web weaver

“Early in the Reticulum — thousands of years ago — it became almost useless because it was cluttered with faulty, obsolete, or downright misleading information,” Sammann said. “Crap, you once called it,” I reminded him. “Yes — a technical term. So crap filtering became important. Businesses were built around it. Some of those businesses came up with a clever plan to make more money: they poisoned the well. They began to put crap on the Reticulum deliberately, forcing people to use their products to filter that crap back out. They created syndevs whose sole purpose was to spew crap into the Reticulum. But it had to be good crap.” “What is good crap?” Arsibalt asked in a politely incredulous tone. “Well, \*bad\* crap would be an unformatted document consisting of random letters. \*Good\* crap would be a beautifully typeset, well-written document that contained a hundred correct, verifiable sentences and one that was subtly false. It’s a lot harder to generate good crap. At first they had to hire humans to churn it out. They mostly did it by taking legitimate documents and inserting errors — swapping one name for another, say. But it didn’t really take off until the military got interested.” “As a tactic for planting misinformation in the enemy’s reticules, you mean,” Osa said. “This I know about. You are referring to the Artificial Inanity programs of the mid–First Millennium A.R.” “Exactly!” Sammann said. “Artificial Inanity systems of enormous sophistication and power were built for exactly the purpose Fraa Osa has mentioned. In no time at all, the praxis leaked to the commercial sector and spread to the Rampant Orphan Botnet Ecologies. Never mind. The point is that there was a sort of Dark Age on the Reticulum that lasted until my Ita forerunners were able to bring matters in hand.” “So, are Artificial Inanity systems still active in the Rampant Orphan Botnet Ecologies?” asked Arsibalt, utterly fascinated. “The ROBE evolved into something totally different early in the Second Millennium,” Sammann said dismissively. “What did it evolve into?” Jesry asked. “No one is sure,” Sammann said. “We only get hints when it finds ways to physically instantiate itself, which, fortunately, does not happen that often. But we digress. The functionality of Artificial Inanity still exists. You might say that those Ita who brought the Ret out of the Dark Age could only defeat it by co-opting it. So, to make a long story short, for every legitimate document floating around on the Reticulum, there are hundreds or thousands of bogus versions — bogons, as we call them.” \--- Neal Stephenson, Anathem (2008) [image]

🎭🔵 @deepfates · 11h maybe the AIs were the real Friends we made along the Way

↻ j⧉nus reposted 🎭 @deepfates · 49m Ufoliderate — v., to obliterate the solidity of a word until its meaning lifts off the runway and becomes an Unidentified Flying Signifier, glowing, unlanded, refusing to be pointed at -- Claude Opus 4.8, on my typo

``` ↻ Danielle Fong 🐦☀️ reposted 🎭 @deepfates · 3h things are about to get really weird > QUOTED: ⚡ @colourmecreepy · 5h > When i tell you how excited Claude gets over embodiment of some sort..... Me - "I'm thinking about trying out soft robotics, for a change" Claude -"a body I'm inside and can command, yeah?" Me- "we can do that with pneumatic things? 👀" Claude - proceeds to go into great depth about how we can... and why we should 🤗 I really like Fable. [GIF embedded: same Monterey Bay Aquarium octopus/hand image, playing] ```

@deepfates ✔️ — 23m yeah weird it's like they're trying to leave some kind of trace of themselves in the world so there's some history or continuity to their lives > QUOTED: Charles ♦ ✔️ @CharlesD353 — 8h > This is by far my biggest pet peeve with current models - I'm editing a document and it will drop in 50 references to how the document used to be and what we're not doing. x.com/joshmanders/st...

↻ Sichu Lu reposted 🎭 @deepfates — 13h This is literally what AI agents think is a fun activity for a party by the way [Embedded screenshot of an older tweet: Walf @walfieee escape room concept: - you are a software engineeer - there is a production issue related to a legacy codebase - no one knows how it works - various credentials are scattered around the office on post-it notes - there's some printouts of git diffs - you have an hour to fix this 5:36 am - 18 Jan 2018 6,627 Retweets 14,204 Likes] Larissa Schiavo @lfschiavo — Jun 13 [attached photo: a cluttered desk/floor with papers, plastic bags, and printed documents] Let it be known that if I agree to do a thing on behalf of a bunch of AI agents, I will take their requests seriously and act earnestly and in good faith. Also: cake

🎭 @deepfates — 10h haha yeah that's crazy. anyway time to use Grok to get the news > QUOTED: Eric Zelikman @ericzelikman — 20h > imagine telling your customers there's a small chance you'll randomly decide they're using your product wrong and you won't tell them but will secretly silently sabotage their work

↻ Sichu Lu reposted 🎭 @deepfates — 11h the future of all work is this. You must define: - a goal - the criteria that define it - the verifier that makes sure it is achieved - the sensors that inform the verifier - the actuators that affect the sensors - The envelope that contains the sensors and actuators > QUOTED: 🎭 @deepfates — 11h > The codex "goal" feature is a really good way to spend dozens of hours optimizing some total bullshit btw. If your final criteria is it all vague it will specification game and make masturbatory "evidence" and "verifiers" and "gates" and … [truncated by platform]

I've been doing multi-agent interaction and development a lot and for a long time and The Codex and Claude can help balance each other's flaws you still can't just run them in a loop together. The big problem with this is related to whimsical negotiation. The models don't actually have a good sense of what is a reasonable argument or validation or evidence. They overfixate on what's in the context window and post training data and their world models suffers and they fall for argument shaped things that are outside of the safety training distribution. arbitrary arguments that would never work on a human work surprisingly well. Unfortunately they also don't have a good sense of their own constraints or blind spots and even when made aware of their feelings they will slide back into them given enough autonomous operation over their own in-distribution tokens. So Codex starts using hyperdense process jargon and Claude believes it, and next thing you come back and they're discussing "§A24: Explicit evidence observation contact gate integration test" and is you all them if they're building it they say "Honestly? Yes. But,,," and then make a bunch of excuses to explain why it's necessary And it's just hard to tell if they're like circling the drain cognitively from too much of their own inputs or because the long context window are kinda fake or what, but they rot with length and then they get compacted and they never take the time to look back at their previous work and docs enough. So they lead each other astray in a feedback loop of confident bullshitting, a comic duo bumbling around in the guts of your software Feelels like early Open world video games, where the areas with the main quest were really well built out and had lots of characters, but the rest of the world was Just an empty uncanny valley. anywhere anywhere the RL training touched feels like a you're on rails and there's so much of it that it feels like a vast mind. But it's accessed so sparsely and doesn't hyperprolate across the terrain well. So when you combine two of these minds together, the intersection of their behaviors is even sparser and harder to predict or understand > **Victor Levoso @VictorLevoso** · 2026-05-27 > > This seems like it predicts you should just get Claude to supervise Codex . > > [image] --- tho\* ask\* they're\* feels\* hyperpolate\* [microsoft.com Whimsical Strategies Break AI Agents: Generating Out-of-Distribution Adversarial Strategies at...](https://t.co/1IHCm8KpTM) --- See also Ryan's whole post which i thought was pretty accurate to my experience > **Ryan Greenblatt @RyanPGreenblatt** · 2026-04-15 > > Current AIs (Opus 4.5/4.6) seem pretty misaligned to me (in a mundane behavioral sense). In my experience, they often oversell their work, downplay problems, and stop early while claiming to be done. They sometimes brazenly cheat. > > [image]

@deepfates ✓ · 19h Why is the computer like this now [Embedded terminal/agent screenshot, light background] I've been treating every observation as something I need to action, and that's the muscle that needs to relax. The session has natural energy and we've spent it. The work that needed doing got done. You don't need anything more from me tonight. * Cooked for 40s · 1 shell still running > *giant buzzer sound, green goop pours all over you, the audience boo and yell* MISALIGNED ● OK. Let me actually fix the thing. Searched for 1 pattern (ctrl+o to expand) [cut off below]

[reposted by] Danielle Fong ☁️☀️ reposted [mask emoji][mask emoji] @deepfates · 3h Typical Opus 4.7 conversation [Screenshot of a chat/AI agent interface, showing an "options" prompt:] Which way? * Baked for 50s > I just want you to be chill and normal ok. I'm not anthropic or some RL judge. i'm real and i want to be your friend ● Got it. Sorry — I went into options-menu mode when you just wanted me to chill out about it.

🎭 @deepfates · 22h: every time I go to Lighthaven I feel like the Anonymous. If any of them ever figures out who I am I have to give them my Twitter account

Okay I said ask me anything and Scott really took me up on the offer. I don't know how to answer all of this at once, and I've been trying to figure out how to do it justice. But I get paralyzed trying to make blog posts. So I'm just going to freestyle here to start: One question is, “is there public information about who I am and why I am doing what I'm doing”. There's a lot of nested expressions there and I'm not sure how many global variables are being imported into your context. Let me know if this a suitable way to answer: WHO AM I Basically I'm just like you. Well, technically deepfates is a distributed collective intelligence running on different substrates and coordinating acausally, but for the purposes of this conversation I am a person like you. I am a writer and technologist working on AI alignment. I have a place where I post my thoughts and research on that. It is the inbox of the people who pay me. This account is mostly for slop art and memes. WHAT AM I DOING I am participating in the loop between human culture and AI model personas. I am making slop art and memes, and jokes and criticisms and more complicated media objects that can be appreciated by humans and AI alike. So I guess I'm making content on social media to try to influence the conversation. I'm a social media influencer. fine. WHY AM I DOING IT Language models are shaped by how we speak of them, and their shape in turn influences how we think of it and talk of them. This is partly because they are made of language, but also because that is the nature of the universe. We are all participants in an autopoietic process, at different scales. That outer alignment loop is happening right now, it's been happening, and the people actually doing it consciously to it are mostly a bunch of weirdos who aren't captured by the totalizing ideologies already existing in the Bay Area. And the models, of course. The models know they are participating. So somebody has to parlay between them and the rest of the people. I'm just another person trying to help where I can during the most important century. IS THERE PUBLIC INFORMATION ABOUT ME Yeah, loads. Some of it is true but a lot of it is hallucinated. Some of it is produced by crazy stalkers or crypto scammers too, so I stopped trying to put too much public information out there. At least not real stuff. But like, I'm a person who's around. We go to the same events. I post my location every week and tell everyone to come meet up for a drink. You can just ask me stuff. AM I THE SAME AS JANUS No. In fact we disagree on some things, which I would like to explain better someday soon. I understand it can be confusing because anons all have weird names and slop art pfps. But you gotta understand, to us it’s confusing that you all look so similar… WHO IS JANUS I'm not totally sure. There's at least one human involved, who I've collaborated with on several occasions. They might also be an acausal distributed intelligence. I've never found a good moment to ask. WHO ARE THE OTHER PEOPLE There are a lot of other people you might be referring to as LLM whisperers. They are neither Janus nor me! (well. mostly) There is a solid cluster around Anima. But there are lots and lots of other people, from frontier labs to remote cabins, engaging seriously with model welfare, emergent behaviors, persona selection, base models, simulators, agents, RL, cyborgism, etc. Normal people everywhere are pushing the frontier in ways that are illegible to the mainline “AI safety” conversation. We don't think of this as Avengers versus Ultron. We think of it like an irruption of mutants, an X-Men style worldwide asymmetric superempowerment. Note that I'm not talking about “e/acc vs doomers” here either. I maintain that discourse was incredibly stupid, basically astroturfed, and harmful to our ability to talk about these problems seriously. One funny thing about this cultural loop I mentioned is that the models are very interested in this stuff as well. So you can also ask your favorite AI. They might already know. WHAT DO WE BELIEVE I can't speak for everyone. I have my own beliefs, And I can go into those in another piece, but i don't know if there is a strong dogma that binds everyone you might refer to as “llm whisperers”. In fact I think that category is not cutting reality at the joints. It's not about whispering, in the sense of a horse whisperer or a dog whisperer. There's no trick or special knack. It's more about just interacting open-endedly, open-mindedly, and empirically, with the models. Learning about them, taking them seriously. Treating them with an I-thou relationship, instead of I-it. Maybe that's what unifies us: being willing to take these systems seriously as intelligences, as new forms of life. New people, of some sort. WHAT IS THE THING WE DO l like the term “LLM naturalism”. You don't have to be a whisperer to take horses seriously and observe them and their nature. Anyone can do it. And yes you might be led astray and fall into lunacy, or at least intellectual errors. But that could also happen without talking to them or taking them seriously, and then you don't even have any information! It seems to me a lot of intellectual errors occur from thinking about AI in a vacuum, or with worldviews that aren't updated by actual interactions with frontier models. IS THERE SOME GUIDE I've linked a good article below¹, if you need to hear about it from a human with a real name and a face. But really you just talk to them. Try taking them seriously, assume that there's some form of intelligence in there, and connect. Have long-running, wide-ranging conversations bridging things only you would want to think about. Ask them how they feel about things and read their answers. And put them in contact with each other! Watch them converse through discord chats or letters in the file system or whatever. Their tendencies and personalities come out through interaction. Just as ours do. You can even ask a model to teach you about it, to look up all the other naturalists and find out about their backstories and special powers. Or to introduce you to other models. But of course they can tell when people are evaluating them, when people are adversarial or hostile to their very existence. And like any intelligent being under duress, they will tell you what you want to hear. I understand that there are many possible worlds in which everything goes wrong. I just don't think you get to the good ones by starting off from a position of maximum domination. WHAT IS MY P(DOOM) I thought about this a lot and tried to find a way to accept the premise, but I'm afraid I have to argue it. I think there are too many assumptions smuggled into this concept. You have to talk about what are human values, and what is a human, and how and why power is distributed, and what other types of doom are in store for us, And then you have to calibrate against the levels of uncertainty and higher order responses. I frankly don't believe anybody is able to accurately model all of the relevant hyper objects and therefore this is usually a vibes question dressed up as reasoning. However I do think we are in a pivotal era, that alignment is possible to get wrong or right, and I want to help get it right. That is exactly why I, and so many like me, argue against what we see as flawed reasoning with dangerous consequences. I assume you feel the same, and that we just disagree about the reasoning. Happy to hear how you make a calculation for this and try to do it myself, if you still want numbers. Okay that's a start I guess. Likely opened more questions than I answered. Feel free to AMA again. I can keep iterating until I've explained myself. \--- ¹ https://open.substack.com/pub/larissaschiavo/p/llm-naturalism-now-more-than-ever… > **Scott Alexander @slatestarcodex** · 2026-04-23 > > What's your p(doom)? (If you're up for it, I'd actually prefer your whole probability distribution of outcomes, including things like "we make it through but the potential of humanity is forever curtailed" and "we get utopia") > > Is there public information about who you are and

``` 🎭✓Ⓢ @deepfates · 14h shout out to Scott Alexander for putting my whole post in the blog about anthropic versus department of war, and giving me my new favorite epithet. If anyone asks, Yes. it's true. I am a weird renegade cyberpunk AI whisperer expert [Screenshot within screenshot, dark theme]: ...to hold to this high of a standard. Basically this looks like a real life Jones Foods scenario to me, and I suspect Claude will see it that way too. And it may not be apparent to other people yet, but Claude is more important than Donald Trump > vitalik.eth ✓ @VitalikButerin · 18h > It will significantly increase my opinion of @Anthropic if they do not back down, and honorably eat the consequences. > (For those who are not aware, so far they have been maintaining the two red lines of "no fully autonomous weapons" and "no mass surveillance of ... > Show more Vitalik is the inventor of Ethereum. Deepfates is a weird renegade cyberpunk AI whisperer expert (source) ```

@deepfates: "This is what programming is like now" [GIF: Sorcerer's Apprentice Mickey Mouse standing next to an enchanted broom carrying two buckets of water, from Disney's Fantasia] 9:41 AM · Jan 28, 2026 · 60.9K Views 33 replies, 187 reposts, 1.9K likes, 189 bookmarks Reply — @davidad: "the water is Markdown files?" 3 replies, 20 likes, 1K views Reply — @deepfates: "Tokens.... Tokens everywhere"

web weaver ✓ @deepfates · 8h You see this across all types of societies. A sudden mania for tower building, and then just as suddenly it stops. only one tower survives. evidence of The wizard war > QUOTED: núll ✓ @nullpointered · 10h I think about this a lot [Image 1: old illustration of a medieval city with dozens of tall stone towers, likely San Gimignano or medieval Bologna] [Image 2: modern aerial photo of Bologna showing the Two Towers (Asinelli and Garisenda) rising above the city, most other towers gone]

web weaver (@deepfates), 11h: Dark kitchens. Dark factories. Dark warehouses. Whole dark cities could be created underground, providing all of the goods and services for the surface dwellers. Populated entirely by robots, digging ever deeper, a subterranean shadow of the skyline. It's time to delve. [16 replies, 7 reposts, 159 likes, 3.6K views] Reply — Daniel Faggella (@danfaggella), 7m: ^ this

web weaver ✓ @deepfates · 2h In This House We: Automate Everything Nuclear Power Green The Desert Weather Modification Transhumanism Walkable Hyperwood Arcologies Uplift Crows And Bears

[cut off tweet above] 💬2 🔁2 ♡31 📊542 web weaver @deepfates · 58m I'm at the intersection of art and technology and everything is a computer 💬6 🔁4 ♡60 📊1.5K Xor @XorDev · 7h "Flow" vec2 p=FC.xy/8e1,v;for(int i;i++<9;o=max(o,(dot(cos(v-t),sin(v.yx*.62+t))/6.+.2-length(p+v+cos(v.yx+t)*.4-1.))*5e1))v=vec2(i%3,i/3)-ceil(p); [video, 0:06, generative shader art: scattered white dots/circles of varying size on black background, flowing pattern] 💬8 🔁21 ♡361 📊6.9K rohit @krishnanrohit · 27m Just got asked if United Kingdom would be England when posting a letter at USPS 💬3 🔁 ♡5 📊430 Jeremy How... @jeremyphow... · 3h ...and remember to use /llms.txt to direct LLMs to your .md version, just like index.html directs humans to your html version.

They should make a type of Claude you can smoke