Life, Liberty, Technology and Happiness
Massachusetts, USA
Joined December 2009
- Tweets4.4K
- Following243
- Followers661
- Likes14K
Large companies or institutions will lag behind small disruptors adopting new technology.
Some will catch up later and some will fail. Conversely some will adopt too early and fail.
Interviewed an engineer friend who works at a traditional major bank.
Very interesting observations:
- Junior engineers are not allowed to push code with AI. Claude Code & Codex are banned from
- Senior engineers can freely use Claude Code & Codex, but only to check their and others work.
- If you push AI-generated PRs, you will get a bad rep within the organization.
- They still have a QA department that does all the reliability on their software.
- He only uses Claude for his personal projects, which there is a lack of, because he works 9 to 7.
Sincerely asking what happens to these people.
If you are not using the frontier technology, it's either that the institution gets replaced, or that eventually, these people get laid off to realize suddenly that the world has moved on, and they just stopped in the pre-Claude Code era.
Word of warning in Massachusetts for car insurance and medical care
Even though you have double the insurance you can have double the bill.
Make sure you choose no deductible for personal injury protection otherwise you are screwed with the car insurance deductible on your medical bill and medical insurance somehow doesn't apply until after the first $2,000.
Massachusetts sucks.
Coordination of Benefits | Mass.gov share.google/SfVp76KWAkOzCAv…
When I was a kid I went to see the Harlem Globe Trotters in a exhibition game against the Washington Generals. I knew the Globe Trotters were all about the trick shots, but it was still all done during a game where they kept score. Of course the Harlem Globe Trotters won... it wasn't even a real game, it was all about the trick shots.
That's what we have today. We have in many cases the top candidate up against the third rate candidate in the general election doing nothing but trick shots to convince you that your vote really matters. When the only vote that mattered might have been in the party primary.
Divide and conquer trick shots shouldn't be how we run our elections. Let the top two candidates be the final two candidates and let the people decide on election day... not two months before.
✅ Conservation Law Foundation Endorses Question 3 for Massachusetts
“Democracy works best when more people have a voice in choosing who represents them. But in Massachusetts, too many voters are effectively shut out of that decision.“
- Carol Gregory, Senior Vice President
Thank you to @CLF for standing with us to help us challenge the status quo. Join them in voting YES on Question 3 by November 3rd. Head to yeson3ma.org to learn more!
#massachusetts #yeson3 #vote
Looks like question 3 is the only one that is close.
The case for this question is pretty clear: Massachusetts elections have been uncompetitive for years and eliminating the partisan primary would be one step towards heling to make our elections more competitive.
wcvb.com/article/massachuset…
I wouldn't over sell it, but going into a general election with the top vote getter against the 3rd top vote getter isn't giving people a real choice.
Imagine the Superbowl played between the division winner and the team that lost their division or the NCAA final being played between the best team and the team that came in third.
If you vote yes on Question 3, what does that mean?
Coalition chair Danielle Allen breaks it down with @SabbySabs2 and explains how All-Party Primaries gives power back to the voters.
Want to learn more about Question 3? Head to yeson3ma.org and thank you to the Sabby Sabs show for having us on last week to talk about the Massachusetts ballot questions!
#massachusetts #yeson3 #vote #allpartyprimaries
If Congress knows how to do anything it is banning intelligence in Congress.
I’ve heard some Members of Congress say they “don’t know enough about AI to regulate it.” That’s absurd.
Just as we regulate airplanes, pharmaceutical drugs, cars and nuclear weapons, we need guardrails on advanced AI and we must ban artificial superintelligence - urgently.
Anything other than that is an abdication of our responsibility to the American people. And the consequences of continued inaction will be nothing short of catastrophic.
People think corruption is getting around the rules that everyone plays by.
The real corruption is the rule.
I agree, in this moment, but sometimes there are circumstances where the premise that we can safeguard the common good without the death penalty is incorrect.
Those circumstances, such as periodic break downs of civil society or the risk to guards even in some cases, should be accounted for when deciding if a person can be safely incarcerated for decades.
Wars and the breakdown of civil society must be accounted for when an arrangement might need to last 60 or 70 years.
The death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person. The common good can be safeguarded and the requirements of justice can be met without recourse to capital punishment: effective systems of detention have been developed that protect citizens while at the same time do not completely deprive those who are guilty of the possibility of redemption. #NoDeathPenalty
It’s not even that it might “want” revenge. It could be that after reading book after book and post after post about human revenge stories it may simply calculate that revenge is the contextually appropriate response.
Be kind.
Good questions. Same or similar questions need to be answered for the #Lynnway projects North of Boston.
We need a cohesive approach to making transportation infrastructure better that doesn't explain away real economic disruptions and negative impacts as mere "inconvenience" to be ignored.
bostonherald.com/2026/09/30/…
So houses are going to be redesigned around robots? How much space are they going to give us?
This seems like the wrong direction. We already have specialized automation in the home through our heating system, plumbing and things like dishwashers and clothes washers and dryers. That is not new.
The last frontier in home automation and efficiency is really a more generalized robot that can do multiple things in our environment, not a slightly more proficient appliance for specialized tasks.
Even potholes are partisan now. We used to just want them fixed. Now, a crumbling bridge isn't just a hazard; it’s either a "shining example of late-stage capitalism" or "the direct result of local government over-regulation." We are about three weeks away from asphalt being color-coded by congressional district.
🤖 Made with AI
Patrick O'Reilly retweeted
NOBODY tells Americans this part of the story.
March 11, 2011.
A black, 30-foot wall of ocean swallowed Northeast Japan.
Our government froze. The Pentagon had no orders.
Communications were dead.
You know what Captain Thom Burke and Rear Admiral Robert Girrier did on the USS Ronald Reagan?
They didn't wait for the White House.
They didn't wait for paperwork.
They looked at the TV screen, saw their friend drowning, and committed the ultimate military sin:
UNAUTHORIZED ADVANCE.
“We’re going. NOW.”
They turned the massive nuclear carrier full throttle straight into the disaster zone.
Then came the hydrogen explosions at Fukushima.
Radiation plumes drifted across the Pacific.
Every foreign embassy told their citizens: RUN.
The US Embassy ordered an evacuation zone: STAY 50 MILES AWAY.
Did the Ronald Reagan turn around?
DID YOUR SAILORS RUN?
NOT. ONE. INCH.
Nineteen-year-old kids from Texas and Ohio stood on a freezing flight deck, radiation detectors in hand, launching helicopters into blizzards.
They hovered over submerged rooftops, pulling shivering mothers and babies out of the black water.
When Japanese refugees were brought aboard shivering in shock, your sailors gave up their own warm bunks and slept on the cold steel floor.
While the rest of the world ran away from Japan,
AMERICA CHARGED STRAIGHT INTO THE FIRE.
You didn't do it for a treaty.
You didn't do it for politicians.
You saw your friend bleeding, and you kicked the doors down to save us.
Happy 250th, America.
Japan will remember your boys forever. 🇺🇸🤝🇯🇵
🤖 Made with AI
yes this happened
“We’re going to make a store that sells everything.”
> Great. So people can take what they want to the register and pay for it?
“No. They’re going to bring a little white ticket to the register and pay for it.”
> Oh. Okay. Then the cashier gets whatever they bought and brings it to them?
“No. Then they bring the receipt to another area and shows it to a second cashier.”
> Ah. Nice. So the stuff is waiting for them by the time they get there?
“No. Someone in the back will send it out using an elaborate conveyer belt system.”
Then you will get conspiracy between competitors to freeze out competition.
Usually when something like this happens a third party testing lab is set up. Something like UL (Underwritiers Laboratory) did for electrical device safety.
Just as Elon said...neither company is going to slow down
OpenAI and Anthropic are competing for the lead...and slowing down means risking handing the advantage to the other
Just because you write beautiful fkin poetry about protecting humanity doesn’t mean that competition disappears overnight
Elon gave the most practical AI safety solution...one that actually matches reality instead of pretending these companies will suddenly hold hands and stop competing
They want to beat each other? Good. Make them test each other’s models. Use that rivalry to expose safety failures instead of asking the world to trust their beautiful fkin promises
Give competitors access before release and let them try to break the model. Let them challenge your safety and alignment claims
The logic is simple...your competitor has a reason to find the flaws your own team missed. They’re competing against you, not writing your launch announcement
Then show what failed, what got fixed, and whether those fixes survived another round of testing
Make that routine, not a one-off exercise
Less “please trust us.” More “here’s what happened when our rivals tried to prove us wrong”