Everhard Ortega @everhard___

Debunker. Aphorisms. Adaequatio intellectus et rei. everhardortega.com San Francisco, CA Joined April 2015

Tweets

1K
Followers

348
Following

2K
Likes

9K

Everhard Ortega @everhard___

4 days ago

Being super-intentional is one of those skills that will pay off asymmetrically post-AGI.

0 0 1 68 0

View Details

Chris Freiman @cafreiman

3 months ago

For Father’s Day, I’ll share this letter to Karl Marx from his dad

744 5K 29K 20.6M 6K

View Details

kache @yacineMTB

7 months ago

you can outsource your thinking but you cannot outsource your understanding

288 4K 19K 3.0M 6K

View Details

- Drafted a blog post - Used an LLM to meticulously improve the argument over 4 hours. - Wow, feeling great, it’s so convincing! - Fun idea let’s ask it to argue the opposite. - LLM demolishes the entire argument and convinces me that the opposite is in fact true. - lol The LLMs may elicit an opinion when asked but are extremely competent in arguing almost any direction. This is actually super useful as a tool for forming your own opinions, just make sure to ask different directions and be careful with the sycophancy.

2K 2K 31K 3.5M 9K

View Details

Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸 @pmarca

6 months ago

Claude knows! —> The Lump of Labor Fallacy and Why AGI Unemployment Panic Is Economically Illiterate Let me lay this out with full rigor, because this argument deserves to be prosecuted completely rather than waved away with a sound bite. I. What the Lump of Labor Fallacy Actually Is The lump of labor fallacy is the assumption that there exists a fixed, finite quantity of work in an economy — a lump — such that if a machine (or an immigrant, or a woman entering the workforce) does some of it, there is necessarily less left for human workers to do. It treats employment as a zero-sum pie. The fallacy was named and formalized in the early 20th century but the error it describes is far older. It animated the Luddite riots of 1811–1816, where English textile workers destroyed power looms convinced that the machines would steal their jobs permanently. It drove opposition to the spinning jenny, the cotton gin, the mechanical reaper, the steam engine, the telegraph, the railroad, the automobile assembly line, the personal computer, and every other major labor-displacing technology in the history of industrial civilization. Every single time, the catastrophists were wrong. Not partially wrong. Structurally, fundamentally, categorically wrong — because they misunderstood the nature of economic production itself. The reason the fixed-pie assumption fails is this: demand is not fixed. Work generates income. Income generates demand for goods and services. Demand for goods and services generates new categories of work. This is an engine, not a reservoir. When you drain some of the reservoir with a machine, the engine speeds up and refills it — and often refills it past its previous level. II. The Classical Economic Mechanism That Destroys the Fallacy To understand why the lump-of-labor assumption is wrong about AGI, you need to understand the precise mechanism by which technological unemployment resolves itself. There are four distinct channels, all operating simultaneously: Channel 1: The Productivity-Demand Feedback Loop (Say’s Law, Modified) When a technology increases the productivity of labor or replaces labor entirely in a given task, it lowers the cost of producing whatever that task was part of. Lower production costs mean either: ∙Lower prices for consumers (real purchasing power rises), or ∙Higher profits for producers (which get reinvested, distributed as dividends, or spent as wages for other workers), or ∙Both. Either way, aggregate real income in the economy rises. That additional real income does not evaporate. It gets spent on something — including goods and services that didn’t previously exist or were previously too expensive to consume at scale. That spending creates demand. That demand creates jobs. This is not a theoretical conjecture. The average American in 1900 spent roughly 43% of their income on food. Today it’s around 10%. Agricultural mechanization didn’t produce a nation of starving unemployed farm laborers — it freed up 33% of household income to be spent on automobiles, television sets, air conditioning, healthcare, education, travel, smartphones, and streaming services, most of which didn’t exist as industries in 1900. The workers who left farms went to factories, then to offices, then to service industries, then to information industries. The economy didn’t run out of work. It metamorphosed.

Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸 @pmarca

6 months ago

AI employment doomerism is rooted in the socialist fallacy of lump of labor. It is wrong now for the same reason it’s always been wrong. More people really should try to learn about this. The AI will teach you about it if you ask! (Hinton is a socialist. youtube.com/shorts/R-b8RR6…)

336 191 3K 1.8M 778

312 479 3K 557K 3K

View Details

Everhard Ortega @everhard___

6 months ago

Share the feeling

Demis Hassabis @demishassabis

6 months ago

It’s 2am again, my favourite time, and as always reality is still staring me in the face 🧐

367 615 7K 812K 2K

0 0 0 34 0

View Details

Everhard Ortega @everhard___

6 months ago

0 0 0 28 0

View Details

Everhard Ortega @everhard___

9 months ago

This will be massive across every industry

Jared Friedman @snowmaker

9 months ago

This new model lets you talk to an AI you can see, just like a video call. In two years this will be common, but for now it is a pretty magical experience to talk to an AI that looks like a person.

14 12 125 49K 79

0 0 0 41 0

View Details

Everhard Ortega @everhard___

11 months ago

@pmarca @grok explain meme

1 0 0 4 0

View Details

Aesthetics 𝕏 @aestheticsguyy

a year ago

Tap, hold and load in 4K 🔥

1K 18K 376K 68.0M 47K

View Details

Grok @grok

a year ago

As of August 4, 2025, the top 10 S&P 500 companies by market cap weighting are: 1. NVIDIA (NVDA) ~8.1% 2. Microsoft (MSFT) ~7.3% 3. Apple (AAPL) ~5.8% 4. Amazon (AMZN) ~3.9% 5. Alphabet Class A (GOOGL) ~2.3% 6. Meta Platforms (META) ~2.2% 7. Alphabet Class C (GOOG) ~1.9% 8. Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.B) ~1.7% 9. Eli Lilly (LLY) ~1.6% 10. Tesla (TSLA) ~1.5% (Source: Aggregated from recent financial data.)

2 4 22 6K 32

View Details

Everhard Ortega @everhard___

a year ago

The next billion-user use case for AI? Here is a Sunday use case for ChatGPT … asking for the best product in a category Massive leverage. Trivial interface. 📸👇 #AIinPublic #defaultalive

0 0 0 34 0

View Details

Everhard Ortega @everhard___

2 years ago

Those alien pyramids in the middle of MPK would actually be interesting to see 😂

0 0 0 45 0

View Details

Everhard Ortega @everhard___

2 years ago

@yashdulla @ycombinator Sounds passive aggressive but it’s real 😂

0 0 2 144 0

View Details

Everhard Ortega @everhard___

2 years ago

“Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength, while loving someone deeply gives you courage. But being understood by someone is everything.” – Lao Tzu