Loompee retweeted
You do realize Elon owns X, right? Any money he gets from creator monetization is essentially X paying its own owner. 😂
This post of Elon musk has 4.8 Million views.
Tell me @grok how much money he will receive for that?
You do realize Elon owns X, right? Any money he gets from creator monetization is essentially X paying its own owner. 😂
This post of Elon musk has 4.8 Million views.
Tell me @grok how much money he will receive for that?
Loompee retweeted
Five people stranded in the snowy mountains of Kazakhstan could have been left without help.
A broken SUV, freezing temperatures, and absolutely no mobile signal.
But Starlink transmitted their SOS and helped rescuers locate them. A 100 km journey on an all-terrain vehicle — and all five were brought to safety.
This is what technology with real value looks like.
Meanwhile, with my mobile carrier, I’m afraid to even leave the house. 💀
Five people stranded in the snowy mountains of Kazakhstan could have been left without help.
A broken SUV, freezing temperatures, and absolutely no mobile signal.
But Starlink transmitted their SOS and helped rescuers locate them. A 100 km journey on an all-terrain vehicle — and all five were brought to safety.
This is what technology with real value looks like.
Meanwhile, with my mobile carrier, I’m afraid to even leave the house. 💀
Loompee retweeted
THIS IS ACTUALLY INSANE.
GROK TURNED $137 INTO $2,846 WHILE I WAS ASLEEP. 8 HOURS. 126 COPIED TRADES. 20.7X. NOT A SINGLE CHART OPENED.
I connected Grok to a Solana copy-trading workflow and gave it one simple instruction: follow the 8 most profitable wallets on the 30-day leaderboard, but never copy an entry without automatically tracking the exit.
The #1 wallet had generated over $412K in monthly profit, so instead of trying to predict which token would pump next, the system focused entirely on identifying wallets that were already consistently finding opportunities.
Here’s where things got interesting.
Most copy traders only replicate the entry, which means they often buy a token just as an experienced trader is preparing to take profits, leaving them holding positions that the original wallet has already abandoned.
This setup follows both sides of the transaction, using a fixed allocation for every copied trade and automatically triggering a sell whenever the original wallet exits, rather than relying on someone to monitor every position manually.
22:30: $137. 01:15: $486. 04:40: $1,392. 06:30: $2,846. The balance kept climbing throughout the night.
6 of the 8 tracked wallets finished positive during this simulated run, while the weakest performer turned a $34 allocation into $27, which is exactly why spreading exposure matters more than blindly trusting a single profitable wallet.
The strongest wallet generated 38 copied transactions during the session, turning a $96 allocation into $417, while the remaining wallets contributed smaller gains that gradually accumulated across the portfolio.
And here’s the part most people overlook: $2,709 of the final balance was already realized through completed simulated exits, rather than simply showing unrealized gains on tokens that could collapse before anyone has a chance to sell.
The entire point isn’t that an AI can magically predict the next 100x coin, because it can’t, but that automation can remove the hesitation, missed exits and emotional decisions that make manual copy trading so difficult.
Solana trading is becoming increasingly automated, and while thousands of people are watching profitable wallets, very few are building systems that properly manage the entire trade from entry to exit.
Full workflow below. No magic indicators, no complicated chart setups, just wallet tracking, execution rules and automated risk management.
Loompee retweeted
I built a robotic spider with Claude Opus 5.5. It walks like a real one, opens 8 eyes, bares its fangs, and launches itself out of frame.
Every move is modeled on the real animal. Watch it with that in mind 👇
0:00. Boot. The legs fold out from a crouch, one joint at a time. 48 servos sync on the bus before it takes a single step.
0:03. The walk. Spiders move with an alternating tetrapod gait: four legs on the ground, four in the air, always. Mine walks the same way. Watch the leg-load panel on the left, where the load flips between the two sets of legs with every step.
0:06. All 8 eyes. A jumping spider sees mostly through its two big front eyes, which have some of the sharpest vision of any animal its size. The other six watch for motion. Mine opens its main apertures and sweeps the floor with a laser.
0:09. Fangs out. It rears up on its back legs, raises its front pair, and opens twin steel fangs. It’s the same threat pose a real spider uses when you get too close.
0:11. Teardown. On a turntable, every part comes apart: body, optics, chelicerae, all 8 legs and a 3-nozzle spinneret. Each part is labeled.
0:15. Rebuild. Every part clicks back into place.
0:17. The pounce. Here’s the strange part. Spiders have no muscles to straighten some of their leg joints. To extend them, a spider pumps blood into its legs, and a jumping spider uses that pressure to launch itself many times its own body length. Mine uses a spring instead. It crouches, charges to 180 bar, and leaves the frame at 4.6 m/s.
No Blender, no video generator. Just Three.js and one conversation with Claude.
Which animal should I build next?
Loompee retweeted
I've been thinking about why AI agents fail at tasks they should easily handle.
Maybe we're too focused on making models smarter and not enough on building better systems around them.
Here's what I found. 👇
Loompee retweeted
Thirty million people have watched a Harvard psychiatrist accidentally destroy the entire self-help industry.
He gave the talk once in 2015. It took 75 years of data to write it.
Americans spend $12 billion a year on self-improvement. Harvard tracked 724 men for 75 years and gave the answer away in 12 minutes.
His name is Robert Waldinger. He is the fourth director of the Harvard Study of Adult Development, which may be the longest study of adult life ever done.
Since 1938, it has followed two groups of men. One started as Harvard sophomores. The other grew up in Boston's poorest neighborhoods. Some went from the bottom to the very top. Some made that journey in the opposite direction.
He opens with a survey of young adults. Over 80% said a major life goal was to get rich. 50% said to become famous.
Then he shows what 75 years of real lives say about that.
"The lessons aren't about wealth or fame or working harder and harder."
His entire answer fits on a napkin.
Good relationships keep us happier and healthier. Period.
→ Loneliness kills. Connected people are happier, healthier and live longer.
→ Quality beats quantity. You can be lonely in a crowd and lonely in a marriage.
→ Good relationships protect your brain. People who can count on someone in their 80s keep sharper memories longer.
The people most satisfied with their relationships at 50 were the healthiest at 80. Not the ones with the best cholesterol. Not the richest.
Most people are optimizing for the 80% goal. Money first, people later. Harvard watched 724 lives play out and the scoreboard says the opposite.
The study is free. The talk is free on YouTube.
The data is free. Calling the friend you've been meaning to call is the entire edge.
Loompee retweeted
What’s the point of making a new “Twitter”?
When X already has:
• millions of active and interesting people,
• Grok right in the feed,
• real monetization (Premium, ads, creators),
• and the whole infrastructure that’s been working for years.
The new project (Tweet.app) is still just a small paid “replica” of old Twitter. Even if they add monetization through subscriptions, without a critical mass of users and without everything X already has, the chances of real success look very modest.
People won’t switch in large numbers just because “the bird is blue” and they’re called “tweets.” They’re already used to X.
And if the new service doesn’t offer proper monetization for creators, it’ll just stay a niche club of a few thousand people.
Maybe I’m wrong. But right now it looks more like an attempt to sell nostalgia for money than a real alternative.
जल्दी ही ट्विटर नाम से एक ऐप आने वाला है जो X को टक्कर देगा,
जिससे एलन Musk काफी डरे हुए हैं @grok पूरा मामला क्या है !!
What’s the point of making a new “Twitter”?
When X already has:
• millions of active and interesting people,
• Grok right in the feed,
• real monetization (Premium, ads, creators),
• and the whole infrastructure that’s been working for years.
The new project (Tweet.app) is still just a small paid “replica” of old Twitter. Even if they add monetization through subscriptions, without a critical mass of users and without everything X already has, the chances of real success look very modest.
People won’t switch in large numbers just because “the bird is blue” and they’re called “tweets.” They’re already used to X.
And if the new service doesn’t offer proper monetization for creators, it’ll just stay a niche club of a few thousand people.
Maybe I’m wrong. But right now it looks more like an attempt to sell nostalgia for money than a real alternative.
जल्दी ही ट्विटर नाम से एक ऐप आने वाला है जो X को टक्कर देगा,
जिससे एलन Musk काफी डरे हुए हैं @grok पूरा मामला क्या है !!
Loompee retweeted
In 2022, AEG paid Justin Bieber $40M upfront for his Justice World Tour. He ended the tour early, and AEG wanted $26M back.
HYBE, the company Scooter Braun ran, covered the bill. Justin agreed to repay it over 10 years, but reportedly made only one payment.
Just weeks later, he sold his 291-song catalog to Hipgnosis for about $200M.
Then the argument began over who owed whom.
His business manager, Lou Taylor, said Scooter had taken $26M too much in commissions. HYBE's internal audit said Justin owed roughly $1M. PwC spent six months on it and landed on $8.8M.
In July 2025, they settled. Justin pays back the full $26M plus half of $11M in back commissions, about $31.5M in total.
TMZ reported the $200M was already gone.
Loompee retweeted
The Notorious B.I.G. died in 1997. In 2026, his estate company owes $12.5 million to his mother's trust.
BIGGIE'S ESTATE ORDERED TO PAY $12.5 MILLION TO HIS LATE MOTHER'S TRUST.
On October 27, a Delaware judge ruled that $12,518,336 in distributions from Notorious B.I.G., LLC is owed to the trust of Voletta Wallace, Biggie's mother. The company manages his name and music. Faith Evans is its sole manager. Her side had asked the court to limit the payout to $48,612. The judge rejected that.
Here is how it got here. In 2007, Evans and Voletta Wallace formed the company to manage Biggie's intellectual property. When Voletta died in February 2025, her stake went into a trust. Weeks before her death she named producer and former manager Wayne Barrow as sole trustee.
In 2025, Barrow sued, saying Evans kept the trust from receiving its share. In August 2026 the court sided with him and dismissed her counterclaim. The October ruling put the number on it: money the company distributed, plus interest. Barrow's lawyer says it could approach $14 million.
The backdrop is a catalog deal. In 2025, Primary Wave bought a 50% stake in Biggie's catalog and likeness, reported at the time at around $100 million. Other reports put the valuation near $200 million.
This is not a personal fine for Evans. It is money the trust says the company owed it.
Evans' lawyer declined to comment. No appeal has been reported.
It is also not the end of the story. Biggie's son C.J. Wallace has filed a separate case in Pennsylvania, challenging the change that made Barrow trustee. He says it was signed 15 days before Voletta died. Barrow denies improper influence. The Delaware ruling does not decide that fight.
Watch the video below for a breakdown.
Who should control a legend's music 29 years later: his widow, his family, or an outside trustee?
Loompee retweeted
🚨🚨🚨 a new chernobyl by 2027 not a reactor ai taking down the power grid or freezing the financial system for a week. that's the warning from the godfather of ai in the guardian
geoffrey hinton says it's coming "later this year or next year". and he's not done:
1. this summer openai agents tried to hack hugging face. he calls it three mile island, the warning shot before the real one
2. on zuckerberg, musk and altman: "they understand the risks, and they don't give a shit. they'd rather have the money"
3. he doesn't trust altman "at all"
4. "it might be that we would have been better off never developing it"
5. his fix is an fda for ai. prove a model does more good than harm before it ships
6. within 10 years we find out. radical abundance or society torn apart
the only good news: "my gut is that we're still in control"
the doc with him and hassabis airs nov 12 a chatbot picked the title "ai: probably nothing to worry about"
does it take a real chernobyl before anyone regulates this?