I don't know if most people would dismiss the sentence "all matter has a sort of proto-subjectivity very different from ours but which gives rise to ours". And it solves some problems (introducing others).
I like the idea, but I'm curious where to draw the boundary. If only I can read it, it can be my full recollection of everything. If I add my siblings, parents, cousins, etc, then some articles become painful or controversial (e.g. divorce, disease). Or I just ommit all the unhappy parts.
One thought I keep coming back to is the immense consequences of how our units of length, weight and volume were defined. Products are often sold with round numbers (1 liter, 0.5 liter, 1 kg, etc). If you could go back in time and fiddle with e.g. the definition of a pint, you'd see that reducing its volume would lead to people drinking less, until it's so small that people just order two pints.
I love it because it's horrible, but in real life I'd just put the options inside the script (which is what you do anyway when you're too lazy to import argparse).
It shows that both Karpathy and the LLM have good taste in random seeds: the answer to life, the universe and everything, and ~1/(the fine structure constant)