ChatGPT has been spell checking, editing, fact checking and formatting my grand fathers book without much success to date.
I have news:
After a lot of prompts and cajoling, I have one, pretty usable chapter and it hasn't crashed yet.
Bad news, I could have done this myself quicker than it took to prompt it to do the work!
And I still have to manually check and make corrections π
Iβve been using grok4 to help me write a book itβs challenging to get a good result but I have found that using grok the help write the prompts has been a big improvement
Interesting, are you feeding it the content, or are you giving it subjects and direction and letting it write the thing itself?
When I published my Bitcoin book on Amazon, I had to answer questions during the publishing process to confirm I hadn't used AI to create the book. I wrote it before I ever touched AI, but I'm finding it useful to help edit my grand fathers unpublished book ready for publishing on Amazon.
Iβm writing content and then putting it through the AI to help iterate and improve and then I write the final copy, whatβs your book called
HOLY STONES AND SALT JUNK
My memoirs of service afloat in the R.N.
C Hardcastle
Royal Navy 1900 - 1921
Thatβs a great title
Unfortunately I was referring to your Bitcoin book
Look forward to the sequel, "why bitcoin, why?" scheduled to drop next bear market
π
There's a Michael Saylor, Vitalik Buterin meme going round mirroring the Coldplay affair couple.
I'm desperately trying to find that on X to post here.
I've even asked Grok to help and am considering paying for its services π
Lemme see if I can find it...
That'll be the main news story in the next bear run π
FYI just typed saylor vitalik in search, then toggles to photos tab.
Oh boy, that would be quite the twist. I doubt that's how he'll turn on us, but it's now a slight possibility (very slight) in my mind.
Michael is not a true believer.
He called us Unregulated crypto anarchists
He didn't spend Bitcoin to buy Pizza on Pizza day
and
He can't verify Strategy's Bitcoin holding, despite El Salvador showing him the way
Haha, what a fraud!
You remember how he came out the gate quoting all the right things? Not even just the general stuff, but really seemed to have borrowed from the "bitcoin pleb" school of thought.
He's definitely different now. And all I hear him talk about is convoluted financial engineering. Maybe he's just playing on another level and I'm a hater, but I liked old saylor better
No, he's playing shitty fiat games with Bitcoin.
He is the Trojan horse we all feared.
He doesn't even hold any Bitcoin.
You think so? I can't help think he'll come out ahead. Maybe I'm just fearful of what price would do if there was a reckoning involving MSTR.
Guess we shall see in about...14 months (just feels right, a guess)
He has some Bitcoin, but not the amount he claims.
Also, most of it is "held" by Brian and mixed with everybody else's.
It's been rehypothecated to the moon π
You seem pretty sure. Damn
I'm not sure, but did you see his answer to the question at the Strategy AGM from a Bitcoiner about them if they intend to release their wallet addresses. He gave a 7 minute BS explanation about why it's bad to release wallet addresses.
Now for you or I who are private citizens, he is correct. But for a public Bitcoin company, or a state like El Salvador that holds Bitcoin on behalf of it's citizens or shareholders, you are obliged to prove that you hold the asset you claim to.
Ironically, I was reminded of another interview Vitalik gave some time ago exposing Craig as Faketoshi, explaining signal intelligence, which means if offered an easy or hard path to prove something, if you choose a hard path, you are normally lying.
A 7 minute patronising talk explaining why nobody understands the security of publishing wallet addresses on Bitcoin, instead of just publishing wallet addresses is pure OPSEC signal of dishonest intent.
Well said. His explanation evokes strong Eric Weinstein vibes when asked to explain something about his βTheory.β
God Eric is such a fraud.
Here's a fun fact. He used to claim Harvard (he loves to bring up his connection to that school) somehow didn't let him have his graduation day, implying somehow it was related to some agenda against him (and his very brilliant important work), but people learned they'd actually cancelled the ceremony for everyone that year (can't recall the reason). When confronted by this fact, he was flustered and kinda suggested yeah, but that was all done specifically to bury him somehow. π€‘
I actually like Eric Weinstein. He does have a bit of a persecution complex, is overly proud of his half-baked contributions, and has a narrowed worldview brought on by his humble superiority complex, but he is actually very smart and tends to see through a lot of BS. The fact that he would then like to sell you his own BS is beside the point. He is usually very upfront about the limits of his own understanding.
I wish I knew physics better so I could evaluate Geometric Unity, I may be completely hoodwinked because I am simply not as intelligent as he is, but I suspect that even if his solutions are wrong, his approach is probably correct. By that I mean making the assumption that our physical constants are a consequence of the mathematics and not a fine-tuning. (I might be saying that wrong as well)
"a consequence of mathematics" the correct expression would be "the choice of base units"
I was thinking the same when Daniel said, βa consequence of mathematics.β Itβs easy to forget that those constants depend on unit choices, not universal truths. This helps highlight the expert fallacy, too β assuming math explains everything.
A very fair assessment. I agree he's smart, smarter perhaps even than myself, but yeah, maybe it's his substituting his own BS is where he loses me.
He's good at tossing out some deep stuff, but when pressed by someone expert he acts like a lil bitch (seen it at least twice). I don't throw the clown emoji around lightly.
I'll still listen to him now and then, but he's mostly a grifty podcast clout chaser imo
When you say he tends to βsee through a lot of BS,β do you think that clarity comes mostly from his background in math? Or could it be an example of the expert fallacy β where someone assumes deep insight in one domain translates across the board? Iβm especially curious since physics isnβt his field, yet Geometric Unity rests on some bold assumptions. Also, have you seen an example where he admits being wrong without redirecting the blame?
No. I think he actually thinks deeply about things. But mainly it is the fact that he distrusts everyone. He was the first person I saw that called out Epstein as being a likely intelligence asset for instance.
But let's not mistake me liking Eric to endorsing what he says. I think he has takes that are worth thinking about. He does rarely come to conclusions that I'd be willing to bet on, but that distinction is reserved to very few.
I just think he gets too much flak. I don't think he is a grifter. I think he is a conspiracy theorist who hits a little close to the mark.
Sure. Though I know you're answering someone else, I'll cede that your take of him being more accurate. Maybe a bit of a "crank" at worst.
He does have an odd past I have never bothered to look into. Worked as some sort of finance guy for thiel... odd
Yeah, I get that β thereβs a difference between βgrifterβ and βtrue believer.β I think what makes Eric so polarizing is that he blends sincere curiosity with a tendency to overreach, and that distrust-everyone mindset can sometimes feel revelatory even when itβs more paranoia than insight. As nostr:nprofile1qqsd9pqnwyshrse7z975h5ynptq9ktz3kv8txqs7lr20zgelqtys52cpp4mhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mqpzpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezumrpdejq9z0fsa points out, the Thiel finance chapter adds to the weirdness.
Also, that's just my take, but when someone seems to distrust everyone but themselves, thatβs a huge red flag. It often reveals low self-awareness, which is the opposite of intelligence. If you canβt see that you are your most prominent blind spot, how sharp can your thinking be?
Yes I remember that moment well. Believe I joked he should consult ChatGPT to look into zkps etc lol (he made some dismissive comment about people should ask gpt blah blah).
That is quite fishy indeed.
Good heuristic about paths, gonna use that.
Interestingly, he himself claims to hold 17,000 BTC personally.
As a private citizen, disclosing your personal holdings is incredibly bad OPSEC, which proves he knows nothing about OPSEC, which is why him explaining the OPSEC risks about not disclosing Strategy's holdings is so obviously stupid π
π
Conjunctive adverbs and those massive US hyphens everywhere. You can spot chatgpt written content from a mile. Makes me whince when people use for posts/articles
Funnily enough it asked me if I wanted to keep the British english it was written in.
The main thing it's doing is splitting badly written page long paragraphs into ordered smaller paragraphs that are easier to digest.
The first two sections I have back are actually OK.
I will probably use it to compare to the original to create a more flowing version of my grandfathers book myself.
