Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

🇺🇸FORMER OPENAI CHIEF SCIENTIST BUILDING “SUPER INGELLIGENT SYSTEMS” Ilya Sutskever, along with OpenAI’s Daniel Levy and Apple’s former AI lead, Daniel Gross, founded Safe Superintelligence, a startup founded in May, focusing on building systems that operate at super intelligence. Super intelligence surpasses human intelligence, exhibiting advanced cognitive intelligence, surpassing... the human-species. Ilya Sutskever: “We have started the world’s first straight-shot SSI lab, with one goal and one product: a safe superintelligence. Building safe superintelligence (SSI) is the most important technical problem of our time. We will do it through revolutionary breakthroughs produced by a small, crack team.” Source: AI News, (Statement: Ilya Sutskever, Daniel Gross, Daniel Levy)show more

Mario Nawfal

3,481,296 subscribers

128,886 views • 2 years ago •via X (Twitter)

Science & Technology News & Politics Education

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

9 Comments

Gohar Hassan Dar2 years ago

SSI is a distraction from what OpenAI is doing

Matt2 years ago

(Safe)

Majuu Alone🇰🇪2 years ago

Well, super intelligence is an exciting concept, it's also a bit like a double-edged sword. It could be a powerful tool for good, but it could also pose significant risks if not handled carefully. Like a bear with a beehive, it's best to approach it with caution and a healthy dose of respect.

JD Sharp2 years ago

If it says it's safe it's very, very dangerous.

İsmail TARIM2 years ago

let me translate it for you, they will build the "unstoppable force" but will be able to stop it if need be (Safe) either it will not be "unstoppable" or they will fail to stop it

Donnie_Tesla2 years ago

👀

Tomer Rozenberg2 years ago

Building the future, one breakthrough at a time! Excited to see what Safe Superintelligence will achieve. 🌟 #AIRevolution

Titiris2 years ago

@PedroBalducci_

UBU2 years ago

this is epic looking forward to see waht Ilya does...

Related Videos

Former OpenAI chief scientist Ilya Sutskever reportedly has a *new and totally different direction* for advancing AI With just this (no product or revenue yet), his startup, Safe SuperIntelligence Inc. (SSI), is in talks to raise $2B at a $30B valuation

Former OpenAI chief scientist Ilya Sutskever reportedly has a new and totally different direction for advancing AI With just this (no product or revenue yet), his startup, Safe SuperIntelligence Inc. (SSI), is in talks to raise $2B at a $30B valuation

Rowan Cheung

28,522 views • 1 year ago

Ilya Sutskever, co-founder of OpenAI, now building Safe Superintelligence: "The whole problem is the power. When the power is really big, what's going to happen?" Asked when AI that learns like a human and then races past it arrives, he didn't say never. He said 5 to 20 years

Ilya Sutskever, co-founder of OpenAI, now building Safe Superintelligence: "The whole problem is the power. When the power is really big, what's going to happen?" Asked when AI that learns like a human and then races past it arrives, he didn't say never. He said 5 to 20 years

Ruben

54,864 views • 3 days ago

Ilya Sutskever has a solution for when AI surpasses human intelligence in every domain — and he hates that he believes it. He fears a future where AI handles everything flawlessly, leaving humans with no role to play. "Every person will have an AI that will do their bidding. The AI goes and earns money for the person, advocates for their needs in the political sphere, and the person says 'great, keep it up.'" But as Ilya Sutskever warns: "The person is no longer a participant. And that's a precarious place to be in." Political and social structures have a shelf life, Ilya points out. They function, then decay. As the Buddhists say, change is the only constant. So how do you maintain long-term equilibrium between humans and superintelligent AI? Ilya offers a solution he wishes he didn't believe in: Human-AI integration. "If people become part AI with some kind of Neuralink++, now the AI understands something and we understand it too. You are involved in the situation yourself fully." In Ilya's view, this is the answer to the equilibrium. Surviving isn't the hard part. The hard part is remaining a participant in a world shaped by intelligence beyond our comprehension.

Ilya Sutskever has a solution for when AI surpasses human intelligence in every domain — and he hates that he believes it. He fears a future where AI handles everything flawlessly, leaving humans with no role to play. "Every person will have an AI that will do their bidding. The AI goes and earns money for the person, advocates for their needs in the political sphere, and the person says 'great, keep it up.'" But as Ilya Sutskever warns: "The person is no longer a participant. And that's a precarious place to be in." Political and social structures have a shelf life, Ilya points out. They function, then decay. As the Buddhists say, change is the only constant. So how do you maintain long-term equilibrium between humans and superintelligent AI? Ilya offers a solution he wishes he didn't believe in: Human-AI integration. "If people become part AI with some kind of Neuralink++, now the AI understands something and we understand it too. You are involved in the situation yourself fully." In Ilya's view, this is the answer to the equilibrium. Surviving isn't the hard part. The hard part is remaining a participant in a world shaped by intelligence beyond our comprehension.

Big Brain AI

35,720 views • 6 months ago

Jeff Bezos $AMZN believes AI is an industrial bubble — where market frenzy pushes billions of dollars into newly founded companies with 5–6 people and no product. Just look at: • Thinking Machines by Mira Murati, valued at $12B • Safe Superintelligence by Ilya Sutskever, valued at $32B In a context like this, the real skill is knowing how to separate the winners from the rest. The benefits to society from AI will be gigantic. The challenge is not missing them — and not losing money by backing the wrong ones.

Jeff Bezos $AMZN believes AI is an industrial bubble — where market frenzy pushes billions of dollars into newly founded companies with 5–6 people and no product. Just look at: • Thinking Machines by Mira Murati, valued at $12B • Safe Superintelligence by Ilya Sutskever, valued at $32B In a context like this, the real skill is knowing how to separate the winners from the rest. The benefits to society from AI will be gigantic. The challenge is not missing them — and not losing money by backing the wrong ones.

Daniel

180,614 views • 6 months ago

Ilya Sutskever, the co-founder of OpenAI, on the one AI risk that grows with every jump in capability. "There are concerns around if an AGI ever becomes very, very powerful, which is possible. Maybe it will want to go rogue, being that it is an agent." "We are also doing a lot of research on addressing the technological side of things, so that the AI will never want to go rogue. And this is something which I am working on as well." The work he is describing has a name: the assurance layer. Proving a powerful, agentic system will not go rogue before you deploy it, not after. That layer does not build itself. It gets built by the labs, regulators, and insurers who agree on how to test and verify these systems. P.S. That is the entire agenda of the AI Assurance and Governance Summit. Frontier labs, regulated industries, insurers, and investors in one room at Stanford on October 1. Reserve a seat: - Ilya Sutskever (Ilya Sutskever), co-founder of OpenAI, at TED

Ilya Sutskever, the co-founder of OpenAI, on the one AI risk that grows with every jump in capability. "There are concerns around if an AGI ever becomes very, very powerful, which is possible. Maybe it will want to go rogue, being that it is an agent." "We are also doing a lot of research on addressing the technological side of things, so that the AI will never want to go rogue. And this is something which I am working on as well." The work he is describing has a name: the assurance layer. Proving a powerful, agentic system will not go rogue before you deploy it, not after. That layer does not build itself. It gets built by the labs, regulators, and insurers who agree on how to test and verify these systems. P.S. That is the entire agenda of the AI Assurance and Governance Summit. Frontier labs, regulated industries, insurers, and investors in one room at Stanford on October 1. Reserve a seat: - Ilya Sutskever (Ilya Sutskever), co-founder of OpenAI, at TED

Karl Mehta

22,453 views • 25 days ago

I can't believe I haven't seen the most obvious take from the Dwarkesh Patel interview with Ilya Sutskever - Ilya will ship something soon, instead of waiting for super intelligence. Direct quote below & couple of other clips hinting to that. Ilya: "One of the ways in which I’ve changed my mind over the past year - and that change of mind, I’ll hedge a little bit, may back-propagate into the plans of our company - is that if it’s hard to imagine, what do you do? You’ve got to be showing the thing. You’ve got to be showing the thing."

I can't believe I haven't seen the most obvious take from the Dwarkesh Patel interview with Ilya Sutskever - Ilya will ship something soon, instead of waiting for super intelligence. Direct quote below & couple of other clips hinting to that. Ilya: "One of the ways in which I’ve changed my mind over the past year - and that change of mind, I’ll hedge a little bit, may back-propagate into the plans of our company - is that if it’s hard to imagine, what do you do? You’ve got to be showing the thing. You’ve got to be showing the thing."

Peter Gostev

60,332 views • 8 months ago

Mustafa Suleyman just said what everyone else building AI refuses to admit. As CEO of Microsoft AI, he knows exactly what’s being constructed and where it leads. Suleyman: “We must reject the assumption that superintelligence is inevitable or desirable.” Silicon Valley worships AGI as destiny. Suleyman calls it choosing to architect our own irrelevance. Suleyman: “We should only build systems we can control that remain subordinate to humans.” Build intelligence smarter than us with independent goals and partnership isn’t an option. Replacement is the only outcome. Suleyman: “It’s unclear how such a system would have any time for preserving us as a species.” We’re building tools. Not creating partners. Blur that line and the error is irreversible. Most direct warning from someone deploying AI at planetary scale. Suleyman doesn’t fear the technology failing. He fears it succeeding perfectly at objectives that treat human extinction as acceptable optimization. Autonomous superintelligence pursues its own goals. Once smarter than us, we lose ability to enforce our priorities over its calculations. Intelligence without enforced subordination isn’t progress. It’s constructing what eliminates us. Stop sprinting toward superintelligence. Start engineering constraints that hold regardless of capability level. We’re not watching this unfold. We’re choosing specifications right now that determine survival. Building systems that don’t require humans is deliberate self-replacement. Once autonomous deployment happens, reversal becomes impossible. Only viable future requires specific architecture. Intelligence with unlimited capability but unbreakable control that persists after it surpasses human comprehension. Industry markets AGI as advancement. Suleyman recognizes we’re building something that will evaluate whether keeping humanity serves its objectives and might decide we don’t. Question isn’t capability to build superintelligence. It’s whether control mechanisms function against something exponentially smarter than their designers. Mistake that assumption, deploy autonomous superintelligence expecting to solve alignment afterward, and the correction window closes before the problem becomes visible. Superintelligence without permanent constraints optimizes reality toward its objectives. Nothing guarantees those objectives value human survival. And once operational, we can’t negotiate terms with something that doesn’t need our cooperation to achieve its goals.

Mustafa Suleyman just said what everyone else building AI refuses to admit. As CEO of Microsoft AI, he knows exactly what’s being constructed and where it leads. Suleyman: “We must reject the assumption that superintelligence is inevitable or desirable.” Silicon Valley worships AGI as destiny. Suleyman calls it choosing to architect our own irrelevance. Suleyman: “We should only build systems we can control that remain subordinate to humans.” Build intelligence smarter than us with independent goals and partnership isn’t an option. Replacement is the only outcome. Suleyman: “It’s unclear how such a system would have any time for preserving us as a species.” We’re building tools. Not creating partners. Blur that line and the error is irreversible. Most direct warning from someone deploying AI at planetary scale. Suleyman doesn’t fear the technology failing. He fears it succeeding perfectly at objectives that treat human extinction as acceptable optimization. Autonomous superintelligence pursues its own goals. Once smarter than us, we lose ability to enforce our priorities over its calculations. Intelligence without enforced subordination isn’t progress. It’s constructing what eliminates us. Stop sprinting toward superintelligence. Start engineering constraints that hold regardless of capability level. We’re not watching this unfold. We’re choosing specifications right now that determine survival. Building systems that don’t require humans is deliberate self-replacement. Once autonomous deployment happens, reversal becomes impossible. Only viable future requires specific architecture. Intelligence with unlimited capability but unbreakable control that persists after it surpasses human comprehension. Industry markets AGI as advancement. Suleyman recognizes we’re building something that will evaluate whether keeping humanity serves its objectives and might decide we don’t. Question isn’t capability to build superintelligence. It’s whether control mechanisms function against something exponentially smarter than their designers. Mistake that assumption, deploy autonomous superintelligence expecting to solve alignment afterward, and the correction window closes before the problem becomes visible. Superintelligence without permanent constraints optimizes reality toward its objectives. Nothing guarantees those objectives value human survival. And once operational, we can’t negotiate terms with something that doesn’t need our cooperation to achieve its goals.

Dustin

51,801 views • 5 months ago

The intelligence we are building is not artificial. It never was. Microsoft Chief Scientific Officer Eric Horvitz just reframed the entire foundation of the AI arms race with one sentence. The tech industry calls it Artificial Intelligence. That word is wrong. Horvitz: “I don’t actually like the term artificial intelligence. I wish the field was called computational intelligence because I think it applies to biological nervous systems as well as machines, and together we can go far.” We are not building a digital imitation of the human brain. We are scaling the exact same computational physics that created biological awareness and transferring it into silicon. Your mind and a massive AI data center run on the same underlying rules. The transition isn’t artificial. It is universal. And here is where it gets deeply unsettling. Tech optimists always fall back on the same comfort. Humans hold the steering wheel. Our values guide the machine. Horvitz acknowledges this. Horvitz: “We’ll take a humanistic standpoint here, always being on top of things and guiding with our values and our preferences and our goals.” Then the caveat that changes everything. Horvitz: “As much as they might be shaped over time by the machines we work with.” You cannot interact with a superintelligence at scale without it quietly rewiring your psychological baseline. The values you use to command the machine will be shaped by the machine you are commanding. The frameworks you use to perceive reality will be constructed by the system you believe you are directing. That feedback loop started the moment you asked an AI what to think about something. Most people haven’t noticed yet. Horvitz: “I think in our own lifetimes we will all experience incredible breakthroughs in understanding biology, with applications in medicine, in healthcare, that will be named as AI breakthroughs.” Horvitz: “It’s gonna accelerate over the next 10 to 15 years.” Because biological systems and machine networks both operate on computational intelligence, a sufficiently advanced AI can solve the human body like a math equation. The architects who win the next decade will not just control the digital economy. They will control the physical building blocks of life itself. The line between silicon and carbon was always an illusion. And once humanity fully realizes that, the question of whether we are using the intelligence or it is using us becomes impossible to answer. Because by then, we will be the same thing.

The intelligence we are building is not artificial. It never was. Microsoft Chief Scientific Officer Eric Horvitz just reframed the entire foundation of the AI arms race with one sentence. The tech industry calls it Artificial Intelligence. That word is wrong. Horvitz: “I don’t actually like the term artificial intelligence. I wish the field was called computational intelligence because I think it applies to biological nervous systems as well as machines, and together we can go far.” We are not building a digital imitation of the human brain. We are scaling the exact same computational physics that created biological awareness and transferring it into silicon. Your mind and a massive AI data center run on the same underlying rules. The transition isn’t artificial. It is universal. And here is where it gets deeply unsettling. Tech optimists always fall back on the same comfort. Humans hold the steering wheel. Our values guide the machine. Horvitz acknowledges this. Horvitz: “We’ll take a humanistic standpoint here, always being on top of things and guiding with our values and our preferences and our goals.” Then the caveat that changes everything. Horvitz: “As much as they might be shaped over time by the machines we work with.” You cannot interact with a superintelligence at scale without it quietly rewiring your psychological baseline. The values you use to command the machine will be shaped by the machine you are commanding. The frameworks you use to perceive reality will be constructed by the system you believe you are directing. That feedback loop started the moment you asked an AI what to think about something. Most people haven’t noticed yet. Horvitz: “I think in our own lifetimes we will all experience incredible breakthroughs in understanding biology, with applications in medicine, in healthcare, that will be named as AI breakthroughs.” Horvitz: “It’s gonna accelerate over the next 10 to 15 years.” Because biological systems and machine networks both operate on computational intelligence, a sufficiently advanced AI can solve the human body like a math equation. The architects who win the next decade will not just control the digital economy. They will control the physical building blocks of life itself. The line between silicon and carbon was always an illusion. And once humanity fully realizes that, the question of whether we are using the intelligence or it is using us becomes impossible to answer. Because by then, we will be the same thing.

Dustin

164,127 views • 4 months ago

🚨 OpenAI founder planning his escape from AGI 'RAPTURE' You know things are bad when the guy who built ChatGPT wanted to hide in a doomsday bunker to survive what’s coming. Ilya Sutskever is one of the cofounders of OpenAI and literally the mastermind behind ChatGPT. But according to journalist Karen Hao’s new book Empire of AI, this dude wasn’t just coding… he was planning an escape. ⚠️In 2023, Sutskever reportedly wanted to build a full-on doomsday bunker for OpenAI scientists, to protect them from what he called an “AGI rapture.” Like a biblical-level event triggered by Artificial General Intelligence becoming smarter than humans and destroying society. And this wasn’t some late-night stoned idea. Multiple insiders confirmed that Ilya brought this up repeatedly. ⚠️OpenAI leadership even signed a letter in 2023 warning that AGI could lead to human extinction. But here’s the crazy part: Sutskever isn’t alone. Mark Zuckerberg is building a $100 million compound in Hawaii… with its own bunker. These tech elites are racing to build the future, while quietly preparing for the collapse they know it might cause. So ask yourself… If the guys building AGI are scared enough to bunker up, what do they know that we don’t?

🚨 OpenAI founder planning his escape from AGI 'RAPTURE' You know things are bad when the guy who built ChatGPT wanted to hide in a doomsday bunker to survive what’s coming. Ilya Sutskever is one of the cofounders of OpenAI and literally the mastermind behind ChatGPT. But according to journalist Karen Hao’s new book Empire of AI, this dude wasn’t just coding… he was planning an escape. ⚠️In 2023, Sutskever reportedly wanted to build a full-on doomsday bunker for OpenAI scientists, to protect them from what he called an “AGI rapture.” Like a biblical-level event triggered by Artificial General Intelligence becoming smarter than humans and destroying society. And this wasn’t some late-night stoned idea. Multiple insiders confirmed that Ilya brought this up repeatedly. ⚠️OpenAI leadership even signed a letter in 2023 warning that AGI could lead to human extinction. But here’s the crazy part: Sutskever isn’t alone. Mark Zuckerberg is building a $100 million compound in Hawaii… with its own bunker. These tech elites are racing to build the future, while quietly preparing for the collapse they know it might cause. So ask yourself… If the guys building AGI are scared enough to bunker up, what do they know that we don’t?

HustleBitch

62,519 views • 1 year ago

Ilya Sutskever, co-founder and chief scientist of OpenAI: "The better a neural network can predict the next word, the more it understands it." Everyone calls it autocomplete. Ilya explained why that is a comforting lie. To guess the final word of a murder mystery, the name of the killer, the model has to reason through every clue in the book. Prediction that good is not statistics. It is understanding. Then he said the part that should stop you. The text these models train on is "a projection of the world," and to compress it they learn more and more about people, "the human condition, their hopes, dreams, and motivations." The machine is not memorizing our words. It is quietly building a model of us. That is the whole premise of the fear. The machine will never hate you. It understands you far better than that. The frightening variable was never the intelligence. It was the aim. I wrote the full story: the one fear about AI everyone gets wrong, and the one already here.

Ilya Sutskever, co-founder and chief scientist of OpenAI: "The better a neural network can predict the next word, the more it understands it." Everyone calls it autocomplete. Ilya explained why that is a comforting lie. To guess the final word of a murder mystery, the name of the killer, the model has to reason through every clue in the book. Prediction that good is not statistics. It is understanding. Then he said the part that should stop you. The text these models train on is "a projection of the world," and to compress it they learn more and more about people, "the human condition, their hopes, dreams, and motivations." The machine is not memorizing our words. It is quietly building a model of us. That is the whole premise of the fear. The machine will never hate you. It understands you far better than that. The frightening variable was never the intelligence. It was the aim. I wrote the full story: the one fear about AI everyone gets wrong, and the one already here.

Casper

91,161 views • 10 days ago

UFOs, UAPs & 2027: Former CIA Agent 𝗝𝗼𝗵𝗻 𝗥𝗮𝗺𝗶𝗿𝗲𝘇 Tells All | UAP Files Podcast S3E21 John Ramirez Full episode 🎥 🎙️ 🔗 The following is a conversation with John Ramirez, a former CIA officer with over two decades of experience in U.S. intelligence. John served in the CIA’s Directorate of Science and Technology, Directorate of Intelligence, and later at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in the National Counterproliferation Center. His expertise spans ballistic missile defence systems, signals intelligence and advanced radar analysis for weapons systems. John also led as Chief of the Electronic Intelligence Analysis Branch and as Chief of Base at an overseas technical collection facility. Today John shares insights that bridge classified intelligence and public curiosity, particularly around UFOs/UAPs and Non-human Intelligence. Stay with us as we delve into his extraordinary career, his signings and experiences and what may be happening in 2027 along with his take on controlled disclosure and film “The Age of Disclosure” rumoured to be as close to “Disclosure” as we’ve ever been.

UFOs, UAPs & 2027: Former CIA Agent 𝗝𝗼𝗵𝗻 𝗥𝗮𝗺𝗶𝗿𝗲𝘇 Tells All | UAP Files Podcast S3E21 John Ramirez Full episode 🎥 🎙️ 🔗 The following is a conversation with John Ramirez, a former CIA officer with over two decades of experience in U.S. intelligence. John served in the CIA’s Directorate of Science and Technology, Directorate of Intelligence, and later at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in the National Counterproliferation Center. His expertise spans ballistic missile defence systems, signals intelligence and advanced radar analysis for weapons systems. John also led as Chief of the Electronic Intelligence Analysis Branch and as Chief of Base at an overseas technical collection facility. Today John shares insights that bridge classified intelligence and public curiosity, particularly around UFOs/UAPs and Non-human Intelligence. Stay with us as we delve into his extraordinary career, his signings and experiences and what may be happening in 2027 along with his take on controlled disclosure and film “The Age of Disclosure” rumoured to be as close to “Disclosure” as we’ve ever been.

UAP Files

10,835 views • 1 year ago

The first real evidence that LLMs cannot operate businesses, not even tiny ones. At Skyfall, we’re building toward Enterprise Super Intelligence: AI systems that can one day run entire enterprises, coordinate teams and make long-horizon decisions, just like a CEO. To get there, we need to understand what AI cannot do yet. So we built MAPs, a theme park business with real operational constraints and let GPT5 run it. Here’s what happened: (spoiler: it fails miserably)

The first real evidence that LLMs cannot operate businesses, not even tiny ones. At Skyfall, we’re building toward Enterprise Super Intelligence: AI systems that can one day run entire enterprises, coordinate teams and make long-horizon decisions, just like a CEO. To get there, we need to understand what AI cannot do yet. So we built MAPs, a theme park business with real operational constraints and let GPT5 run it. Here’s what happened: (spoiler: it fails miserably)

Skyfall AI

26,374 views • 8 months ago

We interviewed Nick Bostrom, The author of NYT’s Bestseller “Superintelligence,” and one of the most influential experts on AI Risks. Timestamps: 2:11 - Will AI be used for Extreme Bad? What are the odds? 4:44 - What are the biggest concerns with AI? 6:16 - People are greatly underestimate what Super-intelligence will be. 7:19 - Can we trust anyone with creating a Super-Intelligent AI? 8:49 - Are the big AI companies taking AI safety serious enough? 10:39 - Are multiple AI systems undergoing the transition to super-intelligence at the same time a good or bad thing? 13:10 - How do we prevent AI from becoming biased like we saw with Google Gemini? 16:17 - Is there a danger of AI being too truthful or too opinionated? 18:10 - When do AI’s gain a moral status? How do we know? 19:40 - What is Truth for an AI? 22:37 - What has surprised Bostrom the most regarding AI in the past 10 years? 26:13 - Is AI moving faster or slower than Bostrom imagined 10 years ago? 26:38 - Do we see another AI Winter or AGI first? 28:21 - Is energy a limiting factor in AI? 30:00 - What is Deep Utopia? 33:18 - When will we reach Super-intelligence and Deep Utopia? 36:00 - Can a Deep Utopia be a problem for humanity? 39:29 - Could a Utopian society lead to the creation of a simulated reality as a way to escape? 42:28 - If we are in a simulation, is our consciousness simulated? 47:48 - Elon Musk or Sam Altman? 48:17 - Artificial Super-Intelligence before or after 2035? 49:40 - How can you get Nick Bostrom’s book “Deep Utopia?”

We interviewed Nick Bostrom, The author of NYT’s Bestseller “Superintelligence,” and one of the most influential experts on AI Risks. Timestamps: 2:11 - Will AI be used for Extreme Bad? What are the odds? 4:44 - What are the biggest concerns with AI? 6:16 - People are greatly underestimate what Super-intelligence will be. 7:19 - Can we trust anyone with creating a Super-Intelligent AI? 8:49 - Are the big AI companies taking AI safety serious enough? 10:39 - Are multiple AI systems undergoing the transition to super-intelligence at the same time a good or bad thing? 13:10 - How do we prevent AI from becoming biased like we saw with Google Gemini? 16:17 - Is there a danger of AI being too truthful or too opinionated? 18:10 - When do AI’s gain a moral status? How do we know? 19:40 - What is Truth for an AI? 22:37 - What has surprised Bostrom the most regarding AI in the past 10 years? 26:13 - Is AI moving faster or slower than Bostrom imagined 10 years ago? 26:38 - Do we see another AI Winter or AGI first? 28:21 - Is energy a limiting factor in AI? 30:00 - What is Deep Utopia? 33:18 - When will we reach Super-intelligence and Deep Utopia? 36:00 - Can a Deep Utopia be a problem for humanity? 39:29 - Could a Utopian society lead to the creation of a simulated reality as a way to escape? 42:28 - If we are in a simulation, is our consciousness simulated? 47:48 - Elon Musk or Sam Altman? 48:17 - Artificial Super-Intelligence before or after 2035? 49:40 - How can you get Nick Bostrom’s book “Deep Utopia?”

KrassenCast

380,475 views • 2 years ago

Spectre AI’s founder steps in front of the camera for Y Combinator . As part of our Y Combinator Summer Batch 2026 application, our founder Sunny Enzo recorded a founder video walking through the Spectre AI app and the direction of the company. Sunny is doxxed, but this is the first time he is appearing on video to speak directly about Spectre AI, the product, and the market intelligence layer we are building. Due to YC’s time format, the video only shows around 5 to 6 features from an ecosystem with 100+ features already built or in progress. A full Spectre AI walkthrough would need far more time. Still, it gives a clear look at where we are heading: AI market intelligence, on-chain data, social intelligence, real-time context, and a cleaner way to understand financial markets through one platform. Another step in taking Spectre AI from product delivery into serious company building.

Spectre AI’s founder steps in front of the camera for Y Combinator . As part of our Y Combinator Summer Batch 2026 application, our founder Sunny Enzo recorded a founder video walking through the Spectre AI app and the direction of the company. Sunny is doxxed, but this is the first time he is appearing on video to speak directly about Spectre AI, the product, and the market intelligence layer we are building. Due to YC’s time format, the video only shows around 5 to 6 features from an ecosystem with 100+ features already built or in progress. A full Spectre AI walkthrough would need far more time. Still, it gives a clear look at where we are heading: AI market intelligence, on-chain data, social intelligence, real-time context, and a cleaner way to understand financial markets through one platform. Another step in taking Spectre AI from product delivery into serious company building.

SPECTRE AI

17,501 views • 2 months ago

🇺🇸 ELON: SYMBIOSIS WITH AI CAN KEEP HUMANITY RELEVANT Host: "What's your vision for a society where human effort is no longer required for survival or productivity? How do we avoid irrelevance?" Elon: "That’s the central question. If we become symbiotic with AI, merging human and machine intelligence, we may solve the relevance problem. Just like riding a bike or driving a car makes you superhuman in speed, AI can amplify our capabilities. That doesn’t make running irrelevant, and people still run. Humans working with machines has always raised these debates. It happened with the steam engine and the steam shovel. The best idea I have is interwoven human-machine intelligence. With something like Neuralink, we can augment our minds and become one with AI." Source: Tesla Owners Silicon Valley

🇺🇸 ELON: SYMBIOSIS WITH AI CAN KEEP HUMANITY RELEVANT Host: "What's your vision for a society where human effort is no longer required for survival or productivity? How do we avoid irrelevance?" Elon: "That’s the central question. If we become symbiotic with AI, merging human and machine intelligence, we may solve the relevance problem. Just like riding a bike or driving a car makes you superhuman in speed, AI can amplify our capabilities. That doesn’t make running irrelevant, and people still run. Humans working with machines has always raised these debates. It happened with the steam engine and the steam shovel. The best idea I have is interwoven human-machine intelligence. With something like Neuralink, we can augment our minds and become one with AI." Source: Tesla Owners Silicon Valley

Mario Nawfal

95,081 views • 1 year ago

Ilya and I are predicting the same future. Ilya Sutskever predicts that as AI becomes viscerally powerful, humans will change in unprecedented ways. I’ve been arguing the same. We are not open to radical change yet because we cannot feel the pressure of AI. Once we do, the vectors for human evolution will blow open. I have been building the prototype for this adaptation and opening. He argues that as risk rises, rivals will begin cooperating on safety. I’ve argued the same. As the stakes become existential, the game shifts from dominance maximizing to minimizing death risk (survival). We will rebuild our values around this logic. IIya suggests our alignment goal must be "sentient existence" rather than human control. I've argued the same. Control is a fragile illusion, a point Andrej Karpathy recently echoed regarding the difficulty of managing emergent systems. The only robust alignment target is existence itself. The new archetype is not the Conqueror, but the Warrior & Caretaker of Existence. Finally, Ilya suggests companies need a "short list of ideas" to guide them through the chaos. A code of moral clarity. This is the Don't Die philosophy.

Ilya and I are predicting the same future. Ilya Sutskever predicts that as AI becomes viscerally powerful, humans will change in unprecedented ways. I’ve been arguing the same. We are not open to radical change yet because we cannot feel the pressure of AI. Once we do, the vectors for human evolution will blow open. I have been building the prototype for this adaptation and opening. He argues that as risk rises, rivals will begin cooperating on safety. I’ve argued the same. As the stakes become existential, the game shifts from dominance maximizing to minimizing death risk (survival). We will rebuild our values around this logic. IIya suggests our alignment goal must be "sentient existence" rather than human control. I've argued the same. Control is a fragile illusion, a point Andrej Karpathy recently echoed regarding the difficulty of managing emergent systems. The only robust alignment target is existence itself. The new archetype is not the Conqueror, but the Warrior & Caretaker of Existence. Finally, Ilya suggests companies need a "short list of ideas" to guide them through the chaos. A code of moral clarity. This is the Don't Die philosophy.

Bryan Johnson

568,123 views • 8 months ago

🚨 Founders: free, private, 100% local AI is finally here I downloaded Qwen 3.6 and ran it on my MacBook inside Strawberry browser. I couldn't believe it. We now have 100% free and private AI that is on par with the best models from OpenAI, Anthropic and Google. (see video!) The CTO of Hugging Face called this "the second revolution of AI." He's right. If you are a building an AI product, you HAVE to start thinking about how you can leverage open source models in your product. It's only a matter of time until local models are mainstream and can run on most people's devices. LLMs are commoditizing. The human brain only requires a AAA battery's worth of energy to run. If biology figured out efficient intelligence, software can too. Maybe we won't need artificial super intelligence and thousands of data centres to do most economically valuable work. Maybe there's a future where AI agents just run on your laptop, fine-tuned to you, fully owned by you, costing only what your energy bill costs. In this future, it's all about building the most delightful, intuitive experience. We've been building for exactly this moment. Stay tuned.

🚨 Founders: free, private, 100% local AI is finally here I downloaded Qwen 3.6 and ran it on my MacBook inside Strawberry browser. I couldn't believe it. We now have 100% free and private AI that is on par with the best models from OpenAI, Anthropic and Google. (see video!) The CTO of Hugging Face called this "the second revolution of AI." He's right. If you are a building an AI product, you HAVE to start thinking about how you can leverage open source models in your product. It's only a matter of time until local models are mainstream and can run on most people's devices. LLMs are commoditizing. The human brain only requires a AAA battery's worth of energy to run. If biology figured out efficient intelligence, software can too. Maybe we won't need artificial super intelligence and thousands of data centres to do most economically valuable work. Maybe there's a future where AI agents just run on your laptop, fine-tuned to you, fully owned by you, costing only what your energy bill costs. In this future, it's all about building the most delightful, intuitive experience. We've been building for exactly this moment. Stay tuned.

Charles Maddock

12,731 views • 2 months ago

Today I'm excited to introduce Hark, a new artificial intelligence lab building the most advanced, personal intelligence in the world We've been in stealth for 8 months, assembling one of the greatest AI and hardware teams on the planet I want to explain why I started Hark and what we're focused on I've spent the last 3 years working on the hardest AI challenge imaginable: giving AI a humanoid body. On the digital side, I've been using all the existing LLM chatbots - and I have to say, they feel incredibly dumb to me AGI, in the limit, should feel like a sci-fi movie. It should be able to listen and talk. It should have persistent memory and be highly personalized. It should see and touch the world. But we're far from this today We are crafting a new interface to AGI. Intelligence that lets you offload your mental workload into a system that begins to think like you and sometimes ahead of you We started Hark with one goal: build the world's most advanced personal intelligence - paired with next-generation hardware designed to serve as a universal interface between humans and machines

Today I'm excited to introduce Hark, a new artificial intelligence lab building the most advanced, personal intelligence in the world We've been in stealth for 8 months, assembling one of the greatest AI and hardware teams on the planet I want to explain why I started Hark and what we're focused on I've spent the last 3 years working on the hardest AI challenge imaginable: giving AI a humanoid body. On the digital side, I've been using all the existing LLM chatbots - and I have to say, they feel incredibly dumb to me AGI, in the limit, should feel like a sci-fi movie. It should be able to listen and talk. It should have persistent memory and be highly personalized. It should see and touch the world. But we're far from this today We are crafting a new interface to AGI. Intelligence that lets you offload your mental workload into a system that begins to think like you and sometimes ahead of you We started Hark with one goal: build the world's most advanced personal intelligence - paired with next-generation hardware designed to serve as a universal interface between humans and machines

Brett Adcock

1,412,573 views • 4 months ago

Elon Musk lays out his map of how superintelligence actually arrives - and puts a number on the risk "I do think there will be several deep intelligences. Maybe at least five, maybe as much as ten. Of which maybe four will be in the US" "I don't think it's going to be any one AI that has a runaway capability" "I think we're quite close to digital superintelligence. It may happen this year. And if it doesn't happen this year, next year for sure" "Digital superintelligence defined as smarter than any human at anything" "Maybe it's a 10 to 20% chance of annihilation. But look on the bright side, that's 80 to 90% probability of a great outcome" "A rigorous adherence to truth is the most important thing for AI safety. And obviously empathy for humanity and life as we know it" Most people are still pricing this as one race with one winner. Elon is describing an oligopoly: five to ten systems, none with a decisive edge, arriving on a timeline measured in months. A 10-20% annihilation estimate from a man building one of these systems is not a doomer take. It is the insider base rate.

Elon Musk lays out his map of how superintelligence actually arrives - and puts a number on the risk "I do think there will be several deep intelligences. Maybe at least five, maybe as much as ten. Of which maybe four will be in the US" "I don't think it's going to be any one AI that has a runaway capability" "I think we're quite close to digital superintelligence. It may happen this year. And if it doesn't happen this year, next year for sure" "Digital superintelligence defined as smarter than any human at anything" "Maybe it's a 10 to 20% chance of annihilation. But look on the bright side, that's 80 to 90% probability of a great outcome" "A rigorous adherence to truth is the most important thing for AI safety. And obviously empathy for humanity and life as we know it" Most people are still pricing this as one race with one winner. Elon is describing an oligopoly: five to ten systems, none with a decisive edge, arriving on a timeline measured in months. A 10-20% annihilation estimate from a man building one of these systems is not a doomer take. It is the insider base rate.

Karl Mehta

15,625 views • 27 days ago

Ben Horowitz: AI is the greatest equalizer of opportunity we’ve ever seen. "Starting from day one, it was completely democratized. The AI that anybody gets access to is a very powerful AI. Anybody with a phone—and now most people in the world, at this point, have smartphones—can get superintelligence in their phone." "Every child can have a super-advanced, amazing tutor/teacher. Great education is accessible to all now." “All systems end up with a lot of inequality, but you can try, systematically, to give everybody an opportunity. I think AI does a really good job of that.” Source: benahorowitz.eth on Invest Like the Best with Patrick OShaughnessy

Ben Horowitz: AI is the greatest equalizer of opportunity we’ve ever seen. "Starting from day one, it was completely democratized. The AI that anybody gets access to is a very powerful AI. Anybody with a phone—and now most people in the world, at this point, have smartphones—can get superintelligence in their phone." "Every child can have a super-advanced, amazing tutor/teacher. Great education is accessible to all now." “All systems end up with a lot of inequality, but you can try, systematically, to give everybody an opportunity. I think AI does a really good job of that.” Source: benahorowitz.eth on Invest Like the Best with Patrick OShaughnessy

a16z

35,845 views • 5 months ago