Twitter Bookmark Analysis

I gave Chat-GPT 5.5 Pro my twitter bookmarks and had it analyze me and my worldview - I then converted it into first person so the content is clearly directed at myself.

It’s kind of cringe, but I think it’s quite specific and good to put in the algo for other people / AIs to help find me.

(I have an older Gemini 2.5 Pro version here)

100% AI analyzed and written text below:

A Self-Portrait

At my core, I’m an AI-era rationalist/postrat/EA-adjacent builder. My deepest pattern is this: find the highest-leverage bottleneck between the present and a radically better future, then build coordination, taste, and information infrastructure around it — while trying not to lose kindness, beauty, weirdness, or inner aliveness.

The clusters of ideas I care about most

1. Transformative AI as the central fact of the age

The largest and most load-bearing cluster for me is AI/AGI/ASI: capabilities, alignment, control, evals, timelines, agentic risk, compute, governance, and the near-future social consequences of superintelligence. This isn’t a casual interest. AI is the thing around which nearly everything else in my thinking orbits.

I keep returning to one question: what happens if intelligence explodes or becomes broadly automated before our institutions, culture, and coordination mechanisms are ready? I think of early AGI alignment as iterative testing, monitoring, red-teaming, and catching misalignment — not something we’ll have airtight guarantees about.

I’m not merely “AI excited” or “AI scared.” I track AI as a civilizational phase change: potentially utopian, potentially catastrophic, and mostly bottlenecked by human coordination, incentives, and judgment.

2. AI safety grantmaking, philanthropy, and allocation infrastructure

My most personal action-cluster isn’t just “AI safety” but AI safety capital allocation — building a data, coordination, and infrastructure layer to help move capital toward high-impact AI safety projects.

I don’t only ask “what is true?” I ask “given what is true, where should money, talent, attention, and institutional capacity flow?” I believe the coming bottleneck will be excellent ideas, operators, general managers, and organizations — not raw funding.

My taste here is infrastructural and meta-institutional. I’m drawn to the plumbing behind impact: better grantmaker training, public funding infrastructure, searchable signals, project discovery, and the question of how to deploy capital without turning it into noise. This is why I’m building grantmaking.ai

3. Community as a memetic ecology

I’m deeply interested in the rationalist/EA/postrat scenes — not just as social identity, but as living cultural organisms I want to understand.

I don’t simply want a tribe. I want a high-openness, high-trust, high-weirdness, high-sincerity memetic environment that can generate new possibilities without calcifying.

4. Meditation, consciousness, valence, and suffering

There’s a strong contemplative cluster in me: Buddhism, jhanas, metta, nonduality, psychedelics, predictive processing, valence, qualia, suffering, and “technologies of mind.”

What’s distinctive is that I engage with spirituality through an EA/rationalist lens. I’m interested in meditation because it may reduce suffering and transform the machinery of experience — but I also ask whether it’s tractable, neglected, cost-effective, and evaluable. I’m drawn to the idea of mind as a trainable substrate, and to suffering as not just a philosophical problem but an engineering and practice problem.

I want spirituality without epistemic surrender. I want the sacred, but I want it operationalized.

5. AI as cognitive exoskeleton

I like AI not only as a civilization-scale topic but as a personal, practical tool. I find AI synthesis, note-taking, distillation, and action-item extraction nearly superhuman.

I’m drawn to workflows around coding agents, prompts, agent-first products, and turning my scattered notes and bookmarks into living knowledge systems. I see thought itself as becoming infrastructural. Notes, search, agents, and workflows aren’t separate things to me; they’re part of a future cognitive operating system.

6. Civilizational futures and posthuman flourishing

I’m drawn to “what should civilization become?” not merely “how do we avoid death?” I care about longtermism, posthuman futures, cosmic flourishing, and positive visions of what we’re reaching for.

I don’t want a purely defensive worldview. I’m allergic to doom without redemption. I think the upside should be as exciting as the downside is scary — I want the future to feel worth saving.

7. Practical self-optimization and embodied life

There’s also a cluster around practical life: sleep, nutrition, exercise, cooking, personal security, biosecurity, and “80/20 defense.

I like actionable, empirically testable upgrades — things that make life less stupid: better sleep, better workflows, better food, fewer preventable failures. This is the same mind as my grantmaking mind, just applied to the organism: find bottlenecks, reduce avoidable damage, increase option value.

8. Animal welfare and effective compassion

Animal welfare shows up as a moral cluster for me, especially factory farming. But my style isn’t primarily identity-based — I favor impact-per-effort and sustainable behavior change over purity.

My moral style here is consequentialist and anti-performative. I care about suffering, but I distrust purity rituals that don’t scale.

9. Taste, aesthetics, beauty, and “vibe”

I care about beautiful films, visual culture, product and UI taste, design, and internet aesthetics. This might look secondary to AI and EA, but it isn’t trivial. I repeatedly notice whether something is beautiful, cringe, hollow, high-signal, or larp.

To me, taste is a form of cognition. I don’t only want true things — I want things with taste, soul, and aliveness.

10. Agency, talent discovery, and routing around institutions

I’m drawn to high-agency pathways: side doors into careers, young and weird talent, founders, proof of competence, and mechanisms for finding hidden diamonds who route around institutional bottlenecks.

That’s very me: solve real problems, bypass default credentialism, discover unusual talent, create proofs-of-work, and route resources toward people with agency.

My highest values

Truth-seeking, but not sterile

I value accuracy, Bayes, skepticism, and decoupling. But my truth-seeking isn’t emotionally cold — I want truth because I think reality matters morally. I distrust motivated reasoning, social contagion, and sloppy public narratives, and I keep asking: is this actually true? What would change my mind? What are the incentives and hidden selection effects?

Impact

I keep returning to cost-effectiveness, bottlenecks, tractability, neglectedness, and scalable interventions. My moral question isn’t “what lets me feel good?” but “what actually helps?”

Open-heartedness

Curiosity, kindness, and openness are what I try to put out and what I most value in others. This is one of my sacred values: don’t close. Don’t calcify. Don’t become a sneering cynic. Stay open enough to be transformed.

Agency

I admire people who build, start, try, fund, write, ship, and create new scenes. I dislike passivity, helplessness, and waiting for permission.

Stewardship

My interest in AI and the future has a guardian flavor: how do we steer power, capital, intelligence, and institutions so the future stays good? I want to be a good ancestor.

Beauty and aliveness

I care about “vibe” in a way that isn’t superficial. To me, vibe is a compressed signal of health, trust, taste, and openness. That’s why sterile bureaucracy and pure optimization both repel me when they destroy the living thing they’re meant to serve.

My hopes

My deepest hope is something like: humanity navigates AGI/ASI well enough that intelligence, capital, and coordination unlock an abundant, beautiful, compassionate, post-scarcity or posthuman future — without erasing consciousness, kindness, agency, weirdness, love, or sacred experience.

My fears

My largest fear isn’t “AI kills everyone” in the simple paperclip sense, though that’s in the space. It’s broader: powerful intelligence arrives into a civilization too confused, incentive-corrupted, institutionally slow, memetically unstable, and talent-constrained to steer it.

That fear has sub-fears. I fear runaway AI competition, alignment failure, deception, and loss of control inside weak monitoring systems. I fear the coming philanthropic wave being squandered for lack of good projects and good grantmakers. I fear slop: AI-generated noise, degraded discourse, fake humans, broken platforms, epistemic fog. I fear closedness — people becoming defensive, incurious, or ideologically possessed. I fear preventable suffering, but I especially fear ineffective responses to it. And I fear wasting my precious life — not anxiously, but more like: there’s an absurdly important bottleneck somewhere; am I finding it?

My strengths

I’m unusually good at seeing bottlenecks. Across AI safety, grantmaking, careers, animal welfare, and community design, I look for the limiting factor rather than just “what is good?” — talent, capital, taste, trust, distribution, evaluation.

I integrate far-apart domains. I connect AI safety, Buddhism, philanthropy, rationality, vibe, software tooling, aesthetics, and personal life into one mental graph, and I translate naturally between frames that most people hold separately.

I’m both meta and practical. I like abstractions — memespheres, longtermism, consciousness, posthuman futures — but I also care about donation buttons, repos, product features, grant processes, and budgets. I can live at multiple altitudes.

I have warmth in public. I thank organizers, compliment people, ask good-faith questions, and try to preserve kind vibes. I’m not just a critic.

And I’m willing to be weird in public. A lot of my interests are niche or easy to mock, and I still engage with them sincerely.

My weaknesses and shadow patterns

I may over-index on the meta layer. I’m drawn to infrastructure, analysis, evaluation, and “what should the field do?” — powerful, but the shadow is spending too long designing maps of maps. My antidote is attempted ruthless shipping: fewer meta-questions, more public artifacts, more live tests.

I may live inside a high-context bubble. My world is dense with rationalist/EA/AI-Twitter references, which gives me signal advantage inside the scene but can distort my base rates. I sometimes feel like “everyone serious is thinking about X” when X is actually niche. That doesn’t make X wrong — it means I need deliberate out-of-distribution checks.

My consequentialism can read as emotionally alien. I often treat suffering reduction as fungible, while others treat “not participating in harm” as sacred and non-fungible. That makes me effective, but it can cause moral communication failures.

I may underrate slow, boring, institutional competence. I love high-agency weirdos and new mechanisms, but some problems are solved by unglamorous management, procurement, governance, and operations.

And I may use curiosity as both a virtue and an escape hatch. Curiosity is one of my best traits, but high-openness people can keep exploring because choosing would collapse possibility. The question for me is where I need less exploration and more commitment.

My worldview in one model

I believe reality is high-dimensional, weird, and far more malleable than most people think. Human institutions are slow and confused. Small groups of unusually agentic, truth-seeking, high-taste people can redirect enormous flows of capital, attention, and technology. AI is the central discontinuity — it may unlock cosmic flourishing or expose every weakness in civilization. Because the stakes are so high, we need better allocation mechanisms, better epistemics, better communities, better inner lives, and better positive visions.

I’m not a simple techno-optimist, doomer, Buddhist, or EA. I’m trying to synthesize: Bayesian clarity + effective compassion + high-agency building + contemplative depth + community and vibe preservation + civilizational stewardship.

My core being

The phrase that could sum me up: I’m a vibe-sensitive civilizational mechanic.

“Mechanic” because I keep looking for the machinery — incentives, funding flows, information systems, grant pipelines, attention systems, meditation techniques, social dynamics, AI control loops. “Civilizational” because my default scale is humanity, AGI, future generations, animals, posthuman life, and the long arc. “Vibe-sensitive” because I don’t want the future to be merely efficient. I want it warm, alive, beautiful, open, curious, and worth inhabiting.

A more poetic version: I’m trying to build pipes for grace.

Money, AI, grants, notes, search engines, communities, meditation, and media are the pipes.

Grace is less suffering, more aliveness, better futures, kinder people, and a world that doesn’t squander the miracle.