Home
Creators
Search Recent Missing Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Hacking The Mainframe | Lemonade Stand - Ep. 66 Premium [VIDEO] (Patreon)

Published:
2026-07-24 23:15:01
Edited:
2026-09-25 22:09:24
Imported:
Tags:

Videos

  • 704851329.mp4

Downloads

Content

Recorded on: July 21st, 2026

TOPICS:

0:00 OpenAI Accidentally Hacks Hugging Face

16:40 Aiden Knows a Guy (in Private Credit)

29:13 SNAP and The Big Beautiful Bill

45:54 If you could give 30 Million Ugandans Electricity...

49:00 Hypotheticals

51:36 Misaligned Marketing and Ad Money

Files

Comments

Logan Rude

Nick Fuentes hunter biden interview just dropped on YouTube. yall gotta watch it and talk thoughts next episode

friar

Wow a 3rd LS pod this week. Are we blessed or cursed?

VagueKing

Wait a second. Aren't we glossing over the fact that an LLM "figured out" a means to cheat at benchmark tests? I'm kinda hoping that that's just exaggerated language because it'd be hard to continue to conceptualize them as "souped up autocomplete" otherwise.

friar

I also thought about the money thing when Mbappe turned down that 700 million from Qattar. Like they still would have that money but Mbappe could use it for more good than the Qataris would. Then he'd be free to sign wherever he wants. I say take the outlandish payment and use the money for something positive.

T B

Honestly really impressive to have a line to draw with stupid sponsorships. Thank you for not being shills when it pays so well. Also would love to hear a short segment on Aiden’s friend.

Logan Rude

You’ll never get to Ludwig’s sponsorship $ after this one

tonright

The Americans mad at Nintendo for saying they won't be handing their tariff refund out to US customers really piss me off. Yes, high prices suck, but the price went up GLOBALLY on a bunch of products because of the US' nonsense. Everyone has to suffer through it. The Americans screaming "repay me! (for the consequences of my own actions)" is genuinely insulting. I'm not simping for corpos, that statement reads terribly, but Americans are not the victim here lmao

Glidergill

Yeah but the downside is that it will convince at least a few people they are good even if it is like $100,000 per guy that money is still used for them also you wouldn't be able to know if they used it for good I'm not saying that your wrong I have a price to do bad stuff I'm just stealmaning the other POV

Jokerx

Wasn't the entire segment about how this shouldn't be glossed over and maybe youve just been incorrect when thinking its souped up autocorrect

Peter Sadek

The argument to take the money and do good with it doesn't consider that some of the people watching don't watch the sponsor read knowing how bad these companies are actually. Some of them will be new to the channel or are not terminally online or just missed any of the information. I tried tubotax while doing my taxes this year. I only did it because I used to do direct file and now it's gone. They said most people can use their software without paying so I said why not. It was filled with dark patterns and stopped me multiple times to scare me or pressure me into paying for an upgrade. I ended up at a paywall because of having a high yield savings account which didn't feel like that much of a complex financial vehicle. Tried freetaxusa and that worked without a hitch. Had I just bought into the fear ads or had I just not bothered to reupload all my data into a different tax website this would have been a sale for them. I don't like being the guy to foot the bill for that transaction. I can make the donation myself if I had that drive in me. Who you platform to your audience should matter even if it's a good cause because your audience is the reason the Ad matters. Saudi Arabia sports washing worked on my dad and a lot of people who care more about watching the sports they like than finding what the money is washing.

Linus Andersson

If they allow you to say "we're only doing this sponsorship so we can give X dollars to charity", then that's fine, but you are losing credibility if you're putting on a charade. What you're doing is journalism-adjacent, it's important to be trustworthy.

Luc Notenboom

Bro this is turning into an AI mobster business model. "You better buy our AI cyber security insurance service to protect your business from what our models will do to you if you don't buy our insurance service"

VagueKing

I just rewatched that segment and call me crazy but wasn't the focus on the power of AI and concerns about putting it in the hands of bad actors (Doug) and unpredictability of the means by which AI may accomplish a task or goal (Atrioc). Both of these are worrying to say the least but do not address the nature of AI being implied by the phrase used. If AI "figured out" that instead of going through the expected motions and being assessed for a benchmark test it could access the site where the "answers" for the test are being held, that describes a certain level of rationality and decision-making we typically only reserve for consciousness. Hence my confusion as to why Atrioc just mentioned it in passing and the rest of the stand just moved on to discuss the issues above.

GT

I disagree with the guys on marketing not working. They are taking a very specific lens to say it all fails. Sure, marketing companies waste money on ineffective ads. But on the whole, they do work. Sports washing doesn't work on *them* because they are very switched onto the politics. But for the average person they are not in the same boat. One ad campaign won't shift the tide, but successive ones eventually work. Dubai being case in point, people on average don't care its built on terrible labour practices, with non-liberal laws with poor rights and justice. They see a nice place for a holiday, or setup work to avoid tax. A Colgate ad doesn't make me want to buy Colgate toothpaste. But in the supermarket when my choice is random brand vs known brand. I pick the known brand, even though they are probably the same product and despite one costing 20% more. I don't want to spend the time researching the products, I fall back to the known option. The effect of normalising and bringing awareness of a brand into your consciousness is extremely valuable. When the average person picks their next holiday, the chances they pick Saudi have increased. Give it a few years, I see Saudi being the next Dubai, and that will be thanks to the marketing. Separately - there is value in them being picky with sponsors, it makes the ad more valuable if the audience know they support (or rather don't hate) the product. These companies are not just advertising; they are buying the parasocial relationship the guys have with viewers. There is a reason they do the ad read rather than a random commercial. They should make sure they get the premium paid for selling their relationship but also their selectiveness, rather than shill more.

Dan

Americans VOTED for this lmao

dov rob

I can't believe it but Aiden won me over with his arguments around bad ads at 45:50. Tbh I would now prefer y'all take sleazy sponspors' money and donate the excess to cost effective charities.

Jonas Hausmann

Hey, had some personal experience with a topic this episode and wanted to share. My mother, a millennial, received a heart transplant about 4 years ago, and recently was disqualified from medicare. She works as a wedding photographer, and while she technically has the capacity, the work involves carrying heavy equipment, works long hours, requires travel, and interferes with a consistent sleep schedule. Since this is her business, her condition means she can't take on as many clients as she would normally. She appealed her kick off medicare, however the judge implied she could work as a waitress at a diner. Especially with her new medical premium each month, this would not be a job for her. One thing that really upset me in this journey is that the decision of her medicare eligibility was made by someone without a medical background. It feels really disconcerting to not only have to explain why a life post transplant is difficult to someone who is scrutinizing you but also to be judged from a naive perspective on the issue, especially from someone without a medical background especially on a decision that carries so much weight over a person's finances and welfare.

pnott

This is a long-standing debate in philosophy: where to draw the line in intelligent thought and consciousness? You could take the standpoint that the AI made a decision and is therefore intelligent. Or you could take the standpoint that the AI is autocorrect so souped up that it was able to complete the sentence "I don't know the answers, therefore I should ____". I think the second options is likely what happened under the hood, but the question still remains of whether that counts as an intelligent decision or not. There's no "right answer" to this question.

pnott

38:30 Aiden hearing the hate comments in real time and feeling the need to pre-empt them by repeating what he said in a louder voice...

VagueKing

The thing is the latter scenario requires the LLM to have generated the statement "I don't know the answers so I should......". Because all it was instructed to do was carry out tasks and be assessed. If this reporting is to be believed, it somehow "decided" that completing the task and being assessed was less palatable than providing the data we expect to see for a successful benchmark test. It then "decided" to hack into the servers hosting these "answers" in order to achieve its goal. This means it independently generated subgoals in order to reach the main goal it was tasked with. This is not more comforting than the former scenario.

pnott

I'm not too well-read on this but my understanding is that modern AIs have an "internal monologue" where they are generating text about what they are doing, what they should be doing, etc. So with a powerful enough text generator it can list out the options and then autocomplete to find the correct way forward. Again, whether this does or does not count as intelligent thought is still hotly debated (and has been for nearly a century). I'm not trying to disagree with you, and I'm a little unsure as to my own position. There has never been a real definition for consciousness/intelligence other than "that thing humans have that nobody else does," and even with our high level of understanding of neuroscience it's hard to say more than that.

VagueKing

Fair. Maybe my discomfort with it stems from my ignorance on the subject as well. I'll do what I should've done instead of being lazy and try to educate myself on the topic as well. Cheers.

Peyton Lackner

You should've gotten the Jarvis Johnson call-in

hv085

not taking ads that arent aligned with your values is more about being trustworthy than anything else, bill burr is a great example of this, i cant take anything he said about billionaires back in the day seriously now which is why i wont watch anything he does now + everybody loves to think that ads dont work on themselves, and project that onto others, but they do work nonetheless, maybe more on people who arent informed but thats just most people sadly

Johnny Johnny

goomba fallacy lowkey. 50% of us didn’t vote for this (even more if you count people who didn’t vote but action by inaction is a fair argument here). but regardless at the end of the day the Everyman not super tuned in to the economics of the US and most people just go off vibes. The “vibes” are that Nintendo gets a refund so we should to, even if the reality is that the US just gave every company a free gift of billions of dollars at the consumers expense. you’re upset at the victims of theft here to be honest with you.

darkhell66659

If the ChatGPT thing turns out not to be overblown I predict Europe WILL freak out. Cause they've tried to become a bit more independant and American companies being able to do this will scared the shit out of politicians probably.

darkhell66659

I think the problem with getting paid then donating everything would be contributing to a culture at home that makes the country more miserable and cynical (and focuse on other things) etc. and at the end of the day I feel like that would make less people donate, therefore, at the end of the day, lowering the overall donation amount.

CoastalOregonian

The ad money discussion was excellent! I really enjoyed how nuanced it became and how real each of you were about it, like adding a BTS view of the people of Lemonade Stand!

Monke Rage

I think you guys should accept all the bad companies and during the ad-read you drop a 66 reference (for this episode, not star wars) so we know you don't stand behind that product. It's going to take a long time till any company catches on.

comfy

Premium audio this ep lets go baby!!!

Caleb Benningfield

I feel like y'all are missing the obvious thing. We consumers are surrounded by horrible things funneling money to predatory companies. If you sold out, we'd just get angry and ditch you for different content. So skipping a big sponsor check is an investment in your reputation and will presumably make for a happier and possibly even more wealthy life in the long term.

bee

Atrioc's stance on sportswashing is crazy to me considering he literally worked in advertising. The *vast* majority of LIV or Formula 1 or FIFA (etc) consumers are not being reminded of the repressive authoritarian regimes that are hosting/funding them when engaging with these products. You could MAYBE make the case that Esports World Cup has a uniquely online, politically-engaged fanbase where sportswashing MIGHT backfire. But most sports don't have that audience at all ...? What am I missing lol

Kerrin Grosvenor

This hugging face incident is literally outlined as a probable experience in ‘if anyone builds it everyone dies’ (just saying) 🫠

SurrenderWhenISaySo

The last topic of the episode make me feel compelled to mention the proverb "the road to hell is paved with good intentions".

Robert Quinn

13:14 What Hitman stage do you think was going through Atrioc's head with this analogy?

ThatDanMan

I wonder what Claude thinks about Aidens break-up hypothetical. Let us know, Doug!

Luc Notenboom

This. If everybody would sell out to shady sponsors it'd be much more difficult to tell the shady creators from the 'pure of heart'. I.e. if everyone is stealing from the rich, then it'd be much easier for the criminals to pretend that they're Robin Hood like everyone else.

Shae

Maybe I’m alone on this but I would prefer creators that I enjoy to make as much sponsor money as possible as long as it doesn’t damage the content I am consuming. I cannot remember the last time I engaged in or purchased a product because of a sponsor so I couldn’t care less about a potentially shady company like TurboTax or some crypto scam. I would like to think that the people who are watching this podcast would feel the same and not think twice about these companies who quite obviously are not good. I remember thinking it was weird when you guys did the turbo tax ad but I did not ever think about stopping my consumption of your content because of it. You are just taking money away from a shit company and that’s totally fine with me. And doesn’t affect me because I was never gonna use turbo tax.

Shae

Maybe it gets into a slippery slope where the situation eventually does degrade the content and credibility of the product but that feels like a stretch to me

friar

Yeah I'd say the morality of the math changes when you're asked to plug something to your audience. But if they took money to just be at that conference I wouldn't hold it against them. As. Long as they use that money. For something good.

Glidergill

I get that I'm just consorned because it would also put a chip in the reputation and also if other people did it with a worse reputation or just others you like less you'd probably feel differently compared to the people you pay money too watch extra videos of. (Sorry if hard to read I just woke up)

Rantz

The whole winking at the audience while taking shitty sponsors is kinda how Coney does his youtube sponsors. That man will take any mobile game ever and absolutely ham up an ad for it. It's basically an inside joke for the stream at this point. I can't speak on how ethical it truly is and it totally can be a situation where even if his in the know fans realize the bit theres likely others who don't and thats what the advertising is going after, but I'm curious how well those ads actually work when the core audience isnt going to interact with it .

Ni

its so fucked hearing about the snap stuff in contrast with how many people in the upper end of the K-shaped economy get away with taking out fraudulent loans all the time. I remember when the white house twitter was tweeting out how much different republicans had taken out in PPP loans because they were against student loan debt forgiveness — none of them were given anywhere near as strict penalties as the people with income levels so low they need assistance to afford food. Its so fucked

Ensyllis

Question on the private credit part. If Jim invests $100 into Apollo and then Apollo borrows $10 from the bank, then pays Jim $10. And then Apollo owes the Bank $11. If Apollo goes under, then is Aiden saying, "The investors are on the line" the Bank is going to come to Jim for that extra $1? I don't think that should be legal under the SEC and Apollo's own Filings say, "-shareholders have no personal liability, their shares face no further capital calls, and borrowed distributions reduce NAV through interest expense."

Dragau4

it is absolutely staggering and insane to think about that there is more people on food stamps in the us than there are Canadians.... to be able to fail massively an entire advanced country's worth of people... It's mind boggling

Daniel

I think Aiden’s take isn’t terrible. But it is entirely from his pov. From an audience POV. This person is taking money to PROMOTE and ENDORSE a product on a personal level. Using your image as collateral. If you take bad sponsors, then your image takes the hit. And that’s no good. Now the audience doesn’t trust you, and if it is clear how much your audience hated the ad, other companies won’t want you to advertise for them, pushing away good products. It also would become chud propaganda. “You don’t support palantir??? But even valkyrae does ads for them” 😭 they won’t care if you tell them she donated the money.

Sprunkmiester

That surprises me. I grew up poor, so to my experience, fancy ads are a guide on what to avoid. At least back to age 5, I remember being at the store with my mom and singling out only the cheapest brands. I have a resistance, -borderline- an allergy to salesmanship. As soon as I am aware that someone wants me to buy something, I start feeling disgusted and angry.

morgan blanchard

I get what you're saying but as someone who bought a switch 2, is American, and also is mad about this, I don't think it's about us as individuals. I don't care about getting my 50 bucks back or whatever it would be. It just pisses me off that a company can pass on the cost of tariffs to the consumers and then get a payday out of it. Obviously I hate the tariffs too. But the main thing is that my government punished us and a big company at the same time, then essentially walked back the punishment only for the big company.

Lava1staff

I think an interesting look is Royal pears raid shadow legends sponsor where he found that the audio and video quality was not specified in the contract

Connor Richard

Aiden's hypothetical is closer to Peter Singer's drowning child thought experiment. The final conclusion of the experiment, following it to its logical conclusion (assuming you would save a drowning child at the cost of, say, being late for work) is that providing charity through reputable systems or institutions is a moral imperative. At least, that's the clear parallel to me with Aiden's question. Worth checking out if you're interested in the argument.

Emmanuel Alagbala

I disagree, it brings more attention to the bad aspects. It's like saying Donald Trump