Register and share your invite link to earn from video plays and referrals.

Search results for Nudge
Nudge community
One keyword maps to one global community path.
Create community
People
Not Found
Tweets including Nudge
⏩ A 30% nudge on the charts and numbers are going wild! Astros Perps registered over $50M in $SUI volume in the last 24h! Astronauts are hungry for action and it shows.
A quick Mini-Workout nudge for Mega Benefits. Reset in minutes with HUAWEI Watch FIT 5 Series!
While the agent works toward its goal, another agent and I review its work in a sidecar, check the results, and feed nudges back into the main agent with the scaffold setup with skill goal-forge ( @thsottiaux do you think this is a feature worth adding to Codex Goal?
Show more
Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson decide to go on a camping trip. After dinner and a bottle of wine, they lie down and go to sleep. Some hours later, Holmes wakes up and nudges his faithful friend. “Watson, look up at the sky and tell me what you see.” Watson replies, “I see millions of stars.” “And what does that tell you?” Watson thinks for a moment. “Astronomically, it tells me there are millions of galaxies and potentially billions of planets. Astrologically, I observe that Saturn is in Leo. Chronologically, I deduce it’s about a quarter past three. Theologically, I see that God is all powerful and we are small and insignificant. Meteorologically, I suspect we’ll have a beautiful day tomorrow. What does it tell you, Holmes?” Holmes is silent for a moment, then says: “Watson… you idiot. Someone has stolen our tent.”
Show more
🚨 Today's the last day for early bird pricing on #RustConf# 2026. If you've been thinking about it, this is the nudge. Register before 11:59pm Eastern to attend the flagship annual #rustlang# conference at the lowest rate:
Show more
A retired plumber in Nebraska beat the CIA at predicting foreign elections in 2013. A 22 year old college dropout beat every pollster in America in 2024. A 9 billion dollar prediction market called Polymarket is now telling you whether the AI bubble bursts this year, whether the US enters a recession, and whether Anthropic overtakes OpenAI before December. They are all using the same 4-step technique a Berkeley professor proved actually works in a 20 year experiment that should have ended the careers of half the experts on television. His name is Philip Tetlock. In the late 1980s he started collecting predictions from 284 experts. Political scientists. Economists. CIA-adjacent analysts. People paid their entire careers to forecast geopolitics. Over 20 years he gathered 28,000 predictions. Then he scored them. The result destroyed an entire profession. The average expert was barely better than chance. The famous ones, the ones with the most media appearances and the loudest voices, were the worst of the group. The more confident the voice, the worse the score. Buried in his data was something nobody else had emphasized. Fewer than 2% of forecasters were dramatically better than the rest. Year after year. Across domains they had no training in. In 2011 the US intelligence community gave him his chance to prove it at scale. Still bruised from missing Iraq, IARPA ran a 4 year tournament on 500 geopolitical questions. Will North Korea launch a missile. Will Russia invade. The intelligence analysts had classified intercepts. Tetlock's team had retired plumbers and ballroom dancers. Tetlock's team won by 35 to 72 percent against the other academic teams. His top forecasters scored 30 percent better than the CIA reading classified data. A retired pipe installer in Nebraska was outpredicting the intelligence community using only the newspaper. The technique sits in his book in plain language and almost nobody applies it. It starts with a method invented by Enrico Fermi during the Manhattan Project. Fermi handed students problems that looked impossible. How many piano tuners are there in Chicago. He did not want a guess. He wanted them to break the question into smaller questions they could actually estimate. Each sub-estimate was rough. Multiplied together, they landed remarkably close to the truth. Superforecasters Fermi-ize everything. They never try to predict a complex event directly. They shatter it into smaller questions where base rates are knowable, then reassemble the pieces. The second move is the outside view. Most people, asked whether a startup will survive or a war will end by a date, dive into the specific details. Story details feel useful. They are not. Superforecasters first ask how often events of this general type happen across history. The story comes last, not first. The third move is what most people refuse to do. Superforecasters update their predictions constantly, in tiny increments. Not dramatic reversals. Small honest nudges. They move like a Bayesian. Most people move like a teenager defending a position. The fourth move is the one that hits closest. Superforecasters express predictions as actual numbers. Not "likely" or "probably." 62 percent. 18 percent. Vague language is unfalsifiable. A number forces accountability, and accountability is the engine of accuracy. Polymarket is the same idea scaled to a hundred thousand strangers with real money on the line. In the final weeks of the 2024 US presidential election, every major pollster called the race a coin flip. FiveThirtyEight had Harris at 50 to 49. Nate Silver had her at 48.6 to 47.6. Polymarket had Trump at 58 to 42 the morning of the election. By midnight, while networks still refused to call swing states, Polymarket was at 97 percent. In late 2025 the New York Stock Exchange invested 2 billion dollars in the platform. Polymarket is now valued at 9 billion. The largest stock exchange in the world is integrating prediction prices directly into the data feed traders use to make decisions. The plumber did not have classified intercepts. The college dropout did not have a polling model. Polymarket does not have an algorithm nobody else can see. They all have the same thing. A method that forces you to write a number on paper, attach a date, and let the world watch you be wrong. In 2026 the gap between people who price the future and people who narrate it is going to be the most expensive gap in the world to be on the wrong side of.
Show more