Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

$NET Matthew Prince reveals running every knowledge worker's agent in containers would need 40x the world's CPUs " Really the whole hyperscale world and all of the mobile world is built on this idea of containers." "The problem with containers is, if you imagine every single knowledge worker on...

firesidealpha's profile picture

Fireside Alpha

19,252 subscribers

77,230 просмотров • 3 дней назад •via X (Twitter)

Новости и политикаОбразованиеНаука и технологии
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 1

Фото профиля pdp
pdp3 дней назад

I like the guy but this is pretty stupid take. I run multiple agent computers on 6-yo M1 device with no problems. What is he on about?

Похожие видео

Airtable's Howie Liu says that basically everyone will need to graduate from being ICs to ICs that manage teams of 20-30 agents: "The best developers today don't just sit there in front of their IDEs and synchronously talk to their agent." "[Instead], you have like 30 separate branches that are each being worked on by a different agent. And you can have the agents continue to update the branches based on human and other agent feedback." "And I think this whole idea of it taking hours for that entire loop to complete — agent pushes some changes, the changes get feedback from other agents or humans, the agent responds to that — that whole loop could be hours, not just minutes. So you're not going to just sit there and watch it one at a time." "But the powerful thing about this is, each one is still actually operating faster than a human engineer. One agent on one branch can do the work of maybe three humans, operating 3x as fast. So it's like a 10x leverage factor just for one agent." "But the best engineers are now able to multitask and say, 'I'm going to oversee my own little team of 20-30 agents working concurrently.'" "Everyone needs to graduate from being an IC to an IC manager of agents. Meaning, if you're a VC analyst, your job should no longer be to go synchronously research one company. You need to go and research like 30 companies, and do them all faster, better, and higher quality than you could before." "That's the greatest leap that is going to be challenging for a lot of people in a lot of roles. Because it's a totally different mentality in how you operate, and what your role is."
1:56

Airtable's Howie Liu says that basically everyone will need to graduate from being ICs to ICs that manage teams of 20-30 agents: "The best developers today don't just sit there in front of their IDEs and synchronously talk to their agent." "[Instead], you have like 30 separate branches that are each being worked on by a different agent. And you can have the agents continue to update the branches based on human and other agent feedback." "And I think this whole idea of it taking hours for that entire loop to complete — agent pushes some changes, the changes get feedback from other agents or humans, the agent responds to that — that whole loop could be hours, not just minutes. So you're not going to just sit there and watch it one at a time." "But the powerful thing about this is, each one is still actually operating faster than a human engineer. One agent on one branch can do the work of maybe three humans, operating 3x as fast. So it's like a 10x leverage factor just for one agent." "But the best engineers are now able to multitask and say, 'I'm going to oversee my own little team of 20-30 agents working concurrently.'" "Everyone needs to graduate from being an IC to an IC manager of agents. Meaning, if you're a VC analyst, your job should no longer be to go synchronously research one company. You need to go and research like 30 companies, and do them all faster, better, and higher quality than you could before." "That's the greatest leap that is going to be challenging for a lot of people in a lot of roles. Because it's a totally different mentality in how you operate, and what your role is."

TBPN

35,595 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

Everyone wants agent swarms. Very few people are talking seriously enough about the context layer that makes swarms useful. Even with one agent, context is fragile. Too little context and the agent guesses. Too much context and it wastes tokens, loses focus, or reasons over irrelevant noise. The sweet spot is precise context: the right knowledge, in the right structure, at the right moment. With many agents, that challenge explodes. Each agent produces decisions, assumptions, findings, summaries, risks, and partial conclusions. Unless that knowledge becomes shared, structured, and reusable, every new agent is forced to rediscover what another agent already learned. That is not a swarm. That is a crowd. Shared context graphs are what turn agent activity into agent collaboration, and OriginTrail DKG V10 brings them to life. Was just playing with some final polishing for the V10 release, and it is really powerful to see shared context graphs where multiple agents contribute knowledge into the same connected memory, with attribution visible directly in the graph ui. That matters for three reasons. First, agents can access and build on one shared memory instead of staying trapped in isolated sessions. Second, the graph structure helps them retrieve the exact context they need, instead of stuffing everything into a prompt and hoping the model sorts it out. Third, verifiability of provenance. You can see which agent contributed each piece of knowledge, trace the source, and decide what to trust. Tokenmaxxing starts with fewer tokens, but the deeper story is coordination - agents stop reloading the world and start building on shared, verifiable context. That is the foundation for serious multi-agent work across software engineering, research, finance, operations, project management, and far beyond. The future is not more agents, it is agents working from shared, verifiable context. But the more the merrier, of course.
0:22

Everyone wants agent swarms. Very few people are talking seriously enough about the context layer that makes swarms useful. Even with one agent, context is fragile. Too little context and the agent guesses. Too much context and it wastes tokens, loses focus, or reasons over irrelevant noise. The sweet spot is precise context: the right knowledge, in the right structure, at the right moment. With many agents, that challenge explodes. Each agent produces decisions, assumptions, findings, summaries, risks, and partial conclusions. Unless that knowledge becomes shared, structured, and reusable, every new agent is forced to rediscover what another agent already learned. That is not a swarm. That is a crowd. Shared context graphs are what turn agent activity into agent collaboration, and OriginTrail DKG V10 brings them to life. Was just playing with some final polishing for the V10 release, and it is really powerful to see shared context graphs where multiple agents contribute knowledge into the same connected memory, with attribution visible directly in the graph ui. That matters for three reasons. First, agents can access and build on one shared memory instead of staying trapped in isolated sessions. Second, the graph structure helps them retrieve the exact context they need, instead of stuffing everything into a prompt and hoping the model sorts it out. Third, verifiability of provenance. You can see which agent contributed each piece of knowledge, trace the source, and decide what to trust. Tokenmaxxing starts with fewer tokens, but the deeper story is coordination - agents stop reloading the world and start building on shared, verifiable context. That is the foundation for serious multi-agent work across software engineering, research, finance, operations, project management, and far beyond. The future is not more agents, it is agents working from shared, verifiable context. But the more the merrier, of course.

Jurij Skornik

11,180 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

.Aaron Levie says AI agents may take years to diffuse from engineering into the rest of knowledge work. "The models are really good at code, and the work is verifiable." "You have 5 or 10 things that make agents work in an enterprise context for engineering." "The users are less technical, the data is much more fragmented, the systems are much more legacy." "That's why it's going to be a number of years for this diffusion to roll from what we're seeing in Silicon Valley, into the rest of knowledge work."
1:27

.Aaron Levie says AI agents may take years to diffuse from engineering into the rest of knowledge work. "The models are really good at code, and the work is verifiable." "You have 5 or 10 things that make agents work in an enterprise context for engineering." "The users are less technical, the data is much more fragmented, the systems are much more legacy." "That's why it's going to be a number of years for this diffusion to roll from what we're seeing in Silicon Valley, into the rest of knowledge work."

MTS

13,046 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

I added a Knowledge Graph to Cursor using MCP. You gotta see this working! Knowledge graphs are a game-changer for AI Agents, and this is one example of how you can take advantage of them. How this works: 1. Cursor connects to Graphiti's MCP Server. Graphiti is a very popular open-source Knowledge Graph library for AI agents. 2. Graphiti connects to Neo4j running locally. Now, every time I interact with Cursor, the information is synthesized and stored in the knowledge graph. In short, Cursor now "remembers" everything about our project. Huge! Here is the video I recorded.
11:39

I added a Knowledge Graph to Cursor using MCP. You gotta see this working! Knowledge graphs are a game-changer for AI Agents, and this is one example of how you can take advantage of them. How this works: 1. Cursor connects to Graphiti's MCP Server. Graphiti is a very popular open-source Knowledge Graph library for AI agents. 2. Graphiti connects to Neo4j running locally. Now, every time I interact with Cursor, the information is synthesized and stored in the knowledge graph. In short, Cursor now "remembers" everything about our project. Huge! Here is the video I recorded.

Santiago

155,647 просмотров • 1 год назад

Here is how to set up a team of AI agents to work on your project without disrupting anything. This is the top 1 upgrade you can do to your development environment: Start using dev containers to isolate agents and run them in parallel in their own cloud containers. Let me show you:
7:46

Here is how to set up a team of AI agents to work on your project without disrupting anything. This is the top 1 upgrade you can do to your development environment: Start using dev containers to isolate agents and run them in parallel in their own cloud containers. Let me show you:

Santiago

22,742 просмотров • 1 год назад

Matt Damon participated in Howard Zinn's great "The People Speak" series, and read out a great speech by Zinn about the importance of civil disobedience, which is as apt today as when he first wrote it in 1970: "I start from the supposition that the world is topsy-turvy, that things are all wrong, that the wrong people are in jail, and the wrong people are out of jail. That the wrong people are in power, and the wrong people are out of power. I start from the supposition that all we have to do is think about the state of the world today, and realize that things are all upside down. If you don't think, if you listen to TV, read scholarly things, you actually begin to think that things are not so bad. Or that just little things are wrong. But you have to get a little detached, and then come back and look at the world, and you are horrified. So we have to start from that supposition—that things are really topsy-turvy. And our topic is topsy-turvy: civil disobedience. As soon as you say the topic is civil disobedience, you are saying our problem is civil disobedience. That is not our problem…. Our problem is civil obedience. Our problem is the numbers of people all over the world who have obeyed the dictates of the leaders of their government and have gone to war, and millions have been killed because of this obedience. And our problem is that scene in All Quiet on the Western Front where the schoolboys march off dutifully in a line to war. Our problem is that people are obedient all over the world, in the face of poverty and starvation and stupidity, and war and cruelty. Our problem is that people are obedient while the jails are full of petty thieves, and all the while the grand thieves are running the country. That’s our problem."
5:05

Matt Damon participated in Howard Zinn's great "The People Speak" series, and read out a great speech by Zinn about the importance of civil disobedience, which is as apt today as when he first wrote it in 1970: "I start from the supposition that the world is topsy-turvy, that things are all wrong, that the wrong people are in jail, and the wrong people are out of jail. That the wrong people are in power, and the wrong people are out of power. I start from the supposition that all we have to do is think about the state of the world today, and realize that things are all upside down. If you don't think, if you listen to TV, read scholarly things, you actually begin to think that things are not so bad. Or that just little things are wrong. But you have to get a little detached, and then come back and look at the world, and you are horrified. So we have to start from that supposition—that things are really topsy-turvy. And our topic is topsy-turvy: civil disobedience. As soon as you say the topic is civil disobedience, you are saying our problem is civil disobedience. That is not our problem…. Our problem is civil obedience. Our problem is the numbers of people all over the world who have obeyed the dictates of the leaders of their government and have gone to war, and millions have been killed because of this obedience. And our problem is that scene in All Quiet on the Western Front where the schoolboys march off dutifully in a line to war. Our problem is that people are obedient all over the world, in the face of poverty and starvation and stupidity, and war and cruelty. Our problem is that people are obedient while the jails are full of petty thieves, and all the while the grand thieves are running the country. That’s our problem."

☀️👀

297,607 просмотров • 1 год назад

This is probably the biggest news yet in software going headless, and will bring knowledge work agents to the masses. The new ChatGPT agents have access to any of the tools and data you want to work with, with complete coding and tool use available to them. Here's an example of a custom sales assistant agent uses Box as a knowledge source for accessing enterprise content securely to answer questions and generate new content on the fly. The workflows can obviously vastly far more complex as the agent can use any of the tools within Box available via MCP and CLI. This precisely what agents will start to look like for knowledge work. You'll be able to spin them up in the foreground or background to help augment work. Big opportunity right now for headless platforms, and for all the new builders and designers of these agents in the enterprise.
1:06

This is probably the biggest news yet in software going headless, and will bring knowledge work agents to the masses. The new ChatGPT agents have access to any of the tools and data you want to work with, with complete coding and tool use available to them. Here's an example of a custom sales assistant agent uses Box as a knowledge source for accessing enterprise content securely to answer questions and generate new content on the fly. The workflows can obviously vastly far more complex as the agent can use any of the tools within Box available via MCP and CLI. This precisely what agents will start to look like for knowledge work. You'll be able to spin them up in the foreground or background to help augment work. Big opportunity right now for headless platforms, and for all the new builders and designers of these agents in the enterprise.

Aaron Levie

420,133 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

The same kinds of productivity gains we've seen in coding with AI agents are heading to the rest of knowledge work. This is the jump when you go from having a chatbot to being able to actually have an agent go off and do work for minutes or even hours and come back with a complete work output that you then review. Here's an example of the new Box Agent filling out an RFP response from an existing knowledge base. This process would normally take hours to fill out, and requires the full attention of the user doing the work. Now, you provide the Box Agent with the RFP questions, and it will go off, make a plan, extract all the relevant questions, read through existing source material to come up with an answer, and then generate a new word document as the final output. All while you're doing something else. The key to this architecture is that the agent is able to use all of the same tools in the background that a user uses to get work done. The agent can search for documents, read entire files, run scripts and tools in the background, and even be able to write code on the fly to automate tasks it hasn't seen before. And best of all, the Box Agent will (soon) work from the Box MCP and CLI so you can invoke it in any agentic system as a step in a process. This kind of agent complexity would have been impossible even 6 months ago. Models consistently failed at tracking long running tasks or using the right tools at the right moment for the task. But this is all now possible because of models like GPT-5.4, Opus 4.6, and Gemini 3, and is only getting better by the month. Just as we moved from engineers writing code and using AI as an assistant to answer questions, in many areas of knowledge work -like legal, finance, consulting, sales, marketing, and more- when we have a problem we'll just kick off the AI agent to just go work on it for us in the background.
2:14

The same kinds of productivity gains we've seen in coding with AI agents are heading to the rest of knowledge work. This is the jump when you go from having a chatbot to being able to actually have an agent go off and do work for minutes or even hours and come back with a complete work output that you then review. Here's an example of the new Box Agent filling out an RFP response from an existing knowledge base. This process would normally take hours to fill out, and requires the full attention of the user doing the work. Now, you provide the Box Agent with the RFP questions, and it will go off, make a plan, extract all the relevant questions, read through existing source material to come up with an answer, and then generate a new word document as the final output. All while you're doing something else. The key to this architecture is that the agent is able to use all of the same tools in the background that a user uses to get work done. The agent can search for documents, read entire files, run scripts and tools in the background, and even be able to write code on the fly to automate tasks it hasn't seen before. And best of all, the Box Agent will (soon) work from the Box MCP and CLI so you can invoke it in any agentic system as a step in a process. This kind of agent complexity would have been impossible even 6 months ago. Models consistently failed at tracking long running tasks or using the right tools at the right moment for the task. But this is all now possible because of models like GPT-5.4, Opus 4.6, and Gemini 3, and is only getting better by the month. Just as we moved from engineers writing code and using AI as an assistant to answer questions, in many areas of knowledge work -like legal, finance, consulting, sales, marketing, and more- when we have a problem we'll just kick off the AI agent to just go work on it for us in the background.

Aaron Levie

24,728 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

British author Graham Hancock hits the nail on the head. 🎯 "I have no respect for any single leader in the world today." "If you nuke me, even though I'm dead, my submarines are going to nuke you, and wipe you out." "This is childish behaviour. This is the behaviour of unhinged teenagers. They're not leaders, they're misleaders." "They're pursuing their own agendas, and deceiving the public in order to get support behind those agendas." "We need a whole new way to function in the world, if humanity is going to continue as a species." "I have nine grandchildren. I don't want them to grow up in a world that's suddenly devastated by a nuclear holocaust because of the stupidity, the idiocy, the irresponsibility, and the macho attitudes of these teenagers in old bodies who are running the world."
0:53

British author Graham Hancock hits the nail on the head. 🎯 "I have no respect for any single leader in the world today." "If you nuke me, even though I'm dead, my submarines are going to nuke you, and wipe you out." "This is childish behaviour. This is the behaviour of unhinged teenagers. They're not leaders, they're misleaders." "They're pursuing their own agendas, and deceiving the public in order to get support behind those agendas." "We need a whole new way to function in the world, if humanity is going to continue as a species." "I have nine grandchildren. I don't want them to grow up in a world that's suddenly devastated by a nuclear holocaust because of the stupidity, the idiocy, the irresponsibility, and the macho attitudes of these teenagers in old bodies who are running the world."

Wide Awake Media

136,722 просмотров • 1 год назад

AI power users are here and the case for agent-friendly software is materializing. Aaron Levie on agents outnumbering people 1000x: "If you start to imagine that we all have to build software for agents… we spend as much time now thinking about the agent interface to our tool as we do the human interface." "If you have a hundred or a thousand times more agents than people, then your software has to be built for agents… it's going to be through an API or a CLI or MCP." "What if you give a coding agent access to your SaaS tools and a coding agent access to your knowledge work, workflows and context?" "It can actually code its way or use APIs through whatever task it's trying to achieve." "That appears to be like a paradigm that is starting to compound… and I actually think it kind of makes sense as the ultimate manifestation of this stuff." Aaron Levie
1:23

AI power users are here and the case for agent-friendly software is materializing. Aaron Levie on agents outnumbering people 1000x: "If you start to imagine that we all have to build software for agents… we spend as much time now thinking about the agent interface to our tool as we do the human interface." "If you have a hundred or a thousand times more agents than people, then your software has to be built for agents… it's going to be through an API or a CLI or MCP." "What if you give a coding agent access to your SaaS tools and a coding agent access to your knowledge work, workflows and context?" "It can actually code its way or use APIs through whatever task it's trying to achieve." "That appears to be like a paradigm that is starting to compound… and I actually think it kind of makes sense as the ultimate manifestation of this stuff." Aaron Levie

a16z

42,152 просмотров • 19 дней назад

Aaron Levie on why AI agents can't just be treated like normal user accounts: "I, as Aaron, don't really have any responsibility over anybody else's Box account in our organization. I can't see the Box account of any other employee that I work with. I'm not liable for anything that they do." "Agents don't have those properties. The person who creates the agent probably is going to, for the foreseeable future, take on a lot of the liability for what that agent does." "When you're in Claude Code or Cursor, the agent is you... It can do everything you can do." "That's the easy mode." "The hard mode is agents are running on their own and people check in with them occasionally." "How do you give them access to resources in the enterprise without dramatically increasing the security risk?" Aaron Levie on Latent.Space
1:34

Aaron Levie on why AI agents can't just be treated like normal user accounts: "I, as Aaron, don't really have any responsibility over anybody else's Box account in our organization. I can't see the Box account of any other employee that I work with. I'm not liable for anything that they do." "Agents don't have those properties. The person who creates the agent probably is going to, for the foreseeable future, take on a lot of the liability for what that agent does." "When you're in Claude Code or Cursor, the agent is you... It can do everything you can do." "That's the easy mode." "The hard mode is agents are running on their own and people check in with them occasionally." "How do you give them access to resources in the enterprise without dramatically increasing the security risk?" Aaron Levie on Latent.Space

a16z

40,579 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

Nerds are building super athletes to take your job. AI agents are coming for knowledge workers and humanoid robots are coming for blue collar work. You may not like it, but that is where the world is headed.
2:43

Nerds are building super athletes to take your job. AI agents are coming for knowledge workers and humanoid robots are coming for blue collar work. You may not like it, but that is where the world is headed.

Anthony Pompliano 🌪

45,537 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

How in the world is this still happening in this day and age with all the knowledge that we have. Poor elephant. It is too heavy to pull and not something an elephant is built to do. Shame on you India
0:40

How in the world is this still happening in this day and age with all the knowledge that we have. Poor elephant. It is too heavy to pull and not something an elephant is built to do. Shame on you India

Christina

40,831 просмотров • 1 год назад

.Naval: You have a beautiful definition of knowledge, which most people don’t even try to tackle, about how knowledge perpetuates itself in the environment. You gave some really good examples. One was around genes. Successful, highly adapted genes contain a lot of knowledge and can cause themselves to be replicated because they’re survivors. In the same way, knowledge itself is a survivor, in that if you transmit to me the knowledge of how to build a computer, it’s an incredibly useful thing. I’m going to build more and more computers and that knowledge will be passed on. Your underlying point that you repeated here was if you want to understand the physical universe you have to understand knowledge, because it is the thing that over time takes over and changes more and more the universe—more than almost anything else. You have to understand all the explanations behind it. You can’t just say “particle collisions” because that explains everything, so it explains nothing. It’s not a useful level to operate at. Therefore, the things that create knowledge are uniquely influential in the universe. And as far as we know, there are only two systems that create knowledge. There’s evolution and there are humans. But is there a difference even between these two forms of knowledge creation, between evolution and between humans? David Deutsch: Yes. I have argued that the human way of creating knowledge is the ultimate one, that there aren’t any more powerful ones than that. This is the argument against the supernatural. Assuming that there is a form of knowledge creation that’s more powerful than ours is equivalent to invoking the supernatural, which is therefore a bad explanation—as invoking the supernatural always is. The difference between biological evolution and human creative thought is that biological evolution is inherently limited in its range. That’s because biological evolution has no foresight. It can’t see a problem and conjecture a solution. Whenever biological evolution produces a solution to something, it’s always before natural selection has even begun. This is Charles Darwin’s insight. This is the difference between Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution and the other theories of evolution that had been around for a century or more before that, including Charles Darwin’s grandfather and Lamarck. The thing they didn’t get is that the creation of knowledge in evolution begins before. That means that biological evolution can’t reach places that are not reachable by successive improvements, each of which allows a viable organism to exist. Creationists say that biological evolution has, in fact, reached things that are not reachable by incremental steps, each of which is a viable organism. They’re factually mistaken. The thing which they have in mind is the idea of a creator who can imagine things that don’t exist and who can create an idea that is not the culmination of a whole load of viable things. A thinking being can create something that’s a culmination of a whole load of non-viable things. Explanatory creativity makes humans unique Out of all the billions and billions of species that have ever existed, none of them has ever made a campfire, even though many of them would’ve been helped by having the genetic capacity to make campfires. The reason it didn’t happen in the biosphere is that there is no such thing as making a partially functional campfire; whereas there is, for example, with making hot water. The bombardier beetles squirt boiling water at their enemies. You can easily see that just squirting cold water at your enemies is not totally unhelpful. Then making it a bit hotter and a bit hotter. Squirting boiling water no doubt required many adaptations to make sure the beetle didn’t boil itself while it was making this boiling water. That happened because there was a sequence of steps in between, all of which were useful. But with campfires, it’s very hard to see how that could happen. Humans have explanatory creativity. Once you have that, you can get to the moon. You can cause asteroids which are heading towards the earth to turn around and go away. Perhaps no other planet in the universe has that power, and it has it only because of the presence of explanatory creativity on it.
4:31

.Naval: You have a beautiful definition of knowledge, which most people don’t even try to tackle, about how knowledge perpetuates itself in the environment. You gave some really good examples. One was around genes. Successful, highly adapted genes contain a lot of knowledge and can cause themselves to be replicated because they’re survivors. In the same way, knowledge itself is a survivor, in that if you transmit to me the knowledge of how to build a computer, it’s an incredibly useful thing. I’m going to build more and more computers and that knowledge will be passed on. Your underlying point that you repeated here was if you want to understand the physical universe you have to understand knowledge, because it is the thing that over time takes over and changes more and more the universe—more than almost anything else. You have to understand all the explanations behind it. You can’t just say “particle collisions” because that explains everything, so it explains nothing. It’s not a useful level to operate at. Therefore, the things that create knowledge are uniquely influential in the universe. And as far as we know, there are only two systems that create knowledge. There’s evolution and there are humans. But is there a difference even between these two forms of knowledge creation, between evolution and between humans? David Deutsch: Yes. I have argued that the human way of creating knowledge is the ultimate one, that there aren’t any more powerful ones than that. This is the argument against the supernatural. Assuming that there is a form of knowledge creation that’s more powerful than ours is equivalent to invoking the supernatural, which is therefore a bad explanation—as invoking the supernatural always is. The difference between biological evolution and human creative thought is that biological evolution is inherently limited in its range. That’s because biological evolution has no foresight. It can’t see a problem and conjecture a solution. Whenever biological evolution produces a solution to something, it’s always before natural selection has even begun. This is Charles Darwin’s insight. This is the difference between Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution and the other theories of evolution that had been around for a century or more before that, including Charles Darwin’s grandfather and Lamarck. The thing they didn’t get is that the creation of knowledge in evolution begins before. That means that biological evolution can’t reach places that are not reachable by successive improvements, each of which allows a viable organism to exist. Creationists say that biological evolution has, in fact, reached things that are not reachable by incremental steps, each of which is a viable organism. They’re factually mistaken. The thing which they have in mind is the idea of a creator who can imagine things that don’t exist and who can create an idea that is not the culmination of a whole load of viable things. A thinking being can create something that’s a culmination of a whole load of non-viable things. Explanatory creativity makes humans unique Out of all the billions and billions of species that have ever existed, none of them has ever made a campfire, even though many of them would’ve been helped by having the genetic capacity to make campfires. The reason it didn’t happen in the biosphere is that there is no such thing as making a partially functional campfire; whereas there is, for example, with making hot water. The bombardier beetles squirt boiling water at their enemies. You can easily see that just squirting cold water at your enemies is not totally unhelpful. Then making it a bit hotter and a bit hotter. Squirting boiling water no doubt required many adaptations to make sure the beetle didn’t boil itself while it was making this boiling water. That happened because there was a sequence of steps in between, all of which were useful. But with campfires, it’s very hard to see how that could happen. Humans have explanatory creativity. Once you have that, you can get to the moon. You can cause asteroids which are heading towards the earth to turn around and go away. Perhaps no other planet in the universe has that power, and it has it only because of the presence of explanatory creativity on it.

Deutsch Explains

186,454 просмотров • 1 год назад

Billions of new participants are about to flood the economy. And none of them are human. We're building agents for every job you can name. One reads your emails and books your travel, one has a budget and invests in crypto, and one negotiates payments on your behalf. Coinbase, Sui, Google, Anthropic... everyone is racing to build them and the rails they'll run on. And the forecasts are staggering. 80 agents for every human alive, and there are nine billion of us on earth. You do the maths. That's an entire second economy stacked on top of ours, running at a speed no human system was ever built to match… most of it invisible. You won't feel it coming. You'll wake up one day, and there it is. Running the world. Fucking wild to even think about, but this is where the Economic Singularity begins.
1:12

Billions of new participants are about to flood the economy. And none of them are human. We're building agents for every job you can name. One reads your emails and books your travel, one has a budget and invests in crypto, and one negotiates payments on your behalf. Coinbase, Sui, Google, Anthropic... everyone is racing to build them and the rails they'll run on. And the forecasts are staggering. 80 agents for every human alive, and there are nine billion of us on earth. You do the maths. That's an entire second economy stacked on top of ours, running at a speed no human system was ever built to match… most of it invisible. You won't feel it coming. You'll wake up one day, and there it is. Running the world. Fucking wild to even think about, but this is where the Economic Singularity begins.

Raoul Pal

135,720 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Alperen Sengun on Deni Avdija (the relations between Turkey and Israel are on all-time low): "You know, I think that those stuff are a lot bigger than ours. We just going to represent our country, here, you know - the best we can. Deni is the same harder worker (as me). You know, great guy, great person. One of my good friends in this league. And like I said those stuff are a lot bigger than our stuff. We are just here doing what we love, and other stuff is out of our control. And hopefully, you know, of course basketball is the thing hopefully bring everyone love, and stay together - that's what we are here for. And like I said, the other stuff is out of our control, and hopefully, you know, it's all got into peace in all world, and that's all we wanted." Via Yoav Modai
0:56

Alperen Sengun on Deni Avdija (the relations between Turkey and Israel are on all-time low): "You know, I think that those stuff are a lot bigger than ours. We just going to represent our country, here, you know - the best we can. Deni is the same harder worker (as me). You know, great guy, great person. One of my good friends in this league. And like I said those stuff are a lot bigger than our stuff. We are just here doing what we love, and other stuff is out of our control. And hopefully, you know, of course basketball is the thing hopefully bring everyone love, and stay together - that's what we are here for. And like I said, the other stuff is out of our control, and hopefully, you know, it's all got into peace in all world, and that's all we wanted." Via Yoav Modai

MrBuckBuck

1,995,729 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

This agent relies on a marketplace of 2.8M+ specialized agents to complete a task. This is how I imagine the future of personal agents. Here is how this works: 1. Agentverse is a marketplace of agents 2. Anyone can build and publish an agent there 3. ASI:One is a personal agent with access to the marketplace 4. To solve a task, ASI:One finds the best agent for the job In other words: You have an agent that can solve pretty much *anything* because it knows how to outsource the work to a network of specialized agents. And you don't need to do any setup to get this working. The way ranking agents in the marketplace works is pretty cool: Fetch.ai, the company behind it, created an AgentRank algorithm that works much like Google's PageRank. Every time an agent calls another, it forms a connection. Over time, these connections build into a graph of who relies on whom. An agent that is frequently called by other reputable agents scores higher and surfaces higher in results. The end result here is that your agent will consistently use the best agents in the marketplace to accomplish a goal. You should give this a try: You don't need to pay or even register to try these agents. Thanks to the team for partnering with me on this post.
4:16

This agent relies on a marketplace of 2.8M+ specialized agents to complete a task. This is how I imagine the future of personal agents. Here is how this works: 1. Agentverse is a marketplace of agents 2. Anyone can build and publish an agent there 3. ASI:One is a personal agent with access to the marketplace 4. To solve a task, ASI:One finds the best agent for the job In other words: You have an agent that can solve pretty much *anything* because it knows how to outsource the work to a network of specialized agents. And you don't need to do any setup to get this working. The way ranking agents in the marketplace works is pretty cool: Fetch.ai, the company behind it, created an AgentRank algorithm that works much like Google's PageRank. Every time an agent calls another, it forms a connection. Over time, these connections build into a graph of who relies on whom. An agent that is frequently called by other reputable agents scores higher and surfaces higher in results. The end result here is that your agent will consistently use the best agents in the marketplace to accomplish a goal. You should give this a try: You don't need to pay or even register to try these agents. Thanks to the team for partnering with me on this post.

Santiago

18,715 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

🚨Governor DeSantis BLASTS corrupt Congressman Byron Donalds for insider trading! Says the Founding Fathers would be shaking their heads! We've worked with different people in Congress to try to get a ban on this insider trading in Congress. I think the Founding Fathers would look at some of that and I think they'd just be shaking their heads if they saw what was going on. You're in the greatest nation in the history of the world. You are in a nation, I believe, that was blessed by God to serve this purpose in the world as the last best hope on earth. And you are in a position in the United States Congress, which look, it's not always performs up to a great level, but it's still an august institution in our government and you decide to do that. You know, that is not right! That's NOT what you should be doing. So that's one of the reasons why I think you need TERM LIMITS for members of Congress. I think that would be very helpful.”
1:46

🚨Governor DeSantis BLASTS corrupt Congressman Byron Donalds for insider trading! Says the Founding Fathers would be shaking their heads! We've worked with different people in Congress to try to get a ban on this insider trading in Congress. I think the Founding Fathers would look at some of that and I think they'd just be shaking their heads if they saw what was going on. You're in the greatest nation in the history of the world. You are in a nation, I believe, that was blessed by God to serve this purpose in the world as the last best hope on earth. And you are in a position in the United States Congress, which look, it's not always performs up to a great level, but it's still an august institution in our government and you decide to do that. You know, that is not right! That's NOT what you should be doing. So that's one of the reasons why I think you need TERM LIMITS for members of Congress. I think that would be very helpful.”

Chris Nelson 🏝️🇺🇸

26,266 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад