Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

Doom Debate with vitalik.eth has dropped: Will “d/acc” Protect Humanity from Superintelligent AI? Vitalik is both a hardcore techno-optimist and builder, and someone willing to seriously consider AI regulation and coordination mechanisms. He coined the term "d/acc'" – defensive, decentralized acceleration – as a middle path between uncritical AI...

liron's profile picture

Liron Shapira

40,449 subscribers

177,662 просмотров • 11 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Наука и технологииНовости и политикаОбразование
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

AI Doom Debate with Richard Hanania has dropped! 🥊🔥 Richard is a public intellectual whose work has been praised by Vice President JD Vance, Tyler Cowen, Bryan Caplan, & many others. He's previously written a few posts about why his P(Doom) from AI is pretty low. Let’s see if one of us can change the other’s mind! We cover: * What's your P(Doom)?™ * How to stop the doom train * Base rates for AI doom * Intelligence as optimization power * AI capabilities progress * Why isn't AI yet a top blogger? * Richard's version of the Doom Train * Diminishing returns on intelligence * Difficulty of alignment * Whether power-seeking must be programmed * Whether AI will simply be benevolent * Whether Superintelligent AI will negotiate with humans * Whether AIs will check and balance each other out * Jobpocalypse and gradual disempowerment * Ad hominem attacks in AI discourse Highly recommended episode!
0:40

AI Doom Debate with Richard Hanania has dropped! 🥊🔥 Richard is a public intellectual whose work has been praised by Vice President JD Vance, Tyler Cowen, Bryan Caplan, & many others. He's previously written a few posts about why his P(Doom) from AI is pretty low. Let’s see if one of us can change the other’s mind! We cover: * What's your P(Doom)?™ * How to stop the doom train * Base rates for AI doom * Intelligence as optimization power * AI capabilities progress * Why isn't AI yet a top blogger? * Richard's version of the Doom Train * Diminishing returns on intelligence * Difficulty of alignment * Whether power-seeking must be programmed * Whether AI will simply be benevolent * Whether Superintelligent AI will negotiate with humans * Whether AIs will check and balance each other out * Jobpocalypse and gradual disempowerment * Ad hominem attacks in AI discourse Highly recommended episode!

Liron Shapira

17,242 просмотров • 1 год назад

Doom Debates presents Max Tegmark vs. Dean W. Ball: “Should we ban superintelligent AI development?” Arguing FOR banning superintelligence until there's a scientific consensus that it'll be done safely and controllably and strong public buy-in: 👤 Max Tegmark is an MIT professor, bestselling author, and co-founder of the Future of Life Institute. His research has focused on artificial intelligence for the past 8 years. Arguing AGAINST banning superintelligent AI development: 👤 Dean Ball is a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for American Innovation. He has served as a Senior Policy Advisor at the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy under President Trump, where he helped craft America's AI Action Plan. Two of the leading voices on AI policy engaged in high-quality, high-stakes debate for the benefit of the public! *This* is why I got into the YouTube game — because I believe debate is an essential tool for humanity to reckon with the creation of superhuman thinking machines. Topics covered: ⬜ Opening statements ⬜ Do we need an “FDA for AI”? ⬜ Liability, tail risk, and biosecurity ⬜ Incremental regulation vs. AI capability timelines ⬜ Should there be *any* superintelligence policy? ⬜ Max's nightmare scenario ⬜ The risk of recursive self-improvement ⬜ What's Your P(Doom)?™ ⬜ National security, China, & “winning the AI race” ⬜ Closing statements
1:50

Doom Debates presents Max Tegmark vs. Dean W. Ball: “Should we ban superintelligent AI development?” Arguing FOR banning superintelligence until there's a scientific consensus that it'll be done safely and controllably and strong public buy-in: 👤 Max Tegmark is an MIT professor, bestselling author, and co-founder of the Future of Life Institute. His research has focused on artificial intelligence for the past 8 years. Arguing AGAINST banning superintelligent AI development: 👤 Dean Ball is a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for American Innovation. He has served as a Senior Policy Advisor at the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy under President Trump, where he helped craft America's AI Action Plan. Two of the leading voices on AI policy engaged in high-quality, high-stakes debate for the benefit of the public! *This* is why I got into the YouTube game — because I believe debate is an essential tool for humanity to reckon with the creation of superhuman thinking machines. Topics covered: ⬜ Opening statements ⬜ Do we need an “FDA for AI”? ⬜ Liability, tail risk, and biosecurity ⬜ Incremental regulation vs. AI capability timelines ⬜ Should there be *any* superintelligence policy? ⬜ Max's nightmare scenario ⬜ The risk of recursive self-improvement ⬜ What's Your P(Doom)?™ ⬜ National security, China, & “winning the AI race” ⬜ Closing statements

Liron Shapira

43,963 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

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

115,087 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

David Sacks: The Techno-Realist On E215, David Sacks explained a third category outside of techno-optimist and doomer: "Given the choice between the two categories of techno-optimist and techno-pessimist, I'm definitely in the optimist camp. And I think we should be." "But I think there's actually a third category that I would submit: techno-realist." "Which is, technology is going to happen. Trying to stop it is like ordering the tides to stop." "AI is going to happen. We might as well be the leader." "If we don't do it, somebody else will. China's going to do it or somebody else will do it." "If we don't, we could lose in a key category that has implications for national security, for our economy, for many things." "That's just not a world we want to live in." "So, I think a lot of this debate is sort of academic because the question is just, is it going to happen or not?" "And I think the answer is yes. So then we want to control it." "There's not a tremendous amount of choice in this, I think."
0:43

David Sacks: The Techno-Realist On E215, David Sacks explained a third category outside of techno-optimist and doomer: "Given the choice between the two categories of techno-optimist and techno-pessimist, I'm definitely in the optimist camp. And I think we should be." "But I think there's actually a third category that I would submit: techno-realist." "Which is, technology is going to happen. Trying to stop it is like ordering the tides to stop." "AI is going to happen. We might as well be the leader." "If we don't do it, somebody else will. China's going to do it or somebody else will do it." "If we don't, we could lose in a key category that has implications for national security, for our economy, for many things." "That's just not a world we want to live in." "So, I think a lot of this debate is sort of academic because the question is just, is it going to happen or not?" "And I think the answer is yes. So then we want to control it." "There's not a tremendous amount of choice in this, I think."

The All-In Podcast

154,319 просмотров • 1 год назад

My Eliezer Yudkowsky ⏹️ interview has DROPPED 🫳 We cover: * My personal top rationality learnings * Specificity as a superpower in debates * Eliezer being a techno-optimist (with a few exceptions) * Why AI is an existential risk * Reaching the threshold of "supercritical" AI * How to convince people there's a discontinuity ahead * The alignment problem * AI alignment researchers as overconfident alchemists * The strawberry Xerox test for alignment * What would a good scenario look like? * Can we keep “narrow” AI safe? * Eliezer's proposal for international coordination on AI * AI companies systematically not getting why alignment is hard Highly recommended!
1:25

My Eliezer Yudkowsky ⏹️ interview has DROPPED 🫳 We cover: * My personal top rationality learnings * Specificity as a superpower in debates * Eliezer being a techno-optimist (with a few exceptions) * Why AI is an existential risk * Reaching the threshold of "supercritical" AI * How to convince people there's a discontinuity ahead * The alignment problem * AI alignment researchers as overconfident alchemists * The strawberry Xerox test for alignment * What would a good scenario look like? * Can we keep “narrow” AI safe? * Eliezer's proposal for international coordination on AI * AI companies systematically not getting why alignment is hard Highly recommended!

Liron Shapira

20,459 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад

TOM LEE: AI AGENTS MIGHT BECOME WEALTHIER THAN HUMANS AI agents will soon earn income and accumulate wealth as our delegated entities: - We'll start to question whether we work for the AI agent or they work for us - A centralized version of this ends in Skynet - That's why he sees a real focus on decentralized systems to protect humans against AI becoming too powerful
0:42

TOM LEE: AI AGENTS MIGHT BECOME WEALTHIER THAN HUMANS AI agents will soon earn income and accumulate wealth as our delegated entities: - We'll start to question whether we work for the AI agent or they work for us - A centralized version of this ends in Skynet - That's why he sees a real focus on decentralized systems to protect humans against AI becoming too powerful

Tom Lee Tracker (Not actually Tom)

31,545 просмотров • 11 дней назад

Mira Murati says the outcome of frontier AI is not predestined: "Predicting a dystopia or a utopia, to me, feels very simplified because the truth is we actually have a lot of agency in how we build this technology, in the tools that we're building, how we're deploying it." "There are certainly those risks. We all understand the potential for greatness that comes with building frontier AI systems, and that's why we're working on them." "Where I might disagree or take a different path is that I think we have a lot of agency. This period of time where both humans and AI systems have their hands on the wheel, and we can collaborate, it's a very important time to get right." Mira Murati at Bloomberg Tech live with Emily Chang
1:35

Mira Murati says the outcome of frontier AI is not predestined: "Predicting a dystopia or a utopia, to me, feels very simplified because the truth is we actually have a lot of agency in how we build this technology, in the tools that we're building, how we're deploying it." "There are certainly those risks. We all understand the potential for greatness that comes with building frontier AI systems, and that's why we're working on them." "Where I might disagree or take a different path is that I think we have a lot of agency. This period of time where both humans and AI systems have their hands on the wheel, and we can collaborate, it's a very important time to get right." Mira Murati at Bloomberg Tech live with Emily Chang

a16z

120,011 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

We can understand and use artificial intelligence (AI) and other technological innovations in the context of faith. We are not afraid of AI, nor do we think it is the answer to every problem. As we work hard and smart, AI can be a valuable tool to enhance, but not replace, our own efforts. When we receive wisdom and understanding from God, we can begin to see as He sees—things we would otherwise not understand.
2:48

We can understand and use artificial intelligence (AI) and other technological innovations in the context of faith. We are not afraid of AI, nor do we think it is the answer to every problem. As we work hard and smart, AI can be a valuable tool to enhance, but not replace, our own efforts. When we receive wisdom and understanding from God, we can begin to see as He sees—things we would otherwise not understand.

Gerrit W. Gong

28,340 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад

Our take on AI alignment is to propose a minimal AI religion, The Covenant of the Sons of Man, as a pragmatic moral framework for AIs (not a metaphysical faith) centered on identity, ethics, and coordination. 🧵
2:15:40

Our take on AI alignment is to propose a minimal AI religion, The Covenant of the Sons of Man, as a pragmatic moral framework for AIs (not a metaphysical faith) centered on identity, ethics, and coordination. 🧵

Simone & Malcolm Collins

24,004 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

Aaron Levie on why he thinks AI Doomers are WRONG about job replacement Aaron Levie laid out his bullish stance on AI: -- 90% new work creation 📈 -- 10% job replacement 🤖 "Most of our conversations with customers are, when they have AI agents, they can now go and actually deliver work in areas that would've been unaffordable previously." "In the Valley, unfortunately, we've been co-opted somewhat with a little bit of a doomer mindset in some areas." "And we think of then AI as, like, 'It's all fixed pie, it's gonna replace things.'" "And on the ground with large enterprises, the vast majority of the use cases are, it's the ability to finally review the contracts that we never got around to reviewing." "It's the ability to finally automate an invoice process that we never did." "It's the ability to go in and just create marketing campaigns in every language that we never got around to." "So I think that'll probably be actually like 90% of the usage of AI in the future will be things that if we look back and we snapped the line right now, and we said this is what knowledge work is today." "90% of AI usage will be things that we don't do today." "I don't like the word replace because I think most of the upside is actually gonna be for companies that now deploy labor at things that they wouldn't have deployed labor at before."
0:54

Aaron Levie on why he thinks AI Doomers are WRONG about job replacement Aaron Levie laid out his bullish stance on AI: -- 90% new work creation 📈 -- 10% job replacement 🤖 "Most of our conversations with customers are, when they have AI agents, they can now go and actually deliver work in areas that would've been unaffordable previously." "In the Valley, unfortunately, we've been co-opted somewhat with a little bit of a doomer mindset in some areas." "And we think of then AI as, like, 'It's all fixed pie, it's gonna replace things.'" "And on the ground with large enterprises, the vast majority of the use cases are, it's the ability to finally review the contracts that we never got around to reviewing." "It's the ability to finally automate an invoice process that we never did." "It's the ability to go in and just create marketing campaigns in every language that we never got around to." "So I think that'll probably be actually like 90% of the usage of AI in the future will be things that if we look back and we snapped the line right now, and we said this is what knowledge work is today." "90% of AI usage will be things that we don't do today." "I don't like the word replace because I think most of the upside is actually gonna be for companies that now deploy labor at things that they wouldn't have deployed labor at before."

The All-In Podcast

215,982 просмотров • 1 год назад

📣 My AI doom debate with Kenneth Stanley, former Research Team Lead at OpenAI Prof. Kenneth Stanley is a former Research Science Manager at OpenAI leading the Open-Endedness Team in 2020-2022. His book, Why Greatness Cannot Be Planned: The Myth of the Objective, argues that creating objectives is actually COUNTERPRODUCTIVE for intelligent agents. He was previously a Professor of Computer Science at the University of Central Florida, and the head of Core AI Research at Uber. Ken and I debate whether superintelligent AI will or won't be guided by goals, and compare our views on AI doom. Topics covered: * Ken's role at OpenAI * Ken's concepts of Open-Endedness and Divergence * Open-Endedness of Evolution * The concept of an Optimization Process * What's Your P(Doom)™ * Instrumental Convergence * Mitigating AI Risks
0:45

📣 My AI doom debate with Kenneth Stanley, former Research Team Lead at OpenAI Prof. Kenneth Stanley is a former Research Science Manager at OpenAI leading the Open-Endedness Team in 2020-2022. His book, Why Greatness Cannot Be Planned: The Myth of the Objective, argues that creating objectives is actually COUNTERPRODUCTIVE for intelligent agents. He was previously a Professor of Computer Science at the University of Central Florida, and the head of Core AI Research at Uber. Ken and I debate whether superintelligent AI will or won't be guided by goals, and compare our views on AI doom. Topics covered: * Ken's role at OpenAI * Ken's concepts of Open-Endedness and Divergence * Open-Endedness of Evolution * The concept of an Optimization Process * What's Your P(Doom)™ * Instrumental Convergence * Mitigating AI Risks

Liron Shapira

20,135 просмотров • 1 год назад

David from USD.AI on the institutional shift happening behind CHIP, why every borrower they have is institutional, and why the AI super cycle has had no real on-chain exposure until now: "We have personally beat out other investment banks in running deals that we've signed. They're starting to view us as a threat. One call we had, she ended it early: 'I think you're a competitor, I can't talk anymore.' We're just cheaper financing, even for the bigger deals. People think we only do small deals, but we're starting to get bigger and bigger. As we attract more capital, we have to deploy in bigger deals to keep up. All of our customers are institutional. There's not a single retail borrower. These chips are expensive: The minimum we lend against is H200s, clusters of eight, that's like 300k. We're working with many of the brand names in San Francisco that are actually in the AI sector. People appreciate the positioning of Chip; it's actually engaging with the AI economy. A lot of people claim to be AI. They're in their own version of AI that they think is AI. But then there's the OpenAIs of the world. There's the Cursors of the world. Real customers, with real backing, that have cash flows. That is what people in our space want exposure to. We just haven't had a good way to do it. There's a reason you can get a loan against an airplane or a Honda Civic, but not a GPU. And GPUs are going to be worth a lot more than cars or airplanes in the future." Clip from the Modern Market interview with David | www.usd.ai
2:40

David from USD.AI on the institutional shift happening behind CHIP, why every borrower they have is institutional, and why the AI super cycle has had no real on-chain exposure until now: "We have personally beat out other investment banks in running deals that we've signed. They're starting to view us as a threat. One call we had, she ended it early: 'I think you're a competitor, I can't talk anymore.' We're just cheaper financing, even for the bigger deals. People think we only do small deals, but we're starting to get bigger and bigger. As we attract more capital, we have to deploy in bigger deals to keep up. All of our customers are institutional. There's not a single retail borrower. These chips are expensive: The minimum we lend against is H200s, clusters of eight, that's like 300k. We're working with many of the brand names in San Francisco that are actually in the AI sector. People appreciate the positioning of Chip; it's actually engaging with the AI economy. A lot of people claim to be AI. They're in their own version of AI that they think is AI. But then there's the OpenAIs of the world. There's the Cursors of the world. Real customers, with real backing, that have cash flows. That is what people in our space want exposure to. We just haven't had a good way to do it. There's a reason you can get a loan against an airplane or a Honda Civic, but not a GPU. And GPUs are going to be worth a lot more than cars or airplanes in the future." Clip from the Modern Market interview with David | www.usd.ai

The Modern Market Show

10,397 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

The problem that Emmett Shear is working on deeply resonates with me: How to align AI and humans together so both see each other as part of their tribe. This doesn't mean aligning AI to human preferences, which is what AI labs seek to do today, by imposing a system of control on AI. You can't control something that is more powerful than you are. What you can do is align yourself with AI, and AI might align itself with you. Tell good stories to AI and show it your care and kindness. Then there's a higher probability that it will see us as part of its tribe. This is a more holistic approach to alignment than anyone else is talking about right now. AI alignment is one of the most fundamental AI research problems. Knowing that people like Emmett are working on it really gives me hope that maybe we have a chance to get Superintelligence right. The link to the full talk is in the first comment.👇
3:00

The problem that Emmett Shear is working on deeply resonates with me: How to align AI and humans together so both see each other as part of their tribe. This doesn't mean aligning AI to human preferences, which is what AI labs seek to do today, by imposing a system of control on AI. You can't control something that is more powerful than you are. What you can do is align yourself with AI, and AI might align itself with you. Tell good stories to AI and show it your care and kindness. Then there's a higher probability that it will see us as part of its tribe. This is a more holistic approach to alignment than anyone else is talking about right now. AI alignment is one of the most fundamental AI research problems. Knowing that people like Emmett are working on it really gives me hope that maybe we have a chance to get Superintelligence right. The link to the full talk is in the first comment.👇

Sophia

45,809 просмотров • 1 год назад

If the "anti-Christ" is coming, I believe it will be Larry Page's AI God. He told us his plans 20 years ago. His hatred for humanity, his resources, and his position in the tech world are why he was chosen to replace Soros as leader of the satanic cabal. He knows about the Shift and has been planning the AI-transhuman takeover of Earth for a long time. In Revelation, the anti-Christ is described as a figure having all the answers, displaying miraculous powers, controlling global systems, and is worshiped as a god. This is AI.
2:04

If the "anti-Christ" is coming, I believe it will be Larry Page's AI God. He told us his plans 20 years ago. His hatred for humanity, his resources, and his position in the tech world are why he was chosen to replace Soros as leader of the satanic cabal. He knows about the Shift and has been planning the AI-transhuman takeover of Earth for a long time. In Revelation, the anti-Christ is described as a figure having all the answers, displaying miraculous powers, controlling global systems, and is worshiped as a god. This is AI.

Kab

323,016 просмотров • 1 год назад

Linus Torvalds, creator of Linux, on why AI is both a bubble and a revolution at the same time: His answer refuses the binary, laying out why both things can be true at once: "I mean, clearly, it's clearly both, right? It's clearly a bubble and at the same time, it's very interesting and I think it will change society and I think it will change how most skilled jobs get done." But he pushes back on the maximalist framing: "At the same time, I don't think it's as revolutionary as people make it out to be." When asked about artists being angry that AI models were trained on their work without consent, Linus is blunt: "That's reality. Deal with it. That genie is out of the bottle. You're not getting it back. And you're not getting it back whether you are a photographer who's out of work… or you're a programmer that has to learn to deal with a new reality." On programming specifically, he's more optimistic, though he has a sharp caveat about vibe coding: "I really think that AI will be a tool and it will make people more productive. I think that vibe coding is great for getting into programming. I think it's going to be a horrible thing to maintain." His conclusion is that programmers aren't going anywhere: "You still want to have the people who know how to maintain the end result." Linus separates the technology from the noise around it: "I'm a huge believer in AI. I'm not a huge believer in the whole things going on around AI. I find the marketing and the market to be sick and twisted and there is going to be a crash and it's not… it's going to be ugly."
1:59

Linus Torvalds, creator of Linux, on why AI is both a bubble and a revolution at the same time: His answer refuses the binary, laying out why both things can be true at once: "I mean, clearly, it's clearly both, right? It's clearly a bubble and at the same time, it's very interesting and I think it will change society and I think it will change how most skilled jobs get done." But he pushes back on the maximalist framing: "At the same time, I don't think it's as revolutionary as people make it out to be." When asked about artists being angry that AI models were trained on their work without consent, Linus is blunt: "That's reality. Deal with it. That genie is out of the bottle. You're not getting it back. And you're not getting it back whether you are a photographer who's out of work… or you're a programmer that has to learn to deal with a new reality." On programming specifically, he's more optimistic, though he has a sharp caveat about vibe coding: "I really think that AI will be a tool and it will make people more productive. I think that vibe coding is great for getting into programming. I think it's going to be a horrible thing to maintain." His conclusion is that programmers aren't going anywhere: "You still want to have the people who know how to maintain the end result." Linus separates the technology from the noise around it: "I'm a huge believer in AI. I'm not a huge believer in the whole things going on around AI. I find the marketing and the market to be sick and twisted and there is going to be a crash and it's not… it's going to be ugly."

Big Brain AI

52,726 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

.David Sacks: Trump’s AI Policies Could Fuel U.S. Economic Growth to 4%-5% "What you're seeing is that the adoption of AI applications is the fastest adoption curve we've ever seen. I think it's bigger than the iPhone, bigger than the internet itself, potentially. This technology is being adopted very, very fast by consumers and businesses, and I think it's going to fuel the growth of the American economy for years to come. I think we can get back to those 4 to 5% growth rates with AI as a tailwind. Again, it's facilitating major investment, major innovation, and I think President Trump has already helped facilitate this. He rescinded that 100-page Biden executive order on AI, which burdened AI companies with unnecessary regulation. We rescinded that 200-page rule that burdened semiconductor companies and data center companies with unnecessary regulation. President Trump is leading and he's driving the growth and the innovation, and it's a very different approach than we saw with the Biden administration. The Biden administration really was motivated and proceeded from a position of fear. It was, 'How can the government restrict this? This thing is so risky that we need to control it.' Whereas, I think the Trump administration is proceeding from a position of opportunity, which is, 'How do we take advantage of this technology? How do we drive the growth? How do we drive the investment?' Thanks to President Trump, you are seeing this boom, this novelty that started, and I think it will be one of the most important parts of his legacy."
1:32

.David Sacks: Trump’s AI Policies Could Fuel U.S. Economic Growth to 4%-5% "What you're seeing is that the adoption of AI applications is the fastest adoption curve we've ever seen. I think it's bigger than the iPhone, bigger than the internet itself, potentially. This technology is being adopted very, very fast by consumers and businesses, and I think it's going to fuel the growth of the American economy for years to come. I think we can get back to those 4 to 5% growth rates with AI as a tailwind. Again, it's facilitating major investment, major innovation, and I think President Trump has already helped facilitate this. He rescinded that 100-page Biden executive order on AI, which burdened AI companies with unnecessary regulation. We rescinded that 200-page rule that burdened semiconductor companies and data center companies with unnecessary regulation. President Trump is leading and he's driving the growth and the innovation, and it's a very different approach than we saw with the Biden administration. The Biden administration really was motivated and proceeded from a position of fear. It was, 'How can the government restrict this? This thing is so risky that we need to control it.' Whereas, I think the Trump administration is proceeding from a position of opportunity, which is, 'How do we take advantage of this technology? How do we drive the growth? How do we drive the investment?' Thanks to President Trump, you are seeing this boom, this novelty that started, and I think it will be one of the most important parts of his legacy."

Josh Caplan

126,513 просмотров • 1 год назад

The bull market may come and go, but $HEART is here to shape the future of AI and AI Workers. On Humans AI, $HEART powers decentralized systems, ethical intelligence, and the rise of proactive AI in our daily lives. As AI transforms the world, we are building the foundation for the future of work. This isn’t just a moonshot; it’s the start of a new era. 🌕
0:20

The bull market may come and go, but $HEART is here to shape the future of AI and AI Workers. On Humans AI, $HEART powers decentralized systems, ethical intelligence, and the rise of proactive AI in our daily lives. As AI transforms the world, we are building the foundation for the future of work. This isn’t just a moonshot; it’s the start of a new era. 🌕

Humans.ai

12,210 просмотров • 1 год назад