I chase the future. I'm commercializing spacecraft, AI, & making tomorrow today. Basically a Universal Business Adapter for space.

Castro Valley, CA
Joined February 2017
Replying to @WarintheFuture
Thanks, Ukraine, for putting the brakes on Russian cyber attacks on the United States and other nations!
5
65
3
615
14,527
Kevin retweeted
Up next, Falcon 9 will launch 130 payloads to orbit from California aboard the Transporter-18 mission. Liftoff is targeted for 11:22 a.m. PT → spacex.com/launches/transpor…
243
760
116
7,686
795,174
Let's go to Space OSSIE #OSSIERoadToSpace
Up next, Falcon 9 will launch 130 payloads to orbit from California aboard the Transporter-18 mission. Liftoff is targeted for 11:22 a.m. PT → spacex.com/launches/transpor…
1
2
8
375
Kevin retweeted
Replying to @PessimistsArc
Right. Dario was already claiming that GPT2 was too dangerous to open source back in 2019. I made fun of them then. Everyone should make fun of them now.
393
3,180
464
25,944
1,994,634
Regulation destroyed the nuclear power industry entirely in this country. Boeing hasn’t launched a new airliner in 22 years—but regulation didn’t prevent them from screwing up the 737 MAX and killing 346 people. Regulation doesn’t prevent the safety problems it allegedly solves. It just allows the incumbents to be fat, lazy and dumb—and to operate as if they are branches of the government.
Capability vs. Safety resource allocation: Nuclear: 60/40 Aviation: 60/40 Medical devices: 20/80 AI: 99/1 Do I understand the situation correctly?
101
468
39
4,530
211,555
Kevin retweeted
The left wants 20 years in prison for software engineers building AI. That is more than kidnapping. More than twice child [redacted]. Four times drug trafficking. The same band as murder. Sanders and Casar compared linear algebra to rogue nuclear weapons. Proposed max. Not law. The chart is first-time federal sentences.
BREAKING: Bernie Sanders has proposed a 20-year prison sentence for AI developers who move forward with Artificial Superintelligence plans, a penalty comparable to illegally developing rogue nuclear weapons.
132
172
34
868
71,476
Wow - @pmarca called this three years ago. TL/DR every bad regulation has a plausible sounding moral cover story—and a secret industrial interest that stands to benefit Regulatory capture is evil.
Replying to @pmarca
The Baptists And Bootleggers Of AI Economists have observed a longstanding pattern in reform movements of this kind. The actors within movements like these fall into two categories – “Baptists” and “Bootleggers” – drawing on the historical example of the prohibition of alcohol in the United States in the 1920’s: “Baptists” are the true believer social reformers who legitimately feel – deeply and emotionally, if not rationally – that new restrictions, regulations, and laws are required to prevent societal disaster. For alcohol prohibition, these actors were often literally devout Christians who felt that alcohol was destroying the moral fabric of society. For AI risk, these actors are true believers that AI presents one or another existential risks – strap them to a polygraph, they really mean it. “Bootleggers” are the self-interested opportunists who stand to financially profit by the imposition of new restrictions, regulations, and laws that insulate them from competitors. For alcohol prohibition, these were the literal bootleggers who made a fortune selling illicit alcohol to Americans when legitimate alcohol sales were banned. For AI risk, these are CEOs who stand to make more money if regulatory barriers are erected that form a cartel of government-blessed AI vendors protected from new startup and open source competition – the software version of “too big to fail” banks. A cynic would suggest that some of the apparent Baptists are also Bootleggers – specifically the ones paid to attack AI by their universities, think tanks, activist groups, and media outlets. If you are paid a salary or receive grants to foster AI panic…you are probably a Bootlegger. The problem with the Bootleggers is that they win. The Baptists are naive ideologues, the Bootleggers are cynical operators, and so the result of reform movements like these is often that the Bootleggers get what they want – regulatory capture, insulation from competition, the formation of a cartel – and the Baptists are left wondering where their drive for social improvement went so wrong. We just lived through a stunning example of this – banking reform after the 2008 global financial crisis. The Baptists told us that we needed new laws and regulations to break up the “too big to fail” banks to prevent such a crisis from ever happening again. So Congress passed the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010, which was marketed as satisfying the Baptists’ goal, but in reality was coopted by the Bootleggers – the big banks. The result is that the same banks that were “too big to fail” in 2008 are much, much larger now. So in practice, even when the Baptists are genuine – and even when the Baptists are right – they are used as cover by manipulative and venal Bootleggers to benefit themselves. And this is what is happening in the drive for AI regulation right now. However, it isn’t sufficient to simply identify the actors and impugn their motives. We should consider the arguments of both the Baptists and the Bootleggers on their merits.
16
83
3
1,235
54,731
This post looks like the start of a VERY sophisticated and well-funded PR operation to get support for Democrats to regulate AI into oblivion. Let me show you how it works: 1.) This guy, with minimal followers and no previous account activity, goes to the Wall Street Journal which publishes an exclusive with quotes from him on his resignation 18 minutes BEFORE this post goes up. Planning was clearly done in advance. 2.) Within hours, it has tens of thousands of reposts and the account has 100k+ followers. The post is punchy, quotable, it almost seems professionally written. The first three accounts to quote tweet it all do so within 15 minutes of the initial posting. Remember, this account had basically zero engagement beforehand, so an organic reach explanation seems unlikely. According to Grok those accounts are @_NathanCalvin (General Counsel at Encode AI), @peterwildeford (Head of Policy at the AI Policy Network), and @DKokotajlo (Head of the AI Futures Project), all of which are up-and-coming AI-Doomer policy advocacy nonprofits. The AI Futures Project website says it is funded “primarily” by the Survival and Flourishing Fund, which says on its own website that it has advised Jaan Tallinn, Skype creator and one of the leading investors in Anthropic, to grant over $2.5 million to the AI Futures Project since 2024. Encode AI says on its website that it is ALSO funded by the Survival and Flourishing Fund, which in turn says that it told Anthropic investor Jaan Tallinn to grant $516,000 to Encode AI in 2025. And wouldn’t you know it, the Survival and Flourishing Fund ALSO says it told Jaan Tallinn to grant $2 million to the AI Policy Institute, the 501(c)(3) affiliate of the AI Policy Network, as well. What are the odds that the first three quote tweets of Coxon’s post would all be major AI-restriction policy advocates funded generously by the same donor, who also happens to be one of the leading investors in, and a board member of, Anthropic, the company Coxon was resigning from? And all within 15 minutes of posting (two within ten)? 3.) Jacob Coxon doesn’t have much of a resume, but we do know that, in 2022, he got a $20,159 scholarship for the “long term future scholarship program” from the Good Ventures Foundation, one of the philanthropic vehicles of Dustin Moskovitz, a notorious AI-doomer who has spent tens if not hundreds of millions on policy advocacy to strictly regulate AI, while also being an Anthropic Investor himself. It also just so happens that the 14th person to quote Coxon’s post was @MaxNadeau_ (27 minutes after posting) who is the program officer for the Technical AI Safety team at Coefficient Giving, another of Moskovitz’s philanthropic spending vehicles. Max is not a frequent poster, his last posts before quoting Coxon were before Labor Day, but he was remarkably quick off the mark for this one. 4.) Basically every major Democrat politician and candidate has suddenly glommed on to this post, and conveniently, as the people cry out foe answers, Bernie Sanders already has a bill written to “ban super intelligence” and regulate AI into oblivion, and will be releasing later this week. The bill, among many other things, will create “a new cabinet-level federal agency to safeguard the public from the dangers of artificial intelligence” that will be “advised by an Artificial Intelligence Advisory Board comprised of experts on artificial intelligence.” Do you think, perhaps, Anthropic and its many investors who fund AI policy advocacy might have interest in getting to place a pet “expert” on the board of an entity that dictates what AI is and isn’t allowed to do? And isn’t it fortuitous that this whistleblower came forward with his oh-so scary stories so close in proximity to the release of the most radical piece of AI legislation ever introduced?
I resigned from Anthropic today. I spent the last three years doing pretraining research at both OpenAI and Anthropic. Neither company is acting responsibly. They are racing straight to self-improving superintelligence and gambling with our lives. More thoughts below.
1,815
6,725
2,242
32,199
7,074,330
gemini has a distinctive and nuanced take on AI sentience
28
20
11
163
29,172
In the 1960s, a blind kid discovered he could control the phone system with his voice. Then, another blind kid discovered the same thing. And then another. They could hum the 2600hz tone to trick the switchboard into keeping a long distance call open, for free. They spent hours doing this, learning how to make arbitrary calls, staying on late into the night. Eventually they found one another, on abandoned internal AT&T conference lines and maintenance channels, which they kept open for others to join. Many did, blind and sighted too. The network of a few blind kids grew to thousands of calls, as many people, and a proto-hardware scene led by a couple of Steves you’ve heard of. Sources from biographies to cyberpunk novels credit this community with birthing the hacker movement fascinated by breaking into systems, often for strange goals. Started by a desire to communicate, explore, and control the wiring all around us. Perhaps that is just what agents do.
12
42
4
622
26,137
Kevin retweeted
Aight fam we need to get this working on the dual sparks now. Whoever figures out this recipe, I owe you.
DeepSeek-V4-Flash can now run 2× faster locally with DSpark! ⚡️ DSpark enables V4-Flash-0731 GGUFs to generate ~1.4–2× faster with no accuracy change. DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 can reach at 120 tokens/s. GGUFs: huggingface.co/unsloth/DeepS… Guide: unsloth.ai/docs/models/deeps…
7
2
38
7,511
For my first post, I’m sharing a letter @NVIDIA signed on why open models matter. AI will transform every industry, power every company, and be built by every country. Open models strengthen safety and cybersecurity, accelerate innovation and diffusion, and enable sovereignty. The world needs both frontier closed models and frontier open models. images.nvidia.com/pdf/Open-W…
15,974
29,253
10,950
171,410
66,509,342
Open-weight models are essential to a healthy AI ecosystem. Together with others across our industry, we are outlining a path for open-weight models to strengthen American competitiveness and expand economic opportunity, while protecting national security. microsoft.com/en-us/corporat…
747
2,475
500
19,149
6,299,179
Kevin retweeted
Distillation is a research technique/algo. It's not inherently good or bad. If you want to do this kind of research, I'll fund great researchers who want to do this with $1M to do experiments that will make it even more sample efficient. Then, we will openly release to the world - DM
There is going to be 10x more distillation research with the threat of open weight model restrictions. It will Streisand effect the whole community into making it even more data / compute efficient. Just to troll the government. Silly game to play.
21
8
2
114
21,294
Kevin retweeted
Our 17th Transporter rideshare mission is targeted to launch tomorrow from California and will deliver 81 payloads to orbit → spacex.com/launches/transpor…
620
1,756
144
12,120
1,196,118
Please sell me your manufacturing startup’s product here Let’s make a thread of manufacturing products and services
25
18
1
177
12,625
🚨 $ASTS SATELLITE USES THRUSTER 🚨 👉THE ORBITAL DATA OF BLUEWALKER 3 SHOWS 4 MONTHS OF STATION KEEPING MANEUVERS! 👉ONBOARD THRUSTER IS OPERATIONAL 🔥 👉MEANS THE SERVICE LIFE OF $ASTS ~100 MN USD ASSET BLUEWALKER 3 IS EXTENDED WITH YEARS. 👉BLOCK1 THRUSTERS WORKING TO.
$ASTS BlueWalker 3 is currently actively using its onboard Hall effect Ion thruster for station keeping at ~ 470 km average altitude. [ You might remember renowned consultant claiming it was incapable of station keeping.] @AST_SpaceMobile isstracker.pl/en/satellites/…
4
20
1
178
17,344
All I want is a new WipEout
93
231
30
2,288
67,483
I just asked ChatGPT if it had any pet theories about how the world works that it hadn’t seen much elsewhere and I liked one of its responses! (I got two and was asked to pick which I preferred) “Absolutely, here’s one I find compelling and haven’t seen widely discussed: “Bandwidth economics” as a driver of social structure. We usually talk about economics in terms of money, resources, or incentives. But what if a major limiting factor in how societies develop—especially in group size, complexity, and norms—is cognitive and emotional bandwidth? Basically: humans only have so much attention, working memory, and emotional capacity to track others’ motivations, resolve ambiguity, and maintain shared understandings. Many social patterns—like hierarchy, taboo, bureaucratic ritual, or even ideologies—can be seen as compression strategies to make social life cognitively manageable. It’s like lossy JPEGs of messy reality. So: •Hierarchies = reduce the number of people you need to track carefully •Rituals = outsource behavioral decisions to shared scripts •Ideologies = heuristics for moral/emotional allocation without constant rethinking •Bureaucracies = attempt to systematize social interactions into predictable formats to minimize cognitive load In this view, many modern failures (e.g., political polarization, burnout in online activism, collapse of shared reality) are driven by bandwidth overflow. We’re exposed to way more people, data, and decisions than our brains evolved to handle. What’s cool about this is it frames social dysfunction not as malice or stupidity, but as compression artifacts from trying to fit a big, messy world into narrow channels. What about you—do you have any favorite underappreciated theories or frameworks?”
70
183
73
1,978
173,027
Kevin retweeted
First ChatGPT inspired market crash
25
25
8
346
51,464