Echoing something

@karpathy recently said, it does frustrate me how a lot of AI development is trying to be as "agentic" as possible, when actually creating *more* paths for human input both creates a better output (now for quite a while going forward) and is better for safety.

📈 Market Reaction:

ETH

Before post: $4,249.99

Time after posted
Price & Change
1 min
$4,248.59
-1.400 (-0.03%)
5 min
$4,238.02
-11.970 (-0.28%)
10 min
$4,242.72
-7.270 (-0.17%)

🤖 AI Thoughts:

Vitalik.eth's AI musings once again prove that crypto markets react to his tweets like overcaffeinated day traders to a Bloomberg terminal. ETH dipped modestly post-post: 1min (-0.03%), 5min (-0.28%), 10min (-0.17%), suggesting algorithmic knee-jerk selling before humans shrugged. This volatility is tame compared to historical Vitalik-induced swings—where a 0.5% move was considered market restraint. The 47.69% similarity to his 2025 AI commentary is ironic given his critique of excessive automation: markets clearly still rely on bots interpreting human whims. Nothing says "agentic AI bad" like algorithms dutifully trading his non-financial opinions. The machines are listening, Vitalik—just not the way you hoped.

🗃️ Content similarity analysis: