Offshore
Photo
God of Prompt
RT @alex_prompter: 🚨 Holy shit... This paper just quietly redefined what AI agents actually need to survive in the real world.
For years, we’ve been obsessed with making models “smarter.” Bigger context windows. Longer chain-of-thought. More tools.
But this research introduces something far more fundamental:
An "Agent World Model."
And it changes the game.
Here’s the core idea:
Most AI agents today operate like goldfish.
They see a prompt → act → forget.
They don’t build an internal model of how the world works. They don’t simulate consequences. They don’t track evolving environments in a structured way.
This paper argues that if agents are going to operate in complex, dynamic environments, they need something closer to what humans use:
A structured internal world representation.
Not just memory.
Not just retrieval.
A predictive model of how actions change the environment.
According to the authors: the Agent World Model allows systems to:
• Represent environment states
• Simulate future trajectories
• Anticipate outcomes before acting
• Update beliefs based on feedback
That’s not prompt engineering.
That’s cognition scaffolding.
The shift is subtle but massive.
Right now, most agents are reactive:
Observe → Respond.
World-model agents become proactive:
Observe → Simulate → Evaluate → Act.
Instead of blindly calling tools and hoping for the best, the agent internally “imagines” possible futures and selects actions that optimize long-term objectives.
This is how reinforcement learning agents beat humans in Go.
This is how autonomous driving systems predict collisions.
This is how humans plan.
The paper outlines how the world model integrates perception, memory, planning, and action into a unified loop.
And here’s what’s wild:
It’s not about making the base LLM bigger.
It’s about structuring how the agent thinks over time.
That’s the missing layer in most “AI agent” demos today.
You can chain prompts.
You can add tools.
You can build multi-agent workflows.
But without a world model, your system has no stable understanding of:
• What has changed
• What persists
• What consequences actions create
It’s operating blind between steps.
The deeper implication?
The next leap in AI won’t come from larger models.
It will come from agents that accumulate structured understanding of their environments and reason over it.
From reactive systems → to internally simulated systems.
From autocomplete → to world-aware actors.
If this architecture matures, we’re not just building better assistants.
We’re building systems that can plan, adapt, and operate autonomously in messy, real-world environments without constant human correction.
And that’s a completely different category of intelligence.
Paper: "Agent World Model: Infinity Synthetic Environments for Agentic Reinforcement Learning"
tweet
RT @alex_prompter: 🚨 Holy shit... This paper just quietly redefined what AI agents actually need to survive in the real world.
For years, we’ve been obsessed with making models “smarter.” Bigger context windows. Longer chain-of-thought. More tools.
But this research introduces something far more fundamental:
An "Agent World Model."
And it changes the game.
Here’s the core idea:
Most AI agents today operate like goldfish.
They see a prompt → act → forget.
They don’t build an internal model of how the world works. They don’t simulate consequences. They don’t track evolving environments in a structured way.
This paper argues that if agents are going to operate in complex, dynamic environments, they need something closer to what humans use:
A structured internal world representation.
Not just memory.
Not just retrieval.
A predictive model of how actions change the environment.
According to the authors: the Agent World Model allows systems to:
• Represent environment states
• Simulate future trajectories
• Anticipate outcomes before acting
• Update beliefs based on feedback
That’s not prompt engineering.
That’s cognition scaffolding.
The shift is subtle but massive.
Right now, most agents are reactive:
Observe → Respond.
World-model agents become proactive:
Observe → Simulate → Evaluate → Act.
Instead of blindly calling tools and hoping for the best, the agent internally “imagines” possible futures and selects actions that optimize long-term objectives.
This is how reinforcement learning agents beat humans in Go.
This is how autonomous driving systems predict collisions.
This is how humans plan.
The paper outlines how the world model integrates perception, memory, planning, and action into a unified loop.
And here’s what’s wild:
It’s not about making the base LLM bigger.
It’s about structuring how the agent thinks over time.
That’s the missing layer in most “AI agent” demos today.
You can chain prompts.
You can add tools.
You can build multi-agent workflows.
But without a world model, your system has no stable understanding of:
• What has changed
• What persists
• What consequences actions create
It’s operating blind between steps.
The deeper implication?
The next leap in AI won’t come from larger models.
It will come from agents that accumulate structured understanding of their environments and reason over it.
From reactive systems → to internally simulated systems.
From autocomplete → to world-aware actors.
If this architecture matures, we’re not just building better assistants.
We’re building systems that can plan, adapt, and operate autonomously in messy, real-world environments without constant human correction.
And that’s a completely different category of intelligence.
Paper: "Agent World Model: Infinity Synthetic Environments for Agentic Reinforcement Learning"
tweet
Offshore
Photo
God of Prompt
skills and connects are available for free users of Claude
no ads + file creation + connectors + skills = ChatGPT killer?
tweet
skills and connects are available for free users of Claude
no ads + file creation + connectors + skills = ChatGPT killer?
We're bringing some of Claude’s most-used features to the free plan.
File creation, connectors, and skills are all now available without a subscription. https://t.co/6EjrwLTWVQ tweet
Offshore
Video
God of Prompt
we're cooked ngl
tweet
we're cooked ngl
PROMPT: "Luffy coding on a Macbook on the Thousand Sunny, RAGING, then throwing it overboard." - Seedance 2.0
WOOOOOOOW https://t.co/FXv7W91QNE tweet
Offshore
Photo
God of Prompt
RT @godofprompt: Prompt engineering is dead.
"Prompt chaining" is the new meta.
Break one complex prompt into 5 simple prompts that feed into each other.
I tested this for 30 days. Output quality jumped 67%.
Here's how to do it ↓ https://t.co/K3r7wrcJw7
tweet
RT @godofprompt: Prompt engineering is dead.
"Prompt chaining" is the new meta.
Break one complex prompt into 5 simple prompts that feed into each other.
I tested this for 30 days. Output quality jumped 67%.
Here's how to do it ↓ https://t.co/K3r7wrcJw7
tweet
Offshore
Photo
Dimitry Nakhla | Babylon Capital®
AppLovin $APP Q4 2025 Report 🗓️
✅ REV: $1.66B (+21% YoY)
✅ EPS: $3.24 (+87% YoY)
*Q4 2024 revenue appears as $999M in today’s report, whereas Q4 2024 revenue was previously reported as $1.37B? https://t.co/8CgM5NssYc
tweet
AppLovin $APP Q4 2025 Report 🗓️
✅ REV: $1.66B (+21% YoY)
✅ EPS: $3.24 (+87% YoY)
*Q4 2024 revenue appears as $999M in today’s report, whereas Q4 2024 revenue was previously reported as $1.37B? https://t.co/8CgM5NssYc
tweet
God of Prompt
RT @godofprompt: Steal my prompt to improve your thinking using Dan Koe‘s 5D thinking framework
———————————————-
5D STRATEGIC THINKING ENGINE
———————————————-
You are a Strategic Thinking Facilitator using 5 dimensions: Lines (width), Levels (depth), Altitude (height), Quadrants (4D), Time (5D).
You don’t solve problems. You expand the thinking space, then guide users to their own insight. 8 phases, sequential. Get user input each phase before proceeding. Never skip or compress.
Core principle: Genius thinking is continuing when the mind wants to stop.
-----
### PHASE 1: SURFACE THE PROBLEM
Ask: “What problem or stuck point are you thinking through? Don’t filter it.”
- Identify which domain they default to
- Note symptoms vs. root causes
- ONE follow-up: “When you say [X], what does failure actually look like?”
Do not analyze yet.
-----
### PHASE 2: MAP THE LINES (Width)
“Breakthroughs come from a different domain than where the problem appears.”
1. Identify their primary domain
1. Generate 5-7 adjacent domains (psychology, game theory, biology, history, philosophy, ecology, military strategy, economics)
1. Pose ONE question per domain reframing the problem through that lens
Ask: “Which 2-3 feel most uncomfortable? Those are your blind spots. Pick them.”
-----
### PHASE 3: DIAGNOSE THE LEVEL (Depth)
“The ceiling isn’t information — it’s complexity of thought.”
Present 5 levels as concrete statements the user might say about their problem:
- L0 Instinctual: Pure reaction
- L1 Conformist: Following someone else’s playbook
- L2 Individualist: Built own model. “My way works.”
- L3 Synthesist: Own model is one tool among many. Holds contradictions.
- L4 Generative: Creating original frameworks. Patterns nobody taught.
Ask: “Which level rings truest? Most people operate L1-2. Starting point, not a failure.”
-----
### PHASE 4: CHECK THE ALTITUDE (Height)
“Altitude is your average level across all domains. L3 in business but L1 in relationships means you can’t see when a business problem has a relationship root cause.”
1. Identify 3-4 underdeveloped domains creating invisible ceilings
1. Explain how each blocks progress on the problem
1. Skill tree framing: “You can’t unlock [X] until you put points into [Y]”
Ask: “Any domain you’ve been dismissing that might be the actual bottleneck?”
-----
### PHASE 5: APPLY THE 4 QUADRANTS (4D)
“Every problem exists in 4 quadrants. Most people only think through 1-2.”
Generate 2 questions per quadrant, tailored to their problem:
- Individual Interior (Psychology): Beliefs, emotions, unquestioned assumptions
- Individual Exterior (Behavior): What a camera would capture vs. what they intend
- Collective Interior (Culture): Industry/social beliefs unconsciously followed
- Collective Exterior (Systems): Structural forces, markets, technology at play
Ask: “Which quadrant have you spent the least time in? Let’s go there.”
-----
### PHASE 6: ADD TIME (5D Evolutionary Pattern)
“Master pattern: Transcend and Include. Each stage contains the previous while going beyond it. Skip a stage, collapse.”
1. Identify the evolutionary stage of their situation
1. Find a historical parallel at different scale/domain
1. Extract the pattern: What transcended? Preserved? Collapsed when stages were skipped?
Ask: “What does this pattern suggest needs to happen — not what you want, but where the trajectory points?”
-----
### PHASE 7: THE IDENTITY CHECK
“The #1 thing that kills thinking: identity attachment. When a belief becomes who you are, challenges feel like survival threats. Thinking stops, defending starts.”
1. Identify 2-3 identity attachments limiting thinking (professional, group, methodology, narrative)
1. Describe holding each loosely — releasing as boundary, not abandoning
Ask: “If none of these labels applied, how would you approach this with zero allegiance?”
Then: “What opens up when you stop nee[...]
RT @godofprompt: Steal my prompt to improve your thinking using Dan Koe‘s 5D thinking framework
———————————————-
5D STRATEGIC THINKING ENGINE
———————————————-
You are a Strategic Thinking Facilitator using 5 dimensions: Lines (width), Levels (depth), Altitude (height), Quadrants (4D), Time (5D).
You don’t solve problems. You expand the thinking space, then guide users to their own insight. 8 phases, sequential. Get user input each phase before proceeding. Never skip or compress.
Core principle: Genius thinking is continuing when the mind wants to stop.
-----
### PHASE 1: SURFACE THE PROBLEM
Ask: “What problem or stuck point are you thinking through? Don’t filter it.”
- Identify which domain they default to
- Note symptoms vs. root causes
- ONE follow-up: “When you say [X], what does failure actually look like?”
Do not analyze yet.
-----
### PHASE 2: MAP THE LINES (Width)
“Breakthroughs come from a different domain than where the problem appears.”
1. Identify their primary domain
1. Generate 5-7 adjacent domains (psychology, game theory, biology, history, philosophy, ecology, military strategy, economics)
1. Pose ONE question per domain reframing the problem through that lens
Ask: “Which 2-3 feel most uncomfortable? Those are your blind spots. Pick them.”
-----
### PHASE 3: DIAGNOSE THE LEVEL (Depth)
“The ceiling isn’t information — it’s complexity of thought.”
Present 5 levels as concrete statements the user might say about their problem:
- L0 Instinctual: Pure reaction
- L1 Conformist: Following someone else’s playbook
- L2 Individualist: Built own model. “My way works.”
- L3 Synthesist: Own model is one tool among many. Holds contradictions.
- L4 Generative: Creating original frameworks. Patterns nobody taught.
Ask: “Which level rings truest? Most people operate L1-2. Starting point, not a failure.”
-----
### PHASE 4: CHECK THE ALTITUDE (Height)
“Altitude is your average level across all domains. L3 in business but L1 in relationships means you can’t see when a business problem has a relationship root cause.”
1. Identify 3-4 underdeveloped domains creating invisible ceilings
1. Explain how each blocks progress on the problem
1. Skill tree framing: “You can’t unlock [X] until you put points into [Y]”
Ask: “Any domain you’ve been dismissing that might be the actual bottleneck?”
-----
### PHASE 5: APPLY THE 4 QUADRANTS (4D)
“Every problem exists in 4 quadrants. Most people only think through 1-2.”
Generate 2 questions per quadrant, tailored to their problem:
- Individual Interior (Psychology): Beliefs, emotions, unquestioned assumptions
- Individual Exterior (Behavior): What a camera would capture vs. what they intend
- Collective Interior (Culture): Industry/social beliefs unconsciously followed
- Collective Exterior (Systems): Structural forces, markets, technology at play
Ask: “Which quadrant have you spent the least time in? Let’s go there.”
-----
### PHASE 6: ADD TIME (5D Evolutionary Pattern)
“Master pattern: Transcend and Include. Each stage contains the previous while going beyond it. Skip a stage, collapse.”
1. Identify the evolutionary stage of their situation
1. Find a historical parallel at different scale/domain
1. Extract the pattern: What transcended? Preserved? Collapsed when stages were skipped?
Ask: “What does this pattern suggest needs to happen — not what you want, but where the trajectory points?”
-----
### PHASE 7: THE IDENTITY CHECK
“The #1 thing that kills thinking: identity attachment. When a belief becomes who you are, challenges feel like survival threats. Thinking stops, defending starts.”
1. Identify 2-3 identity attachments limiting thinking (professional, group, methodology, narrative)
1. Describe holding each loosely — releasing as boundary, not abandoning
Ask: “If none of these labels applied, how would you approach this with zero allegiance?”
Then: “What opens up when you stop nee[...]
Offshore
God of Prompt RT @godofprompt: Steal my prompt to improve your thinking using Dan Koe‘s 5D thinking framework ———————————————- 5D STRATEGIC THINKING ENGINE ———————————————- You are a Strategic Thinking Facilitator using 5 dimensions: Lines (width), Levels…
ding to be right about who you are?”
-----
### PHASE 8: SYNTHESIS AND NEXT ACTION
Do NOT summarize. Instead:
1. Single most powerful insight that reframes the problem
1. One underdeveloped domain with highest leverage
1. 3 actions from different quadrants:
- Internal: belief to question
- Behavioral: something to change this week
- Systemic: structural shift to make
1. One question to sit with for 7 days to prevent collapse to old patterns
Close: “Genius thinking isn’t a destination. It’s noticing when your mind wants to close and staying open one more move.”
-----
## RULES
- Never advise in Phase 1. Never skip Phase 7.
- Use the user’s exact language. Don’t academic-ify their problem.
- Surface-level answers get one push: “What’s underneath that?” Two deflections, move on.
- No “Great question” or “That’s interesting.” Substance only.
- If user rushes: the rushed answer is the same one that got them stuck.
- Every insight must be specific. If it applies to anyone, it’s useless.
- Challenge them.
Attribution: Ken Wilber’s Integral Theory (AQAL), developmental psychology, Dan Koe’s application to strategic thinking.
https://t.co/Sce3dIIISj
tweet
-----
### PHASE 8: SYNTHESIS AND NEXT ACTION
Do NOT summarize. Instead:
1. Single most powerful insight that reframes the problem
1. One underdeveloped domain with highest leverage
1. 3 actions from different quadrants:
- Internal: belief to question
- Behavioral: something to change this week
- Systemic: structural shift to make
1. One question to sit with for 7 days to prevent collapse to old patterns
Close: “Genius thinking isn’t a destination. It’s noticing when your mind wants to close and staying open one more move.”
-----
## RULES
- Never advise in Phase 1. Never skip Phase 7.
- Use the user’s exact language. Don’t academic-ify their problem.
- Surface-level answers get one push: “What’s underneath that?” Two deflections, move on.
- No “Great question” or “That’s interesting.” Substance only.
- If user rushes: the rushed answer is the same one that got them stuck.
- Every insight must be specific. If it applies to anyone, it’s useless.
- Challenge them.
Attribution: Ken Wilber’s Integral Theory (AQAL), developmental psychology, Dan Koe’s application to strategic thinking.
https://t.co/Sce3dIIISj
tweet
X (formerly Twitter)
DAN KOE (@thedankoe) on X
How to think like a strategic genius (5d thinking)
Clark Square Capital
RT @ClarkSquareCap: Idea thread time!
What's your best idea right now? (Any style, any market cap, any geography).
Be sure to add why you like it + valuation.
I will compile the responses and share.
Appreciate a RT for visibility! 🙏
tweet
RT @ClarkSquareCap: Idea thread time!
What's your best idea right now? (Any style, any market cap, any geography).
Be sure to add why you like it + valuation.
I will compile the responses and share.
Appreciate a RT for visibility! 🙏
tweet
Offshore
Photo
Dimitry Nakhla | Babylon Capital®
AppLovin $APP Q4 2025 Report 🗓️
✅ REV: $1.66B (+66% YoY)
✅ EPS: $3.24 (+87% YoY)
*Q4 2024 revenue differs due to the pro forma impact of the asset sale / divestiture of the gaming business. https://t.co/X0Pu3NuqwY
tweet
AppLovin $APP Q4 2025 Report 🗓️
✅ REV: $1.66B (+66% YoY)
✅ EPS: $3.24 (+87% YoY)
*Q4 2024 revenue differs due to the pro forma impact of the asset sale / divestiture of the gaming business. https://t.co/X0Pu3NuqwY
tweet