• Because now there’s a new constraint: mastering how to orchestrate AI teams…the tools, workflows and product craft in this new world.  Feels like there is no bigger lever than learning these skills. Channeling all my spare time and energy here.

• Broski’s comments reflect the law-of-the jungle quality of being a creator for YouTube, where 20mn new videos compete for attention every day.
• In 2015, Sean Evans reinvented the chat show format for the YouTube era with his show Hot Ones. In each episode, he interviews a celebrity while they both eat increasingly spicy chicken wings. Guests have included Gordon Ramsay, Jennifer Lawrence, Billie Eilish and Shaquille O’Neal, and the show has 15mn subscribers. The show’s parent company, First We Feast, was sold last year for $82.5mn.

• Law has one of the strongest "unions" in the form of the Bar Association, backed by legal force. You cannot practice law without "passing they bar" as they say.
• And they know when it’s right and wrong.
• Can you imagine a world without lawyers?

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uG3uea-Hvy4
• Very much doubt, what you’ll see is it killing off paralegal work.

  In most jurisdictions legal advice is a regulated and restricted activity. Qualified lawyers today get themselves into trouble without AI advising on areas they have no right to practice in.

• As usual with "AI replacing humans", the key thing to consider here is accountability.

  I want to get my legal advice from someone who is accountable for that advice, and is willing to stake their professional reputation on that advice being correct.

  An LLM can never be accountable.

  I don't want an LLM for a lawyer. I want a lawyer armed with LLMs, who's more effective than the previous generations of lawyers.
• Any pure information-processing profession will be affected - programming, legal, teaching, financial, medical diagnosis, research, writing, videos, movies, music, art, design, architecture, business consulting, marketing, gaming, dating, chat, voice, customer support, real-time monitoring, ...

  Any physical world interaction might survive for more time - cooking, goods delivery, transport, construction, medical testing, field work, lab work, class room work, handyman jobs, factory work, farming, mining, fishing, travel & tourism, retail shops, offices, gym, sports, fashion, hardware,..
• I think theoretically, it's okay for LLMs to write legal briefs, to replace attorneys. Write the best argument you can with whatever tools you want.

  What worries me is the idea of them replacing JUDGES.
• Expensive lawyers have better relationships with opposing parties, have more and better legal research both already on hand and available to be done, with more and smarter people doing research, with more and more experienced people available to consult, and may hire outside consultants when the situation calls for it.

  They can also better afford to play dirty in various ways, from burying you in discovery documents to dragging things out with various motions.

• the average intelligence goes up noticeably as you interact with more expensive firms (which tracks, because they hired people with the top performance in and possibly after law school).

  AI may close the gap on some things, but not others.
• FYI, even lawyers who represent themselves generally don't do well, no matter how smart they are or how much experience they have in that area. But that's not because the judge wants them to pay into the cartel -- it's because law is hard, there are a million factors affecting performance on a particular case, and one major factor is ability to keep perspective on your case. People are uniformly terrible at this when looking at their own cases.
• Cheaper lawyers can’t afford to pay for as many research librarians, paralegals, junior attorneys, writing consultants, jury consultants, etc. LLMs may level the playing field in this regard. But of course, the expensive lawyer might be able to pay for more tokens.

9 more annotations...

• Perhaps they are quintillionaires in a distant parallel universe which justifies the risks they took.
• Founders are expected to adopt a linear wealth mindset and take big risks that maximize expected value as cogs in the venture capital machine dependent on power law home runs.
• Salvation comes only to the select few who clear an ever steepening power law threshold.
• That taste for outsized risk has seeped into everyday culture. Wage growth has severely lagged compounded capital, causing ordinary people to increasingly see their best shot at real upward mobility in negative EV jackpots. Online gambling, 0DTE options, retail meme stocks, sports betting, and crypto memecoins all testify to the phenomena of exponential wealth preference. Technology makes speculating effortless, while social media spreads the story of each new overnight millionaire, luring the broader population into one giant losing bet like moths to a light.
• We’re becoming a culture that worships the jackpot and increasingly prices survival at zero.
• And AI exacerbates the trend by further devaluing labor and intensifying winner take all outcomes. The techno-optimist dream of an abundant post-AGI world where humans devote their days to art and leisure will look more like billions of people chasing negative sum capital and status jackpots with UBI stipends.
• Perhaps the up only e/acc logo should be redrawn to reflect the blizzard of paths that bleed to zero along the way, the true silhouette of the Jackpot Age.
• The Jackpot Paradox math says it’s rational for civilization to treat humanity as interchangeable labor, sacrificing millions of worker bees to maximize the linear expected value for the colony.
• That might be the most efficient for aggregate growth, but it distributes purpose and meaning miserably.
• “man was not meant to be farmed; man was meant to be useful, to be productive, to be proud.”
• We have boosted the mean at the cost of the median, leaving a widening gap in mobility, status, and dignity that have bred entire economies of negative sum cultural phenomena.
• Underneath there is typically a scarcity mindset driving it, a gnawing sense of feeling “behind” where they should be and a compulsion to make it fast.
• My answer is always the same. build more edge rather than risk more size. Don’t kill yourself chasing the jackpot. Log wealth is what matters. Maximize the 50th percentile outcome. Make your own luck. Avoid drawdowns. Eventually you will get there.
• But most people will not ever generate consistent edge. “Just win more” isn’t scalable advice.
• Christianity once scaled because it promised salvation to anyone. Buddhism spread on the claim that anyone could reach enlightenment.
• A modern analog would have to do the same in offering dignity, purpose, and an alternative path forward for all people so they don’t destroy themselves chasing jackpots.

14 more annotations...