m3m3tic

temp 0 means that there will be no randomness injected into the response, and that for any given input you will get the exact same output, assuming the context window is also the same. Part of what makes an LLM more of a "thinking machine" than purely a "calculation machine" is that it will occasionally choose a less-probable next token than the statistically most likely token as a way of making the response more "flavorful" (or at least that's my understanding of why), and the likelihood of the response diverging from its most probable outcome is influenced by the temperature.

There's luck involved, but if you listen or read some of Marc Andreesen's ideas there's no doubt he's highly intelligent and thoughtful. Ben Horowitz even said he was the smartest person he'd ever met in his book. While he was obviously working on the right thing at the right time, his fortune is not what I would consider blind luck.

Just another run-of-the-mill post-ZIRP bloated org chart cleanup with a nice PR spin. Spend more time innovating on your products, it's a mistake to innovate on company hierarchy, despite what PR departments like to suggest.

it's recursive leveraging using multiple different market makers that are giving you further leveraged bets on already leveraged assets

This is already possible with search engines, there is enough information on the internet that you can substantiate just about any claim regardless of how much evidence there is to the contrary. (see flat-earth, plenty of plausible sounding claims with real, albeit, cherry picked evidence).