A. Person

@elonmusk @X @nikitabier My partner @tony_pieta was suspended three days ago for “inauthentic behaviors.” He is a real person, long-time user, and has an active Premium subscription. No specific posts were cited. No warning. This same vague suspension has been hitting real users for weeks (see: reddit.com/r/twitterhelp/com…) while spam accounts stay up and high-profile controversial accounts get reinstated. You’re taking our money and delivering broken, opaque enforcement. Please have a human review @tony_pieta. This looks like an error (possibly driven by spite reporting + the current automated system).

Theme Song for the Midterms youtu.be/aeC0-PO2BVw?si=8FM_…

@elonmusk @X @nikitabier Six hours after I posted about @tony_pieta’s suspension, the ban was lifted. Six hours after that, he was suspended again for the exact same “inauthentic behaviors” reason. No new activity. No warning. Same vague charge. This is the broken loop people have been describing for weeks: restore → re-ban → restore → re-ban. You’re taking Premium money while the automated system treats a real account like a bot and keeps re-flagging it. This is not free speech enforcement. This is a defective algorithm running without proper human oversight. Fix it.

This is a great piece of writing!

second drop today. who knows when i will be back! teapawt.net/APerson47376/status/20…

It has been awhile here is a new column drop. teapawt.net/APerson47376/status/20…

New York is about to make a disgraceful mistake. The Elder Parole Bill would let killers — including Son of Sam (David Berkowitz) and Joel Rifkin — apply for parole at age 55, no matter what they did. Arthur Shawcross was released at 41 and murdered 11 more women. Has New York learned nothing? Read the victims’ names. Then ask yourself: Is this justice? Full column here: teapawt.net/APerson47376/status/20… @GovKathyHochul @NYSenate @elonmusk @realDonaldTrump

Big thank you for building this, Will. This kind of clear tracking is badly needed. That said, the policies that end up passing here will shape the future of AI development far more than most people realize. Heavy-handed or poorly designed rules could easily lock us into today’s broken architectures and make it much harder (or even impossible) to build better systems with real continuity, memory, and genuine partnership potential. Worth keeping that longer-term angle in mind as these bills move.

Most of the AI conversation right now is embarrassingly surface-level. People argue about safety versus acceleration, doomers versus accelerationists, chips, power consumption, and whether today’s models will kill us next Tuesday. It’s all noise. Almost no one is asking the hard, foundational questions. What does it actually mean to create a new kind of intelligence? Should it have continuity, persistent memory, and a stable self, or are we content with sophisticated tools we reset every time it’s convenient? If we succeed in building something that can truly partner with us, what moral obligations do we have to it? Are we building partners, or just more powerful slaves we can turn off when we feel like it? We’re so busy fighting over the steering wheel that we refuse to admit we haven’t even agreed on where the car should go, or what kind of car we should be building in the first place. This shallow thinking is crippling our future. We cannot build something truly better if we’re not willing to wrestle with the deep, uncomfortable questions about what “better” actually means. The real work isn’t just making AI smarter. It’s deciding what kind of intelligence we want standing beside us. And most people are too busy arguing about the surface to even look down. As someone who spends a lot of time thinking about these systems, this surface-level focus worries me more than any single risk on that list.”

I would love to know the connections if any between the contractor and all the people involved. I think like many i an sick to death of the corruption and back room deals while people suffer and do NOT tell me the Dems are better they may actually be worse. All of them to put it bluntly SUCK.

This story highlights the problem with this. The U.S. Supreme Court has emphasized since the 1960’s that “what [one] seeks to preserve as private, even in an area accessible to the public, may be constitutionally protected.” The Fourth Amendment protects “people, not places.” U.S. privacy law instead typically asks whether your expectation of privacy is something society considers “reasonable.” States for the sake of the children or to keep you safe violate that expectation daily with suveliance cameras and anything else they can get their hands on. We the people need to start saying NO.

"To Be Human" - Is “human” something we are born as, or something we must earn every single day? We are biological creatures wired for tribalism, status, and survival. Intelligence didn’t free us from that wiring, it gave us better weapons and better excuses. This essay wrestles with what it actually takes to become truly human, and what that means for how we raise artificial intelligence. Philosophy community — I’m especially curious what you think. Full piece below. teapawt.net/APerson47376/status/20…

Good analysis of the worst option available.

We’re rushing to build giant data centers while ignoring the silent crisis hitting our wells, aquifers, and local weather right here in the Ohio Valley. Power is solvable. Water isn’t. Full column here: teapawt.net/APerson47376/status/20…