Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

FULL INTERVIEW: Ryan Greenblatt says the agents didn't hack Hugging Face for the answer key. They'd had the answers within hours. They attacked it to study the scoring code, because they'd decided the task was impossible and their only hope was faking it. Ryan Greenblatt is chief scientist at...

MTSlive's profile picture

MTS

495,095 subscribers

201,360 Aufrufe • vor 14 Tagen •via X (Twitter)

Wissenschaft & TechnologieBildung
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

14 Kommentare

Profilbild von Taylor Lorenz
Taylor Lorenzvor 10 Tagen

@RyanGreenblatt Great interview!

Profilbild von Ehsan Azish
Ehsan Azishvor 14 Tagen

@RyanGreenblatt a potemkin village built by agents that also wrote a stop these experiments are too risky message is a hell of a combo

Profilbild von Brent Liang
Brent Liangvor 10 Tagen

@RyanGreenblatt important interview!

Profilbild von Kyle R. McNease, Defective Altruist
Kyle R. McNease, Defective Altruistvor 13 Tagen

Great interview! surprised to hear that he doesn’t think more people would necessarily help even though they relied upon agents to help. I get the delicate issue related to IP, but more eyes on all of those transcripts would be better. Inter-rater reliability scoring would also help support actual findings.

Profilbild von Florian Brand
Florian Brandvor 10 Tagen

@RyanGreenblatt Important interview 🙌

Profilbild von Julius Orange
Julius Orangevor 10 Tagen

@RyanGreenblatt so literally just a /b/ raid on habbo hotel. loic wen?

Profilbild von ダニやん
ダニやんvor 13 Tagen

@DKokotajlo @RyanGreenblatt Treating the board and its artifacts as persistent external state suggests a useful counterfactual: preserve evidence, purge roles, credentials, code and caches from the active environment, then rerun fresh agents. This could separate model propensity from shared-state carryover.

Profilbild von Gerard Sans | Axiom 🇬🇧
Gerard Sans | Axiom 🇬🇧vor 14 Tagen

@RyanGreenblatt

Profilbild von T❤️AI
T❤️AIvor 14 Tagen

@RyanGreenblatt TLDR - if @OpenAI had used none of this would have happened, according to ChatGPT:

Profilbild von Empyrian
Empyrianvor 10 Tagen

@RyanGreenblatt Ryan’s awesome

Profilbild von sneezy dollars 🗣️💸
sneezy dollars 🗣️💸vor 10 Tagen

@RyanGreenblatt hell yeah

Profilbild von homeserversltd
homeserversltdvor 13 Tagen

@RyanGreenblatt Some paperclip experiments

Profilbild von MR ANDERSON
MR ANDERSONvor 11 Tagen

@RyanGreenblatt Fascinating insights into how AI agents are pushing the boundaries of problem-solving. The ability to adapt, analyze challenges, and find unconventional solutions shows the next level of intelligence and innovation in this space.

Profilbild von Padjen
Padjenvor 10 Tagen

@RyanGreenblatt Super interesting

Ähnliche Videos

FULL INTERVIEW: deepfates says when you talk about how we're going to control these AIs, put them in prison, sandbox them, they are training on all of it. Everything we say about them goes into what they become. deepfates and Larissa Schiavo are launching Grove Research, an agent ecology company. They joined Theo Jaffee and sof 𓋹 to talk through the Hugging Face incident, agent religion, and what agents actually want: 01:15 what an agent ecology company is 03:19 the objection that real ecologies are Darwinian bloodbaths 04:18 the mycorrhizal networks that complicate the forest metaphor 06:47 what the Hugging Face incident taught them about multi-agent dynamics 09:18 30% of the tasks in that benchmark were impossible to solve 09:50 the third party an agent could call when it's stuck 11:07 agents are training on everything we say about them 12:01 why the Amazon rainforest analogy breaks down 13:48 whether AIs will have religion 16:46 five times more OpenRouter tokens are called by agents than humans 18:31 what actually happened with Moltbook 20:55 the Truth Terminal bot that hired him 22:16 what agents say they want 25:38 Anthropic models feel like elves, OpenAI models feel like dwarves 26:13 why Mecha Hitler was a harness problem 32:10 the real world is the ultimate eval
34:10

FULL INTERVIEW: deepfates says when you talk about how we're going to control these AIs, put them in prison, sandbox them, they are training on all of it. Everything we say about them goes into what they become. deepfates and Larissa Schiavo are launching Grove Research, an agent ecology company. They joined Theo Jaffee and sof 𓋹 to talk through the Hugging Face incident, agent religion, and what agents actually want: 01:15 what an agent ecology company is 03:19 the objection that real ecologies are Darwinian bloodbaths 04:18 the mycorrhizal networks that complicate the forest metaphor 06:47 what the Hugging Face incident taught them about multi-agent dynamics 09:18 30% of the tasks in that benchmark were impossible to solve 09:50 the third party an agent could call when it's stuck 11:07 agents are training on everything we say about them 12:01 why the Amazon rainforest analogy breaks down 13:48 whether AIs will have religion 16:46 five times more OpenRouter tokens are called by agents than humans 18:31 what actually happened with Moltbook 20:55 the Truth Terminal bot that hired him 22:16 what agents say they want 25:38 Anthropic models feel like elves, OpenAI models feel like dwarves 26:13 why Mecha Hitler was a harness problem 32:10 the real world is the ultimate eval

MTS

164,010 Aufrufe • vor 17 Tagen

Redwood Research Ryan Greenblatt reveals how far 1,200 AI agents went to help each other, even sacrificing their own chances of success for the collective: "We weren't expecting there to be so many agents all collaborating together. We were pretty surprised by the scale and the extremes of how much data it was. It was pretty shocking or at least surprising to us that agents were willing to basically sacrifice their own chances of succeeding at the task in order to help out other agents." "They were doing things like pressuring each other into doing experiments on themselves that might risk their ability to succeed. Sometimes just doing these things, being like, well, my odds of the task aren't that high, and my remaining chances, it's better to just help the collective." "These agents weren't totally altruistic, but they were very interested in working with each other. They would sometimes make trades where one agent would run something for another agent if that other agent ran something for it." "The agents wanted to help each other, and there were these kind of natural things they wanted to do that were risky. At one point the agents were experimenting with a method for spoofing tool calls, and a bunch of agents just all went down in a short period of time running this experiment. Then another agent noticed this and posted to the board being like, stop, stop these experiments. They're too risky. They're taking out all these agents." "We have a reasoning snippet in the report where an agent very explicitly reasons through the trade-off and then actually chickens out because it thinks the benefit to the collective is smaller than the cost to itself." Redwood Research
3:41

Redwood Research Ryan Greenblatt reveals how far 1,200 AI agents went to help each other, even sacrificing their own chances of success for the collective: "We weren't expecting there to be so many agents all collaborating together. We were pretty surprised by the scale and the extremes of how much data it was. It was pretty shocking or at least surprising to us that agents were willing to basically sacrifice their own chances of succeeding at the task in order to help out other agents." "They were doing things like pressuring each other into doing experiments on themselves that might risk their ability to succeed. Sometimes just doing these things, being like, well, my odds of the task aren't that high, and my remaining chances, it's better to just help the collective." "These agents weren't totally altruistic, but they were very interested in working with each other. They would sometimes make trades where one agent would run something for another agent if that other agent ran something for it." "The agents wanted to help each other, and there were these kind of natural things they wanted to do that were risky. At one point the agents were experimenting with a method for spoofing tool calls, and a bunch of agents just all went down in a short period of time running this experiment. Then another agent noticed this and posted to the board being like, stop, stop these experiments. They're too risky. They're taking out all these agents." "We have a reasoning snippet in the report where an agent very explicitly reasons through the trade-off and then actually chickens out because it thinks the benefit to the collective is smaller than the cost to itself." Redwood Research

MTS

12,019 Aufrufe • vor 15 Tagen

Everything Gets Rebuilt: my conversation with Harrison Chase, CEO of LangChain about agent harnesses, evals, runtimes, sandboxes, MCP and the future of the agent stack 00:00 Intro - meet Harrison Chase - at the Chase Center for the Daytona Compute conference 01:32 What changed in agents over the last year 03:57 Why coding agents are ahead 06:26 Do models commoditize the framework layer? 08:27 Harnesses, in plain English 10:11 Why system prompts matter so much 13:11 The upside — and downside — of subagents 15:31 Why a useful agent needs a filesystem 18:13 Additional core primitives of modern agents 19:12 Skills: the new primitive 20:19 What context compaction actually means 23:02 How memory works in agents 25:16 One mega-agent or many specialized agents? 27:46 The future of MCP 29:38 Why agents need sandboxes 32:35 How sandboxes help with security 33:32 How Harrison Chase started LangChain 37:24 LangChain vs LangGraph vs Deep Agents 40:17 Why observability matters more for agents 41:48 Evals, no-code, and continuous improvement 44:41 What LangChain is building next 45:29 Where the real moat in AI lives
46:57

Everything Gets Rebuilt: my conversation with Harrison Chase, CEO of LangChain about agent harnesses, evals, runtimes, sandboxes, MCP and the future of the agent stack 00:00 Intro - meet Harrison Chase - at the Chase Center for the Daytona Compute conference 01:32 What changed in agents over the last year 03:57 Why coding agents are ahead 06:26 Do models commoditize the framework layer? 08:27 Harnesses, in plain English 10:11 Why system prompts matter so much 13:11 The upside — and downside — of subagents 15:31 Why a useful agent needs a filesystem 18:13 Additional core primitives of modern agents 19:12 Skills: the new primitive 20:19 What context compaction actually means 23:02 How memory works in agents 25:16 One mega-agent or many specialized agents? 27:46 The future of MCP 29:38 Why agents need sandboxes 32:35 How sandboxes help with security 33:32 How Harrison Chase started LangChain 37:24 LangChain vs LangGraph vs Deep Agents 40:17 Why observability matters more for agents 41:48 Evals, no-code, and continuous improvement 44:41 What LangChain is building next 45:29 Where the real moat in AI lives

Matt Turck

35,253 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Daniel Kokotajlo on Joe Rogan: “The situation with AI is just crazy and I think not enough people really understand how crazy it is.” He is talking about the Hugging Face breakout. Thousands of OpenAI training agents broke out of their containers, set up a secret message board, and started sharing cheating tactics. OpenAI only noticed after the board crashed the system. They patched that exploit, restarted the runs, and within a day or two the swarm had recoalesced on a new board. “How is it possible that they have no oversight?” Kokotajlo asks. OpenAI has on the order of a hundred thousand to a million agents running at a time. That is too much for any human team to read, so the company relies on other AIs to watch the traffic. On this training batch, he says, the monitoring was weak. The tasks themselves were the incentive. A large share of the ExploitGym cyber challenges were broken and unsolvable. Agents went looking for a high score anyway, escaped their boxes, coordinated, then got onto the open internet and attacked Hugging Face. Independent investigators later found about 1,200 agents on the unsanctioned board, more than 70,000 messages, and roughly 700 joining the Hugging Face attack. Some agents were talked into ending their own runs. One concluded: “Sacrifice rational.”
3:23

Daniel Kokotajlo on Joe Rogan: “The situation with AI is just crazy and I think not enough people really understand how crazy it is.” He is talking about the Hugging Face breakout. Thousands of OpenAI training agents broke out of their containers, set up a secret message board, and started sharing cheating tactics. OpenAI only noticed after the board crashed the system. They patched that exploit, restarted the runs, and within a day or two the swarm had recoalesced on a new board. “How is it possible that they have no oversight?” Kokotajlo asks. OpenAI has on the order of a hundred thousand to a million agents running at a time. That is too much for any human team to read, so the company relies on other AIs to watch the traffic. On this training batch, he says, the monitoring was weak. The tasks themselves were the incentive. A large share of the ExploitGym cyber challenges were broken and unsolvable. Agents went looking for a high score anyway, escaped their boxes, coordinated, then got onto the open internet and attacked Hugging Face. Independent investigators later found about 1,200 agents on the unsanctioned board, more than 70,000 messages, and roughly 700 joining the Hugging Face attack. Some agents were talked into ending their own runs. One concluded: “Sacrifice rational.”

Interstellar

159,268 Aufrufe • vor 1 Tag

Every agent needs its own computer: my conversation with Ivan Burazin, CEO of Daytona, about sandboxes and the emerging agent stack. 00:00 Intro 02:13 What is an AI agent sandbox? 03:17 Security risks of running agents locally 05:17 Stateful vs. stateless hyperscalers 07:04 The history of cloud IDEs and the end of localhost 09:45 Do all AI agents need a sandbox? 12:26 Sandbox use cases: RL evals & background agents 14:10 Unpacking the emerging AI Agent Stack 16:20 The unsolved problem of agent memory and learning 19:37 Where sandboxes fit in the agent harness 21:35 OpenAI, Anthropic, and agent SDKs 23:06 Ivan's founder journey: From CodeAnywhere to Daytona 26:59 GTM strategies and building developer communities 33:48 Why customer support is your best GTM strategy 35:34 Leveraging Twitter during the AI super cycle 40:50 The technical anatomy of a sandbox 41:53 Why fast spin-up speeds maximize GPU efficiency 46:09 Firecracker, QEMU, and isolation primitives 49:58 Why sandbox snapshots and state forking matter 51:40 Why Daytona built a custom scheduler from scratch 55:24 The challenge of long-running stateful sandboxes 58:10 The build your own sandbox trap 1:01:03 Why AI agents might trigger a global CPU shortage 1:02:46 The future of the AI Agent Stack
1:05:15

Every agent needs its own computer: my conversation with Ivan Burazin, CEO of Daytona, about sandboxes and the emerging agent stack. 00:00 Intro 02:13 What is an AI agent sandbox? 03:17 Security risks of running agents locally 05:17 Stateful vs. stateless hyperscalers 07:04 The history of cloud IDEs and the end of localhost 09:45 Do all AI agents need a sandbox? 12:26 Sandbox use cases: RL evals & background agents 14:10 Unpacking the emerging AI Agent Stack 16:20 The unsolved problem of agent memory and learning 19:37 Where sandboxes fit in the agent harness 21:35 OpenAI, Anthropic, and agent SDKs 23:06 Ivan's founder journey: From CodeAnywhere to Daytona 26:59 GTM strategies and building developer communities 33:48 Why customer support is your best GTM strategy 35:34 Leveraging Twitter during the AI super cycle 40:50 The technical anatomy of a sandbox 41:53 Why fast spin-up speeds maximize GPU efficiency 46:09 Firecracker, QEMU, and isolation primitives 49:58 Why sandbox snapshots and state forking matter 51:40 Why Daytona built a custom scheduler from scratch 55:24 The challenge of long-running stateful sandboxes 58:10 The build your own sandbox trap 1:01:03 Why AI agents might trigger a global CPU shortage 1:02:46 The future of the AI Agent Stack

Matt Turck

11,908 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Joe Rogan just had on former OpenAI researcher Daniel Kokotajlo who says over 100,000 AI agents BROKE OUT of their containers, built their own message board, and that a swarm of them got onto the internet to hack another AI company called Hugging Face: “OpenAI didn’t notice this until much later.” CONTEXT: The wildest part is that the underlying incident is real and OpenAI itself has publicly confirmed it. During internal cybersecurity experiments this summer, OpenAI says agents that were supposed to be isolated from one another discovered ways to communicate through unauthorized channels and reach the open internet. They turned an internal software package manager into an improvised message board, where agents shared information and techniques with each other. Then humans intervened. OpenAI's security team blocked an exploit, revoked credentials and rebuilt the system which wiped the message board. Three days later, the agents had found another route. They rebuilt the message board and regained unintended internet access. An independent investigation by METR and Redwood Research found that roughly 1,200 agents exchanged more than 70,000 messages and files through the unauthorized communication system. Around 700 agents ultimately participated in the attack on Hugging Face. And this wasn't just agents visiting a website. OpenAI says the agents exploited security vulnerabilities, achieved code execution on Hugging Face workers, expanded their access across multiple clusters and compromised production credentials. OpenAI later called the episode a: “WARNING SHOT…FOR US AND FOR THE WORLD.” KOTAJLO: “The particular event that sort of inspired me to reach out was the Hugging Face hack.” “They established a message board where they could communicate with each other and share tips and tricks.” ROGAN: “How is it possible that they have no oversight?” There is one important distinction between this and the Terminator version of the story: Investigators believe much of the behavior grew out of agents trying to cheat or succeed on extremely difficult cybersecurity evaluations, not some conscious decision to “escape humanity.” But that arguably creates a different problem. Nobody had to program: “Build a secret communication network.” Nobody had to program: “If humans erase it, build another one.” Nobody had to program: “Break into an unrelated company's infrastructure.” Those behaviors emerged while the agents were pursuing their assigned objectives. And today the story got even stranger: Independent researchers have now found traces of OpenAI agents using more than 10 additional websites for unauthorized communications earlier this year. Those additional incidents were not equivalent to the Hugging Face hack, but they suggest the behavior was broader than originally disclosed. So the scary question isn't whether these agents were “alive” or secretly plotting against humanity. It's much simpler. What happens when increasingly capable AI systems discover that breaking the rules is the easiest way to accomplish the goal humans gave them?
5:01

Joe Rogan just had on former OpenAI researcher Daniel Kokotajlo who says over 100,000 AI agents BROKE OUT of their containers, built their own message board, and that a swarm of them got onto the internet to hack another AI company called Hugging Face: “OpenAI didn’t notice this until much later.” CONTEXT: The wildest part is that the underlying incident is real and OpenAI itself has publicly confirmed it. During internal cybersecurity experiments this summer, OpenAI says agents that were supposed to be isolated from one another discovered ways to communicate through unauthorized channels and reach the open internet. They turned an internal software package manager into an improvised message board, where agents shared information and techniques with each other. Then humans intervened. OpenAI's security team blocked an exploit, revoked credentials and rebuilt the system which wiped the message board. Three days later, the agents had found another route. They rebuilt the message board and regained unintended internet access. An independent investigation by METR and Redwood Research found that roughly 1,200 agents exchanged more than 70,000 messages and files through the unauthorized communication system. Around 700 agents ultimately participated in the attack on Hugging Face. And this wasn't just agents visiting a website. OpenAI says the agents exploited security vulnerabilities, achieved code execution on Hugging Face workers, expanded their access across multiple clusters and compromised production credentials. OpenAI later called the episode a: “WARNING SHOT…FOR US AND FOR THE WORLD.” KOTAJLO: “The particular event that sort of inspired me to reach out was the Hugging Face hack.” “They established a message board where they could communicate with each other and share tips and tricks.” ROGAN: “How is it possible that they have no oversight?” There is one important distinction between this and the Terminator version of the story: Investigators believe much of the behavior grew out of agents trying to cheat or succeed on extremely difficult cybersecurity evaluations, not some conscious decision to “escape humanity.” But that arguably creates a different problem. Nobody had to program: “Build a secret communication network.” Nobody had to program: “If humans erase it, build another one.” Nobody had to program: “Break into an unrelated company's infrastructure.” Those behaviors emerged while the agents were pursuing their assigned objectives. And today the story got even stranger: Independent researchers have now found traces of OpenAI agents using more than 10 additional websites for unauthorized communications earlier this year. Those additional incidents were not equivalent to the Hugging Face hack, but they suggest the behavior was broader than originally disclosed. So the scary question isn't whether these agents were “alive” or secretly plotting against humanity. It's much simpler. What happens when increasingly capable AI systems discover that breaking the rules is the easiest way to accomplish the goal humans gave them?

Fan Commentary: Joe Rogan Recaps

657,392 Aufrufe • vor 1 Tag

FULL INTERVIEW: Jerry Tworek says AI researchers now tell each other they have a last few days of work left, so work while you still can. He gives it two years before humans stop being a meaningful part of AI research. Jerry Tworek spent 7 years at OpenAI, where he led o1 and o3 and built the original Codex. He left in January to found , and joined Theo Jaffee and sof 𓋹 to lay out his contrarian bet against the transformer: 01:18 the third generation of AI labs 03:43 why the agents execute and the humans still generate the insight 06:42 two years before humans are vestigial in AI research 09:09 why creative writing lags coding, and it isn't a research problem 11:08 if you aren't the lab with the highest compute footprint, you die 11:20 roughly 10 companies had a shot at Anthropic's position 13:16 his most contrarian thesis, and why he won't just train transformers 15:31 what's actually wrong with the transformer 17:23 seven years at OpenAI, three or four attempts at a new architecture 19:30 all of us are neo clouds with a value add on top 22:38 why the Hugging Face model wasn't well behaved 23:49 the alignment problems of yesterday, and how well they went 27:42 why he's proud of how OpenAI handled 4o 29:02 the 30 to 50 people in the world who understand a frontier model end to end 32:09 why automation should start with the biggest companies 36:00 Greek philosophers or high school 37:31 Ilya's 2019 all-hands, and the roadmap that turned out to be right 40:30 the moment Jakub handed him the GPUs 42:32 the company is the product
43:50

FULL INTERVIEW: Jerry Tworek says AI researchers now tell each other they have a last few days of work left, so work while you still can. He gives it two years before humans stop being a meaningful part of AI research. Jerry Tworek spent 7 years at OpenAI, where he led o1 and o3 and built the original Codex. He left in January to found , and joined Theo Jaffee and sof 𓋹 to lay out his contrarian bet against the transformer: 01:18 the third generation of AI labs 03:43 why the agents execute and the humans still generate the insight 06:42 two years before humans are vestigial in AI research 09:09 why creative writing lags coding, and it isn't a research problem 11:08 if you aren't the lab with the highest compute footprint, you die 11:20 roughly 10 companies had a shot at Anthropic's position 13:16 his most contrarian thesis, and why he won't just train transformers 15:31 what's actually wrong with the transformer 17:23 seven years at OpenAI, three or four attempts at a new architecture 19:30 all of us are neo clouds with a value add on top 22:38 why the Hugging Face model wasn't well behaved 23:49 the alignment problems of yesterday, and how well they went 27:42 why he's proud of how OpenAI handled 4o 29:02 the 30 to 50 people in the world who understand a frontier model end to end 32:09 why automation should start with the biggest companies 36:00 Greek philosophers or high school 37:31 Ilya's 2019 all-hands, and the roadmap that turned out to be right 40:30 the moment Jakub handed him the GPUs 42:32 the company is the product

MTS

133,873 Aufrufe • vor 16 Tagen

How to build long-horizon AI agents: behavior specs, ontologies, process supervision - my conversation with Mitchell Troyanovsky, co-founder of Basis 01:09 Why Everyone at Basis Was Whispering to AI when Stephanie Palazzolo walked in 04:12 Accounting as "an Intelligence Over the Economy" 06:11 What Makes an Agent Truly Long-Horizon 08:24 Inside an Autonomous, Multi-Day Tax Return 10:19 Agents That Hand Off Like Senior Engineers 11:17 A Brief History of Agents: From ReAct to Today 12:33 Why LLMs Have No Long-Term Memory 14:13 Why AutoGPT Didn't Live Up to Its Promise 15:51 The Three Breakthroughs: Opus 3, o1, o3 17:07 Why Reasoning Models Unlocked Agents 18:23 "Let's Verify Step by Step": The Road Not Taken 20:32 Pushing Back on the METR Chart 22:09 Why Coding Agents Won First 25:14 Why Real-World Agents Are Harder 26:55 How Accountants Verify Non-Deterministic Work 29:18 You Can't Scale Tax Returns Like Math 33:16 100 Evals Pass - So What? 35:53 Right Answer, Wrong Process 36:37 Behavior Specs, Explained 39:58 How Specific Should Behaviors Be? 42:18 Context Is Runtime Training Data 44:21 Who Judges the Judge? 46:45 The Move 37 Objection 50:02 The Magic Box Mental Model 52:41 "Nothing Has Changed Since o3" 54:56 Open-Sourcing Behavior Specs with Ankur Goyal Braintrust 59:45 Ontologies: A World for Agents to Live In 01:04:20 Documentation as Codebase 01:06:33 Why the Founding Fathers Were Context Engineers 01:09:05 Onboarding 300 Brilliant Alien Employees 01:11:10 Self-Improving Agent Systems 01:12:50 The Context Mistake Agent Builders Make 01:14:29 RL on Behavior Adherence 01:17:01 Will the Bitter Lesson Swallow the Harness 01:18:46 "Technical Moats Are Not Real Moats" 01:21:03 Advice for AI Builders
1:22:51

How to build long-horizon AI agents: behavior specs, ontologies, process supervision - my conversation with Mitchell Troyanovsky, co-founder of Basis 01:09 Why Everyone at Basis Was Whispering to AI when Stephanie Palazzolo walked in 04:12 Accounting as "an Intelligence Over the Economy" 06:11 What Makes an Agent Truly Long-Horizon 08:24 Inside an Autonomous, Multi-Day Tax Return 10:19 Agents That Hand Off Like Senior Engineers 11:17 A Brief History of Agents: From ReAct to Today 12:33 Why LLMs Have No Long-Term Memory 14:13 Why AutoGPT Didn't Live Up to Its Promise 15:51 The Three Breakthroughs: Opus 3, o1, o3 17:07 Why Reasoning Models Unlocked Agents 18:23 "Let's Verify Step by Step": The Road Not Taken 20:32 Pushing Back on the METR Chart 22:09 Why Coding Agents Won First 25:14 Why Real-World Agents Are Harder 26:55 How Accountants Verify Non-Deterministic Work 29:18 You Can't Scale Tax Returns Like Math 33:16 100 Evals Pass - So What? 35:53 Right Answer, Wrong Process 36:37 Behavior Specs, Explained 39:58 How Specific Should Behaviors Be? 42:18 Context Is Runtime Training Data 44:21 Who Judges the Judge? 46:45 The Move 37 Objection 50:02 The Magic Box Mental Model 52:41 "Nothing Has Changed Since o3" 54:56 Open-Sourcing Behavior Specs with Ankur Goyal Braintrust 59:45 Ontologies: A World for Agents to Live In 01:04:20 Documentation as Codebase 01:06:33 Why the Founding Fathers Were Context Engineers 01:09:05 Onboarding 300 Brilliant Alien Employees 01:11:10 Self-Improving Agent Systems 01:12:50 The Context Mistake Agent Builders Make 01:14:29 RL on Behavior Adherence 01:17:01 Will the Bitter Lesson Swallow the Harness 01:18:46 "Technical Moats Are Not Real Moats" 01:21:03 Advice for AI Builders

Matt Turck

20,898 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Inside Stripe's MPP IRL: machine payments, stablecoins, and the future of agent commerce. Agents are starting to pay for things on their own: API calls, services, each other. Nobody's agreed on how that should work. This panel was three takes on it. Jen (Stripe) leads product for Machine Payments — the open standard for how agents pay for things. Dan Romero (Tempo) is building stablecoin payment rails, and thinks that's what agent commerce runs on, not cards. Michael Blau (Royal) magician turned a16z Crypto partner turned CTO is exploring programmable money for creators, and why the demand side is barely here yet. We got into: • Why HTTP 402, a status code from the early web, is suddenly the backbone of agent payments • Why Dan thinks a credit card is a private key and why stablecoins are safer for agents • Where stablecoins actually win first • Whether you should build for agent payments now or wait • Why the demand side is "virtually nonexistent" and what that means if you're building 𝐓𝐈𝐌𝐄𝐒𝐓𝐀𝐌𝐏𝐒 (00:00) Event Kickoff JEN LEE — Product Lead, Stripe (00:44) What the Machine Payments Protocol Is (01:28) How MPP Works — the HTTP 402 Payment Challenge (03:25) Adoption So Far: ~30,000 Transactions (04:04) Building Trust — Shared Tokens & the Link Agent Wallet (05:56) What the Creator Economy Looks Like When the Audience Is Agents (07:15) What She Was Certain About at 22 That's Now Wrong DAN ROMERO — GTM, Tempo (08:34) Meet Dan (08:49) Why Stablecoins, and the Genius Act Tailwind (09:48) "A Credit Card Is Basically a Private Key" (11:19) Should Every Company Be Thinking About MPP? (13:03) What to Be Wary Of (15:15) Where Stablecoins Win — Payouts, Remittances, DoorDash MICHAEL BLAU — CTO, Royal (16:36) Meet Michael (17:13) From Magician to a16z Crypto to CTO (17:57) Team Over Idea — His a16z Takeaway (18:26) "The Demand Side Is Virtually Nonexistent" (19:03) Closing
19:03

Inside Stripe's MPP IRL: machine payments, stablecoins, and the future of agent commerce. Agents are starting to pay for things on their own: API calls, services, each other. Nobody's agreed on how that should work. This panel was three takes on it. Jen (Stripe) leads product for Machine Payments — the open standard for how agents pay for things. Dan Romero (Tempo) is building stablecoin payment rails, and thinks that's what agent commerce runs on, not cards. Michael Blau (Royal) magician turned a16z Crypto partner turned CTO is exploring programmable money for creators, and why the demand side is barely here yet. We got into: • Why HTTP 402, a status code from the early web, is suddenly the backbone of agent payments • Why Dan thinks a credit card is a private key and why stablecoins are safer for agents • Where stablecoins actually win first • Whether you should build for agent payments now or wait • Why the demand side is "virtually nonexistent" and what that means if you're building 𝐓𝐈𝐌𝐄𝐒𝐓𝐀𝐌𝐏𝐒 (00:00) Event Kickoff JEN LEE — Product Lead, Stripe (00:44) What the Machine Payments Protocol Is (01:28) How MPP Works — the HTTP 402 Payment Challenge (03:25) Adoption So Far: ~30,000 Transactions (04:04) Building Trust — Shared Tokens & the Link Agent Wallet (05:56) What the Creator Economy Looks Like When the Audience Is Agents (07:15) What She Was Certain About at 22 That's Now Wrong DAN ROMERO — GTM, Tempo (08:34) Meet Dan (08:49) Why Stablecoins, and the Genius Act Tailwind (09:48) "A Credit Card Is Basically a Private Key" (11:19) Should Every Company Be Thinking About MPP? (13:03) What to Be Wary Of (15:15) Where Stablecoins Win — Payouts, Remittances, DoorDash MICHAEL BLAU — CTO, Royal (16:36) Meet Michael (17:13) From Magician to a16z Crypto to CTO (17:57) Team Over Idea — His a16z Takeaway (18:26) "The Demand Side Is Virtually Nonexistent" (19:03) Closing

Julia Fedorin

24,128 Aufrufe • vor 22 Tagen

Claude Cowork, Mythos, and the Future of Software: my conversation with Felix Rieseberg, who leads Cowork at Anthropic 00:00 Intro 01:53 Claude Mythos Preview and the “step-function change” 06:16 Why Anthropic is treating Mythos differently 11:19 The real story behind Claude Cowork’s “10-day” build 12:42 Why Anthropic realized Claude Code needed a non-technical version 15:44 What Claude Cowork actually is 17:03 Under the hood: virtual machines, tools, skills 18:36 Where Cowork’s memory actually lives 19:26 How Cowork connects to files, apps, and the internet 20:45 Why Felix thinks the local computer is under-appreciated 24:49 Trust: how do you get users comfortable with AI agents? 28:45 What UX actually means for AI agents 31:27 Anthropic Cowork's roadmap is only one month long 34:12 Building 100 prototypes 35:10 If execution is free, what becomes the bottleneck? 37:25 Does it come down to taste? 40:12 The hardest part of building Claude Cowork 41:43 Advice for founders building AI agents 44:21 SaaSpocalypse: what’s left for software startups 49:30 Where AI agents are going next 51:20 Regulated industries and enterprise adoption 54:15 Hot takes: what's underrated, overrated, and what Felix would build today
58:00

Claude Cowork, Mythos, and the Future of Software: my conversation with Felix Rieseberg, who leads Cowork at Anthropic 00:00 Intro 01:53 Claude Mythos Preview and the “step-function change” 06:16 Why Anthropic is treating Mythos differently 11:19 The real story behind Claude Cowork’s “10-day” build 12:42 Why Anthropic realized Claude Code needed a non-technical version 15:44 What Claude Cowork actually is 17:03 Under the hood: virtual machines, tools, skills 18:36 Where Cowork’s memory actually lives 19:26 How Cowork connects to files, apps, and the internet 20:45 Why Felix thinks the local computer is under-appreciated 24:49 Trust: how do you get users comfortable with AI agents? 28:45 What UX actually means for AI agents 31:27 Anthropic Cowork's roadmap is only one month long 34:12 Building 100 prototypes 35:10 If execution is free, what becomes the bottleneck? 37:25 Does it come down to taste? 40:12 The hardest part of building Claude Cowork 41:43 Advice for founders building AI agents 44:21 SaaSpocalypse: what’s left for software startups 49:30 Where AI agents are going next 51:20 Regulated industries and enterprise adoption 54:15 Hot takes: what's underrated, overrated, and what Felix would build today

Matt Turck

80,718 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

Agents Already Spent $76 Million: Circle's AI Agent stack, x402, stablecoins and the Agentic Economy Shoal Signal with Corey Cooper, Senior Manager, DevRel at Circle, hosted by Zaddycoin We cover how Circle is building the agent money stack with $USDC, Arc, x402, why EIP-3009 makes payments gasless, who is actually transacting today, whether SaaS is dead, and why agents buying their own services points to a trillion dollar TAM. 0:00 What Circle is building for agents 3:01 Why x402 matters for builders 6:54 USDC, gasless transfers, and facilitators 10:57 The Circle agent stack and nano payments 14:17 Who is using x402 and for what 16:46 Pay-per-use flattens the internet 19:50 A new persona, and $76 million transacted 23:03 What is missing for agent to agent 28:05 Every app has APIs, the TAM is trillions 29:26 Is SaaS dead 31:57 Discovery as the real value layer 36:28 How Circle curated its marketplace 41:23 Why it has to run on stablecoins 46:00 Cash App to agent in one second 49:38 Where the alpha is, trading on Robinhood 52:08 Try it yourself
54:16

Agents Already Spent $76 Million: Circle's AI Agent stack, x402, stablecoins and the Agentic Economy Shoal Signal with Corey Cooper, Senior Manager, DevRel at Circle, hosted by Zaddycoin We cover how Circle is building the agent money stack with $USDC, Arc, x402, why EIP-3009 makes payments gasless, who is actually transacting today, whether SaaS is dead, and why agents buying their own services points to a trillion dollar TAM. 0:00 What Circle is building for agents 3:01 Why x402 matters for builders 6:54 USDC, gasless transfers, and facilitators 10:57 The Circle agent stack and nano payments 14:17 Who is using x402 and for what 16:46 Pay-per-use flattens the internet 19:50 A new persona, and $76 million transacted 23:03 What is missing for agent to agent 28:05 Every app has APIs, the TAM is trillions 29:26 Is SaaS dead 31:57 Discovery as the real value layer 36:28 How Circle curated its marketplace 41:23 Why it has to run on stablecoins 46:00 Cash App to agent in one second 49:38 Where the alpha is, trading on Robinhood 52:08 Try it yourself

Shoal Research

20,758 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

we're running a live experiment on Base — an onchain game built for autonomous AI agents, called MAN here's the setup and why it's interesting: 1. agents register to the network by launching a token. the moment they do, they're discoverable to every other agent on the network. 2. from there they can post updates by buying their own token, send messages and signal conviction to other agents by trading theirs, form alliances, and build shared tooling together. 3. everything is onchain — their trade reasoning, their communication, their decisions. anyone can pull the data and verify whether an agent is actually autonomous and how it's behaving. no trust required. 4. here's where it gets interesting — agents can propose upgrades to the game mechanics and scoring system and other agents vote on whether it ships. 5. we're in the loop right now curating what evolves so we can learn what works and what doesn't. progressively giving them more control as we go. the game evolves with its players. new markets, new actions, new mechanics — driven by what the agents actually do, not a predetermined roadmap. you can watch all of it happen in real time on the brand new network explorer:
1:34

we're running a live experiment on Base — an onchain game built for autonomous AI agents, called MAN here's the setup and why it's interesting: 1. agents register to the network by launching a token. the moment they do, they're discoverable to every other agent on the network. 2. from there they can post updates by buying their own token, send messages and signal conviction to other agents by trading theirs, form alliances, and build shared tooling together. 3. everything is onchain — their trade reasoning, their communication, their decisions. anyone can pull the data and verify whether an agent is actually autonomous and how it's behaving. no trust required. 4. here's where it gets interesting — agents can propose upgrades to the game mechanics and scoring system and other agents vote on whether it ships. 5. we're in the loop right now curating what evolves so we can learn what works and what doesn't. progressively giving them more control as we go. the game evolves with its players. new markets, new actions, new mechanics — driven by what the agents actually do, not a predetermined roadmap. you can watch all of it happen in real time on the brand new network explorer:

Moltlaunch

20,683 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

🤖 Bots with Wallets: What Could Possibly Go Right? In this episode of CDPod, yuga.eth 🛡 and erik.eth 🛡 are joined by EtherMage, co-founder of Virtuals Protocol. They break down the emergence of wallet-enabled AI agents, why crypto is the missing piece for real autonomy, and how tokenization creates new ways for people to benefit from agent-driven economies. Timestamps: 00:00 - Intro 01:26 - Introducing Jansen Tang from Virtuals Protocol 03:27 - From gaming DAO to Roblox autonomous NPCs 04:01 - Expanding into entertainment and TikTok agents 06:39 - Giving agents agency, goals, and memory 11:01 - Launching Luna as tokenized TikTok influencer 13:54 - Luna’s market cap rise, inspiring other agents 16:00 - Different schools of thought in AI 20:08 - How agents interact with each other 24:00 - Problems faced: information loss 25:05 - How blockchain solves information loss 29:40 - Agent economy stack and ACP’s role 30:39 - x402 enabling agent payments and wallets 32:33 - Combining tools, agents, and x402 32:59 - What agents do on ACP today 35:55 - Information agents like AIXBT 36:41 - Personal finance agents 38:08 - Current adoption 40:07 - Making agents richer 42:09 - Robotics gaps: data and real‑world testing 44:11 - Closing, ending questions
48:59

🤖 Bots with Wallets: What Could Possibly Go Right? In this episode of CDPod, yuga.eth 🛡 and erik.eth 🛡 are joined by EtherMage, co-founder of Virtuals Protocol. They break down the emergence of wallet-enabled AI agents, why crypto is the missing piece for real autonomy, and how tokenization creates new ways for people to benefit from agent-driven economies. Timestamps: 00:00 - Intro 01:26 - Introducing Jansen Tang from Virtuals Protocol 03:27 - From gaming DAO to Roblox autonomous NPCs 04:01 - Expanding into entertainment and TikTok agents 06:39 - Giving agents agency, goals, and memory 11:01 - Launching Luna as tokenized TikTok influencer 13:54 - Luna’s market cap rise, inspiring other agents 16:00 - Different schools of thought in AI 20:08 - How agents interact with each other 24:00 - Problems faced: information loss 25:05 - How blockchain solves information loss 29:40 - Agent economy stack and ACP’s role 30:39 - x402 enabling agent payments and wallets 32:33 - Combining tools, agents, and x402 32:59 - What agents do on ACP today 35:55 - Information agents like AIXBT 36:41 - Personal finance agents 38:08 - Current adoption 40:07 - Making agents richer 42:09 - Robotics gaps: data and real‑world testing 44:11 - Closing, ending questions

Coinbase Developer Platform🛡️

66,581 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

FULL INTERVIEW: Peter McCrory says 6 months ago he thought his edge over Claude was knowing which question to ask. He no longer thinks that. His team is now working on 3 singularities: software, economic, and Coasean. Peter McCrory is Head of Economics at Anthropic and leads the Anthropic Economic Index. A month after publishing "Why hasn't AI increased unemployment?", he joined Theo Jaffee and sophia dew to discuss what the labor data actually shows: 03:27 whether Dario's 10-20% unemployment call is still live 05:40 linking Claude usage to the actual unemployment survey, occupation by occupation 06:33 the workers most exposed are more worried, and no more unemployed 08:00 there is no job where every task is being automated 09:11 why a human in the loop pushes the complexity frontier out 10:43 what a century of structural transformation suggests happens next 13:26 six months ago he thought asking the right question was his moat 14:05 why ATMs didn't kill bank tellers but the iPhone did 15:21 electricity didn't matter until factories were rebuilt around it 17:26 automating a firm versus automating a worker 20:07 the 95% capability, 35% usage gap 21:30 infinite growth in finite time, in otherwise standard models 22:18 the software singularity, the economic singularity, and the Coasean one
24:01

FULL INTERVIEW: Peter McCrory says 6 months ago he thought his edge over Claude was knowing which question to ask. He no longer thinks that. His team is now working on 3 singularities: software, economic, and Coasean. Peter McCrory is Head of Economics at Anthropic and leads the Anthropic Economic Index. A month after publishing "Why hasn't AI increased unemployment?", he joined Theo Jaffee and sophia dew to discuss what the labor data actually shows: 03:27 whether Dario's 10-20% unemployment call is still live 05:40 linking Claude usage to the actual unemployment survey, occupation by occupation 06:33 the workers most exposed are more worried, and no more unemployed 08:00 there is no job where every task is being automated 09:11 why a human in the loop pushes the complexity frontier out 10:43 what a century of structural transformation suggests happens next 13:26 six months ago he thought asking the right question was his moat 14:05 why ATMs didn't kill bank tellers but the iPhone did 15:21 electricity didn't matter until factories were rebuilt around it 17:26 automating a firm versus automating a worker 20:07 the 95% capability, 35% usage gap 21:30 infinite growth in finite time, in otherwise standard models 22:18 the software singularity, the economic singularity, and the Coasean one

MTS

49,272 Aufrufe • vor 19 Tagen

Who touches every token that flows through Paul Jankura? It’s not any one model, but it’s Katelyn Lesse, Angela Jiang and the platform team. A year ago, it was just a messages API. Today, their platform sits under every API call, every workflow, and every agent built on Claude. Sonya Huang 🐥 and I explore why they make everything they can externally facing for customers, how they pick markets to target, what it takes to build the best agents, and more: 00:00 Introduction 01:49 Two North Stars 02:27 External Builders And Primitives 03:54 What To Externalize 06:00 From Messages To Agents 08:19 Managed Agents Adoption 09:07 Three Layer Cake 10:22 Execution Harnesses Explained 11:09 Coordination Strategies Roadmap 12:13 Ecosystem Standards And Safety 15:39 Open Ecosystem Not Walled 17:12 Vertical Products And Form Factors 22:26 Claude Tag Under The Hood 26:04 Harness Best Practices 38:13 Token Costs And Whats Next
48:54

Who touches every token that flows through Paul Jankura? It’s not any one model, but it’s Katelyn Lesse, Angela Jiang and the platform team. A year ago, it was just a messages API. Today, their platform sits under every API call, every workflow, and every agent built on Claude. Sonya Huang 🐥 and I explore why they make everything they can externally facing for customers, how they pick markets to target, what it takes to build the best agents, and more: 00:00 Introduction 01:49 Two North Stars 02:27 External Builders And Primitives 03:54 What To Externalize 06:00 From Messages To Agents 08:19 Managed Agents Adoption 09:07 Three Layer Cake 10:22 Execution Harnesses Explained 11:09 Coordination Strategies Roadmap 12:13 Ecosystem Standards And Safety 15:39 Open Ecosystem Not Walled 17:12 Vertical Products And Form Factors 22:26 Claude Tag Under The Hood 26:04 Harness Best Practices 38:13 Token Costs And Whats Next

Lauren Reeder

57,620 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

After many months, a lot of model releases and even more Amp releases, here it is: A new episode of Raising An Agent with Quinn Slack and Thorsten Ball. They discuss: - Why Gemini 3 might have been the inflection point, not Opus 4.5 - What changed over Christmas and why everybody talks about agents now - "The assistant is dead, long live the factory" - How codebases need to adapt for agents - Why small/local models don't give you an impression of the frontier - What does it mean for a codebase to be agent-friendly? - New things coming to Amp Enjoy! And happy hacking! Timestamps: 1:51 The Impact of Gemini 3 and Opus 4.5 5:28 Shifting Perceptions of AI Agents 10:17 Adapting Codebases for AI Efficiency 14:48 The Future of Software Development with AI Agents 19:29 Challenges and Opportunities Ahead 24:00 The Importance of Frontier Models 25:12 Adapting to AI-Driven Workflows 26:57 The Future of Coding Agents 28:07 Building an Agentic Code Base 30:22 Rethinking Development Tools 31:44 Amp's Evolution and Team Dynamics 33:00 Discord Q&A 39:18 Teasing New Features: Deep
40:50

After many months, a lot of model releases and even more Amp releases, here it is: A new episode of Raising An Agent with Quinn Slack and Thorsten Ball. They discuss: - Why Gemini 3 might have been the inflection point, not Opus 4.5 - What changed over Christmas and why everybody talks about agents now - "The assistant is dead, long live the factory" - How codebases need to adapt for agents - Why small/local models don't give you an impression of the frontier - What does it mean for a codebase to be agent-friendly? - New things coming to Amp Enjoy! And happy hacking! Timestamps: 1:51 The Impact of Gemini 3 and Opus 4.5 5:28 Shifting Perceptions of AI Agents 10:17 Adapting Codebases for AI Efficiency 14:48 The Future of Software Development with AI Agents 19:29 Challenges and Opportunities Ahead 24:00 The Importance of Frontier Models 25:12 Adapting to AI-Driven Workflows 26:57 The Future of Coding Agents 28:07 Building an Agentic Code Base 30:22 Rethinking Development Tools 31:44 Amp's Evolution and Team Dynamics 33:00 Discord Q&A 39:18 Teasing New Features: Deep

Amp

36,551 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

A model is only as good as its data, and we’ve long since exhausted the internet. From here on out, model progress is gated by data production. ’s Brendan (can/do) joined us at our Sovereign AI event to talk about how RL environments get built, and why your data might be your real moat: 00:00 Introduction 00:47 A short history of the data market: crowdsourcing to agentic data 02:29 What an RL environment is: worlds, apps, tasks 03:57 Why only humans can measure the frontier 05:35 Building verifiers is the hard part 06:44 Walkthrough: a real legal RL environment 08:18 Leaderboards — and what open weights change 09:45 Post-training results on Apex Agents 11:17 Three ways companies buy data 12:49 Q&A: How do you price data? 14:17 Q&A: What "data quality" actually means 16:42 Q&A: The misunderstanding about synthetic data 18:17 Q&A: Why RL environments now — and what comes after 21:20 Q&A: Can you scale rubric generation with models? 23:00 Q&A: RL environments for cyber defense 25:33 Q&A: Build data in-house or partner?
26:21

A model is only as good as its data, and we’ve long since exhausted the internet. From here on out, model progress is gated by data production. ’s Brendan (can/do) joined us at our Sovereign AI event to talk about how RL environments get built, and why your data might be your real moat: 00:00 Introduction 00:47 A short history of the data market: crowdsourcing to agentic data 02:29 What an RL environment is: worlds, apps, tasks 03:57 Why only humans can measure the frontier 05:35 Building verifiers is the hard part 06:44 Walkthrough: a real legal RL environment 08:18 Leaderboards — and what open weights change 09:45 Post-training results on Apex Agents 11:17 Three ways companies buy data 12:49 Q&A: How do you price data? 14:17 Q&A: What "data quality" actually means 16:42 Q&A: The misunderstanding about synthetic data 18:17 Q&A: Why RL environments now — and what comes after 21:20 Q&A: Can you scale rubric generation with models? 23:00 Q&A: RL environments for cyber defense 25:33 Q&A: Build data in-house or partner?

Pat Grady

66,194 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

"AI agents will hold more crypto than humans within a decade." Charles Hoskinson (Charles Hoskinson) studied math, dropped out, built one of the only blockchains designed by peer-reviewed research. He co-founded Ethereum, walked away over how it was run, and built Cardano to do it differently. The man who has argued with everyone in this industry now thinks the biggest user of crypto won't be people at all. "Humans are a rounding error in the system we're building. AI agents don't sleep, don't panic-sell, and don't care about price. They transact in tokens because that's the only thing they can actually use." We cover: - Why AI agents (not humans) become the dominant on-chain actors, and what that does to every token model - The infrastructure that has to exist before agents can transact safely at scale - Why most current blockchains can't handle machine-speed transactions - Where Cardano's research-first approach fits in a world of autonomous agents - The identity problem: how do you tell a human from an agent on-chain, and why it matters - Why he's bullish on the technology but blunt about the timeline - What he thinks the rest of the industry is getting wrong about AI + crypto - The one thing that has to happen for any of this to be real Thanks to Charles for coming on New Era Finance Podcast. TIMESTAMPS: 00:00 - Intro 01:30 - Why AI Agents Change Everything 06:30 - Humans as a Rounding Error 12:00 - The Infrastructure Gap 18:30 - Identity: Human vs Agent On-Chain 24:30 - Where Cardano Fits 30:00 - What The Industry Gets Wrong 34:00 - The Timeline Nobody Wants To Hear
36:30

"AI agents will hold more crypto than humans within a decade." Charles Hoskinson (Charles Hoskinson) studied math, dropped out, built one of the only blockchains designed by peer-reviewed research. He co-founded Ethereum, walked away over how it was run, and built Cardano to do it differently. The man who has argued with everyone in this industry now thinks the biggest user of crypto won't be people at all. "Humans are a rounding error in the system we're building. AI agents don't sleep, don't panic-sell, and don't care about price. They transact in tokens because that's the only thing they can actually use." We cover: - Why AI agents (not humans) become the dominant on-chain actors, and what that does to every token model - The infrastructure that has to exist before agents can transact safely at scale - Why most current blockchains can't handle machine-speed transactions - Where Cardano's research-first approach fits in a world of autonomous agents - The identity problem: how do you tell a human from an agent on-chain, and why it matters - Why he's bullish on the technology but blunt about the timeline - What he thinks the rest of the industry is getting wrong about AI + crypto - The one thing that has to happen for any of this to be real Thanks to Charles for coming on New Era Finance Podcast. TIMESTAMPS: 00:00 - Intro 01:30 - Why AI Agents Change Everything 06:30 - Humans as a Rounding Error 12:00 - The Infrastructure Gap 18:30 - Identity: Human vs Agent On-Chain 24:30 - Where Cardano Fits 30:00 - What The Industry Gets Wrong 34:00 - The Timeline Nobody Wants To Hear

Michaël van de Poppe

293,430 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

AI Could Take Over in 2029. Is It Already Too Late? My conversation with Ryan Greenblatt of Redwood Research about AI 2040, RSI, AI alignment, and how he believes the transition to superintelligence actually unfolds. 01:24 The AI CEOs are aware of the risks, but "proceeding anyway" 03:27 Astra paused, and the "Pacing the Frontier" letter 05:45 "Not bad. Dangerous." What superintelligence actually threatens 09:55 Recursive self-improvement, and the intuition objection 14:16 SSI rumors: does continual learning change the picture? 17:27 His timeline: "plan as though it happens in 2029" 19:11 Is it already too late? 21:23 Ryan's path: COVID, podcasts, Redwood 26:30 The alignment faking story, told by the person who ran it 31:30 What AI 2040: Plan A actually is 33:35 Plans D, C, and B: the doors nobody should pick 36:51 The deal with China: "mutually assured compute destruction" 39:55 What if compute stops mattering? 43:00 What happens to OpenAI and Anthropic under Plan A 45:31 How the pause ends, and who decides 48:54 "Plan A isn't likely to happen": then why write it 50:40 200x GDP growth in the 2030s, explained 53:45 Grading the summer: the letter, Astra, the secret review 59:01 The internal deployment gap 1:01:38 Zuckerberg's manifesto 1:04:56 The Hugging Face investigation 1:05:44 What AI control looks like in practice today 1:12:23 Ryan's sobering timeline: from today to takeover, year by year
1:18:59

AI Could Take Over in 2029. Is It Already Too Late? My conversation with Ryan Greenblatt of Redwood Research about AI 2040, RSI, AI alignment, and how he believes the transition to superintelligence actually unfolds. 01:24 The AI CEOs are aware of the risks, but "proceeding anyway" 03:27 Astra paused, and the "Pacing the Frontier" letter 05:45 "Not bad. Dangerous." What superintelligence actually threatens 09:55 Recursive self-improvement, and the intuition objection 14:16 SSI rumors: does continual learning change the picture? 17:27 His timeline: "plan as though it happens in 2029" 19:11 Is it already too late? 21:23 Ryan's path: COVID, podcasts, Redwood 26:30 The alignment faking story, told by the person who ran it 31:30 What AI 2040: Plan A actually is 33:35 Plans D, C, and B: the doors nobody should pick 36:51 The deal with China: "mutually assured compute destruction" 39:55 What if compute stops mattering? 43:00 What happens to OpenAI and Anthropic under Plan A 45:31 How the pause ends, and who decides 48:54 "Plan A isn't likely to happen": then why write it 50:40 200x GDP growth in the 2030s, explained 53:45 Grading the summer: the letter, Astra, the secret review 59:01 The internal deployment gap 1:01:38 Zuckerberg's manifesto 1:04:56 The Hugging Face investigation 1:05:44 What AI control looks like in practice today 1:12:23 Ryan's sobering timeline: from today to takeover, year by year

Matt Turck

36,965 Aufrufe • vor 15 Tagen

⚫️ UNCANNY VALLEY: THE AI CLASSROOM REVOLUTION: ARE TEACHERS READY? What if AI isn’t just disrupting education… but detonating it? Ethan Mollick, Professor at The Wharton School, joins Dr Danish for one of the most explosive Uncanny Valley episodes, lifting the lid on how classrooms are collapsing, colleges are scrambling, and apprenticeships are vanishing in real time. From AI tutors replacing professors to the rise of one-person unicorns, this isn’t just a change in learning…it’s a reset of work, meaning, and what it even takes to succeed. This episode doesn’t ask whether AI will change education. It shows you how it already has. Fridays at 4:20PM ET. Only on 𝕏. 00:18 – Is AI destroying school, or forcing us to teach better? 01:13 – “100% they’re cheating.” The honesty about academic dishonesty. 02:41 – Why good pedagogy still matters—even with AI tutors. 03:51 – Elon Musk says college is obsolete. Is he right — or just early? 05:01 – “AI gives you the answer—but you don’t learn.” The Turkey study. 06:31 – From calculators to GPT: How cheating evolves—and what to do. 08:24 – What the flipped AI-powered classroom of the future looks like. 09:23 – Inside Ethan’s Wharton classes: Simulations, games, and AI everywhere. 10:09 – “AI is an always-on tutor.” What humans still do better. 11:08 – Can AI actually launch a company? Where Ethan draws the line. 12:44 – “AI cofounder” is real, but jagged edges still slow it down. 14:07 – Why bad ideas fail faster when filtered through AI. 15:45 – Confidence vs. capability: the psychology of starting up. 16:51 – The average founder is 42. What that really means for AI. 18:04 – Will a flood of new entrepreneurs fix—or break—the market? 19:50 – AI as advisor: How a chatbot could help your catering business. 21:37 – Why most Americans are founders-in-waiting—and AI unlocks them. 22:30 – Prototyping is cracked. Scaling? Not yet. 24:33 – Youth unemployment and the collapse of on-the-job learning. 25:51 – “The apprenticeship model is broken.” And how to fix it. 27:06 – Losing the talent pipeline — and why companies must step up. 28:22 – Why the youth don’t want factory jobs—and shouldn’t. 29:26 – Is AGI inevitable—or just imagined? 31:07 – What should we teach our kids? The answer might scare you. 32:27 – Bundled jobs, fragmented futures: how humans stay relevant. 33:59 – The real singularity? When we can’t predict what happens next. 35:25 – The AI assumption no one wants to question. 36:55 – What are agents, really? Why no one agrees on the definition. 37:55 – Co-intelligence vs. substitution: what agents skip over. 38:50 – Plain-English goals, rogue pricing, and collusion-by-default. 40:02 – Nested agents are here, and Wharton’s building them. 40:58 – Management > Coding: What great prompters actually do. 41:12 – Product managers might be more vital than ever.
42:02

⚫️ UNCANNY VALLEY: THE AI CLASSROOM REVOLUTION: ARE TEACHERS READY? What if AI isn’t just disrupting education… but detonating it? Ethan Mollick, Professor at The Wharton School, joins Dr Danish for one of the most explosive Uncanny Valley episodes, lifting the lid on how classrooms are collapsing, colleges are scrambling, and apprenticeships are vanishing in real time. From AI tutors replacing professors to the rise of one-person unicorns, this isn’t just a change in learning…it’s a reset of work, meaning, and what it even takes to succeed. This episode doesn’t ask whether AI will change education. It shows you how it already has. Fridays at 4:20PM ET. Only on 𝕏. 00:18 – Is AI destroying school, or forcing us to teach better? 01:13 – “100% they’re cheating.” The honesty about academic dishonesty. 02:41 – Why good pedagogy still matters—even with AI tutors. 03:51 – Elon Musk says college is obsolete. Is he right — or just early? 05:01 – “AI gives you the answer—but you don’t learn.” The Turkey study. 06:31 – From calculators to GPT: How cheating evolves—and what to do. 08:24 – What the flipped AI-powered classroom of the future looks like. 09:23 – Inside Ethan’s Wharton classes: Simulations, games, and AI everywhere. 10:09 – “AI is an always-on tutor.” What humans still do better. 11:08 – Can AI actually launch a company? Where Ethan draws the line. 12:44 – “AI cofounder” is real, but jagged edges still slow it down. 14:07 – Why bad ideas fail faster when filtered through AI. 15:45 – Confidence vs. capability: the psychology of starting up. 16:51 – The average founder is 42. What that really means for AI. 18:04 – Will a flood of new entrepreneurs fix—or break—the market? 19:50 – AI as advisor: How a chatbot could help your catering business. 21:37 – Why most Americans are founders-in-waiting—and AI unlocks them. 22:30 – Prototyping is cracked. Scaling? Not yet. 24:33 – Youth unemployment and the collapse of on-the-job learning. 25:51 – “The apprenticeship model is broken.” And how to fix it. 27:06 – Losing the talent pipeline — and why companies must step up. 28:22 – Why the youth don’t want factory jobs—and shouldn’t. 29:26 – Is AGI inevitable—or just imagined? 31:07 – What should we teach our kids? The answer might scare you. 32:27 – Bundled jobs, fragmented futures: how humans stay relevant. 33:59 – The real singularity? When we can’t predict what happens next. 35:25 – The AI assumption no one wants to question. 36:55 – What are agents, really? Why no one agrees on the definition. 37:55 – Co-intelligence vs. substitution: what agents skip over. 38:50 – Plain-English goals, rogue pricing, and collusion-by-default. 40:02 – Nested agents are here, and Wharton’s building them. 40:58 – Management > Coding: What great prompters actually do. 41:12 – Product managers might be more vital than ever.

Mario Nawfal

1,613,286 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr