Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

Regulating AI matters. On either side of the table, the question is no longer whether it happens. It is who gets to say they did it first. "I think it's totally possible Trump regulates AI too." "There is a world where the advisors really internalize that OpenAI and Anthropic...

SemiAnalysis_'s profile picture

SemiAnalysis

165,133 subscribers

23,465 views • 10 days ago •via X (Twitter)

News & PoliticsScience & Technology
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

4 Comments

SemiAnalysis's profile picture
SemiAnalysis10 days ago

Watch it Now:

zoidz00's profile picture
zoidz0010 days ago

yo we don't need another fucking podcasts with a bunch of kids parroting twitter takes what is the purpose of this

ShadowAguy's profile picture
ShadowAguy10 days ago

racing to be first to regulate AI is just writing rules for a thing you don't get.

Kenny Chen｜AI × 生产力's profile picture
Kenny Chen｜AI × 生产力10 days ago

The June 2 executive order points to early government access to powerful models without slowing deployment, so builders should watch access and compliance costs more than the label "regulation."

Related Videos

If you go back to Trump's first term and even in the second term, the number of people in the inner circle, it's very volatile. People come, people go. It's kind of like a rotation. You get too close to the sun, your wings melt and you fall out. It's not the end of the free world as we know it. I actually think these two men will get back together again. I know it's salacious, it's really an interesting story, but at the end of the day they both have attributes that the other wants. Elon is a unique individual and Trump is a unique individual. They both have huge egos. They had a bad date. It's like a marriage and they're having a fight. I'm over it already. I think this is noise frankly. I don't think it really matters long-term. They can call each other on their cell phones and work it out and they will.
2:04

If you go back to Trump's first term and even in the second term, the number of people in the inner circle, it's very volatile. People come, people go. It's kind of like a rotation. You get too close to the sun, your wings melt and you fall out. It's not the end of the free world as we know it. I actually think these two men will get back together again. I know it's salacious, it's really an interesting story, but at the end of the day they both have attributes that the other wants. Elon is a unique individual and Trump is a unique individual. They both have huge egos. They had a bad date. It's like a marriage and they're having a fight. I'm over it already. I think this is noise frankly. I don't think it really matters long-term. They can call each other on their cell phones and work it out and they will.

Kevin O'Leary aka Mr. Wonderful

267,461 views • 1 year ago

Rick Rubin on being addicted to the miracle of creation: “I like the moment of revelation. So we're working on something and it's just okay. It's boring. I'd rather not be there. That's how it feels. But then something happens and it's like magic. Something appears. It's not like we made it. Something comes up in the process. It's conjured in the process. It’s like a miracle and that's the thing that's addictive. That feeling when it's like it's not good, it's not good, it's not good, it's not good. We try something and it doesn't work. Try something else and it doesn't work. But then all of the sudden what we're listening to is really cool. That's the [addictive] feeling, that moment of discovery where it goes from nothing to something really good. And then the whole rest of the process after that is protecting that because it's super delicate. When it happens it's like this miracle happened and this magic thing happened and now we have to protect it through the rest of the process to not ruin it. It's scary because you don't want it to end. You don't want it to stop because we know if it stops, we can't control it. We can't do it again. It's not like that. It's this moment in time where something magical happens. So we spend a lot of time waiting and I can't say that's fun. Waiting is not fun.”
1:44

Rick Rubin on being addicted to the miracle of creation: “I like the moment of revelation. So we're working on something and it's just okay. It's boring. I'd rather not be there. That's how it feels. But then something happens and it's like magic. Something appears. It's not like we made it. Something comes up in the process. It's conjured in the process. It’s like a miracle and that's the thing that's addictive. That feeling when it's like it's not good, it's not good, it's not good, it's not good. We try something and it doesn't work. Try something else and it doesn't work. But then all of the sudden what we're listening to is really cool. That's the [addictive] feeling, that moment of discovery where it goes from nothing to something really good. And then the whole rest of the process after that is protecting that because it's super delicate. When it happens it's like this miracle happened and this magic thing happened and now we have to protect it through the rest of the process to not ruin it. It's scary because you don't want it to end. You don't want it to stop because we know if it stops, we can't control it. We can't do it again. It's not like that. It's this moment in time where something magical happens. So we spend a lot of time waiting and I can't say that's fun. Waiting is not fun.”

David Senra

12,759 views • 4 months ago

Greg Brockman on AGI arriving quietly and unevenly: "I think that AGI has turned out to be less of a point in time and more of this sort of fuzzy spectrum. And for me, Astra has really hit something that I'm like, 'Okay, I think this is pretty reasonable to call it AGI.'" "With its computer use capabilities, you really can ask it to do long-lived tasks, and it'll just do it. We've seen it run coherently for 24 hours to go accomplish tasks that I think are quite amazing and across a wide variety of domains." "It still is jagged... It's the first time it's not slop writing. But it's not great writing. There are a number of areas where I feel like we just need to polish it a little bit, and it would be fantastic. It's just not quite there." "What people are finding is that it is so capable across such a wide variety of tasks, that it is accelerative, it is empowering, and it's something that I think we've never really seen a model that's been a jump like this." Greg Brockman
1:13

Greg Brockman on AGI arriving quietly and unevenly: "I think that AGI has turned out to be less of a point in time and more of this sort of fuzzy spectrum. And for me, Astra has really hit something that I'm like, 'Okay, I think this is pretty reasonable to call it AGI.'" "With its computer use capabilities, you really can ask it to do long-lived tasks, and it'll just do it. We've seen it run coherently for 24 hours to go accomplish tasks that I think are quite amazing and across a wide variety of domains." "It still is jagged... It's the first time it's not slop writing. But it's not great writing. There are a number of areas where I feel like we just need to polish it a little bit, and it would be fantastic. It's just not quite there." "What people are finding is that it is so capable across such a wide variety of tasks, that it is accelerative, it is empowering, and it's something that I think we've never really seen a model that's been a jump like this." Greg Brockman

a16z

62,514 views • 13 days ago

The better AI writing gets, the less we'll want to read it. Life of Pi author Yann Martel explains why: 1) AI Inflation "Once you know it's AI, then suddenly it's like special effects in movies. I find my kids when they watch movies with special effects, they'll just shrug because we know a computer can generate anything. So a sort of inflation sets in where we're less impressed. Then you have a great actor who's just acting with no special effects and it's like, wow, that works. What really has an impact is the actor emoting the authenticity of that." 2) AI Aversion "I think publishers are going to start saying, 'hey, it cannot be beyond spell check and maybe minimal AI, but you cannot use AI.' I think readers will agree with that, and that the ones who cheat on that will be seen as cheaters. They're not going to get published, but even if they do, they won't be read. They're not going to win prizes, they're not going to win good reviews. It'll be pointed out that this is not the way to do it."
2:26

The better AI writing gets, the less we'll want to read it. Life of Pi author Yann Martel explains why: 1) AI Inflation "Once you know it's AI, then suddenly it's like special effects in movies. I find my kids when they watch movies with special effects, they'll just shrug because we know a computer can generate anything. So a sort of inflation sets in where we're less impressed. Then you have a great actor who's just acting with no special effects and it's like, wow, that works. What really has an impact is the actor emoting the authenticity of that." 2) AI Aversion "I think publishers are going to start saying, 'hey, it cannot be beyond spell check and maybe minimal AI, but you cannot use AI.' I think readers will agree with that, and that the ones who cheat on that will be seen as cheaters. They're not going to get published, but even if they do, they won't be read. They're not going to win prizes, they're not going to win good reviews. It'll be pointed out that this is not the way to do it."

How I Write Clips

92,573 views • 4 months ago

Peter Jackson talks about AI in Hollywood. Calls it “a tool” like stop-motion or CGI before and what ultimately matters is “imagination, originality” of whoever uses the tool: “I think AI — used in the right way — is a tool like any other tool. [The original] King Kong…was stop-motion and done by a person moving a rubber creature. Why shouldn't somebody on a computer using AI software be able to create their own imagery? They should. It's a tool. It's no different from many other tools that have existed over the years. But the other side of it is that it's always going to come down to the imagination and originality of the person feeding the instructions into the AI program. It's not that you're going to type in an instruction and it's going to generate your shot, and that's that. The question is: is it actually interesting? Is it funny? Is it imaginative? And are you going to stitch it together to make a narrative, a story? Some people will make really great films that way. Some people will do exactly the same process and their film will be crap, just like in the normal film industry. Whether it's AI or anything else, it comes down to whether the person behind it — or the people behind it — have originality, imagination, and an ability to entertain people.”
1:32

Peter Jackson talks about AI in Hollywood. Calls it “a tool” like stop-motion or CGI before and what ultimately matters is “imagination, originality” of whoever uses the tool: “I think AI — used in the right way — is a tool like any other tool. [The original] King Kong…was stop-motion and done by a person moving a rubber creature. Why shouldn't somebody on a computer using AI software be able to create their own imagery? They should. It's a tool. It's no different from many other tools that have existed over the years. But the other side of it is that it's always going to come down to the imagination and originality of the person feeding the instructions into the AI program. It's not that you're going to type in an instruction and it's going to generate your shot, and that's that. The question is: is it actually interesting? Is it funny? Is it imaginative? And are you going to stitch it together to make a narrative, a story? Some people will make really great films that way. Some people will do exactly the same process and their film will be crap, just like in the normal film industry. Whether it's AI or anything else, it comes down to whether the person behind it — or the people behind it — have originality, imagination, and an ability to entertain people.”

Bearly AI

43,816 views • 4 months ago

Andrej Karpathy called the current AI models as "slop" "I do think that overall the models are not there yet. I feel like the industry is making too big of a jump and trying to pretend that this is amazing, but it's not. It's slop, and I think they are not coming to terms with it. Maybe they are trying to fundraise or something like that, I'm not sure what's going on. We are at this intermediate stage. The models are amazing, but they still need a lot of work for now. Autocomplete is my sweet spot." --- On the latest Dwarkesh Patel podcast.
0:30

Andrej Karpathy called the current AI models as "slop" "I do think that overall the models are not there yet. I feel like the industry is making too big of a jump and trying to pretend that this is amazing, but it's not. It's slop, and I think they are not coming to terms with it. Maybe they are trying to fundraise or something like that, I'm not sure what's going on. We are at this intermediate stage. The models are amazing, but they still need a lot of work for now. Autocomplete is my sweet spot." --- On the latest Dwarkesh Patel podcast.

Rohan Paul

33,331 views • 11 months ago

Sam Altman: “Concentration of power with AI is a terrifying thing.” "A lot of the talk about safety concerns is well-founded, and then a lot of it is about people that just really, even if it's slightly subconscious, wanna concentrate power. I don't think anyone should want to live in a world of AI overlords, where someone is making decisions for all of the future, and in exchange for a cure for cancer, which obviously is a wonderful thing, we collectively cede all agency. I am terrified of a world where the very real fears of AI are used as a way to say, “Only this small group of people can have it because it's too dangerous, and only they understand it. But don't worry, they're gonna make the right decisions for all of us.” I was a child of the internet. There were no rules. It was amazing, and I think it's critical we preserve that spirit with AI."
1:17

Sam Altman: “Concentration of power with AI is a terrifying thing.” "A lot of the talk about safety concerns is well-founded, and then a lot of it is about people that just really, even if it's slightly subconscious, wanna concentrate power. I don't think anyone should want to live in a world of AI overlords, where someone is making decisions for all of the future, and in exchange for a cure for cancer, which obviously is a wonderful thing, we collectively cede all agency. I am terrified of a world where the very real fears of AI are used as a way to say, “Only this small group of people can have it because it's too dangerous, and only they understand it. But don't worry, they're gonna make the right decisions for all of us.” I was a child of the internet. There were no rules. It was amazing, and I think it's critical we preserve that spirit with AI."

Patrick OShaughnessy

67,444 views • 2 months ago

Downey: Not everything is woke. I think we're abusing the term a little bit too much, where it's losing its meaning, and that's really important because some things actually are woke and we should call it like it is
0:52

Downey: Not everything is woke. I think we're abusing the term a little bit too much, where it's losing its meaning, and that's really important because some things actually are woke and we should call it like it is

Acyn

38,856 views • 1 year ago

Dario Amodei says AI improving itself is not a moment that is coming, and he put Anthropic's internal number on how fast it is already happening: "I don't think it's a moment in time. I think it's a continuous process. We're already seeing it in some ways, where the AI is able to suggest architectures for the next AI." "I would say a year ago we were seeing 10 to 15% kind of increase in total factor productivity due to AI. Like, that's probably up to 20 or 30% now. It might be doubling. Like, as with all things, we're on the exponential." "There's no moment where AI improves itself or runs out of control or becomes unsafe. What we have is an accelerating exponential. And at each point on the exponential we have to assess, is this a time to slow down? Is this a time to put more controls on this technology? I think more and more of that is going to be required." "But I think the Rosetta Stone to all of this is the smooth exponential." "I think there's an object lesson in the people who were against all AI regulation and then they saw one thing and they wanted to nationalize. I think there's an object lesson in the people who dismissed the power of AI and then said, oh my God, it's improving itself. It's running out of control. We have to shut it all down. Yo-yoing between those extreme reactions is incredibly unhelpful as a response to this technology." "The right response, the wise response, is to say, we're not going to panic. Our countermeasures will smoothly ratchet up with the power of the technology. If you see someone having this kind of crazy yo-yo reaction, that's a sign that they were caught by surprise and that they're not serious." - Dario Amodei (Dario Amodei), CEO of Anthropic, on The Circuit with Emily Chang (Bloomberg Originals).
1:27

Dario Amodei says AI improving itself is not a moment that is coming, and he put Anthropic's internal number on how fast it is already happening: "I don't think it's a moment in time. I think it's a continuous process. We're already seeing it in some ways, where the AI is able to suggest architectures for the next AI." "I would say a year ago we were seeing 10 to 15% kind of increase in total factor productivity due to AI. Like, that's probably up to 20 or 30% now. It might be doubling. Like, as with all things, we're on the exponential." "There's no moment where AI improves itself or runs out of control or becomes unsafe. What we have is an accelerating exponential. And at each point on the exponential we have to assess, is this a time to slow down? Is this a time to put more controls on this technology? I think more and more of that is going to be required." "But I think the Rosetta Stone to all of this is the smooth exponential." "I think there's an object lesson in the people who were against all AI regulation and then they saw one thing and they wanted to nationalize. I think there's an object lesson in the people who dismissed the power of AI and then said, oh my God, it's improving itself. It's running out of control. We have to shut it all down. Yo-yoing between those extreme reactions is incredibly unhelpful as a response to this technology." "The right response, the wise response, is to say, we're not going to panic. Our countermeasures will smoothly ratchet up with the power of the technology. If you see someone having this kind of crazy yo-yo reaction, that's a sign that they were caught by surprise and that they're not serious." - Dario Amodei (Dario Amodei), CEO of Anthropic, on The Circuit with Emily Chang (Bloomberg Originals).

Karl Mehta

50,718 views • 2 months ago

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

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

Big Brain AI

52,726 views • 4 months ago

Hunt: So, who’s right on data centers? President Trump or Governor Shapiro? Fetterman: Oh, the president is actually right overall. I mean, you know, uh, we we used to be moving forward on data centers and now, I mean, he's actually scared by the polls. So I mean, what really what's really motivated by more than just the polls overall, you know, I set out I set up my message on it on data centers just a couple days on X where I'm saying it's, you know, the president happens to be right in this. You know, I think it's it's very necessary that we win the war on AI. Uh, we, I think it's necessary because AI is going to transform our world. And, you know, it can be either us be the leaders or it can be the Chinese. And we could we could live under those rules and they're going to build unlimited data centers. And they're not really, uh, really stopped by with the kind of like democracy and the kinds of rules that, that we have overall, I think it's important. And I would remind people, like a lot of the opposition is, is been driven by the ccp and a lot of a lot of influence. So I think now withwith data centers, uh, also there's the facts now that it, it consumes a very, very, maybe one tenth of 1%, you know, compared to almonds and compared to other other things, part of our economy and also our land usage as well, too. Pennsylvania, you know, we are energy rich, we are water rich. And we have we're land rich now. So I think it's an important part of our economy, not just for Pennsylvania's but also the country right now.
2:02

Hunt: So, who’s right on data centers? President Trump or Governor Shapiro? Fetterman: Oh, the president is actually right overall. I mean, you know, uh, we we used to be moving forward on data centers and now, I mean, he's actually scared by the polls. So I mean, what really what's really motivated by more than just the polls overall, you know, I set out I set up my message on it on data centers just a couple days on X where I'm saying it's, you know, the president happens to be right in this. You know, I think it's it's very necessary that we win the war on AI. Uh, we, I think it's necessary because AI is going to transform our world. And, you know, it can be either us be the leaders or it can be the Chinese. And we could we could live under those rules and they're going to build unlimited data centers. And they're not really, uh, really stopped by with the kind of like democracy and the kinds of rules that, that we have overall, I think it's important. And I would remind people, like a lot of the opposition is, is been driven by the ccp and a lot of a lot of influence. So I think now withwith data centers, uh, also there's the facts now that it, it consumes a very, very, maybe one tenth of 1%, you know, compared to almonds and compared to other other things, part of our economy and also our land usage as well, too. Pennsylvania, you know, we are energy rich, we are water rich. And we have we're land rich now. So I think it's an important part of our economy, not just for Pennsylvania's but also the country right now.

Acyn

204,594 views • 24 days ago

ELON: DON'T LET THE RISK OF FAILURE STOP YOU “I think failure is bad. I don't think it's good. But if something's important enough, then you do it, even though the risk of failure is high. And so, my advice if somebody wants to start a company is they should bear in mind that the most likely outcome is it's not going to work, and they should reconcile themselves to that strong possibility. And they should only do it if they feel that they are really compelled to do it.” Source: Computer History Museum, January 2013
0:29

ELON: DON'T LET THE RISK OF FAILURE STOP YOU “I think failure is bad. I don't think it's good. But if something's important enough, then you do it, even though the risk of failure is high. And so, my advice if somebody wants to start a company is they should bear in mind that the most likely outcome is it's not going to work, and they should reconcile themselves to that strong possibility. And they should only do it if they feel that they are really compelled to do it.” Source: Computer History Museum, January 2013

Mario Nawfal

107,555 views • 1 year ago

Trump: We don't want to see China take over crypto. I don't want to see China win with AI. AI and crypto. Crypto is a big deal. I mean I see it more and more where people are paying with Bitcoin and you know they don't even know about cash anymore. That takes a lot of pressure off our dollar. It's a good thing for our country. But if China took over crypto, which they would love to do, or if China took over AI, which they would really... So, we are leading with AI on China. Nobody thought that was possible.
0:43

Trump: We don't want to see China take over crypto. I don't want to see China win with AI. AI and crypto. Crypto is a big deal. I mean I see it more and more where people are paying with Bitcoin and you know they don't even know about cash anymore. That takes a lot of pressure off our dollar. It's a good thing for our country. But if China took over crypto, which they would love to do, or if China took over AI, which they would really... So, we are leading with AI on China. Nobody thought that was possible.

Military Summary

11,831 views • 1 month ago

ANTHONY POMPLIANO IS SUPER BULLISH ON BITCOIN DURING THIS BEAR MARKET: "I own more Bitcoin today than I did before the drawdown and we've got a public company that they own more Bitcoin than we did before the drawdown." "Anyone who holds Bitcoin and doesn't think that it's gonna hit a new all-time high at some point the next two or three years then maybe they don't really understand what they own." "I actually think it's very important that we don't know who Satoshi is... I prefer not to know because I think that one of the strengths of Bitcoin is the fact that it is not associated with any one person." "We are ALL Satoshi?"
2:21

ANTHONY POMPLIANO IS SUPER BULLISH ON BITCOIN DURING THIS BEAR MARKET: "I own more Bitcoin today than I did before the drawdown and we've got a public company that they own more Bitcoin than we did before the drawdown." "Anyone who holds Bitcoin and doesn't think that it's gonna hit a new all-time high at some point the next two or three years then maybe they don't really understand what they own." "I actually think it's very important that we don't know who Satoshi is... I prefer not to know because I think that one of the strengths of Bitcoin is the fact that it is not associated with any one person." "We are ALL Satoshi?"

Simply Bitcoin

161,140 views • 5 months ago

Why anybody would expect somebody else to pay for them is beyond me. Even if it was a close friend, I would think about it. If it did not happen often and I didn’t think they were trying to finesse me then I would more than likely do it. It sounds like in this case, the friend does this often and doesn’t pay her back. I have a name for someone like this and it’s a moocher. We will all have a friend like this in our lives and I think there will come a time where we have to decide whether or not this is something we are willing to tolerate. I would never do this to anybody else. If I had dinner plans but not enough money, the solution would be very simple, I would apologize and then cancel. I would y tell them why because that doesn’t matter. What matters is that I don’t have enough and I am not going to put my problems on anybody else. Friend’s like that have a short timespan to actually be a friend. I feel that people who do this are taking advantage and they know exactly what they are doing.
0:52

Why anybody would expect somebody else to pay for them is beyond me. Even if it was a close friend, I would think about it. If it did not happen often and I didn’t think they were trying to finesse me then I would more than likely do it. It sounds like in this case, the friend does this often and doesn’t pay her back. I have a name for someone like this and it’s a moocher. We will all have a friend like this in our lives and I think there will come a time where we have to decide whether or not this is something we are willing to tolerate. I would never do this to anybody else. If I had dinner plans but not enough money, the solution would be very simple, I would apologize and then cancel. I would y tell them why because that doesn’t matter. What matters is that I don’t have enough and I am not going to put my problems on anybody else. Friend’s like that have a short timespan to actually be a friend. I feel that people who do this are taking advantage and they know exactly what they are doing.

SonnyBoy🇺🇸

50,678 views • 4 months ago

Elon Musk on how his actions unintentionally accelerated AI: “I guess the only thing we can try to do is minimize the probability of a bad outcome. For the longest time, I declined to participate in AI. I created OpenAI essentially as a counterweight to Google because, at the time, they were more or less a monopoly on AI. Then Anthropic spun out of OpenAI. If anything, it seems like my actions have really accelerated AI. I wasn’t aiming to accelerate AI, but creating OpenAI, and then having Anthropic spin out of it, resulted in knock-on effects that accelerated AI, which wasn’t really my intention. It just seems like all roads lead to the acceleration of AI. So then I’m like, okay, you can either be sad about it or join the club.”
1:25

Elon Musk on how his actions unintentionally accelerated AI: “I guess the only thing we can try to do is minimize the probability of a bad outcome. For the longest time, I declined to participate in AI. I created OpenAI essentially as a counterweight to Google because, at the time, they were more or less a monopoly on AI. Then Anthropic spun out of OpenAI. If anything, it seems like my actions have really accelerated AI. I wasn’t aiming to accelerate AI, but creating OpenAI, and then having Anthropic spin out of it, resulted in knock-on effects that accelerated AI, which wasn’t really my intention. It just seems like all roads lead to the acceleration of AI. So then I’m like, okay, you can either be sad about it or join the club.”

DogeDesigner

35,071 views • 2 months ago

🚨 NOW: President Trump is GOING HARD calling on Senate Republicans to get SMART and NUKE the filibuster Leader Thune needs to OBTAIN THE VOTES! Imagine how easily we can pass SAVE America🔥 "I think it's very foolish for the Republicans not to immediately terminate the filibuster and get everything approved, like the great big beautiful bill. And I think they're getting much closer to it. It's shocking that there are some, a couple of people that just don't want to do it." "Now, why? You'll have to ask them. But if we did that, we could get things done at a record clip. I deal with it all the time." "I mean, especially lately, I said, how much can a Republican senator stand because what they're doing with respect to defunding all of our law enforcement, frankly, which is really what they're doing. They're defunding ICE. They're defunding Border Patrol." "They're defunding some of our greatest people, our greatest patriots. And at some point, I think the senators have to get smart and they have to do it because the Democrats will do it in their first hour." "And they'll use it in their first day and they'll be adding additional states and they'll be adding additional Supreme Court justices." "I hear up to 21 is the number they really want. Twenty one. They want to dilute it and it would be terrible." "There will be very little voting cheating if we do the Save America Act. And the way they're going to do that is to terminate the filibuster."
1:33

🚨 NOW: President Trump is GOING HARD calling on Senate Republicans to get SMART and NUKE the filibuster Leader Thune needs to OBTAIN THE VOTES! Imagine how easily we can pass SAVE America🔥 "I think it's very foolish for the Republicans not to immediately terminate the filibuster and get everything approved, like the great big beautiful bill. And I think they're getting much closer to it. It's shocking that there are some, a couple of people that just don't want to do it." "Now, why? You'll have to ask them. But if we did that, we could get things done at a record clip. I deal with it all the time." "I mean, especially lately, I said, how much can a Republican senator stand because what they're doing with respect to defunding all of our law enforcement, frankly, which is really what they're doing. They're defunding ICE. They're defunding Border Patrol." "They're defunding some of our greatest people, our greatest patriots. And at some point, I think the senators have to get smart and they have to do it because the Democrats will do it in their first hour." "And they'll use it in their first day and they'll be adding additional states and they'll be adding additional Supreme Court justices." "I hear up to 21 is the number they really want. Twenty one. They want to dilute it and it would be terrible." "There will be very little voting cheating if we do the Save America Act. And the way they're going to do that is to terminate the filibuster."

Eric Daugherty

25,603 views • 4 months ago