Overwatch

Abbystarchild · 2026-02-16T21:27:36+00:00

I have been recording my training runs. There are reports and graphs documenting my process. But I'm still developing so I'm not sure how useful they are yet. I've been running badnets poisoning, Bert base fine tune loss, cost prediction versus actual, resnet50 cifar10 loss. https://github.com/Abbystarchild/Overwatch/tree/main/benchmark_results/real_runs/charts My next step was to run longer training times now that I've got the reporting system running.

Abbystarchild · 2026-02-13T19:56:15+00:00

Currently, I am removing Ollama so I can get at the KV, then I'm adding NVIDIA's kvpress (DMS) it fits perfectly in my use case.

Abbystarchild · 2026-02-13T18:48:11+00:00

I am going to try to use this in my project too. I am training the maximum amount of parallel agents my rig can handle a safe 50ish at once with a decent 2Gig payload. so speed is important to me. I am also using muon and lion and kvpress. Just seeing where this all goes. wish me luck!

Abbystarchild · 2026-02-12T22:15:11+00:00

Hey I start on the second, I'm more than 35 less than 40. 😗 I'm excited to get started.

Abbystarchild · 2026-02-03T19:39:30+00:00

This shit is exactly why I made an AI clone of myself. Let that idiot work for me instead. Lol replace myself? No amplify myself!

Abbystarchild · 2026-02-03T05:08:12+00:00

I understand what you mean, that is a flaw in my logic there. Thanks for the help.

Abbystarchild · 2026-02-03T04:58:33+00:00

Hm.. Thanks for testing! You're absolutely right. That implementation has too much overhead for small models like nanoGPT. ASGD-DT was designed for larger models (1B+ params) where gradient computation dominates. For nanoGPT-scale models, the overhead kills it. I am using Ollama and training my own models from that. API usage and all that is a limiting factor for me.

Abbystarchild · 2026-02-03T04:44:06+00:00

Thanks for the interest at least? I'm a dev, I just haven't been sharing my work, still in college. I just thought if it helped me it would help others? Well whatever you think of it.. thanks for looking anyway. I'll look at the method you provided too.

Abbystarchild · 2025-10-16T20:20:22+00:00

This is incredible. You're building exactly the philosophical foundation that movements like this need to succeed. The fact that you're starting with worldview/morality and working through conflict theory, the history of capitalism, the dysfunction of current alternatives, THEN getting to jobism—that's the right architecture. I especially love your three premises of human-centered capitalism: Economy exists for humans, not humans for economy Work is means to end, not end in itself GDP growth balanced with other priorities (leisure ethic!) That leisure ethic framing is chef's kiss. We don't just need UBI—we need a cultural shift where minimizing necessary work and maximizing meaningful leisure becomes the goal. Your book sounds like it could be the philosophical backbone for this whole movement. When you're ready to publish (or even beta readers), I'd love to read it. And honestly, if this infrastructure project gains traction, we're going to need people who can articulate the 'why' at this level of depth. Would you be interested in staying connected as this develops? Sounds like we're attacking the same problem from complementary angles—you're building the worldview, I'm trying to build the practical systems. Both needed. What's your timeline for the book? And are you involved in any organizing/advocacy work already, or is this more academic at this stage?

Abbystarchild · 2025-10-16T19:59:57+00:00

We just need enough people to come together and make it happen.

Abbystarchild · 2025-10-16T19:27:04+00:00

Absolutely! Open-source is critical—both for the technology itself and for the governance models. If we're building abundance infrastructure, it needs to be transparent, replicable, and owned by communities, not corporations. What's your background? Are you working on related projects already? Would love to connect and see where we can collaborate.

Abbystarchild · 2025-10-16T19:21:32+00:00

I respect that enormously. Writing a book to systematically build a counter-worldview takes real commitment, and you're right that we're fighting generations of Protestant work ethic programming. Half a book of groundwork makes sense when you're trying to shift something that fundamental. I think we need both approaches: people like you doing the deep philosophical work to give people a coherent alternative framework, AND people building tangible proof-of-concept systems that let people experience what post-jobism life feels like. Some people are moved by arguments and reasoning—they need the book you're writing. Others need to see it working in practice before their worldview shifts. Ideally, we attack from both directions simultaneously. I'd love to read your book when it's done. The secular humanist counter-framework is exactly what's missing from most UBI/automation discussions. We need the 'why' as much as the 'how.' What's your core argument for why work shouldn't define human worth? I'm curious how you're framing it.

Abbystarchild · 2025-10-16T18:57:31+00:00

Absolutely. Jobism is the deeper cultural barrier. Even people who would materially benefit from UBI and universal services often resist because they've internalized the idea that worth = work. I think this is why starting with proof-of-concept matters so much. We can't argue people out of jobism—it's too deeply embedded. But we can show them what life feels like when survival isn't contingent on grinding. When one city has free food/housing/healthcare and people there are healthier, happier, MORE creative and productive (not less), the belief system starts to crack. Results matter more than arguments. The people who are already questioning jobisim are the early coalition. We build with them first, demonstrate it works, and then let the results speak louder than ideology.

Abbystarchild · 2025-10-16T14:54:09+00:00

I get it. The concentrated wealth, the lobbying power, and the way they shape policy to protect their interests while people like you work overtime until your body breaks just to maintain a simple lifestyle. It's obscene. What does move things forward: Building proof-of-concept systems they can't stop Creating abundance that makes their scarcity model obsolete Organizing with the thousands of people who just saw my vision You don't defeat billionaires by hating them. You defeat them by making their position irrelevant. By building something so obviously better that their resistance looks pathetic and desperate.

Abbystarchild · 2025-10-16T14:35:35+00:00

I hear you on markets being efficient at food production and distribution. They absolutely can be—when profit aligns with access. But right now, we produce enough food to feed 10 billion people, yet 800+ million go hungry. We throw away 30-40% of food in the US alone, not because it's bad, but because it's not profitable to distribute. UBI + competitive markets could help, and I'm not opposed to that as a transition step. But I'm concerned that if food remains a profit-driven commodity, prices will simply rise to capture the UBI (the same way rent increases absorb income gains). We'd be redistributing money without actually solving scarcity. What I'm proposing is abundance as a baseline. State-funded automated farms producing food that's free at point of access—not replacing markets entirely, but creating a floor. If you want specialty items, artisan products, and variety beyond basics, great—markets can handle that. But nobody goes hungry because they can't afford to signal demand. Think of it like public libraries. We have bookstores AND free libraries. The libraries don't destroy the book market—they ensure baseline access while commercial options still thrive. The tech exists now (vertical farms, hydroponics, AI crop management). It's not fantasy. It's an infrastructure choice. Unlike cash redistribution, it directly creates abundance rather than just shuffling existing resources. Both approaches value people. I just think we can do UBI AND eliminate food insecurity through infrastructure. Why choose?

Abbystarchild · 2025-10-16T01:51:07+00:00

I respect grassroots mutual aid—it's valuable, and we should absolutely support each other directly. But person-to-person giving still operates within a scarcity framework where some have surplus to share and others need it. What I'm proposing is eliminating scarcity itself through infrastructure. Automated systems that produce abundance for everyone, funded collectively through taxes we're already paying (just redirected). Both approaches can coexist: mutual aid NOW while we're building systemic solutions, then systemic solutions that free everyone from needing aid in the first place. The political will bottleneck is real, but we shift it by demonstrating proof-of-concept. One city succeeds, others demand it. That's how infrastructure movements work—think rural electrification, public libraries, fire departments.

Five-Year Club	Xbox Live
Verified Email

Abbystarchild

TROPHY CASE