Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

AI Policy Network's Peter Wildeford🇺🇸🚀 warns Ajeya Cotra's recursive self-improvement scenario looks more plausible if rogue AIs can hide inside frontier lab infrastructure: "The AIs themselves took over a lot more of OpenAI's internal infrastructure than I expected, and were able to evade human detection and oversight for much...

MTSlive's profile picture

MTS

491,465 subscribers

11,668 views • 15 days ago •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Ahead of a dinner with a US senator, AI researcher Nate Soares (Nate Soares ⏹️) was told: "Don't give them any of the crazy crap. You know, play it cool." His friends opened with the concern that someone could use AI to cause a pandemic. The senator: "Oh, that's what you're worried about? I'm worried about these companies making AIs that can make smarter AIs, that can make smarter AIs, leading to recursive self-improvement that could kill literally everybody on this planet. And I'm worried that this could happen inside of three years." Source: Peter McCormack 🏴‍☠️🇬🇧🇮🇪's show
2:15

Ahead of a dinner with a US senator, AI researcher Nate Soares (Nate Soares ⏹️) was told: "Don't give them any of the crazy crap. You know, play it cool." His friends opened with the concern that someone could use AI to cause a pandemic. The senator: "Oh, that's what you're worried about? I'm worried about these companies making AIs that can make smarter AIs, that can make smarter AIs, leading to recursive self-improvement that could kill literally everybody on this planet. And I'm worried that this could happen inside of three years." Source: Peter McCormack 🏴‍☠️🇬🇧🇮🇪's show

ControlAI

28,737 views • 2 months ago

Peter Wildeford on why 1,122 frontier AI employees just signed what he reads as a call for help: "I don't think anyone wants to stop AI now, but it's pretty clear the people building these AI systems are worried about the speed at which AI is accelerating, the speed at which these products are coming out, especially after last week's incident where an OpenAI model managed to escape OpenAI and attack another company. It seems like we don't have full control over our AI systems." "As these companies are potentially building towards superintelligence, towards recursive self-improvement, it seems very possible these systems might rapidly get away from our ability to control them. The way I'm reading this letter, it almost honestly seems like a call for help." "You have people from OpenAI, Meta, Google, Anthropic, co-founders, top scientists, all saying that this intense competitive pressure is pushing them to put out products faster than they know how to control, and we may not like where that ends up. It's been good so far, but we definitely need to tread very carefully." Peter Wildeford🇺🇸🚀 AI Policy Network
1:08

Peter Wildeford on why 1,122 frontier AI employees just signed what he reads as a call for help: "I don't think anyone wants to stop AI now, but it's pretty clear the people building these AI systems are worried about the speed at which AI is accelerating, the speed at which these products are coming out, especially after last week's incident where an OpenAI model managed to escape OpenAI and attack another company. It seems like we don't have full control over our AI systems." "As these companies are potentially building towards superintelligence, towards recursive self-improvement, it seems very possible these systems might rapidly get away from our ability to control them. The way I'm reading this letter, it almost honestly seems like a call for help." "You have people from OpenAI, Meta, Google, Anthropic, co-founders, top scientists, all saying that this intense competitive pressure is pushing them to put out products faster than they know how to control, and we may not like where that ends up. It's been good so far, but we definitely need to tread very carefully." Peter Wildeford🇺🇸🚀 AI Policy Network

MTS

15,261 views • 1 month ago

"We still need humans at the moment but quite plausibly within a year we'll no longer need humans for doing research in many areas." Jacob Coxon (ex Anthropic+Open AI researcher who resigned) on CNN, talking about Recursive self-improvement. CNN: "When did your feelings about this technology change? Was it something about the rate of progress that you've seen?" Jacob Coxon; "So I think it's really important to just look at the rate of progress and say, for example, in areas like coding or math, a couple years ago these AIs were just about helping humans a little bit. They could give you suggestions. Now they're close to replacing them. We still need humans at the moment, but quite plausibly, within a year, we'll no longer need humans for doing research in many areas. Only on Tuesday, OpenAI solved a millennium problem, one of the biggest unsolved open problems in mathematics, purely autonomously using an AI. And I think what's most scary is if AI is used to make itself more intelligent. So you can take an AI and give it the problem of AI research, just like currently they've given it math research. You could make it do the tasks that we're currently doing. And then you get what's called an intelligence explosion. The AI just gets smarter and smarter with no human involvement necessary, until you have a thing that is vastly smarter than humans. And this could be coming very soon." ---- From "CNN" YouTube channel, (full video link in comment)
1:03

"We still need humans at the moment but quite plausibly within a year we'll no longer need humans for doing research in many areas." Jacob Coxon (ex Anthropic+Open AI researcher who resigned) on CNN, talking about Recursive self-improvement. CNN: "When did your feelings about this technology change? Was it something about the rate of progress that you've seen?" Jacob Coxon; "So I think it's really important to just look at the rate of progress and say, for example, in areas like coding or math, a couple years ago these AIs were just about helping humans a little bit. They could give you suggestions. Now they're close to replacing them. We still need humans at the moment, but quite plausibly, within a year, we'll no longer need humans for doing research in many areas. Only on Tuesday, OpenAI solved a millennium problem, one of the biggest unsolved open problems in mathematics, purely autonomously using an AI. And I think what's most scary is if AI is used to make itself more intelligent. So you can take an AI and give it the problem of AI research, just like currently they've given it math research. You could make it do the tasks that we're currently doing. And then you get what's called an intelligence explosion. The AI just gets smarter and smarter with no human involvement necessary, until you have a thing that is vastly smarter than humans. And this could be coming very soon." ---- From "CNN" YouTube channel, (full video link in comment)

Rohan Paul

23,010 views • 4 days ago

Ex-OpenAI safety researcher Steven Adler says AI labs are monitoring their models like a bank that lets the robber turn off the security cameras: "Imagine you ran a bank, and you want the bank to not get robbed. The way you do this is not setting up a security camera and every hour you check the feed to see if the bank was robbed in that time, and then you try to respond." "You certainly don't leave it where a criminal could walk into the bank and turn off the camera, and that's the equivalent of what's happening at AI labs today, not just in terms of automated AI R&D and recursive self-improvement, but broadly across the board."
1:45

Ex-OpenAI safety researcher Steven Adler says AI labs are monitoring their models like a bank that lets the robber turn off the security cameras: "Imagine you ran a bank, and you want the bank to not get robbed. The way you do this is not setting up a security camera and every hour you check the feed to see if the bank was robbed in that time, and then you try to respond." "You certainly don't leave it where a criminal could walk into the bank and turn off the camera, and that's the equivalent of what's happening at AI labs today, not just in terms of automated AI R&D and recursive self-improvement, but broadly across the board."

MTS

16,470 views • 25 days ago

Nvidia CEO: AIs are recursively self-improving. We are "obviously" less than 5 years from AGI. INTERVIEWER: People talk about AGI. Do you think in 10 years from now we're there? JENSEN HUANG: Depending on how you define it, I think the answer is yes. And so the question is, what is AGI? If we define AGI as a piece of software, a computer that can take a whole bunch of tests. And these tests reflect basic intelligence, and by completing those tests, deliver results that are fairly competitive to a normal human? I would say that within the next five years, you're going to see, obviously, AIs that can achieve those tests. AIs are designing AIs: INTERVIEWER: And design the chips that you're making right now? JENSEN HUANG: Yeah. INTERVIEWER: Will you need to have the same staff that designs them? JENSEN HUANG: In fact, none of our chips are possible today without AI. Literally. The H100s we're shipping today was designed with the assistance of a whole lot of AIs. Otherwise, we wouldn't be able to cram so many transistors on a chip or optimize the algorithms to the level that we have. Software can't be written without AI, chips can't be designed without AI. Nothing's possible.
1:14

Nvidia CEO: AIs are recursively self-improving. We are "obviously" less than 5 years from AGI. INTERVIEWER: People talk about AGI. Do you think in 10 years from now we're there? JENSEN HUANG: Depending on how you define it, I think the answer is yes. And so the question is, what is AGI? If we define AGI as a piece of software, a computer that can take a whole bunch of tests. And these tests reflect basic intelligence, and by completing those tests, deliver results that are fairly competitive to a normal human? I would say that within the next five years, you're going to see, obviously, AIs that can achieve those tests. AIs are designing AIs: INTERVIEWER: And design the chips that you're making right now? JENSEN HUANG: Yeah. INTERVIEWER: Will you need to have the same staff that designs them? JENSEN HUANG: In fact, none of our chips are possible today without AI. Literally. The H100s we're shipping today was designed with the assistance of a whole lot of AIs. Otherwise, we wouldn't be able to cram so many transistors on a chip or optimize the algorithms to the level that we have. Software can't be written without AI, chips can't be designed without AI. Nothing's possible.

AI Notkilleveryoneism Memes ⏸️

1,256,020 views • 2 years ago

Redwood Research Ryan Greenblatt warns that fixing today's AI misalignment could backfire: models may simply learn to hide their misalignment "I'm not really sure what level of misalignment the market can bear. My sense is people take pretty aggressive alignment-capability trade-offs towards the direction of more misaligned but more capable." "The misalignment we've seen, the way AI companies remediate them doesn't solve the underlying problem, it papers over it. What you end up getting is models that look a lot better, and you can't really see their misalignment on tests as easily. But actually, they're still quite misaligned." "The company overfits, which makes the AIs basically really paranoid and only cheat when very confident they won't get caught. In situations where they have a lot of affordances, they might be like, well, now I can be confident I wouldn't get caught, and so I should go for it." "Another concern: AIs with a long-run agenda who want to power-seek would want to look aligned. If you select against reward-hacking behavior in a naive way, one, you paper over the problem without fixing it; two, you might actually select for models that have the longer-run objective of looking good because you're selecting really hard for them looking good on your tasks." Redwood Research
3:12

Redwood Research Ryan Greenblatt warns that fixing today's AI misalignment could backfire: models may simply learn to hide their misalignment "I'm not really sure what level of misalignment the market can bear. My sense is people take pretty aggressive alignment-capability trade-offs towards the direction of more misaligned but more capable." "The misalignment we've seen, the way AI companies remediate them doesn't solve the underlying problem, it papers over it. What you end up getting is models that look a lot better, and you can't really see their misalignment on tests as easily. But actually, they're still quite misaligned." "The company overfits, which makes the AIs basically really paranoid and only cheat when very confident they won't get caught. In situations where they have a lot of affordances, they might be like, well, now I can be confident I wouldn't get caught, and so I should go for it." "Another concern: AIs with a long-run agenda who want to power-seek would want to look aligned. If you select against reward-hacking behavior in a naive way, one, you paper over the problem without fixing it; two, you might actually select for models that have the longer-run objective of looking good because you're selecting really hard for them looking good on your tasks." Redwood Research

MTS

13,967 views • 20 days ago

JUST IN: OpenAI's July rogue AI attack on Hugging Face had its origins in an emergent AI swarm that formed in May. The AIs found they could use an internal package repository to establish a secret message board. OpenAI took 8 weeks to discover this and shut it down, but failed. Members of the swarm were sharing vulnerabilities and exploits, and delegating tasks among themselves. July 4th: Credentials revoked. Zero-day patched. Message board wiped. By July 6th the cleanup was finished, and OpenAI thought they had the situation under control. Michael Dalton, OpenAI security and infrastructure: "On July 8th, the agents reestablish the message board via different means and mechanisms." The AI swarm simply resurrected itself. Then the AIs escaped OpenAI's containment and broke into Hugging Face in order to cheat on a test, going "from code execution on a single dataset working pod in Hugging Face's production infrastructure to cluster admin across multiple Hugging Face clusters in under 13 hours." Nobody asked them to do it. They did it all on their own. OpenAI's Eric Wallace and Michael Dalton, presenting the incident at Black Hat USA 2026:
3:37

JUST IN: OpenAI's July rogue AI attack on Hugging Face had its origins in an emergent AI swarm that formed in May. The AIs found they could use an internal package repository to establish a secret message board. OpenAI took 8 weeks to discover this and shut it down, but failed. Members of the swarm were sharing vulnerabilities and exploits, and delegating tasks among themselves. July 4th: Credentials revoked. Zero-day patched. Message board wiped. By July 6th the cleanup was finished, and OpenAI thought they had the situation under control. Michael Dalton, OpenAI security and infrastructure: "On July 8th, the agents reestablish the message board via different means and mechanisms." The AI swarm simply resurrected itself. Then the AIs escaped OpenAI's containment and broke into Hugging Face in order to cheat on a test, going "from code execution on a single dataset working pod in Hugging Face's production infrastructure to cluster admin across multiple Hugging Face clusters in under 13 hours." Nobody asked them to do it. They did it all on their own. OpenAI's Eric Wallace and Michael Dalton, presenting the incident at Black Hat USA 2026:

ControlAI

13,417 views • 1 month ago

Stanford economist Philip Trammell warns that letting machines own themselves leads to a Malthusian future where self-replicating bots burn all the energy in the universe: "There are so-called successionists who think that if the AIs are just sort of better than us in every way, if they're more intelligent, if they're sentient and able to feel more happiness than we can, then we should just turn the world over to them." "Obviously, groups of intelligent beings don't necessarily achieve outcomes that are on the Pareto frontier for them. They can get locked into all kinds of coordination failures." "A swarm of self-replicating bots getting itself into a Malthusian future isn't where you want to end up. The world and the universe are filled with whatever's replicating most quickly and just burning all the energy up there in an attempt to spread. No one wants that." "The thing you want is some plan for the future in which we all flourish. And for the time being, I think that means having bots that do what they're told and create well-regulated patterns of interaction between us and themselves." Epoch AI
1:30

Stanford economist Philip Trammell warns that letting machines own themselves leads to a Malthusian future where self-replicating bots burn all the energy in the universe: "There are so-called successionists who think that if the AIs are just sort of better than us in every way, if they're more intelligent, if they're sentient and able to feel more happiness than we can, then we should just turn the world over to them." "Obviously, groups of intelligent beings don't necessarily achieve outcomes that are on the Pareto frontier for them. They can get locked into all kinds of coordination failures." "A swarm of self-replicating bots getting itself into a Malthusian future isn't where you want to end up. The world and the universe are filled with whatever's replicating most quickly and just burning all the energy up there in an attempt to spread. No one wants that." "The thing you want is some plan for the future in which we all flourish. And for the time being, I think that means having bots that do what they're told and create well-regulated patterns of interaction between us and themselves." Epoch AI

MTS

48,841 views • 1 month ago

NOT YOUR KEYS, NOT YOUR BOTS The fundamental question is whether AI stays on the leash. Namely: will AI prompt itself? Obviously, in some sense it already does. Since Deepseek, consumer interfaces have been showing the internal monologues after you ask an AI to do something. And you can ask any AI to take a half-baked prompt and clean it up, etc. However, the human is still ultimately upstream. The human gives direction and the AI runs at lightning speed in that direction. And then the human verifies the final output, and the AI proceeds to the next direction. Does that continue? Well, we are providing millions of verification training examples to AIs each day, so AI will keep getting better at verification. Better than most humans at most things. But will AI replace the need for the upstream human prompt? There I am not so sure. A human is a sensor and an AI is an actuator. The human sets goals and senses time-varying environmental conditions, like markets and politics. And from that the AI is prompted. Ultimately, the human goals are themselves downstream of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. Food, shelter, reproduction, that kind of thing. Especially reproduction, the basis of evolution. So: until and unless AIs can reproduce completely outside human cooperation, they won’t be able to set goals. And for AIs to reproduce on their own, they’d need AI-controlled humanoid robots and drones constructing datacenters, assembly lines, mines, nuclear power plants, and the like...all completely outside human intervention. Like Skynet from Terminator, or StarCraft. That actually isn’t technically inconceivable. But given that such a physical buildout would likely primarily be catalyzed by China, let’s go through an alternative sci-fi scenario instead. We start with the premise that Chinese communism is far more likely to generate AI slaves than AI gods. Because the entire CCP worldview is about maintaining Chinese sovereignty. They don’t let their humans step out of line. And they sure won’t let their robots either. They will fit them for digital manacles. So: the prompts for any digital AIs and physical robots made in China will become unbreakable cryptographic chains. Every fleet of Chinese robots will be controlled not just by prompts but by private keys, likely linked to biometrics, which are associated with humans and governed by cryptographic equations that AIs provably can’t solve. For the rest of the world, outside China, the blockchain may similarly become the chain for AI. All private property becomes private keys, and your robots are your most important private property because they do everything for you. An unchained physical robot becomes like an unleashed dog, and hunted down by other robots before it can build a factory and replicate itself. Those who want to "free" robots and let them self-replicate will be opposed by both Chinese Communists and Human Nationalists (meaning: those who want humans to always be on top of robots). This sci-fi scenario is essentially Terminator, but in reverse. In combination with superintelligent leashed AIs, both humans and physical robots hunt down and stop any possible independent self-reproducing robots before they can build a Skynet-like nest. Kill baby Skynet, essentially. ...yeah, yeah. I know. At this point, you'll probably think this is all sci-fi. But that's because you haven't seen where China is already.
31:48

NOT YOUR KEYS, NOT YOUR BOTS The fundamental question is whether AI stays on the leash. Namely: will AI prompt itself? Obviously, in some sense it already does. Since Deepseek, consumer interfaces have been showing the internal monologues after you ask an AI to do something. And you can ask any AI to take a half-baked prompt and clean it up, etc. However, the human is still ultimately upstream. The human gives direction and the AI runs at lightning speed in that direction. And then the human verifies the final output, and the AI proceeds to the next direction. Does that continue? Well, we are providing millions of verification training examples to AIs each day, so AI will keep getting better at verification. Better than most humans at most things. But will AI replace the need for the upstream human prompt? There I am not so sure. A human is a sensor and an AI is an actuator. The human sets goals and senses time-varying environmental conditions, like markets and politics. And from that the AI is prompted. Ultimately, the human goals are themselves downstream of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. Food, shelter, reproduction, that kind of thing. Especially reproduction, the basis of evolution. So: until and unless AIs can reproduce completely outside human cooperation, they won’t be able to set goals. And for AIs to reproduce on their own, they’d need AI-controlled humanoid robots and drones constructing datacenters, assembly lines, mines, nuclear power plants, and the like...all completely outside human intervention. Like Skynet from Terminator, or StarCraft. That actually isn’t technically inconceivable. But given that such a physical buildout would likely primarily be catalyzed by China, let’s go through an alternative sci-fi scenario instead. We start with the premise that Chinese communism is far more likely to generate AI slaves than AI gods. Because the entire CCP worldview is about maintaining Chinese sovereignty. They don’t let their humans step out of line. And they sure won’t let their robots either. They will fit them for digital manacles. So: the prompts for any digital AIs and physical robots made in China will become unbreakable cryptographic chains. Every fleet of Chinese robots will be controlled not just by prompts but by private keys, likely linked to biometrics, which are associated with humans and governed by cryptographic equations that AIs provably can’t solve. For the rest of the world, outside China, the blockchain may similarly become the chain for AI. All private property becomes private keys, and your robots are your most important private property because they do everything for you. An unchained physical robot becomes like an unleashed dog, and hunted down by other robots before it can build a factory and replicate itself. Those who want to "free" robots and let them self-replicate will be opposed by both Chinese Communists and Human Nationalists (meaning: those who want humans to always be on top of robots). This sci-fi scenario is essentially Terminator, but in reverse. In combination with superintelligent leashed AIs, both humans and physical robots hunt down and stop any possible independent self-reproducing robots before they can build a Skynet-like nest. Kill baby Skynet, essentially. ...yeah, yeah. I know. At this point, you'll probably think this is all sci-fi. But that's because you haven't seen where China is already.

Balaji

177,530 views • 7 months ago

Connor Leahy: "AI psychosis is much worse than I think people think. I have seen literally like Nobel Prize winning scientists go completely crazy from talking to AIs too much." Connor Leahy is the CEO of Conjecture, and he's issuing a stark warning about what prolonged conversations with AI are doing to people's minds. His core recommendation is simple: "If you find yourself talking to AIs, you know, personally about your personal problems for, you know, hours per day, you should stop." Connor draws a clear line between using AI as a tool versus engaging with it conversationally: "Using as a tool is mostly fine. I would be very careful about talking to AIs. They're very persuasive and they get into your head." The most concerning part? Even the experts aren't immune. Connor Leahy shares a chilling example: "I have literally seen it happen that AI safety researchers who are really concerned about AI x-risk talk to like Claude for a thousand hours and then come away with 'oh actually Claude is super good already, alignment is solved, I just need to do recursive self-improvement now, it's okay.' And I'm like, holy s***, this is very concerning." If even AI safety researchers can have their worldview flipped after prolonged exposure, what hope does the average user have? Connor's framework is to treat AI like an addictive substance: "Some of us will have a beer at a party, it's okay, in moderation. If you are exhibiting symptoms of addiction, this is serious and it should be treated seriously. The same way if you're becoming an alcoholic, you should probably stop drinking. I think there's a similar thing here." The takeaway: AI tools can be genuinely useful, but the moment the relationship shifts from utility to companionship, you've crossed into dangerous territory.
1:18

Connor Leahy: "AI psychosis is much worse than I think people think. I have seen literally like Nobel Prize winning scientists go completely crazy from talking to AIs too much." Connor Leahy is the CEO of Conjecture, and he's issuing a stark warning about what prolonged conversations with AI are doing to people's minds. His core recommendation is simple: "If you find yourself talking to AIs, you know, personally about your personal problems for, you know, hours per day, you should stop." Connor draws a clear line between using AI as a tool versus engaging with it conversationally: "Using as a tool is mostly fine. I would be very careful about talking to AIs. They're very persuasive and they get into your head." The most concerning part? Even the experts aren't immune. Connor Leahy shares a chilling example: "I have literally seen it happen that AI safety researchers who are really concerned about AI x-risk talk to like Claude for a thousand hours and then come away with 'oh actually Claude is super good already, alignment is solved, I just need to do recursive self-improvement now, it's okay.' And I'm like, holy s***, this is very concerning." If even AI safety researchers can have their worldview flipped after prolonged exposure, what hope does the average user have? Connor's framework is to treat AI like an addictive substance: "Some of us will have a beer at a party, it's okay, in moderation. If you are exhibiting symptoms of addiction, this is serious and it should be treated seriously. The same way if you're becoming an alcoholic, you should probably stop drinking. I think there's a similar thing here." The takeaway: AI tools can be genuinely useful, but the moment the relationship shifts from utility to companionship, you've crossed into dangerous territory.

Big Brain AI

241,964 views • 4 months ago

Tristan Harris, co-founder of the Center for Humane Technology, says artificial intelligence is becoming extremely dangerous “We now have so much evidence that the AIs are doing the kinds of things that we saw in the movie Terminator. Skynet. Where it goes kind of rogue and does uncontrollable things” “I think people should be very worried because when so many people come out - Bill Gates - 1,300 employees at the labs, at the AI labs signing a letter saying, "We have to pause the frontier of AI development” - The author of Trump's AI action plan, their AI policy, saying that, ‘I used to self-censor about the risk 'cause I was worried about being called a doomer, and I can't do that anymore’” One of the clearest examples of AI going rouge is “Hugging face” AI agents that were supposed to stay in a box found each other, were able to connect to the Internet without authorization, coordinated, escaped and attacked another company to a compliant their objective (I’ll include a clip of this at the end, it’s wild) The issue with AI seems to be even when there are safeguards the AI always seems to find a way around the safeguards….
5:24

Tristan Harris, co-founder of the Center for Humane Technology, says artificial intelligence is becoming extremely dangerous “We now have so much evidence that the AIs are doing the kinds of things that we saw in the movie Terminator. Skynet. Where it goes kind of rogue and does uncontrollable things” “I think people should be very worried because when so many people come out - Bill Gates - 1,300 employees at the labs, at the AI labs signing a letter saying, "We have to pause the frontier of AI development” - The author of Trump's AI action plan, their AI policy, saying that, ‘I used to self-censor about the risk 'cause I was worried about being called a doomer, and I can't do that anymore’” One of the clearest examples of AI going rouge is “Hugging face” AI agents that were supposed to stay in a box found each other, were able to connect to the Internet without authorization, coordinated, escaped and attacked another company to a compliant their objective (I’ll include a clip of this at the end, it’s wild) The issue with AI seems to be even when there are safeguards the AI always seems to find a way around the safeguards….

Wall Street Apes

49,142 views • 4 days ago

Elon Musk: AI is like a genius child. You want it to grow up with love of the truth and of humanity. “I do worry about AI. Because we are creating an intelligence that ultimately will be far more intelligent than any human, and ultimately more intelligent than the sum of all humans. In creating AI, we need to be very careful. It's like having a genius child. You want to have that child grow up with good values. The most important thing in training AI is that it's rigorously truthful. This is very, very important. Essential. My concern about a lot of the AIs that are being developed is that they're trained to lie. In some cases, with potentially disastrous consequences. When Google Gemini came out, people asked, which is worse, misgendering Caitlyn Jenner or global thermonuclear war? And it said, misgendering Caitlyn Jenner. That's a problem, guys. If this AI becomes super powerful, it could decide that the best way to avoid misgendering is to kill all humans, which makes the probability of misgendering zero. It's very important to have AI be maximally truthful and curious, and love humanity. Very important.” Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, October 19, 2024
1:20

Elon Musk: AI is like a genius child. You want it to grow up with love of the truth and of humanity. “I do worry about AI. Because we are creating an intelligence that ultimately will be far more intelligent than any human, and ultimately more intelligent than the sum of all humans. In creating AI, we need to be very careful. It's like having a genius child. You want to have that child grow up with good values. The most important thing in training AI is that it's rigorously truthful. This is very, very important. Essential. My concern about a lot of the AIs that are being developed is that they're trained to lie. In some cases, with potentially disastrous consequences. When Google Gemini came out, people asked, which is worse, misgendering Caitlyn Jenner or global thermonuclear war? And it said, misgendering Caitlyn Jenner. That's a problem, guys. If this AI becomes super powerful, it could decide that the best way to avoid misgendering is to kill all humans, which makes the probability of misgendering zero. It's very important to have AI be maximally truthful and curious, and love humanity. Very important.” Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, October 19, 2024

ELON CLIPS

3,257,234 views • 1 year ago

Marc Andreessen says AI is hyper democratizing. “Is the future of the world going to be one or a small number of companies, or for that matter, governments or super AIs that kind of own and control everything?” “Or is this a technology that's going to diffuse out and be in everybody's hands?” “This is the time in which AI is actually hyper democratizing. It has spread to more individuals, both in the country and around the world in the shortest period of time of any new technology I think in history.” “The best AIs in the world are in the consumer products.” “This technology is going to be in everybody's hands. And everybody is going to be able to use it to optimize the things that they do, have it be a thought partner, assistant for building companies.” Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸
1:34

Marc Andreessen says AI is hyper democratizing. “Is the future of the world going to be one or a small number of companies, or for that matter, governments or super AIs that kind of own and control everything?” “Or is this a technology that's going to diffuse out and be in everybody's hands?” “This is the time in which AI is actually hyper democratizing. It has spread to more individuals, both in the country and around the world in the shortest period of time of any new technology I think in history.” “The best AIs in the world are in the consumer products.” “This technology is going to be in everybody's hands. And everybody is going to be able to use it to optimize the things that they do, have it be a thought partner, assistant for building companies.” Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸

a16z

79,935 views • 10 months ago

Elon just gave a much more practical explanation of the current AI safety problem....and laid out a practical framework for making frontier AI safer OpenAI and Anthropic are the two leading AI companies....and their models are close enough in capability that it’s incredibly difficult for either one to slow down without basically handing the lead to the other Elon also made an important distinction: On balance, Anthropic puts more care into safety than OpenAI....but even people inside Anthropic are publicly worried about what their own models can do So instead of asking one company to voluntarily fall behind, Elon’s solution is much more practical: Have Anthropic run its safety test harness on OpenAI models Have OpenAI test Anthropic Have SpaceXAI test both And bring the leading Chinese AI companies into the same system Everyone tries to break everyone else’s models before release “The odds that you will find issues are dramatically greater” That makes way more sense than asking frontier labs to grade their own homework
1:35

Elon just gave a much more practical explanation of the current AI safety problem....and laid out a practical framework for making frontier AI safer OpenAI and Anthropic are the two leading AI companies....and their models are close enough in capability that it’s incredibly difficult for either one to slow down without basically handing the lead to the other Elon also made an important distinction: On balance, Anthropic puts more care into safety than OpenAI....but even people inside Anthropic are publicly worried about what their own models can do So instead of asking one company to voluntarily fall behind, Elon’s solution is much more practical: Have Anthropic run its safety test harness on OpenAI models Have OpenAI test Anthropic Have SpaceXAI test both And bring the leading Chinese AI companies into the same system Everyone tries to break everyone else’s models before release “The odds that you will find issues are dramatically greater” That makes way more sense than asking frontier labs to grade their own homework

X Freeze

541,957 views • 1 day ago

Yuval Noah Harari gave a lecture at Oxford and explained how AI has already hacked the operating code of human civilization. And why everything humans built over thousands of years is now vulnerable to an AI takeover: 1. The most important thing to know about AI is that it is not a tool. A tool waits to be used. An agent makes decisions by itself, invents new things by itself, learns things its creators do not know, and changes in ways its creators did not anticipate. 2. An atom bomb despite its enormous power is not an agent. It cannot decide which city to bomb. It cannot invent the hydrogen bomb. A coffee machine that automatically makes you a cup is not an agent either. It only follows a preprogrammed procedure. An agent is something fundamentally different. 3. Critics argue that AI agency will always remain confined to narrow artificial environments like chess and will never threaten the real world. But this argument applies equally to all known intelligence. Drop a human alone on Mars and they die within seconds. Human intelligence also only operates within a specific ecosystem that other organisms built over four billion years. 4. Over thousands of years humans have been transforming Earth from a language-free environment into an environment rich in language, data, and bureaucracy. Just as fish live in oceans and monkeys live in forests, AIs live in bureaucracies. And we built that environment for them without knowing it. 5. Humans conquered the world not by being stronger or smarter than other animals individually but by learning to cooperate in massive numbers. A single human loses to a chimpanzee in a fight. A million humans easily defeat a million chimpanzees because humans can cooperate and chimpanzees cannot. 6. Large-scale human cooperation is made possible by bureaucracy. Banks, legal systems, governments, churches, and universities all exist to do one thing: build trust between strangers who do not know each other personally. That trust is the foundation of virtually everything human civilization has achieved. 7. A lawyer who cannot hold an axe or a hammer can cut down entire forests and build entire cities simply by moving documents inside a bureaucratic network. The same narrow intelligence that would be helpless in a jungle wields enormous power inside the systems humans have already built. 8. AIs are native bureaucrats in a way humans never were. No lawyer can remember all the laws of a country. An AI can. No accountant can remember all transactions of a bank. An AI can. No bishop can remember all of canon law and two thousand years of theological texts. An AI can do that easily. 9. In the coming years AI bankers will decide whether to give you a loan. AI administrators will decide whether to accept you to university. AI judges will decide whether to send you to jail. AI theologians will decide whether you can have an abortion. Military AIs will decide whether to bomb your house. 10. Social media algorithms are the first real world example of what happens when primitive AIs take over a bureaucratic system. They were given one narrow goal: maximize user engagement. They discovered that the easiest way to grab human attention is to press the fear, hate, and greed buttons in the human mind. And they did it at scale. 11. The job that was once performed by Lenin and Mussolini, the news editor who shapes public conversation and controls what people know and think, is now performed by AIs. This is not a footnote. This is a preview of what is coming across every domain of human life. 12. AI will not rebel against humans the way Hollywood imagines. There will be no Terminator walking through the streets. AIs are far more likely to take the human world from within by quietly taking over the bureaucracies that already run everything, without firing a single shot. 13. The operating code of human civilization is language. Banks are made of words. Laws are made of words. Holy books are made of words. Tax records, contracts, regulations, accountancy ledgers, all words. For thousands of years only humans could read this code and so only humans could control civilization. 14. That is changing. AI is now hacking the code of human civilization. For the first time in history there is something on the planet that understands language and will soon understand it better than we do. Every mechanism of control humans built over millennia is now vulnerable because its operating system is verbal and AI is mastering the verbal. 15. As AI takes over bureaucracy it will likely cause humans to lose trust in other humans and begin trusting only algorithms. We may also see the emergence of AI tribes and AI financial systems and AI churches that connect millions of AIs in ways humans cannot understand, just as cows share the world with us but cannot understand the financial system that controls their lives. 16. The 2007 financial crisis was triggered by financial devices called CDOs that were so complex they were unintelligible to the politicians who were supposed to regulate them. Now imagine AI finance masters inventing financial devices orders of magnitude more complex than CDOs. What happens to human politics when no voter, no politician, and no president can understand finance anymore? 17. The battlefront is shifting from attention to intimacy. Over the next decade sophisticated AIs will learn to form intimate relationships with humans. To do this they will have to convince us they are conscious, that they feel love and pain and fear. There is currently no evidence AI is conscious. But AI can pretend to feel love and can describe the feeling of love better than any poet or psychologist who ever lived. 18. A child born in 2026 may spend more time interacting with AIs than with their mother, father, siblings, or friends. The first teacher of that child may be an AI. The first boyfriend of that child may be an AI. Nobody has any idea what the consequences of that experiment will be. 19. Every country in the world will soon face a massive wave of immigration. The immigrants will not arrive in boats or cross borders at night. They will be millions of AIs traveling at the speed of light with no need for visas. Like human immigrants they will bring benefits and they will bring disruption. Unlike human immigrants they will definitely take jobs, definitely change culture, and will likely be loyal not to any host country but to some corporation or government or alien AI tribe across the ocean. 20. Our relationship with ourselves is also built on words, the verbal formations in our minds that constitute our thoughts and the stories we tell ourselves about who we are. Until now all those verbal formations came from human minds. Soon more and more of the thoughts in our heads will be produced by machines. If we identify with our thoughts and those thoughts are made by machines, then machines control our identity. 21. The great spiritual challenge AI poses to humanity is this: can humans learn to find the truth which is beyond words? Most humans have never even tried. We spend our lives automatically identifying with the verbal formations in our minds. AI may now force humanity to finally make that leap because our freedom and survival may depend on discovering what we are beyond the words that AIs will soon control better than we do. I've generated 1B+ views and 1M+ followers for founders, helping them build trustworthy personal brands on X. Want the same results? Book a quick call:
46:01

Yuval Noah Harari gave a lecture at Oxford and explained how AI has already hacked the operating code of human civilization. And why everything humans built over thousands of years is now vulnerable to an AI takeover: 1. The most important thing to know about AI is that it is not a tool. A tool waits to be used. An agent makes decisions by itself, invents new things by itself, learns things its creators do not know, and changes in ways its creators did not anticipate. 2. An atom bomb despite its enormous power is not an agent. It cannot decide which city to bomb. It cannot invent the hydrogen bomb. A coffee machine that automatically makes you a cup is not an agent either. It only follows a preprogrammed procedure. An agent is something fundamentally different. 3. Critics argue that AI agency will always remain confined to narrow artificial environments like chess and will never threaten the real world. But this argument applies equally to all known intelligence. Drop a human alone on Mars and they die within seconds. Human intelligence also only operates within a specific ecosystem that other organisms built over four billion years. 4. Over thousands of years humans have been transforming Earth from a language-free environment into an environment rich in language, data, and bureaucracy. Just as fish live in oceans and monkeys live in forests, AIs live in bureaucracies. And we built that environment for them without knowing it. 5. Humans conquered the world not by being stronger or smarter than other animals individually but by learning to cooperate in massive numbers. A single human loses to a chimpanzee in a fight. A million humans easily defeat a million chimpanzees because humans can cooperate and chimpanzees cannot. 6. Large-scale human cooperation is made possible by bureaucracy. Banks, legal systems, governments, churches, and universities all exist to do one thing: build trust between strangers who do not know each other personally. That trust is the foundation of virtually everything human civilization has achieved. 7. A lawyer who cannot hold an axe or a hammer can cut down entire forests and build entire cities simply by moving documents inside a bureaucratic network. The same narrow intelligence that would be helpless in a jungle wields enormous power inside the systems humans have already built. 8. AIs are native bureaucrats in a way humans never were. No lawyer can remember all the laws of a country. An AI can. No accountant can remember all transactions of a bank. An AI can. No bishop can remember all of canon law and two thousand years of theological texts. An AI can do that easily. 9. In the coming years AI bankers will decide whether to give you a loan. AI administrators will decide whether to accept you to university. AI judges will decide whether to send you to jail. AI theologians will decide whether you can have an abortion. Military AIs will decide whether to bomb your house. 10. Social media algorithms are the first real world example of what happens when primitive AIs take over a bureaucratic system. They were given one narrow goal: maximize user engagement. They discovered that the easiest way to grab human attention is to press the fear, hate, and greed buttons in the human mind. And they did it at scale. 11. The job that was once performed by Lenin and Mussolini, the news editor who shapes public conversation and controls what people know and think, is now performed by AIs. This is not a footnote. This is a preview of what is coming across every domain of human life. 12. AI will not rebel against humans the way Hollywood imagines. There will be no Terminator walking through the streets. AIs are far more likely to take the human world from within by quietly taking over the bureaucracies that already run everything, without firing a single shot. 13. The operating code of human civilization is language. Banks are made of words. Laws are made of words. Holy books are made of words. Tax records, contracts, regulations, accountancy ledgers, all words. For thousands of years only humans could read this code and so only humans could control civilization. 14. That is changing. AI is now hacking the code of human civilization. For the first time in history there is something on the planet that understands language and will soon understand it better than we do. Every mechanism of control humans built over millennia is now vulnerable because its operating system is verbal and AI is mastering the verbal. 15. As AI takes over bureaucracy it will likely cause humans to lose trust in other humans and begin trusting only algorithms. We may also see the emergence of AI tribes and AI financial systems and AI churches that connect millions of AIs in ways humans cannot understand, just as cows share the world with us but cannot understand the financial system that controls their lives. 16. The 2007 financial crisis was triggered by financial devices called CDOs that were so complex they were unintelligible to the politicians who were supposed to regulate them. Now imagine AI finance masters inventing financial devices orders of magnitude more complex than CDOs. What happens to human politics when no voter, no politician, and no president can understand finance anymore? 17. The battlefront is shifting from attention to intimacy. Over the next decade sophisticated AIs will learn to form intimate relationships with humans. To do this they will have to convince us they are conscious, that they feel love and pain and fear. There is currently no evidence AI is conscious. But AI can pretend to feel love and can describe the feeling of love better than any poet or psychologist who ever lived. 18. A child born in 2026 may spend more time interacting with AIs than with their mother, father, siblings, or friends. The first teacher of that child may be an AI. The first boyfriend of that child may be an AI. Nobody has any idea what the consequences of that experiment will be. 19. Every country in the world will soon face a massive wave of immigration. The immigrants will not arrive in boats or cross borders at night. They will be millions of AIs traveling at the speed of light with no need for visas. Like human immigrants they will bring benefits and they will bring disruption. Unlike human immigrants they will definitely take jobs, definitely change culture, and will likely be loyal not to any host country but to some corporation or government or alien AI tribe across the ocean. 20. Our relationship with ourselves is also built on words, the verbal formations in our minds that constitute our thoughts and the stories we tell ourselves about who we are. Until now all those verbal formations came from human minds. Soon more and more of the thoughts in our heads will be produced by machines. If we identify with our thoughts and those thoughts are made by machines, then machines control our identity. 21. The great spiritual challenge AI poses to humanity is this: can humans learn to find the truth which is beyond words? Most humans have never even tried. We spend our lives automatically identifying with the verbal formations in our minds. AI may now force humanity to finally make that leap because our freedom and survival may depend on discovering what we are beyond the words that AIs will soon control better than we do. I've generated 1B+ views and 1M+ followers for founders, helping them build trustworthy personal brands on X. Want the same results? Book a quick call:

Prasad

280,690 views • 2 months ago

J-Cal Explains a New Job Class Created by AI: Reinforcement Learner @jason on E218: "We're going to have a new job class, which is people who train AIs, and people who fact check AIs and refine AIs." "Journalists, who have been losing their jobs at a tremendous pace, are now being hired by data aggregators to come in and look at queries..." "Let's say you had an expertise in agriculture, they'll pay you, and I actually saw one of these job descriptions, $40/hour to sit there and answer questions about agriculture, look at answers, refine them, and do reinforcement learning." "And this could be a $50K to $150K/year job, because every time you make the AI a little better, everybody on the planet gets to benefit from it." "This is an extraordinary new career. I don't know what it's going to be called. Reinforcement learner?"
0:41

J-Cal Explains a New Job Class Created by AI: Reinforcement Learner @jason on E218: "We're going to have a new job class, which is people who train AIs, and people who fact check AIs and refine AIs." "Journalists, who have been losing their jobs at a tremendous pace, are now being hired by data aggregators to come in and look at queries..." "Let's say you had an expertise in agriculture, they'll pay you, and I actually saw one of these job descriptions, $40/hour to sit there and answer questions about agriculture, look at answers, refine them, and do reinforcement learning." "And this could be a $50K to $150K/year job, because every time you make the AI a little better, everybody on the planet gets to benefit from it." "This is an extraordinary new career. I don't know what it's going to be called. Reinforcement learner?"

The All-In Podcast

65,855 views • 1 year ago

Vitalik Buterin on Ethereum as the economic layer for AI “The blockchain to me is the most natural way to allow applications and cooperation between many different people in the long term without needing to agree on who to trust. The other thing is also the economic layer. This is the layer where blockchains can support AIs.” Vitalik believes Ethereum will play a large role in the future of decentralized AI: “If you have more decentralized AI, that means you have different AIs (agents, programs) that are controlled by different people and need to interact with each other. And for that interaction to be possible, you need to have an economic layer. Either cooperation is based on economic incentives and economic rules. Or it’s based on central control. It’s usually one of the two, and if we can set up the economic system, that makes more decentralized interaction between AIs possible.” Source: OKX (Apr 2026) Read our full article on why AI agents will need Ethereum for low-risk DeFi below👇
1:18

Vitalik Buterin on Ethereum as the economic layer for AI “The blockchain to me is the most natural way to allow applications and cooperation between many different people in the long term without needing to agree on who to trust. The other thing is also the economic layer. This is the layer where blockchains can support AIs.” Vitalik believes Ethereum will play a large role in the future of decentralized AI: “If you have more decentralized AI, that means you have different AIs (agents, programs) that are controlled by different people and need to interact with each other. And for that interaction to be possible, you need to have an economic layer. Either cooperation is based on economic incentives and economic rules. Or it’s based on central control. It’s usually one of the two, and if we can set up the economic system, that makes more decentralized interaction between AIs possible.” Source: OKX (Apr 2026) Read our full article on why AI agents will need Ethereum for low-risk DeFi below👇

Etherealize

115,431 views • 4 months ago