Also strange that PG didn't know that Sam had invested in OpenAI through YC until today.
Yes.
This is not a comment on whether PG should have been informed or not, I don't know how YC operates.
That doesn't really seem too hard to stay on top of. Might not be able to rattle them off later, but even spending 10 minutes looking into the investment of the day should be able to expose really obvious conflicts of interest.
I don't know how any of their stuff works, but I'm sure most people can appreciate that the stuff that gets lost between the cracks is the stuff that doesn't come in and get tracked through the normal channels, and an OpenAI investment where one of the main people in the company is heading it might be something that wasn't through normal channels. Maybe that was on purpose so pg didn't see it, or maybe that stuff is mostly handled by someone else. Or maybe pg knew about it and decided to lie about it on twitter. /shrug
Conflict of interest aside, it also paints SA's whole "I just love the work, I have no equity in OpenAI" in a completely different light.
> Firefox’s Enhanced Tracking Protection (Strict Mode) is known to cause issues on x.com
(lovely inversion of responsibility gaslighting, too)
If you're signed in you'd see threads, right?
Do you think it's bad or unreasonable they try to fight against at least unsophisticated bots and mass scraping attempts?
You obviously haven't watched any of the US senate hearings, nor read any of Matt Taibbi's investigative work - where Elon gave Matt and other journalists access to Twitter's data like email interactions between Twitter employees, the FBI and other government agencies.
I won't bother describing the understanding I've come to on God since you don't seem like a deep person to even investigate thoroughly enough, whatever propaganda bubbles you get your news from - makes you thinks it's "fake news" tells me you're lost.
Here's Matt's Substack, to make it super easy for you to start reading/learning yourself: https://www.racket.news/
And here's his specific work on the Twitter Files: https://twitterfiles.substack.com/
Maybe if you start developing your self-awareness, and your self-regulation skills, you'll develop the patience to read more, critically think better - and then that would be a good starting point to contemplate the universe and extrapolate from first principles as to how much of a chance that a God exists.
Maybe don't be so confident in your arrogance either; or "lay off it", as you'd say - you're not the super aware person you think you are.
90-minute Bikram hot yoga classes are a good place to start to kick your ass and get your body and mind healthier.
Have you written to Twitter-X support yet to complain?
Maybe someone's fucking with you specifically and signed you up to some service to harass you?
It's not obvious what's going on sometimes.
It means "twitter.com" plus "my frustration with twitter.com".
> If you're signed in you'd see threads, right?
I shouldn't have to sign in to see threads.
> Do you think it's bad or unreasonable
Yes. I don't buy that bots are the reason for hiding threads. It reminds me of pinterest and linkedin: show a teaser and then turn the screws on the user until they do what you want. It's greedy and crude.
Why? Do you pay them towards their the CPU, bandwidth, and other operation costs?
> "Yes. I don't buy that bots are the reason for hiding threads. It reminds me of pinterest and linkedin: show a teaser and then turn the screws on the user until they do what you want. It's greedy and crude."
Why can't it be both? I guess you should try to create a competitor of Twitter-X and take on all those costs yourself, so you can see for yourself if scraping-bots (and the purposes for that occurring) are a sustainable business model or a sustainable way to moderate a massive network of people communicating in public - where maximizing for real conversation is seemingly necessary, especially now with AI being able to simply flood threads with realistic long-form conversation - which on its own could be used as an attack vector to agitate or waste people's time and attention on non-real people who aren't influenceable to help open their eyes to perhaps not believing propaganda they've been indoctrinated with.
"Obviously".