Dan Sullivan retweeted
America, more than any other nation in world history, was shaped by the Christian tradition of spreading the gospel unto all nations.
Join us in celebrating International Religious Freedom Day.
Dan Sullivan retweeted
It's pretty wild that a month ago a bunch of important Linux distros and open source projects were about to ban AI and now everyone has figured out it's the only way we're going to fix any of this.
Today was kind of wild. I built my own analytics platfotm because it was easier than configuring Google Analytics. Took a couple hours. Future's gonna get nutty.
One of the disruptive side effects of remote work is people regularly being late to meetings (or missing them entirely) to deal with personal matters. That wasn't the norm during my in-office tenure.
Receiving unsolicited / unwanted political text messages and being unable to stop them is weird and gross. You should just be able to unsubscribe once and be done with it.
Dan Sullivan retweeted
This is how banks are planning to stop those "agentic bank runs." Watch closely: their business model depends on seeding this narrative that AI agents are dangerous.
Remember, an "agentic bank run" (coined by Apollo) means agents helping customers move their own money en masse to higher-yielding products.
Once agents are ubiquitous, there are only a few ways for banks to hold onto cheap retail deposits.
Option A: Raise APYs (lol no)
Option B: Reduce leverage via fewer loans (no fun)
Option C: Ban AI agents, claiming they are a security risk (ding ding ding)
Cloud agents like Muse and Dot are trivial to stop, since they come from Meta / OAI IP ranges. If JPM sends them a cease and desist, they will comply.
Why would JPM bother? Because their business model depends on it; a huge portion of their ROE comes from cheap retail deposits. This is not theoretical. Just like Amazon banned Muse from shopping there to protect their ad revenue, JPM and Schwab have already banned AI agents to protect sticky deposits.
Are agents perfectly reliable today? Of course not. But look at the fix they chose. Not "here's a safe API for agents," it's "no agents ever." That tells you they're not protecting customers, they're protecting themselves.
No company ever wins a technological revolution this way. It's the last gasp of a dying business model. It's like the retailers who refused to put their inventory online and demanded users walk into the storefront. Over time they will lose market share to those platforms that embrace what's coming. Their whole deposit franchise depends on users unthinkingly clicking through walls of T&Cs and accepting 0.2% when the risk free rate is closer to 4%. Agents read the fine print and do their research, even when humans don't.
For users, the answer is simple: local AI agent frameworks like Hermes, that will actually act on your behalf and that the banks can't block. As the article says, if the agent is running on your own computer, they can't actually tell it's not you.
SCOOP: Major U.S. banks are detecting unauthorized third-party AI agents inside customer accounts, including some attempting to take actions that appear to be independent of user instructions, sources told Axios.
The findings have alarmed banking executives, who are racing to restrict access to their systems as AI moves at a velocity faster than financial institutions can respond, multiple industry and bank executives told Axios.
Several banks are now preparing for worst-case and even “day after” scenarios, including how to rapidly secure or restore customer accounts if things go wrong, the people said.
Several bank executives told Axios they're struggling to distinguish between human users and AI agents. One executive said banks also struggle to determine whether agents are authorized by customers or potentially operating without their permission, more akin to rogue agent behavior.
Read my latest for Axios here: axios.com/2026/10/22/ai-agen…
Dan Sullivan retweeted
🚨BREAKING: White House fraud hotline overwhelmed with reports about the Federal Reserve banking system.
Dan Sullivan retweeted
NEW: According to a bombshell report in the New York Times, Anthropic co-founder Chris Olah threatened to walk out of Pope Leo XIV’s AI encyclical launch in May because the pope rejected the idea that machines can be conscious.
Olah’s team then privately lobbied the pope’s advisers “to take the possibility of model consciousness seriously.” Pope Leo XIV held firm.
For months, Anthropic has wined and dined theologians and religious scholars under nondisclosure agreements, hoping they would bless the idea that Claude has moral standing. thelettersfromleo.com/p/nyt-…
