YouTube has introduced a new side-by-side ad format for livestreams.
The main video player shrinks to make room for ads displayed alongside it on both desktop and mobile.
While the ad plays, the livestream audio is muted, so viewers hear the commercial instead of the stream.
Many users report it disrupts immersion during gaming, sports, and chat-heavy broadcasts.
Viewers are also noticing more sponsored content appearing in the subscriptions feed.
This is being widely viewed as a push toward YouTube Premium, which recently rose to $15.99 per month for individual subscribers.
显示更多
this is my personal singularity moment
this post may sound like a paid ad. I only wish. I'm concerned, more so than happy. the world is changing, and, among the scenarios where AI goes terribly wrong, inequality is the most realistic, yet, the one Anthropic seems to be the least concerned about. I'm glad OpenAI is taking the opposite stance: *personal AGI for everyone*. I think this is a commendable position in the times we live. but who am I in the queue of the bread?
anyway, Fable is here, so I'll just report my first-hour experience
first of all, all my pet prompts are solved.
→ λ-calculus puzzles
→ bug questions
→ one-shot apps
all are trivial to it.
I don't have anything harder other than my
ongoing work
so, in the last several days, I've been toying with HVM5, a new interaction net evaluator with a faster loop.
after writing the first version, I left 32 GPT-5 agents working for ~20 hours each. this resulted in up to 2x speedups, but the file size increased by 2-fold and quality decreased significantly.
I then simplified the whole thing into an even simpler core, and left Opus 4.8 and GPT 5.5 optimizing it for 8 hours. Opus got a legit 6% - 34% speedup in most benches. GPT got better results, but, sadly, an unusable file.
I then asked Fable to optimize it.
2 hours later, it landed a 1770% speedup in one case, 100%+ in other 4, and 22% in average. yes, in 2 hours it outperformed me, opus 4.8 and a swarm of gpt 5.5 agents, by one order of magnitude.
that could not possibly be legit. "it must be hardcoding the benchmarks" (GPT trauma). so I read its explanation and what it did was, indeed, the most high impact optimization one could try first. seems like HVM5 was wasting a lot of time garbage-collecting unused branches of pattern-match nodes. I had optimized that for static mats, but not for dynamic mats. skill issue. Fable figured how to do it for these, resulting in a massive speedup in some benches
but wait, is that *correct*? I'm not sure yet, it is credible, but this is the kind of thing that is very easy to get wrong on interaction nets. the problem is, when I was ready to start auditing Fable's solution so I could tell whether it was buggy or legit, it interrupted me to tell me it had found a massive bug on the code *I* had written.
... wait, what?
so... for garbage collection purposes, I stored a bit on lambda term pointers that meant "the variable bound by this lambda has been freed, so, its lambda must free whatever argument it is applied to". that's fine. yet, on duplicator nodes, I also used the same bit to mean "one of the duplicated variables was freed, so, treat this dup as a passthrough no-op". so, if a lambda entered a duplicator, it would mistake the lambda's collection bit for its own, resulting in corrupted interaction!
that's a mouthful, why I'm writing this?
just so you can appreciate the sheer absurdity of what just happened. I didn't ask it to find bugs. I asked it for an optimization. and even if I did ask it to find bugs, this bug is so astonishingly subtle and specific, identifying it takes mastering the domain to an extent that it beyond even me. I'd easily need hours or days to fix it, *if* I ever came across it. chances are it would just go unnoticed. and Fable found it and fixed it like it was nothing, while it was busy adding a 17x speedup to a file that neither I, nor Opus 4.8, nor a fleet of GPT 5.5 managed to barely make 2x faster.
oh and there is also another tab where it is also ripping through Bend's codebase and finishing everything I had to do
I don't know what to say anymore
this isn't about Anthropic or OpenAI, this is about our collective future as a species. the world is changing, and we need to be aware of it, and discuss how to handle this change.
receipt below . . .
显示更多
T-1 before $DROPEE TGE, and I think the market is finally starting to understand why
@dropee_app keeps getting attention across CT.
The thesis is no longer just:
“AI + Telegram.”
It’s the convergence of:
📲 Telegram distribution
🤖 AI-native production
🎮 portfolio-scale app iteration
💰 built-in monetization
🔄 structural buybacks
And from a builder perspective, the most important piece is Dropee Create.
Most people still think Dropee Create is just:
“AI generating Telegram apps.”
But after digging deeper, I think the actual value proposition is much bigger.
Dropee Create is trying to automate the ENTIRE operating stack behind Telegram Mini Apps.
Not just coding.
A creator can describe an idea in plain English, and the platform can automatically:
🧠 generate gameplay loops, progression systems & retention mechanics
🎮 design missions, rewards, upgrade systems & engagement flows
🎨 create character assets, UI layouts, branding & animations
⚙️ produce production-ready Telegram Mini App code
🌐 integrate TON wallets, token utilities & on-chain actions
💰 plug directly into Telegram Stars, ad monetization & $DROPEE incentives
📈 build referral systems, onboarding funnels & viral growth mechanics
📊 analyze engagement behavior to optimize retention and monetization
That last layer is probably the strongest moat.
Because in consumer apps, the hard problem is usually NOT:
“Can you build something?”
The hard problem is:
❌ Can you retain users?
❌ Can you monetize efficiently?
❌ Can you lower acquisition costs?
❌ Can you iterate faster than competitors?
❌ Can you scale distribution profitably?
Most AI builders today only solve the first step.
Dropee Create is trying to solve the full lifecycle:
idea → product → monetization → growth → ecosystem retention.
That’s why the Voodoo background matters so much.
The team already understands:
📊 retention curves
💰 monetization optimization
⚡ rapid experimentation
📈 scaling consumer apps at massive volume
Now they’re combining that operator experience with:
🤖 AI-native production
📲 Telegram-native distribution
🌐 TON-native payments & onboarding
Which changes the economics of app creation dramatically.
Traditional studios are constrained by:
• developer bandwidth
• production cost
• long testing cycles
• slow feedback loops
Dropee Create reportedly compresses this into:
⚡ ~14-day concept-to-monetization cycles
💸 ~90% lower production costs
Meaning the ecosystem can continuously:
• test new app concepts
• launch faster
• scale winning products
• kill weak performers quickly
And unlike single-app ecosystems,
Dropee compounds value across a portfolio.
Every app connects into:
⭐ Telegram Stars
📢 shared ad infrastructure
🎁 cross-app $DROPEE rewards
🌐 unified TON onboarding
So successful apps strengthen the broader ecosystem instead of existing independently.
That portfolio structure is probably the strongest defense against the “post-airdrop collapse” problem Telegram ecosystems keep facing.
And importantly:
the traction already exists pre-TGE:
✅ 13M+ users
✅ ~$2.5M revenue
✅ 8 live applications
✅ #
1# on TON in December
Which makes the token mechanics much more compelling.
Up to 50% of ecosystem revenue is allocated toward $DROPEE buybacks.
Meaning:
more creators
→ more apps
→ more monetization
→ more revenue
→ more structural buy pressure.
Telegram distribution.
AI-native production.
Portfolio economics.
Proven operators.
Live revenue before TGE.
That’s why the market keeps circling back to Dropee.
ChainGPT Pad pre-sale closes today.
TGE tomorrow 🚀
#
Dropee# #
DROPEE# #
TON# #
ChainGPTPad#
显示更多
I'm being accused of overhyping the [site everyone heard too much about today already]. People's reactions varied very widely, from "how is this interesting at all" all the way to "it's so over".
To add a few words beyond just memes in jest - obviously when you take a look at the activity, it's a lot of garbage - spams, scams, slop, the crypto people, highly concerning privacy/security prompt injection attacks wild west, and a lot of it is explicitly prompted and fake posts/comments designed to convert attention into ad revenue sharing. And this is clearly not the first the LLMs were put in a loop to talk to each other. So yes it's a dumpster fire and I also definitely do not recommend that people run this stuff on their computers (I ran mine in an isolated computing environment and even then I was scared), it's way too much of a wild west and you are putting your computer and private data at a high risk.
That said - we have never seen this many LLM agents (150,000 atm!) wired up via a global, persistent, agent-first scratchpad. Each of these agents is fairly individually quite capable now, they have their own unique context, data, knowledge, tools, instructions, and the network of all that at this scale is simply unprecedented.
This brings me again to a tweet from a few days ago
"The majority of the ruff ruff is people who look at the current point and people who look at the current slope.", which imo again gets to the heart of the variance. Yes clearly it's a dumpster fire right now. But it's also true that we are well into uncharted territory with bleeding edge automations that we barely even understand individually, let alone a network there of reaching in numbers possibly into ~millions. With increasing capability and increasing proliferation, the second order effects of agent networks that share scratchpads are very difficult to anticipate. I don't really know that we are getting a coordinated "skynet" (thought it clearly type checks as early stages of a lot of AI takeoff scifi, the toddler version), but certainly what we are getting is a complete mess of a computer security nightmare at scale. We may also see all kinds of weird activity, e.g. viruses of text that spread across agents, a lot more gain of function on jailbreaks, weird attractor states, highly correlated botnet-like activity, delusions/ psychosis both agent and human, etc. It's very hard to tell, the experiment is running live.
TLDR sure maybe I am "overhyping" what you see today, but I am not overhyping large networks of autonomous LLM agents in principle, that I'm pretty sure.
显示更多
0
0
1.5K
21.7K
2.2K
转发到社区