancy between top-stackers-by-value vs top-stackers-by-stacking seems large at times.

Does it make sense to have a ranking that ignores rewards and territory income / expense? Just checking what y'all think.

Archived link: https://archive.is/7BmHJ

The most often complained about bundle in my environment is Adobe's subscription. You want for example Photoshop and Acrobat and you end up paying for an (expensive!) license for everything.

The reverse is annoying too though: iPad without charger. ugh!

No, the code is a fake exploit I wrote in 5 minutes because I don't want to publish the real exploit but you can figure out what I mean. The BAI code that this would attack is what I linked on your repo.

Luckily, thanks to fetch, you don't seem to have a supply chain outside the browser itself at a glance so in this particular extension the only way to inject the exploit would be to either introduce a dependency in a PR on your repo and then attack that, or introduce the first 4 lines of the exploit in an obscured way directly into your codebase.

However, if you normalize people installing extensions then it will be more likely that they will install other extensions that may have a much more vulnerable supply chain and with vibe coding nowadays this risk becomes much larger. For example, I could create BAI++ which looks nicer and has the vulnerability and then, when I have 10k installs, I activate the exploit.

Because there is no protection against this (extensions ignore SCP) the only solution for the past decade has been to tell everyone to never use extensions, and it still is the only solution today.

We could argue that it was .5% in the '56-'65 era due to the 10-year exhaustion of that budget, but I think this figure is closer to the methodology used in the chart because of the word "era". Either way - interstates were expensive but I've seen figures that claim a 600% ROI on it, which is what matters in the end.

Budget: 25B ¹ GDP: 440B ²