This person was never lied to. Nobody promised him he would make it (probably). The promise was structural and unspoken and therefore unprosecutable: built on falsifiable claims that presence converts to opportunity, the room itself (anywhere) is a ladder, and that the people who show up are the people who eventually get pulled up. This is the load-bearing hyperfiction of every local scene, and the reason it’s fiction is that the relationship between showing up and winning is a tournament (it follows power-scaling laws). The scene cannot make him and it cannot make artists anymore; it can only host the contest in which, statistically, he loses. And like every tournament dressed as a community, it needs a steady supply of entrants who believe in it, or the whole thing collapses.

So watch what happens when he encounters the thing he hates. He hates Suno with a heat that surprises even him. It wasn’t like this 6 years ago despite the practices of musicians + AI researchers being roughly the same (train models, personal use is free game, LAION datasets FTW). He posts about AI slop, about theft, about real artists, about ten thousand hours never put in to becoming LeBron James level at his craft because joining the discourse is easier. He frames it, as everyone in his tier frames it, as a generational crime: the machine ate our work and is selling it back to us and if it weren’t for the machine I would have blown up by now. Here lies the fact that the framing can’t survive: this machine actually didn’t eat his work. He is below the line. The training sets that the lawsuits fight over are major-label catalogs and indie artists with registered copyrights and streaming footprints worth scraping. A man with 1,400 monthly listeners and eleven years of SoundCloud plates was never in the corpus. There is nothing of his to steal, because at his scale, to the machine, he does not exist. He might show up in a LAION set if he’s lucky, but there’s no proof that generators like Suno train on all rows of the set (and likely go through a dataset filtering process to produce better results with less compute/time dedication). His grievance is real and his account of it is wrong, and the problem diagnostics are wrong, and the gap between the two is the whole story. Sometimes people spend their entire lives in this gap. Those people, the 40+ year old “local DJs”, genuinely scare the hell out of me and a just society would produce some sort of coordinated re-education for them that starts with someone loudly yelling at them that it’s never going to happen.

The local scene is not a community in the sentimental sense. It’s a recruitment pyramid which is reasonable for people in their mid-20s, especially if locked out of elite spaces for socialization like universities and large college campuses, and the product is the dream that participation pays. Take a look at any local music scene and you will find people generally on the bottom half of society’s bell curve and not the top half. If people come from the top half, they’re usually downwardly mobile upper-middle classmen who are there to provide economic resources to others — the guy who owns a house somehow which we can blast amplifiers in, the dude who owns CDJs because his parents bought them for him. The economics only close if there is a constant inflow of believers at the very bottom — the eighteen-year-olds who just got a cracked copy of Ableton, who will buy the ticket block, fill the room, run the sound (if it’s not being run by an older member with a completely ruined life), share the flyer, and prop up the slightly-more-established acts one tier above them on the explicit understanding that this is how you climb. The guy who has been at it ten years is not at the bottom of the pyramid anymore. He is middle management. He’s probably starting a collective which recruits people some years his former. This collective will never produce any works worth writing about. His audience is not fans; it is an 80/20 ground beef mix of recruits and friends who kinda sometimes feel bad that it’s gone on this long. What he gets from them is not money, which barely ever moves, but the thing that keeps the whole apparatus from being visibly absurd: other people, in the room, treating the climb as real. The myth is false, but the myth making is always true.

Now you can see what companies like Suno actually threaten, and it is not his masters. It is his downline. Suno is an off-ramp for the eighteen-year-old. The person who is just behind becoming a starter producer who, last year, would have paid his dues — bought the ticket, filled the room, believed the ladder — can now type a prompt and get back something competent enough to satisfy the itch that drove him to the basement in the first place, often posting nonsensical music We Are Charlie Kirk to social media for several orders of magnitude more impressions than another Splice-sample saturated dubstep or hyperpop or electro-house song. The itch was never be canonized as an author. The itch was make a thing that sounds like the thing I love and have someone hear it, or even make enough from creating that it allows me to work a traditional job less or not at all and the machine satisfies that itch in nine seconds for far less money. So the recruit doesn’t show up anymore. The recruit now makes Tung Tung Tung Sahur brainrot videos for Instagram and has 30 million impressions a month. And the man who has been running the scene’s middle tier for a decade never loses a song to the machine. He loses the unpaid labor force and the audience-of-peers whose belief was the only thing converting his door deals into a narrative of ascent. His rage is not the rage of a robbed artist. It is the rage of a franchise operator watching the recruits stop walking in the door. This is completely understandable, totally rational. It’s just aimed at a horizontal or lateral target, because the right target — the recruitment model itself — is the thing he has organized his identity around defending. He’s The Guy. Support Local Music. Without this there may not be anything that sets him apart from anyone, and this is the crisis of being that many people are going through and the root reason why GenAI or not — it likely wouldn’t have happened for them.

The standard defense of the scene is that it produces culture, that it is the R&D lab of music, that Seattle and Athens and Memphis came out of exactly these rooms, that you can’t have the breakout without the ecosystem that feeds it. This used to be true. Howard Becker was right that art is collective action and never the solitary genius; Will Straw was right that the scene, not the lone author, is the real unit. The basement really was the lab. But holy shit, everything is different now. Things were even totally different in 2020. Back then, today’s Anti-AI artists were collaborating with people who literally invented the methods used to generate long-form music from text prompts. The comments read like something from an alternate dimension: almost all of them are hopeful and positive.

Our defense of local scenes against the onslaught of Suno describes a machine that was already breaking before the machine he hates ever shipped. The thing that broke it wasn’t Suno, or any model for that matter.

It was, like most things, damaged beyond repair by a global virus.

2020 is the turning point. That’s where the corpse actually died two years before Suno was anything. When the venues closed, the United States spent $16.25 billion through the Shuttered Venue Operators Grant to keep the buildings standing, and it worked: the real estate survived. The bailout saved buildings, not circuit logic. The connective tissue — the secondary and tertiary markets, the regional touring lattice that let a local act ladder up town by town — thinned to a few metropolitan nodes and never grew back. In the UK, where no comparable rescue existed, the Music Venue Trust watched grassroots rooms close at two a week and the average tour collapse from twenty-two dates across twenty-eight towns in the nineties to eleven dates across twelve cities, all of them major. The ladder lost more than just a few rungs, it basically lost the entire middle of the country.

And in the same window, the actual breakouts arrived from nowhere geographic at all. Hyperpop came out of bedrooms in suburban St. Louis and a town south of Asheville, and its church was Discord. Phonk repackaged thirty-year-old Memphis tapes into a genre with no physical scene, no venue, no door deal, distributed entirely by recommendation algorithms and a fifteen-second clip. I know an 18 year old who secured a $12 million a year deal from UMG for ambient music and speed house, located far outside the United States with a fanbase spreading across 150+ different countries. The discovery function that the local club used to perform — the room where a scene decided who was real — migrated to a playlist and a feed and middle-Americans thrash and complain and refuse to adapt to having to compete with the Literal Rest of the Globe Now. Especially post-pandemic, culture entirely decoupled from geography and it did so on its own, years before generative longform audio, while the man in the basement was still saving his folder of tracks for the moment. The scene died because the function it performed left the building and moved onto the network, where its information could be transmitted faster and for cheaper, and the building stayed open out of inertia and grant money and the sunk costs of the people inside it until it would close and become a different type of business which doesn’t bend to network as easily (this is also why a lot of club venues tried to pivot to serving food, which somehow is less risky than just operating a bar that hosts music).

For fifteen years, every serious account of where culture went has described the same thing: the dissolution of the individual author into networked, collective, contextless production. Barthes killed the author in theory; the internet revived him as a brand and then dissolved the brand into the feed. Do Not Research theorized it; the dark-forest writers mapped culture’s retreat into private Discords and group chats where the real work now happens off the indexed web; controversial of an example as it is — Remilia/Milady and the post-authorship crowd turned anonymous collective posting into an explicit doctrine where the author is just a vessel and the egregore is the artist. Spotify filled its own playlists with ghost artists nobody authored, and an AI band reached over a million monthly listeners before anyone noticed there was no band, and an AI rapper collaborated with RXKNephew as the human feature, and the numbers only fell on the former when the press told people they should be embarrassed. The demand side was already post-author. Listeners wanted the vibe, not the name. They had wanted the vibe and not the name for years. Suno automated the supply side of a market that had gone post-author while the man in the basement was still printing his name on the flyer and demanding authorship.

I’m not planning on being one-sided about this. The scene still produces real things, real relationships, and a lot of people participate for fun or at least the pretend frame that they’re doing it for fun. Memphis right now is a genuinely local, genuinely physical pipeline throwing off national acts; Miami still supplies a huge and economically satiated amount of Latin music into the world very reliably, the basement still teaches by osmosis; the room is still where a kid learns to read a crowd and decode whether a song is honest or just flat out sucks. The social goods are real and the occasional breakout is real and anyone who tells you the local scene produces literally nothing is being dramatic or fabricating a more fictional story than the world supports. Regardless. The local-physical scene is no longer the primary engine of relevant culture, and propping it up as if it were is not production (and thus does not deserve to exist within the argument of ‘workers rights’) but is a form of cultural preservation. Enjoying the room as a social practice is fine and good and human. Confusing the social practice with a career ladder is a massive mistake with increasing penalty as time goes on, and the scene’s entire economy depends on the participants never drawing the distinction, because the moment they draw it, the ticket blocks stop selling.

Which returns us, finally, to why he hates the machine, and to why the hatred is the most revealing thing about him. He experiences Suno as the assassin of his culture. It’s an omen, and a coroner. The scene as a production engine was already dead when the virus emptied the rooms and the network took the discovery function with it; what remained after 2020 was a social club performing the rituals of an industry that had completely relocated. Suno’s only crime was also operating on the premise of the rules of the past — training commercial models off of gray-area data that would ultimately become a point of contention some years after COVID killed almost all the venues that sucked and a handful of great ones. Now, artists have to compete for the same amount of attention with a new contender (slop) and regardless of what they think about it, kids seem to love the AI-generated shark wearing shoes or the fake overproduced AI-pop music about Epstein Island.

The people sucked into this are talented. That’s where the @grok is this true? morons get it wrong. But that’s kind of what makes it unbearable, and that’s also what makes the scene’s use of it obscene. You can’t run a recruitment pyramid on people with nothing to offer; you need the genuinely good ones to stay visible at the middle tier, almost-making-it, forever, as a proof of concept for the kids beneath them. When you’re young and 18 or 19 you might look up to the 35 year old local DJ veteran as something you want to be and that’s valid. God forbid you become him. The man making dubstep in his hometown for ten years is not a failure of the scene. He’s the scene’s most important asset: the credible near-miss, the one whose almost keeps everyone else’s maybe alive. The machines he hates didn’t take that from him. The machines just told the kids the truth that the room was built to hide — that you do not have to pay a particular toll to make a particular sound — and the kids, who never wanted the toll, only the sound, walked out. That’s not the death of culture. The culture already left. The machine, hungry for electricity and attention, turned off the lights on the people still performing for an audience that had already gone home.

“What I’ve always appreciated about Paul [Worley] is his ability to see, and hear the Forest for the Trees”

- Anonymous

A twenty-three-year-old leaves the Army with a Post-9/11 GI Bill that will pay roughly the full cost of tuition at a private institution plus a housing stipend pegged to the last reported local cost of living. In his city four years prior, the program to measure cost of living at the State level was suspended due to COVID-19. Our patriot wants to follow his dreams to make music, or work in film, or design video games, after serving our country through two administrations. He enrolls at a for-profit arts school, which in his city is the wealthiest and most “known” in the nation.

Three or four years later, he holds a degree, somewhere north of zero in private loans on top of the exhausted benefit, and a credential that the industry he wishes to enter doesn’t recognize, request, or reward. The school, in a recent press release, exclaimed record revenue. They’ll be taking over a smaller private arts school in Denver this Fall, wrapping it into a multi-state effort to expand the student body nationally and stripping its programs down to just film and design. The Treasury, similarly, recorded an outlay. Our veteran recorded the most expensive years of his life against an asset which, for all intents and purposes doesn’t actually exist.

Every party to the transaction behaved rationally and the aggregate result is theft.

Naming the Problem

The reflexive critique from the institutions is that these are very competitive spaces and their school outperforms others in the cohort. The public critique is that institutions lie. Sometimes they do, and when they do the remedy is ordinary fraud law, which is uninteresting because everyone already agrees. The harder and more honest position is that The Dreamer Economy does its worst damage when it tells the truth. The Full Sails of the world can publish accurate placement data, disclose its cost in compliant federal fonts, and deliver competent instruction in Pro Tools, and the moral structure of the transaction never improves at all since the system is working as intended (siphon public funds into expensive private education, accept nearly anyone, farm). I’m not arguing these schools are participating in misrepresentation, that’d be hypocritical. I technically have an “arts” degree (MS Audio Engineering) from a wonderful private university which provided me tons of opportunities in music which ultimately had nothing to do with what I am doing now, outside giving me great campfire stories to tell people in software about finding out that I qualified for a GRAMMY award while jobless at my parents’ house in the months leading up to my thesis defense. In general, what I’m arguing in this piece is that the ‘wrong’ is in the sale of a lottery ticket at the price of a sure thing, and the placement of a potentially unknowing or low-information actor into a game the seller has already counted the players in.

The Dreamer Economy is the set of American businesses that monetize aspiration in markets the seller knows to be saturated, charging the full present cost of a future that is at the population level statistically unavailable. The defining feature isn’t “these schools are low quality”. Plenty (I would argue most) of these programs are well run (it helps that much of the assessment structure is subjective). The defining feature is the structural mismatch between what’s priced and what’s actually delivered: the customer pays for an outcome and receives an attempt, and the seller knows, with actuarial confidence, that the ratio of attempts to outcomes is brutal and fixed before anyone walks in the door or takes any courses. This is not the case with other programs and a problem endemic to private education in the arts in America.

Remember in the last few articles when I discussed power-law dynamics? Let’s call them “aspirational” industries (recording, film, professional gaming, fashion, acting, music production, much of "creative" media) — these are winner-take-most tournaments. Returns aren’t normally distributed around a comfortable mean; they are power-law distributed around a tiny tiny tiny apex and a vast vast vast floor. A small number of entrants capture nearly all the income, and unlike a technical or trade industry, the median entrant earns close to nothing from the craft itself. This isn’t a defect of these fields. It’s their nature, and partially because historically a career in the Arts carries a ton of social capital (and risk). A tournament with a thousand entrants and ten prizes is still a tournament with ten prizes no matter how many thousands you add. Training the 1,100th contestant doesn’t create an eleventh prize, it creates an 1,100th loser who is still paying the same price in tuition.

In an ordinary market, adding a qualified supplier expands output: another welder means another building gets welded, another nurse means another patient gets seen, and the new entrant is met by latent demand. The labor has a marginal product roughly equal to what the market will bear. The Dreamer Economy operates in the opposite context. The fields it feeds are demand-constrained instead of supply-constrained. What this means is, in basic terms — there’s no unmet appetite for the 10,000th aspiring rapper that the 10,001st will satisfy. It’s truthful to argue that the marginal entrant's expected lifetime income from the trained craft is for the overwhelming majority below the cost of the training. The school isn’t building human capital. It’s manufacturing competitors for a fixed (or shrinking) pool of rents and charging the competitors for the privilege of diluting one another’s chances at succeeding. The training has negative expected value for the median buyer and the seller can compute this (and does). What do you call a business that knowingly sells a product with negative expected value to the buyer, while the buyer believes the expected value is positive? We’ve located the exact coordinates of immorality even when every sentence in the prospectus is true. Nobody’s lied, per se, but something about this still seems wrong to anyone who spends more than a few seconds thinking about its mechanics.

The Defense

The standard libertarian defense is arguing that any transaction in which both parties consent is moral: the buyer is an adult with agency, the information is out there, the dream is his to chase, and a free people must be free to bet on themselves. It’s important that we complainers take this seriously, because it is the only argument that matters (and the most popular one). It fails on two mechanisms, and they are compounding failures.

Defense Failure #1

The first is that the relevant probability is unknowable to the buyer by construction. To price a lottery ticket correctly you need the odds, and the odds in a tournament market are not the published placement rate but rather the joint distribution of talent, timing, network, and luck, conditioned on a winner-take-most payout structure that the buyer has never seen modeled (and that the seller has every incentive not to model for him). This is, to me, a representation of total asymmetry. The school has watched ten thousand of these stories resolve (they see every case, so the population). The student has watched the highlight reel (they see a sample of the population of total cases). Consent requires informed parties, and here one party holds the full cohort distribution and the other holds a subset of that distribution. This is not even close to the ordinary informational gap of any sale (even used cars require transparent lending paperwork by law, showing people how much they will owe over a long period of time given principal, interest, etc). There’s a specific gap in information access that the entire business model depends on: the buyer must never close this gap, because the moment the median buyer sees the cohort distribution honestly, the sale doesn’t happen and the lead (someone looking to enroll) shifts somewhere else. A transaction's viability where it only survives from demanding the systematic non-comprehension of one party looks non-consensual, and it kind of feels like farming where students are reduced to crops and yield.

Defense Failure #2

The second mechanism is that the dream isn’t a freely chosen luxury good. In low-information spaces, suburban towns and exurbs and rural areas, any form of schooling is seen (by at least the prior generations) as the best shot at upward economic mobility. Arts education fits well into the outputs of this system’s lower education / grade school college preparatory synthesis. The Dreamer Economy doesn’t arise in a vacuum; it seems to metastasize where the ordinary ladders have been pulled up. When stable middle-class entry through a four-year degree has been financialized into debt peonage, when the trades have been culturally demoted for two generations (and an ineffective administration leveling policy like the CHIPS act determined to increase trade demand out of political spite), when the median young person correctly perceives that the conventional path now offers downward mobility, dreaming starts to seem as ‘risky’ as the well-trodden path (and in many cases, and places, this is true). The arts school, the non-accredited bootcamp, the "academy" that pumps drivers into a saturated rideshare market or coders into a layoff cycle, the private “independently accredited” school founded by someone with less than 10 years experience in a retail subset of the industry it seeks to train for — these sell the last available story in which the buyer's life bends upward. They aren’t competing with safer bets. They’re competing with despair/desparation, and they price accordingly (higher). The ontology of how business is done in these spaces is the same as the following thought experiment: opening up a boutique restaurant in a warzone stricken by famine.

Rent-Seeking

The consent frame, even if we win that argument, only establishes that the individual transaction is exploitative. The deeper sin is that the Dreamer Economy itself is a transfer mechanism dressed as an education sector, and that it transfers wealth in the most wrong & unsustainable direction possible.

Let’s take the GI Bill case, because it makes the flows hyper-visible. Public funds (benefits extended to a veteran as deferred compensation for service, the closest thing the United States has to a sacred, non-negotiable fiscal obligation) are routed through the veteran into a private institution, where they exit as tuition revenue and, ultimately, as enterprise value and equity returns. The veteran in this system is a conduit, not a beneficiary. He is the pipe through which the public’s debt to him is converted into a shareholder’s asset, left holding a credential whose market value is near zero. As soon as you graduate one of these programs, the emphasis shifts away from the degree entirely towards “the portfolio”, and many of those opportunities are locked behind non-disclosure agreements. Ironically, the very thing these students are told to develop, if impressive, is restricted from distribution by nature of the market transaction (i.e. working on digital retouching works for Jennifer Aniston as a junior means they can never live on your personal website; they are the property of the organization you work for). In rare cases, such as being credited on successful pop records, the decade of “credential bloat” makes these near worthless unless you can get a decision-maker or the artist themselves to vouch for you. And even then, it may not promulgate more opportunity. You will at least get an “Oh, awesome!”.

Funny enough, this is the only place where my crossover knowledge in digital banking/anti-money-laundering & private arts education applies. Structurally, this is identical to a money-laundering operation in which the launderer is also the victim. The state believes it’s zeroed-out the financial obligation (the deferred payment to the veteran). The veteran believes he has acquired a future. The only party whose belief matches reality is the one collecting the check (the institution).

This is why the 85/15 and 90/10 rules exist, and why the relevant operators fight so hard at their margins: the regulations are an admission, written into federal code, that these businesses are abnormally dependent on public money and abnormally bad at producing the outcomes that public money is supposed to buy. A sector that must be legally restrained from deriving its entire revenue from federal benefit programs is a sector whose private demand (the demand of buyers spending their own money with their own eyes open) is known to be insufficient to sustain the sector. The taxpayer subsidy is the business model of this economy. Strip the federal aid and the arbitrage collapses, which tells you the value was never in the education. It was in the access to the spigot. People who are committed to study Art out of a desire to study Art will still indebt themselves to do so (and should, I believe the value of education is in education). The market will be less saturated with new entrants and average artist pay will go up (or at least slow its decline).

Capital extracts present-dollar tuition, certain and front-loaded, from people who have the least margin for a failed bet, in exchange for a probabilistic outcome whose downside is borne entirely by the buyer and whose upside, in aggregate, accrues to no one but the seller. Risk flows down and reward flows up.

The Positives

There are some good aspects to this. First and foremost, people derive real utility from trying. The four years at the arts school were not nothing; he learned, he was happy, he became someone. Dignity inheres in the attempt and a paternalist who forbids the attempt is the real villain. This is true and it doesn’t survive contact with the price tag. The objection would license the sale of a forty-thousand-dollar gym membership to someone who wants to feel like an athlete, on the grounds that the feeling has value (it would). The bad isn’t in allowing for people to take risky bets in the shape of a school (the trying). It’s in charging the price of the destination for a ticket to the attempt, while representing the attempt as the destination, to a buyer who cannot afford to learn the difference until the money is gone and they’re close to graduation to graduated to years after graduating going “Oh, fuck” in the shower one morning. A society can absolutely subsidize the dignity of the attempt! Big cities do this all the time! That’s what cheap community college, public arts funding, the option to go to a museum in the city you pay taxes in for free, and a robust safety net are for. The Dreamer Economy does the opposite, charging retail prices for dignity and pocketing the spread (price difference between sale tag and actual value).

There’s lower spaces than private arts schools. The non-accredited vocational case removes even the consolation of beauty. There is no dream of art here, only the dream of stability. Some examples:

1. The coding bootcamp selling a six-figure pipeline into a market that just laid off the last three cohorts due to Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) being achieved in late 2025,

2. The truck-driving “academy” feeding a freight market in structural oversupply (or constrained by the rising cost of gas from conflict in oil-rich markets), the medical-assistant mill credentialing more graduates than the local labor market will absorb in a decade (also downstream of AGI),

3. The cosmetics school which succeeds in its aims only if you are the one person who is already wicked talented and at the top of your class,

4. Various other population-fixed creative demand sectors like gaming, content creation, etc. which have education that occurs outside of the context of a University.

These operators sell the dream of the boring but stable middle class, which is in some ways the crueler sale, because the buyer isn’t even chasing a star. They’re just chasing a floor that the seller knows has already been filled, and the seller is filling it further, with him, for a fee. Generally speaking, these folks aren’t even chasing a dream most of the time, they’re chasing exiting some form of nightmare which a functional safety net would provide the option for. This is also why many of these vocational training centers exist in low-regulatory areas — they have no economic need to exist in places with a strong economic mobility system within the social welfare strata. This is also why the owners of the largest of these schools typically lobby against regulation which would close the gap between them and the outcomes of more effective and totalizing public services (CUNY is a great example). Both take taxpayer money, but only one of them makes the owner of the vocational school orders of magnitude wealthier than even their most successful graduates.

The unifying immorality, then, is this. The Dreamer Economy is the monetization of the gap between the distribution a person can see and the distribution the seller can compute, in markets where that gap is widest and the buyer’s need is most pressing (at Vectorculture, we define this as a triage economy). It doesn’t require lying (fraud). It does not require coercion in any form the law recognizes. It requires only that one party hold the cohort-level truth “the full picture/the Forest”, and that the other party hold the individual-level hope “the Trees”, that the price be set at the value of the hope rather than the truth, and that the difference be collected before the truth is actualized. Every element of that structure is legal.

The dream is very real, maybe even hyperreal. That’s what makes it sellable, and that is what makes selling it this way obscene. You cannot defraud a person of something worthless. The Dreamer Economy works because the thing it monetizes is the most valuable thing a struggling person owns — the belief that their life can still bend upward — and it has found a way to charge full price for it, deliver the statistical near-certainty of failure, and call the whole arrangement opportunity. The honesty of the brochure is not a defense. It is the most damning fact in the case. They told the truth, you signed, and the math was always against you. That is not a market failure. It is the market working exactly as designed, on you, by people who counted.

So, if you happen to go to one of these schools, and succeed on the other end of it — and I’m not talking about getting sucked back in as an instructor, make sure you never, ever mention them.

It probably had nothing to do with the school, and everything to do with you.

And here’s the crazy part — it wasn’t even the most powerful model Anthropic currently has in its inventory.

Claude Fable, released on June 9, 2026 to the public (The New Stack),…

Read more

TL;DR

• The history of AI agents runs from 1980s symbolic and reactive architectures, through the deep-reinforcement-learning game-players of 2013–2017, to the LLM-agent explosion catalyzed by ReAct (2022), Toolformer (2023) and AutoGPT (2023), and finally to the 2024–2026 era of c…

Read more

Read more

Read more

Read more

Read more

Read more

"experiencing reality at a high frame rate" is how I've often described my experience & potentially the experience of adhd broadly

both your perceptual sampling rate (experiencing shifts in sensory inputs and/or internal states) AND agency sampling rate (opportunities/affordances to act on something) tend to be higher, which is precisely the reason why y…

Read more

Read more

The following is a short note I shared in reply to someone talking about this “vibe shift”:

“Memetics” is just on…

Read more

I remember the first time I saw them in Orlando around ~2008-09 with my m…

Read more

If you’re coming from X, you know that I’m a big fan of complaining about people who don’t do enough having large audiences, like that one person you know with an F-150 who never uses the bed for anything. Well, for the past two months or so, that’s been me.…

Read more

We need to act fast to stop more cults from forming around these tools. The connection between them and historical rises in fascism.

Read more

Read more

Early in the morning on July 4th, around 1:14 am CDT, a Flash Flood Warning was issued for Kerr County, TX.

At 4…

Read more

Read more

Read more

On Sept. 6, 1930, George Jenkins opened the first Publix location, known then as Publix Food Store…

Read more