
cooking 🕶️ prev @indexcoop @bloomcbt @freeletics
Outer Rim
Joined May 2012
- Tweets1.3K
- Following3.1K
- Followers582
- Likes22.3K
Swarm riders and Swarm-native companies
AI-use even among highly AI-native people is power-law distributed.
There seems to be a new class of people — call them “swarm riders” — who are capable of consistently commanding large swarms of agents to productive ends.
This is a new kind of managerial skill, analogous to the skill it takes to manage large organizations of people, but wholly different in nature and of course more technical.
Based on the swarm riders we know (including many at @Tempo and @Paradigm), these people are capable of productive token spend that is 1000x-10000x higher than median software engineers, and 100x higher than top 5% Claude Code users.
The art of swarm riding is different from software engineering and more akin to machine learning, where practitioners grapple with black box systems: defining reward functions and evals, transmuting non-verifiable problems into verifiable problems, running experiments, etc.
Swarm-native companies are a new class of company founded by and populated by swarm riders. These companies are organized around swarms in a way that conventional companies will struggle to replicate, as the cost of internal human coordination is sand in the gears of an effective swarm. Effective swarm-native companies will define the right reward functions and evals, remove functional and bureaucratic barriers, and then let the swarms cook.
We’ve gotten to see a few swarm-native companies up close — reshaping financial rails @Tempo, building a new gaming platform @Spawn, cyber swarms at Cathedral Systems — and it’s clear these teams wield a significant advantage over pre-AI teams.
Some questions I’ve been wondering about:
1) How fast will swarm riding diffuse through the economy? The implications for token spend could be significant.
2) Can swarms be effectively adopted by existing companies or will it generally track the formation of new swarm-native companies?
3) What becomes scarce as swarm capabilities themselves commoditize (through frontier models becoming better at swarming, swarm capabilities built into harnesses, etc)? Cultures and teams that can define reward functions well and otherwise get out of the way?
1
1
47
JD🕶⚡️ retweeted
What if we could manipulate UI at the speed of thought?
Built this voice coffee ordering system with @typesafeai Jev. The drink and any updates show up while I’m still mid-sentence, ~200 ms from word to screen.
Feels pretty magical!
Currently experimenting with a new open-position screen for my hyperliquid trading app.
After building the Rust order book, I went back to the order book in my personal Hyperliquid iOS trading app applying some of those learnings.
Live Hyperliquid depth, tap a level to set TP/SL, zoom $0.1 → $100. Entry, TP, SL and liq sit on the ladder.
1
2
121
After building the Rust order book, I went back to the order book in my personal Hyperliquid iOS trading app applying some of those learnings.
Live Hyperliquid depth, tap a level to set TP/SL, zoom $0.1 → $100. Entry, TP, SL and liq sit on the ladder.
In a recent system design interview I was asked how I'd build an exchange-style order book, matching engine included.
Naturally, I had to actually build one to learn how it really works. 🧵
Biggest learning: measure first before optimizing. almost all of the lag is not the code.
~0.3 s is the source's own delay before data reaches the service. The engine adds tens of milliseconds (batching, waiting for all 7 feeds), the code itself under one.
2
67
Code, measurements and trade-offs: github.com/janndriessen/orde…
If you've built or run a real matching engine or market data system, I'd love your feedback. What would you have done differently?
40
Trade-offs, on purpose:
• public price levels instead of running a Hyperliquid node, so queues are synthetic
• one engine, no journal or replicas
• JSON over WebSocket, not a binary feed
All listed in the README, next to how production systems do it.
14
Some numbers:
• ~10M commands/s in the matcher (~100 ns each)
• ~0.2 ms of compute per live update, end to end
• ~83 ms behind Hyperliquid's own feed when run locally
• identical to Hyperliquid's own book on 28 of 28 updates compared side by side
17
a weird inversion with LLMs is the models improve faster than the tinkerers
when i see people with custom workflows and setups they're all addressing problems that don't exist anymore
the person naively using vanilla codex is more likely to be experiencing state of the art
I'm usually not a hype guy but Sonnet 5.5: youtube.com/watch?v=N03Ho4VM…
Introducing Claude Sonnet 5.5, the second model in the Claude 5.5 family.
It’s a clear upgrade over Sonnet 5, runs more than 30% faster, and costs up to 30% less for most work.
1
332











