正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

Superintelligence is Near! Three innovations that prove it! Three recent innovations lead me to believe that we've just seen the invention of the next generation of "cognitive primitives" that will lead us directly to ASI. Do you remember LSTM? At the time, there were jokes that "brains are just...

DaveShapi's profile picture

David Shapiro ⏩

45,496 subscribers

31,137 次观看 • 11 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

科学技术新闻政治教育
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

🧠David Friedberg explains the great hope of Artificial Superintelligence: Massive leverage on time to solve thousand-year problems "I don't think that humans are limited in our ability to solve problems." "I think we're limited in terms of time, and what digital intelligence gives us is leverage on time so that we can now tackle ever more complex tasks." "This idea of superintelligence is that it could give us immense leverage in solving that complex problem that we otherwise may be challenged to solve over decades, or hundreds of years, or think about one day solving a problem that would take humans thousands of years to solve." "So if I as a human said, 'I would like to harness fusion power similar to what the sun uses to make energy, and I wanna do that on Earth,' today, we're in, call it year 40 or 50 of a research cycle of humans trying to solve that particularly complex problem." "It's a scientific problem, it's a discovery problem, it's an engineering problem." "Functionally, leveraging to complexity is where this becomes super compelling for humans." "And it's why I think we can and should be highly optimistic about living very long lives, and traveling anywhere we want, and having abundance in food, and having abundance in resources, and having abundance in recouping our time to do the things we want to do instead of the things that we have to do today."
1:04

🧠David Friedberg explains the great hope of Artificial Superintelligence: Massive leverage on time to solve thousand-year problems "I don't think that humans are limited in our ability to solve problems." "I think we're limited in terms of time, and what digital intelligence gives us is leverage on time so that we can now tackle ever more complex tasks." "This idea of superintelligence is that it could give us immense leverage in solving that complex problem that we otherwise may be challenged to solve over decades, or hundreds of years, or think about one day solving a problem that would take humans thousands of years to solve." "So if I as a human said, 'I would like to harness fusion power similar to what the sun uses to make energy, and I wanna do that on Earth,' today, we're in, call it year 40 or 50 of a research cycle of humans trying to solve that particularly complex problem." "It's a scientific problem, it's a discovery problem, it's an engineering problem." "Functionally, leveraging to complexity is where this becomes super compelling for humans." "And it's why I think we can and should be highly optimistic about living very long lives, and traveling anywhere we want, and having abundance in food, and having abundance in resources, and having abundance in recouping our time to do the things we want to do instead of the things that we have to do today."

The All-In Podcast

53,187 次观看 • 1 年前

Rogin: It looks very likely that we're about to restart bombing of Iran. And there are a lot of reports out there that this is about to happen. And what that means is that all of the problems, not just with the US economy, with the economy of every country in the world, are about to get worse. And it means that the Iran war is going to go much longer than otherwise anticipated. And that is a disaster not just for Americans, but for all people. And then if you think about the effects on energy and then manufacturing, and then rates will continue to go up, and then inflation, it's a it's a calamity for the world economy with no strategy whatsoever.
1:12

Rogin: It looks very likely that we're about to restart bombing of Iran. And there are a lot of reports out there that this is about to happen. And what that means is that all of the problems, not just with the US economy, with the economy of every country in the world, are about to get worse. And it means that the Iran war is going to go much longer than otherwise anticipated. And that is a disaster not just for Americans, but for all people. And then if you think about the effects on energy and then manufacturing, and then rates will continue to go up, and then inflation, it's a it's a calamity for the world economy with no strategy whatsoever.

Acyn

74,258 次观看 • 1 个月前

"What is P vs NP and how does it relate to human knowledge?" Avi Wigderson (Turing Award & Abel Prize winner): "In a very basic way, all the problems we want to solve are really NP problems. A subset of it is the problems we can solve. So the question of P versus NP is whether we can solve all the problems we want to solve, whether we can know everything we want to know. This is basically about the limits of our knowledge. You can think there is no limit to what we may want to know but I claim that essentially in any human endeavor, what people are searching for have the property that when a solution is found, it is easily recognized. NP are all problems that we can honestly say we really want to solve and P are those that we can solve. Whether they are equal is just the very fact that a solution can be easily recognized would imply that it can be efficiently found. That means that we can know everything we ever want to know, it's a fundamental question about human knowledge."
1:00

"What is P vs NP and how does it relate to human knowledge?" Avi Wigderson (Turing Award & Abel Prize winner): "In a very basic way, all the problems we want to solve are really NP problems. A subset of it is the problems we can solve. So the question of P versus NP is whether we can solve all the problems we want to solve, whether we can know everything we want to know. This is basically about the limits of our knowledge. You can think there is no limit to what we may want to know but I claim that essentially in any human endeavor, what people are searching for have the property that when a solution is found, it is easily recognized. NP are all problems that we can honestly say we really want to solve and P are those that we can solve. Whether they are equal is just the very fact that a solution can be easily recognized would imply that it can be efficiently found. That means that we can know everything we ever want to know, it's a fundamental question about human knowledge."

Ryan Peterman

20,069 次观看 • 1 个月前

AGI might be the culmination of human purpose. Lomez: "I've been trying to talk myself out of the inevitability of AGI for a while. It's not even my preference, but that doesn't matter." "There's a teleology of humanness that almost is designed to produce AGI. We're fulfilling almost some kind of Calvinist, religious project." "This is the culmination of human intelligence and ingenuity. I just don't see any way around that." "There's something beautiful about it. It fits. There's some harmony in the idea that humans are designed to do this... to produce an intelligence greater than itself."
2:19

AGI might be the culmination of human purpose. Lomez: "I've been trying to talk myself out of the inevitability of AGI for a while. It's not even my preference, but that doesn't matter." "There's a teleology of humanness that almost is designed to produce AGI. We're fulfilling almost some kind of Calvinist, religious project." "This is the culmination of human intelligence and ingenuity. I just don't see any way around that." "There's something beautiful about it. It fits. There's some harmony in the idea that humans are designed to do this... to produce an intelligence greater than itself."

MTS

69,899 次观看 • 2 个月前

“I am going to probably use $300M of Anthropic this year at Salesforce.” - Marc Benioff “ These coding agents are awesome. Anthropic is awesome. Coding, everything's going to be cheaper to make, it's more efficient. I can do things that I just could not do before. I can go faster than ever before. I can implement my software and sell it at the same time. I've never been able to do that before. Today, I have humans, agents, and headless platforms all interoperating, never before. So the opportunity for my own company and the efficiency that I have in my own company, in service and support, in distribution and marketing, across the board, is unprecedented. What I can do for our customers, unprecedented. And, to that point, my gosh, have you seen Anthropic? It is a rocket ship that will not stop.”
0:49

“I am going to probably use $300M of Anthropic this year at Salesforce.” - Marc Benioff “ These coding agents are awesome. Anthropic is awesome. Coding, everything's going to be cheaper to make, it's more efficient. I can do things that I just could not do before. I can go faster than ever before. I can implement my software and sell it at the same time. I've never been able to do that before. Today, I have humans, agents, and headless platforms all interoperating, never before. So the opportunity for my own company and the efficiency that I have in my own company, in service and support, in distribution and marketing, across the board, is unprecedented. What I can do for our customers, unprecedented. And, to that point, my gosh, have you seen Anthropic? It is a rocket ship that will not stop.”

The All-In Podcast

229,269 次观看 • 2 个月前

"You can either produce excellence or you can avoid criticism. But you cannot do both of those. The reason that you don't have certain excellence that you want is because you are afraid of getting criticized. You are afraid of the judgment that comes with it. You are afraid of standing out. You are afraid of being alone. You are afraid of people looking at you. You are worried about what people think of you. There are 2 categories of things in this world: 1) Things that are up to you 2) Things that are not up to you Which category does your reputation sit in? Your reputation is not up to you. I'm the one who associates your reputation with something, not you. You just do things. What's up to you? How you act. Your decisions. Your actions. That is up to you. Your reputation is not up to you. Here's how I know that: You all have a reputation about me and it's not in my control. I get to say and do whatever I say and do up here. I am in control of saying it. I am in control of doing it. The moment words leave my lips, who has control over what is done with those words? You! You are in control of what you think of me. And there's no way everybody in this room is going to think the exact same thing about me. No way. When it comes to exceptional, what we've got to understand is you can spend your whole life trying to avoid criticism and earn reputation, and it still won't be in your control. We can waste a lot of time missing out on excellence we could have been producing if we were just simply LESS trying to engineer what we wanted other people to think about us."
1:32

"You can either produce excellence or you can avoid criticism. But you cannot do both of those. The reason that you don't have certain excellence that you want is because you are afraid of getting criticized. You are afraid of the judgment that comes with it. You are afraid of standing out. You are afraid of being alone. You are afraid of people looking at you. You are worried about what people think of you. There are 2 categories of things in this world: 1) Things that are up to you 2) Things that are not up to you Which category does your reputation sit in? Your reputation is not up to you. I'm the one who associates your reputation with something, not you. You just do things. What's up to you? How you act. Your decisions. Your actions. That is up to you. Your reputation is not up to you. Here's how I know that: You all have a reputation about me and it's not in my control. I get to say and do whatever I say and do up here. I am in control of saying it. I am in control of doing it. The moment words leave my lips, who has control over what is done with those words? You! You are in control of what you think of me. And there's no way everybody in this room is going to think the exact same thing about me. No way. When it comes to exceptional, what we've got to understand is you can spend your whole life trying to avoid criticism and earn reputation, and it still won't be in your control. We can waste a lot of time missing out on excellence we could have been producing if we were just simply LESS trying to engineer what we wanted other people to think about us."

Brian Kight

308,812 次观看 • 1 年前

Elon Musk: The probability of AI going bad is not zero. “I saw GPT-1, GPT-2, GPT-3, GPT-4, the whole lead-up to that. So it was easy for me to kind of see where it's going. If you just extrapolate the points on a curve and assume that trend will continue, then we will have profound artificial intelligence, and obviously at a level that far exceeds human intelligence. So I'm glad to see at this point that people are taking safety seriously. And I do think overall that the potential is there for artificial intelligence, AI, to have most likely a positive effect and to create a future of abundance where there is no scarcity of goods and services. But it is somewhat of the magic genie problem, where if you have a magic genie that can grant all the wishes, usually those stories don't end well. Be careful what you wish for.” In Conversation with Rishi Sunak, November 2, 2023.
1:12

Elon Musk: The probability of AI going bad is not zero. “I saw GPT-1, GPT-2, GPT-3, GPT-4, the whole lead-up to that. So it was easy for me to kind of see where it's going. If you just extrapolate the points on a curve and assume that trend will continue, then we will have profound artificial intelligence, and obviously at a level that far exceeds human intelligence. So I'm glad to see at this point that people are taking safety seriously. And I do think overall that the potential is there for artificial intelligence, AI, to have most likely a positive effect and to create a future of abundance where there is no scarcity of goods and services. But it is somewhat of the magic genie problem, where if you have a magic genie that can grant all the wishes, usually those stories don't end well. Be careful what you wish for.” In Conversation with Rishi Sunak, November 2, 2023.

ELON CLIPS

22,095 次观看 • 18 天前

Mike to Emily: “There are things about you that reminded me of Chester since the beginning. Just certain things you do, and [..] hype everybody up from the moment you show up - Chester had that kind of energy, you have that kind of energy. Not everybody can do that.” MY HEART😭
0:42

Mike to Emily: “There are things about you that reminded me of Chester since the beginning. Just certain things you do, and [..] hype everybody up from the moment you show up - Chester had that kind of energy, you have that kind of energy. Not everybody can do that.” MY HEART😭

a.🍍| fan account

19,259 次观看 • 1 年前

I asked Luke Kornet about his memories from stretches where he was a DNP for many games in a row, and what his message is to the young guys who find themselves in that position now: “It's just a lot of peace to come to life of accepting the position that you're in and then just doing the best with that, versus trying to fight it and want to be in a different one.” “You can spend a lot of time worrying about things that you can't really control. But when you just take the opportunity that you have and do the best with that, you can have days like today where a lot of guys came in and were able to contribute. You can have peace about knowing that you did your job well, just as you did the day before, the day after. It might just look a different way every time. I feel like that's what I've been taught through my life. That's the only thing attitude that you can have that you can actually do something with – versus trying to control things that are outside of what you can control.”
2:15

I asked Luke Kornet about his memories from stretches where he was a DNP for many games in a row, and what his message is to the young guys who find themselves in that position now: “It's just a lot of peace to come to life of accepting the position that you're in and then just doing the best with that, versus trying to fight it and want to be in a different one.” “You can spend a lot of time worrying about things that you can't really control. But when you just take the opportunity that you have and do the best with that, you can have days like today where a lot of guys came in and were able to contribute. You can have peace about knowing that you did your job well, just as you did the day before, the day after. It might just look a different way every time. I feel like that's what I've been taught through my life. That's the only thing attitude that you can have that you can actually do something with – versus trying to control things that are outside of what you can control.”

Noa Dalzell 🏀

48,992 次观看 • 1 年前

.David Deutsch: "What's currently called AI and AGI are not only different from each other, they are very close to being the exact opposites of each other. The reason is that an AI, current AI is like an AI that diagnoses diseases or an AI that plays chess or an AI that controls a huge factory. Those things have objective functions, that is they have a function that they are designed to maximize and that is why they are used in those particular applications. Or in military terms, you could say the objective is to hit the target. You might say the objective is to hit the target unless some thing specified, but it's a specified thing comes up in which case don't hit the target and so on. This is, as I said, almost the opposite of what humans do when humans think. For a start, the AI has to be obedient, that is it has to actually do the things it is programmed to do, whereas a human is fundamentally disobedient, especially when being creative. When a human plays chess, they are performing a completely different kind of computation. They don't do the same things, they don't investigate the same possibilities that the artificial chess playing machine does, because the artificial one is capable of looking at billions and billions of possibilities, whereas the human can only look at hundreds or something. They are doing something completely different. Another difference is that the human can explain, can write a book later, having become world champion, can write a book saying how I did it, as the computer program that beats the world champion can write no such book, because it has no idea how it did it. It was just following a program. I was doing this and that and that and none of that is illuminating. Also, third thing, the chess player can decide I don't want to play chess anymore, from now on I will play Go or from now on I will play tennis. If commanded to play chess, the functionality will deteriorate completely. Those things are different. What we want in an AGI is that it behaves in a way that cannot be specified in advance, because if you specified it, you would already have the answer. The AGI program has to give unexpected answers, answers to questions we didn't even know how to ask."
3:11

.David Deutsch: "What's currently called AI and AGI are not only different from each other, they are very close to being the exact opposites of each other. The reason is that an AI, current AI is like an AI that diagnoses diseases or an AI that plays chess or an AI that controls a huge factory. Those things have objective functions, that is they have a function that they are designed to maximize and that is why they are used in those particular applications. Or in military terms, you could say the objective is to hit the target. You might say the objective is to hit the target unless some thing specified, but it's a specified thing comes up in which case don't hit the target and so on. This is, as I said, almost the opposite of what humans do when humans think. For a start, the AI has to be obedient, that is it has to actually do the things it is programmed to do, whereas a human is fundamentally disobedient, especially when being creative. When a human plays chess, they are performing a completely different kind of computation. They don't do the same things, they don't investigate the same possibilities that the artificial chess playing machine does, because the artificial one is capable of looking at billions and billions of possibilities, whereas the human can only look at hundreds or something. They are doing something completely different. Another difference is that the human can explain, can write a book later, having become world champion, can write a book saying how I did it, as the computer program that beats the world champion can write no such book, because it has no idea how it did it. It was just following a program. I was doing this and that and that and none of that is illuminating. Also, third thing, the chess player can decide I don't want to play chess anymore, from now on I will play Go or from now on I will play tennis. If commanded to play chess, the functionality will deteriorate completely. Those things are different. What we want in an AGI is that it behaves in a way that cannot be specified in advance, because if you specified it, you would already have the answer. The AGI program has to give unexpected answers, answers to questions we didn't even know how to ask."

Deutsch Explains

72,455 次观看 • 1 年前

🎻: before you were always the one asking me questions, right— so i just wanted to say that 🎻: i don’t know if you like the ‘us’ that is in the same group, or just simply ‘us’ 🎻: yes— what i can promise you is that i will definitely come see you and he will definitely come see you 🎻: even though the both of us cannot see you at the same time, but the both of us will continue/always be together, and will always let you be able to see
0:25

🎻: before you were always the one asking me questions, right— so i just wanted to say that 🎻: i don’t know if you like the ‘us’ that is in the same group, or just simply ‘us’ 🎻: yes— what i can promise you is that i will definitely come see you and he will definitely come see you 🎻: even though the both of us cannot see you at the same time, but the both of us will continue/always be together, and will always let you be able to see

햇빛

793,863 次观看 • 5 个月前

Physicist Avi Loeb just told me that futuristic technology could enable humanity to travel “faster than the speed of light.” But we would have to move beyond the three dimensions we are familiar with. And he speculated that advanced alien civilizations could already have access to these dimensions. You need to hear his fascinating theory: “Think about living on the surface of a balloon.” “That is two dimensional.” “You might not be aware that there is a third dimension because you are just living on the surface of that balloon.” “If there is another being that is capable of taking advantage of the third dimension, then that being will cross the distance between two points on the surface of the balloon faster than you can imagine.” “Because the travel between the two points can go through the third dimension that connects the two points—not necessarily on the curved surface of the balloon.” “So there are, in principle, possibilities of navigating in more than the dimensions that we are familiar with.” “We are familiar with three spatial dimensions plus time.” “If there are more than three and there is a technological way of taking advantage of those … objects will appear and disappear in ways that we cannot understand.” “Einstein’s theory of relativity states that no material object can move faster than light.” “However, if there are extra dimensions, you might actually travel faster than light in the three dimensions, even though you’re traveling less than the speed of light in the extra dimensions.”
3:09

Physicist Avi Loeb just told me that futuristic technology could enable humanity to travel “faster than the speed of light.” But we would have to move beyond the three dimensions we are familiar with. And he speculated that advanced alien civilizations could already have access to these dimensions. You need to hear his fascinating theory: “Think about living on the surface of a balloon.” “That is two dimensional.” “You might not be aware that there is a third dimension because you are just living on the surface of that balloon.” “If there is another being that is capable of taking advantage of the third dimension, then that being will cross the distance between two points on the surface of the balloon faster than you can imagine.” “Because the travel between the two points can go through the third dimension that connects the two points—not necessarily on the curved surface of the balloon.” “So there are, in principle, possibilities of navigating in more than the dimensions that we are familiar with.” “We are familiar with three spatial dimensions plus time.” “If there are more than three and there is a technological way of taking advantage of those … objects will appear and disappear in ways that we cannot understand.” “Einstein’s theory of relativity states that no material object can move faster than light.” “However, if there are extra dimensions, you might actually travel faster than light in the three dimensions, even though you’re traveling less than the speed of light in the extra dimensions.”

Jan Jekielek

31,984 次观看 • 4 个月前

The most interesting part for me is where Andrej Karpathy describes why LLMs aren't able to learn like humans. As you would expect, he comes up with a wonderfully evocative phrase to describe RL: “sucking supervision bits through a straw.” A single end reward gets broadcast across every token in a successful trajectory, upweighting even wrong or irrelevant turns that lead to the right answer. > “Humans don't use reinforcement learning, as I've said before. I think they do something different. Reinforcement learning is a lot worse than the average person thinks. Reinforcement learning is terrible. It just so happens that everything that we had before is much worse.” So what do humans do instead? > “The book I’m reading is a set of prompts for me to do synthetic data generation. It's by manipulating that information that you actually gain that knowledge. We have no equivalent of that with LLMs; they don't really do that.” > “I'd love to see during pretraining some kind of a stage where the model thinks through the material and tries to reconcile it with what it already knows. There's no equivalent of any of this. This is all research.” Why can’t we just add this training to LLMs today? > “There are very subtle, hard to understand reasons why it's not trivial. If I just give synthetic generation of the model thinking about a book, you look at it and you're like, 'This looks great. Why can't I train on it?' You could try, but the model will actually get much worse if you continue trying.” > “Say we have a chapter of a book and I ask an LLM to think about it. It will give you something that looks very reasonable. But if I ask it 10 times, you'll notice that all of them are the same.” > “You're not getting the richness and the diversity and the entropy from these models as you would get from humans. How do you get synthetic data generation to work despite the collapse and while maintaining the entropy? It is a research problem.” How do humans get around model collapse? > “These analogies are surprisingly good. Humans collapse during the course of their lives. Children haven't overfit yet. They will say stuff that will shock you. Because they're not yet collapsed. But we [adults] are collapsed. We end up revisiting the same thoughts, we end up saying more and more of the same stuff, the learning rates go down, the collapse continues to get worse, and then everything deteriorates.” In fact, there’s an interesting paper arguing that dreaming evolved to assist generalization, and resist overfitting to daily learning - look up The Overfitted Brain by Erik Hoel. I asked Karpathy: Isn’t it interesting that humans learn best at a part of their lives (childhood) whose actual details they completely forget, adults still learn really well but have terrible memory about the particulars of the things they read or watch, and LLMs can memorize arbitrary details about text that no human could but are currently pretty bad at generalization? > “[Fallible human memory] is a feature, not a bug, because it forces you to only learn the generalizable components. LLMs are distracted by all the memory that they have of the pre-trained documents. That's why when I talk about the cognitive core, I actually want to remove the memory. I'd love to have them have less memory so that they have to look things up and they only maintain the algorithms for thought, and the idea of an experiment, and all this cognitive glue for acting.”
7:01

The most interesting part for me is where Andrej Karpathy describes why LLMs aren't able to learn like humans. As you would expect, he comes up with a wonderfully evocative phrase to describe RL: “sucking supervision bits through a straw.” A single end reward gets broadcast across every token in a successful trajectory, upweighting even wrong or irrelevant turns that lead to the right answer. > “Humans don't use reinforcement learning, as I've said before. I think they do something different. Reinforcement learning is a lot worse than the average person thinks. Reinforcement learning is terrible. It just so happens that everything that we had before is much worse.” So what do humans do instead? > “The book I’m reading is a set of prompts for me to do synthetic data generation. It's by manipulating that information that you actually gain that knowledge. We have no equivalent of that with LLMs; they don't really do that.” > “I'd love to see during pretraining some kind of a stage where the model thinks through the material and tries to reconcile it with what it already knows. There's no equivalent of any of this. This is all research.” Why can’t we just add this training to LLMs today? > “There are very subtle, hard to understand reasons why it's not trivial. If I just give synthetic generation of the model thinking about a book, you look at it and you're like, 'This looks great. Why can't I train on it?' You could try, but the model will actually get much worse if you continue trying.” > “Say we have a chapter of a book and I ask an LLM to think about it. It will give you something that looks very reasonable. But if I ask it 10 times, you'll notice that all of them are the same.” > “You're not getting the richness and the diversity and the entropy from these models as you would get from humans. How do you get synthetic data generation to work despite the collapse and while maintaining the entropy? It is a research problem.” How do humans get around model collapse? > “These analogies are surprisingly good. Humans collapse during the course of their lives. Children haven't overfit yet. They will say stuff that will shock you. Because they're not yet collapsed. But we [adults] are collapsed. We end up revisiting the same thoughts, we end up saying more and more of the same stuff, the learning rates go down, the collapse continues to get worse, and then everything deteriorates.” In fact, there’s an interesting paper arguing that dreaming evolved to assist generalization, and resist overfitting to daily learning - look up The Overfitted Brain by Erik Hoel. I asked Karpathy: Isn’t it interesting that humans learn best at a part of their lives (childhood) whose actual details they completely forget, adults still learn really well but have terrible memory about the particulars of the things they read or watch, and LLMs can memorize arbitrary details about text that no human could but are currently pretty bad at generalization? > “[Fallible human memory] is a feature, not a bug, because it forces you to only learn the generalizable components. LLMs are distracted by all the memory that they have of the pre-trained documents. That's why when I talk about the cognitive core, I actually want to remove the memory. I'd love to have them have less memory so that they have to look things up and they only maintain the algorithms for thought, and the idea of an experiment, and all this cognitive glue for acting.”

Dwarkesh Patel

1,051,064 次观看 • 9 个月前

🛑 Burkina Faso 🇧🇫 - Captain with school boys and girls! The young Captain was having a conversation with the pupils, and here is what he saying, “I was telling you a while ago, in school they were telling us that we couldn’t do it here. They lied to us. We grow wheat here, and it works well, and we will develop it. Some people have started, this year, I was able to see people who did it, as part of the presidential initiative, and I was told that in the past, some were able to do it and they produced it well. Currently, we are sowing wheat in some farmlands as part do the presidential initiative. What you eat must be produced here. So, this is why I say that we will teach you many things, and we will review the curricula they teach you. For those who drink coffee, they told us that your coffee, chocolate, it is only in the countries with abundant rainfalls, that here is only savanna, desert, it does not rain, we cannot farm. Again, they lied to us. It’s not true! Coffee grows well here, cocoa grows well too. There are people here who have the farms here, even in Ouagadougou here, there are people who have cocoa trees in their yards. This means that, chocolate that children envy those from well to do familes can be manufactured here in Burkina and all the children can eat chocolate in Burkina. We found out it is possible. As for milk, why do we have to import it? We can do it. I just want to tell you that there are many things that they never told us the truth about. You guys are lucky, we are now teaching you, and we promise you that we will do all we can so that you can eat your fill. As we say, you will eat well in the morning before you go to school, you will go to school for free, you will eat lunch, you will have fun, and in the afternoon, when you return home, you will have fun in the neighborhood, then in the evening, you will learn and review your homework and sleep. This is the dream we have. As long as the children in Burkina are not in these conditions, our fight will not stop. Ok? (Claps). So, we know these are your aspirations and it is right and legal. Any parent is fighting for this. Even those who do not have children fight in the hope of having children and to take care of them, so that they can live in better conditions, and be better than them. This is the fight of everyone, this is the fight of every generation. We are lucky God gave us everything. Do you know that everywhere in Burkina we can farm? Everywhere! In the Sahel where they tell you it is the desert, it is only sand, we can farm. As for us, we have been lied to so much, it is the brainwashing of the colonizer. He did that so that we may not think 💭. But we finally found out that everything was a lie ( damn lie, emphasis is mine). If God left many lakes in that desert, He knows why. We can farm everything in Burkina, we can do everything, the land is fertile. And there are so many natural things in Burkina that we never planted but they were here, isn’t it ? Have you ever learned how to plant a shea tree in Burkina? You were born and found them already here right? It is there in the wild in nature. You know it is a gift from God. There are many things in the shea fruit. You have the shea butter, that is oil; do you know that there is chocolate in it? There are seven derivatives in the shea fruit. You also have the Parkia biglobosa (also known as the African locust bean) which is a natural fruit. We have many things, it is not only the minerals in the soil. Even with the soil, we were told that it’s ferralitic soil, that it is not fertile, everything is a lie. You see that today there is so much gold in Burkina. But it is just poorly managed. Our mission is to well manage these resources, and to take good care of you, so that you can be in your basic rights, to lead a good life, to go to school, and that we may protect you. And also that you may fulfill your duties, because your duties are very important, aren’t they?…
5:01

🛑 Burkina Faso 🇧🇫 - Captain with school boys and girls! The young Captain was having a conversation with the pupils, and here is what he saying, “I was telling you a while ago, in school they were telling us that we couldn’t do it here. They lied to us. We grow wheat here, and it works well, and we will develop it. Some people have started, this year, I was able to see people who did it, as part of the presidential initiative, and I was told that in the past, some were able to do it and they produced it well. Currently, we are sowing wheat in some farmlands as part do the presidential initiative. What you eat must be produced here. So, this is why I say that we will teach you many things, and we will review the curricula they teach you. For those who drink coffee, they told us that your coffee, chocolate, it is only in the countries with abundant rainfalls, that here is only savanna, desert, it does not rain, we cannot farm. Again, they lied to us. It’s not true! Coffee grows well here, cocoa grows well too. There are people here who have the farms here, even in Ouagadougou here, there are people who have cocoa trees in their yards. This means that, chocolate that children envy those from well to do familes can be manufactured here in Burkina and all the children can eat chocolate in Burkina. We found out it is possible. As for milk, why do we have to import it? We can do it. I just want to tell you that there are many things that they never told us the truth about. You guys are lucky, we are now teaching you, and we promise you that we will do all we can so that you can eat your fill. As we say, you will eat well in the morning before you go to school, you will go to school for free, you will eat lunch, you will have fun, and in the afternoon, when you return home, you will have fun in the neighborhood, then in the evening, you will learn and review your homework and sleep. This is the dream we have. As long as the children in Burkina are not in these conditions, our fight will not stop. Ok? (Claps). So, we know these are your aspirations and it is right and legal. Any parent is fighting for this. Even those who do not have children fight in the hope of having children and to take care of them, so that they can live in better conditions, and be better than them. This is the fight of everyone, this is the fight of every generation. We are lucky God gave us everything. Do you know that everywhere in Burkina we can farm? Everywhere! In the Sahel where they tell you it is the desert, it is only sand, we can farm. As for us, we have been lied to so much, it is the brainwashing of the colonizer. He did that so that we may not think 💭. But we finally found out that everything was a lie ( damn lie, emphasis is mine). If God left many lakes in that desert, He knows why. We can farm everything in Burkina, we can do everything, the land is fertile. And there are so many natural things in Burkina that we never planted but they were here, isn’t it ? Have you ever learned how to plant a shea tree in Burkina? You were born and found them already here right? It is there in the wild in nature. You know it is a gift from God. There are many things in the shea fruit. You have the shea butter, that is oil; do you know that there is chocolate in it? There are seven derivatives in the shea fruit. You also have the Parkia biglobosa (also known as the African locust bean) which is a natural fruit. We have many things, it is not only the minerals in the soil. Even with the soil, we were told that it’s ferralitic soil, that it is not fertile, everything is a lie. You see that today there is so much gold in Burkina. But it is just poorly managed. Our mission is to well manage these resources, and to take good care of you, so that you can be in your basic rights, to lead a good life, to go to school, and that we may protect you. And also that you may fulfill your duties, because your duties are very important, aren’t they?…

Sy Marcus Herve Traore

94,967 次观看 • 2 年前

To me, the Democrats are a bunch of potty mouth kids. I think they believe that if they swear, that they’re real and relatable, and that the American people will say they are just like us… but they’re not‼️
2:18

To me, the Democrats are a bunch of potty mouth kids. I think they believe that if they swear, that they’re real and relatable, and that the American people will say they are just like us… but they’re not‼️

Jeanine Pirro

92,789 次观看 • 1 年前

I just want to apologize to most of all ChanceMorris and Mizkif but I also want to apologize to the community that I let down in this time of peril. All I can say is that I will learn from my mistakes in the future and I hope that the community can forgive me one day.
2:00

I just want to apologize to most of all ChanceMorris and Mizkif but I also want to apologize to the community that I let down in this time of peril. All I can say is that I will learn from my mistakes in the future and I hope that the community can forgive me one day.

RUSSEL

388,361 次观看 • 2 年前

The depth of Elon Musk’s messianic delusions is not fully appreciated. He is a transhumanist eugenicist who thinks humans are a “biological bootloader” for AI. He believes that purging humanity of “inferior races” is crucial to his mission of creating a superintelligence. Musk tells accelerationist fraud Peter Diamandis that humanity will be like an “Iain Banks Culture sort of future.” The Culture is a science fiction series by socialist author Iain M. Banks in which humanity is a kind of pet for giant AIs that control huge spaceships. Humans can change their bodies into almost anything—switch gender, add wings, etc.—and take all the drugs they want. This is the future Musk imagines: Superintelligent AIs that allow a few elites to hang around enjoying “abundance.” The rest of us are nowhere to be found in his vision. His only response to the poors is to just throw money at us—because he says it’s worth nothing anyway. In reality, he will use his unlimited money and power to try to cull the population. He’s already started. MUSK: And I do think we’ll have universal income. We’ll basically just issue money to people and the, really, just because the output of goods and services will so far exceed the money supply. But that, that effectively you have deflation. Because just deflation is just the ratio of the output of goods and services to the money supply. So that’s, so if the rate of growth of goods and services or exceeds the rate of growth of the money supply, which I predict will happen, then you will have deflation. DIAMANDIS: Yes. And a lot of people spinning up new companies, competing against each other, driving the price down and increasing the variability and deflation. Faster and faster. MUSK: Yeah, it’s basically, yeah, AI and robots are going to make so much stuff and provide to many services that they will actually run out of things to do for the humans. They’ll just run out of things to do for the humans. And then they, well, you know, there’s only so much that humans can even express that they want. So you go back to my example of like, if you go a million times greater than the host economy, you’ve long since saturated all human desire. You know, maybe like, if you go a thousand times more than our current economy, thousand times, you probably have already saturated saturated human, anything people can think of that they want. DIAMANDIS: So do you think the value of money is going to significantly decrease? Will it, will we go post capitalist? MUSK: Yeah, I think money will stop being relevant at some point in the future. So just as you’re becoming-- It’s probably something like an Iain Banks Culture sort of future. And I think the AI down the road will really not use human currency. It will just care about power and mass, what is in tonnage? DIAMANDIS: It’s kind of ironic then, right? Just as you’re becoming a multi-trillionaire or money starts to have less value. MUSK: Yeah, pretty much. Yeah, you know, there’s all this stuff. It’s really just truly the interest represents like some percentage ownership in companies that I have, you know, built. And it’s not like sitting in the bank account. It’s just literally, I don’t know, percentage of the companies the companies are doing. Let’s say useful things, the value that company grows. I own a percentage of the companies. And that sums up to that number, which seems high.
3:04

The depth of Elon Musk’s messianic delusions is not fully appreciated. He is a transhumanist eugenicist who thinks humans are a “biological bootloader” for AI. He believes that purging humanity of “inferior races” is crucial to his mission of creating a superintelligence. Musk tells accelerationist fraud Peter Diamandis that humanity will be like an “Iain Banks Culture sort of future.” The Culture is a science fiction series by socialist author Iain M. Banks in which humanity is a kind of pet for giant AIs that control huge spaceships. Humans can change their bodies into almost anything—switch gender, add wings, etc.—and take all the drugs they want. This is the future Musk imagines: Superintelligent AIs that allow a few elites to hang around enjoying “abundance.” The rest of us are nowhere to be found in his vision. His only response to the poors is to just throw money at us—because he says it’s worth nothing anyway. In reality, he will use his unlimited money and power to try to cull the population. He’s already started. MUSK: And I do think we’ll have universal income. We’ll basically just issue money to people and the, really, just because the output of goods and services will so far exceed the money supply. But that, that effectively you have deflation. Because just deflation is just the ratio of the output of goods and services to the money supply. So that’s, so if the rate of growth of goods and services or exceeds the rate of growth of the money supply, which I predict will happen, then you will have deflation. DIAMANDIS: Yes. And a lot of people spinning up new companies, competing against each other, driving the price down and increasing the variability and deflation. Faster and faster. MUSK: Yeah, it’s basically, yeah, AI and robots are going to make so much stuff and provide to many services that they will actually run out of things to do for the humans. They’ll just run out of things to do for the humans. And then they, well, you know, there’s only so much that humans can even express that they want. So you go back to my example of like, if you go a million times greater than the host economy, you’ve long since saturated all human desire. You know, maybe like, if you go a thousand times more than our current economy, thousand times, you probably have already saturated saturated human, anything people can think of that they want. DIAMANDIS: So do you think the value of money is going to significantly decrease? Will it, will we go post capitalist? MUSK: Yeah, I think money will stop being relevant at some point in the future. So just as you’re becoming-- It’s probably something like an Iain Banks Culture sort of future. And I think the AI down the road will really not use human currency. It will just care about power and mass, what is in tonnage? DIAMANDIS: It’s kind of ironic then, right? Just as you’re becoming a multi-trillionaire or money starts to have less value. MUSK: Yeah, pretty much. Yeah, you know, there’s all this stuff. It’s really just truly the interest represents like some percentage ownership in companies that I have, you know, built. And it’s not like sitting in the bank account. It’s just literally, I don’t know, percentage of the companies the companies are doing. Let’s say useful things, the value that company grows. I own a percentage of the companies. And that sums up to that number, which seems high.

Jim Stewartson, Decelerationist 🇨🇦🇺🇦🇺🇸

177,984 次观看 • 1 个月前