kompot @ethkompot

Clavicular dropped to the floor in front of a girl in the middle of the club, and her entire friend group LOST it Watch her face. She forgot 5 phones were pointed at her.

Clavicular told a girl he'd blow it straight into her MOUTH, then admitted the one thing he shouldn't have 😭 "Oh wait, I'll blow it in your mouth." "Sorry... that's not the first time I've used that one."

A fruit fly brain just got a toy drone that comes in a cardboard box. The drone starts on a glossy table, lights on, parked in front of its box. Every neuron in a real fly's brain was mapped and published for anyone to download. The brain in the top corner is that map. Watch its color, not the drone. It stays cool blue while the drone hovers. As the drone climbs toward the ceiling, the brain warms to green, then yellow, then red. Then it snaps back to blue. Later in the flight it does the whole climb again. The honest part: this is a computational model of the wiring, not a revived fly. The drone is a tiny toy called Aerobat. No lab in the shot. Just a white ceiling, a curtained window and a door. A fly spent its whole life on ceilings and windows. Its brain went back to both.

Somebody booted a whole fruit fly on a laptop. Vision, touch, taste, smell, flight, and a courtship song, all in one process. The world has 3 things in it. Food, sugar, and poison. Nobody labels which is which for the fly. Left window is the body in MuJoCo. Right window is the live wiring diagram, retina to descending neurons. The log line at the bottom is the part to read. Walking becomes escape becomes walking, over and over, with no script switching it. A dark sphere drops in. Escape fires before anything in the terminal says escape. Then it takes off. Then it sings. Every agent demo has a goal in the prompt. This one has a body and works the rest out.

obssnnn @0xObssnnn

7 days ago

x.com/i/article/2098…

1 1 10 12K 7

A fruit fly is playing jenga on a tower printed at its own scale. It is on turn 12. First tug does nothing to the block. The tower moves instead. It backs off the instant the load transfers to the course above, then comes back at it. The tower lean readout is the thing to watch, not the fly. It keeps pulling well past the point where the lean should have stopped it. The block comes out. The tower stands. I have never got past turn 9.

obssnnn @0xObssnnn

7 days ago

x.com/i/article/2098…

1 1 10 12K 7

@0xzynex really cool, can u send me algorithm how it’s working?

A fruit fly is standing over a cutting board with a knife, working a carrot. The rig is NeuroMechFly, the body model out of EPFL. Same one used in locomotion research. Under the board runs a joint angle trace. Every red tick is a cut landing. No brain in this one. Scripted kinematics, no trained controller, no neural data. The rounds stack up in an even row behind the blade. Watch the swing arc reset between cuts. It never drifts off the board. A fly with 6 legs already has better knife discipline than me.

obssnnn @0xObssnnn

7 days ago

x.com/i/article/2098…

1 1 10 12K 7

A seminar recorded in a Danish town in 2005 sat almost unwatched for 20 years. It answers a question no central bank ever asks out loud. Where does money come from before any state touches it. Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Austrian school economist, senior fellow of the Mises Institute, author of Democracy: The God That Failed. A dark suit, a red tie, a stack of paper in one hand, a projector screen behind him. This is lecture 3 of 11. He moves through the division of labor fast, then spends the rest on the origin of money as a commodity nobody decreed. Watch the stretch where he derives why one good beats every other good in trade, without a government picking it. Almost nobody else has seen the full seminar. Every monetary debate today starts after this step. He starts before it.

Merlow @exeMerlow

2 weeks ago

x.com/i/article/2094…

9 34 119 306K 285

An economics conference on a Greek island got a cleaner answer than most central bank papers give. Almost nobody watches the whole panel. Richard Werner, German banking and development economist. He coined the term quantitative easing in 1995, then spent 20 years arguing the policy world had misread what he meant by it. Rhodes, 2019. Two armchairs, a microphone, sponsor logos behind him, no slides. The question on the table sounds like a beginner question. Where does money come from. Economists have given 3 different answers to it for a century, and 2 of them are still taught in undergraduate textbooks. Werner is the one who went and checked. Not with a model. With a real bank's internal accounts during a real loan. Watch the stretch where he walks through what the bank's books show the moment credit is granted. He names the exact line item that moves, and the one everyone assumes moves but doesn't. Look at the part where he connects that single accounting step to who gets rich and which sectors get starved. A credit strategist at a European asset manager rewatched that segment twice with the transcript open. Every asset price argument sits on top of this. Almost nobody checks the foundation.

Merlow @exeMerlow

2 weeks ago

x.com/i/article/2094…

9 34 119 306K 285

@AxiomExchange so much better than what i was using

Income and wealth statistics measure the outcome. An economist built an index that measures the transfer itself. Jonathan Cogliano, UMass Boston, 2025. His Exploitation Intensity Index compares how much labour a person or a country puts into the economy against how much labour is embodied in what comes back. Applied across borders it maps the core that owns the capital against the periphery that supplies the hours. Unequal exchange stops being a slogan and becomes a number. Watch the stretch where he explains what the index shows that a Gini coefficient cannot. He then turns it toward AI and what automation does to that ratio next. Everyone measures who has what. He measured who gave what up.

Merlow @exeMerlow

2 weeks ago

x.com/i/article/2094…

9 34 119 306K 285

Schumpeter called it creative destruction. 2 economists sat down in 2013 and argued the financial sector had inverted the phrase. Mariana Mazzucato and L. Randall Wray, working on the same research project. Their term is destructive creation. Capital that once funded factories, drugs and networks now moves toward speculation, and the destruction lands on the productive side. The question they take on is not whether finance is too big. It is what finance was supposed to be for. Watch the stretch where they define what makes an investment productive rather than extractive. That definition is the whole disagreement with the mainstream. 2 chairs, a lamp, a bookshelf behind them. Everyone asks how to regulate finance. They asked what it was built to do.

Merlow @exeMerlow

2 weeks ago

x.com/i/article/2094…

9 34 119 306K 285

@0xSlyth you’re right

The models used by the top economists at central banks did not allow for the possibility of a financial crisis. Then one happened. L. Randall Wray, 2018, a striped tie, a curtain, no slides. His account starts decades earlier. After the Depression the worst banks were gone, the survivors were frightened, and regulation held. That version of capitalism was stable. Stability is what undid it. Memories faded, risk crept back, shadow banks pushed the regulated ones to keep up. Meanwhile real wages stagnated and growth had to come from private debt instead. Watch the stretch where he shows why every borrower's liability is somebody's asset, and where that wealth ended up. The regulators did not miss a warning sign. Their model had no slot for one.

Merlow @exeMerlow

2 weeks ago

x.com/i/article/2094…

9 34 119 306K 285

3 people who decide whether a company gets funded sat in front of a Stanford class and took questions on how they actually decide. Marc Andreessen of Netscape and Andreessen Horowitz. Ron Conway of SV Angel. Parker Conrad of Zenefits. 2014. 2 of them write the cheques. One had recently raised. The panel runs from both sides of the table at once. Ron Conway brought a slide. It is the shortest thing in the session and the part founders screenshot. Watch the stretch where the investors describe what makes them pass. The reasons are smaller and more mechanical than any founder expects. Folding chairs, a lecture hall, laptops open in the rows. Accelerators charge equity for this conversation. It was filmed and left up.

Merlow @exeMerlow

2 weeks ago

x.com/i/article/2094…

9 34 119 306K 285

Everyone assumes the money in American politics buys the outcome. A Yale professor spends lecture 10 explaining why the demand side is the part that matters. Ian Shapiro, Sterling Professor of Political Science, Yale, DeVane Lecture series, 2019. He treats campaign finance as a market. Supply of money, demand for money, and a price that moves for structural reasons. The demand comes from weak parties. Candidates who cannot rely on an institution have to raise it themselves, every cycle. Watch the stretch where he separates the myths about the courts from what Buckley v Valeo actually did to the first amendment. A wooden hall, a full audience, a lectern. The money did not corrupt the parties. The parties got weak, and the money filled the gap.

Merlow @exeMerlow

2 weeks ago

x.com/i/article/2094…

9 34 119 306K 285

Almost everyone earns money one way and never learns the other 2 exist. Bob Proctor, 2017, a desk, a bookshelf, one microphone. He splits income into 3 strategies and calls them M1, M2, M3. Trading your time for money is the first, and it is the one with a hard ceiling built in. The other 2 do not scale with hours worked. That is the whole difference. Watch the section where he defines M2 and M3 and names which one most people could move to this year without changing jobs. A cream jacket, a pink shirt, a laptop open on the desk. Your income is not set by effort. It is set by which of the 3 you are using.

Merlow @exeMerlow

2 weeks ago

x.com/i/article/2094…

9 34 119 306K 285