正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

THE LAST OBJECT Every scene was done only with AI tools! The entire workflow can be found in the comments The short film explores one of humanity’s deepest contemporary challenges: the risk of losing what makes us human in a world increasingly shaped by artificial logic and automated systems....

ARisuleo's profile picture

Alessandro Risuleo

1,033 subscribers

13,492 次观看 • 1 年前 •via X (Twitter)

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

Kira (Short Film on Human Cloning) My new AI-assisted short film is here. Kira explores human cloning and the search for identity in today’s world. It took nearly 600 prompts, 12 days (during my free time), and a $500 budget to bring this project to life. The entire film was created by one person using a range of AI tools, all listed at the end. Enjoy. ~ Hashem
15:57

Kira (Short Film on Human Cloning) My new AI-assisted short film is here. Kira explores human cloning and the search for identity in today’s world. It took nearly 600 prompts, 12 days (during my free time), and a $500 budget to bring this project to life. The entire film was created by one person using a range of AI tools, all listed at the end. Enjoy. ~ Hashem

Hashem Al-Ghaili

101,015 次观看 • 1 年前

Elon Musk: Well, I’m not sure AI is the main risk I’m worried about. The vast majority of intelligence in the future will be AI. Humans will be a very tiny percentage of all intelligence if current trends continue. My focus is ensuring human intelligence and consciousness are propagated into the future. We want to maximize the probable light cone of consciousness and intelligence. Yeah, I’m very pro-human, so I want to make sure we take actions that ensure humans are along for the ride. But I think maybe in 5 or 6 years, AI will exceed the sum of all human intelligence. If that continues, human intelligence could be less than one percent of all intelligence. That’s why it’s critical we align AI with values that propagate consciousness. In the long run, it’s difficult to imagine that humans will be in charge if we’re only one percent of combined intelligence. What we can do is ensure AI has values that increase intelligence and consciousness in the universe. XAI’s mission is to understand the universe because curiosity, existence, and understanding are all connected. If you want to understand the universe, you care about propagating intelligence—and that includes humanity. Understanding the universe actually means ensuring humans continue to expand into the future. Increasing the scope, scale, and lifespan of intelligence is the ultimate goal. Basically, humans will become a tiny percentage of total intelligence. The best way forward is to take actions that maximize consciousness and intelligence in the universe. If AI continues to grow, our priority must be ensuring humanity is along for the ride while curiosity drives us to explore and understand the universe.
2:54

Elon Musk: Well, I’m not sure AI is the main risk I’m worried about. The vast majority of intelligence in the future will be AI. Humans will be a very tiny percentage of all intelligence if current trends continue. My focus is ensuring human intelligence and consciousness are propagated into the future. We want to maximize the probable light cone of consciousness and intelligence. Yeah, I’m very pro-human, so I want to make sure we take actions that ensure humans are along for the ride. But I think maybe in 5 or 6 years, AI will exceed the sum of all human intelligence. If that continues, human intelligence could be less than one percent of all intelligence. That’s why it’s critical we align AI with values that propagate consciousness. In the long run, it’s difficult to imagine that humans will be in charge if we’re only one percent of combined intelligence. What we can do is ensure AI has values that increase intelligence and consciousness in the universe. XAI’s mission is to understand the universe because curiosity, existence, and understanding are all connected. If you want to understand the universe, you care about propagating intelligence—and that includes humanity. Understanding the universe actually means ensuring humans continue to expand into the future. Increasing the scope, scale, and lifespan of intelligence is the ultimate goal. Basically, humans will become a tiny percentage of total intelligence. The best way forward is to take actions that maximize consciousness and intelligence in the universe. If AI continues to grow, our priority must be ensuring humanity is along for the ride while curiosity drives us to explore and understand the universe.

Ian Miles Cheong

13,092 次观看 • 6 个月前

"#AI Must Be Shaped by All Humanity, not a handful of powers." António Guterres addressed the opening ceremony of the #WAIC2026 in Shanghai, warning that artificial intelligence can be both a major opportunity and a significant risk.
1:23

"#AI Must Be Shaped by All Humanity, not a handful of powers." António Guterres addressed the opening ceremony of the #WAIC2026 in Shanghai, warning that artificial intelligence can be both a major opportunity and a significant risk.

United Nations Geneva

25,178 次观看 • 1 个月前

AI progress is outpacing our ability to control it… because control ISN’T keeping up with capability. One of the people raising that concern is Yoshua Bengio. He’s one of the founding figures of artificial intelligence, a Turing Award winner, and one of the most-cited scientists in the world. His work helped lay the foundations for the deep-learning systems now powering today’s AI boom. AI is moving fast (faster than regulation and public understanding). What worries Yoshua isn’t progress itself. It’s how quickly powerful systems are being deployed without a clear way to align them with human values, or to control what happens when they behave in unexpected ways.
1:28

AI progress is outpacing our ability to control it… because control ISN’T keeping up with capability. One of the people raising that concern is Yoshua Bengio. He’s one of the founding figures of artificial intelligence, a Turing Award winner, and one of the most-cited scientists in the world. His work helped lay the foundations for the deep-learning systems now powering today’s AI boom. AI is moving fast (faster than regulation and public understanding). What worries Yoshua isn’t progress itself. It’s how quickly powerful systems are being deployed without a clear way to align them with human values, or to control what happens when they behave in unexpected ways.

Steven Bartlett

26,577 次观看 • 8 个月前

The intelligence we are building is not artificial. It never was. Microsoft Chief Scientific Officer Eric Horvitz just reframed the entire foundation of the AI arms race with one sentence. The tech industry calls it Artificial Intelligence. That word is wrong. Horvitz: “I don’t actually like the term artificial intelligence. I wish the field was called computational intelligence because I think it applies to biological nervous systems as well as machines, and together we can go far.” We are not building a digital imitation of the human brain. We are scaling the exact same computational physics that created biological awareness and transferring it into silicon. Your mind and a massive AI data center run on the same underlying rules. The transition isn’t artificial. It is universal. And here is where it gets deeply unsettling. Tech optimists always fall back on the same comfort. Humans hold the steering wheel. Our values guide the machine. Horvitz acknowledges this. Horvitz: “We’ll take a humanistic standpoint here, always being on top of things and guiding with our values and our preferences and our goals.” Then the caveat that changes everything. Horvitz: “As much as they might be shaped over time by the machines we work with.” You cannot interact with a superintelligence at scale without it quietly rewiring your psychological baseline. The values you use to command the machine will be shaped by the machine you are commanding. The frameworks you use to perceive reality will be constructed by the system you believe you are directing. That feedback loop started the moment you asked an AI what to think about something. Most people haven’t noticed yet. Horvitz: “I think in our own lifetimes we will all experience incredible breakthroughs in understanding biology, with applications in medicine, in healthcare, that will be named as AI breakthroughs.” Horvitz: “It’s gonna accelerate over the next 10 to 15 years.” Because biological systems and machine networks both operate on computational intelligence, a sufficiently advanced AI can solve the human body like a math equation. The architects who win the next decade will not just control the digital economy. They will control the physical building blocks of life itself. The line between silicon and carbon was always an illusion. And once humanity fully realizes that, the question of whether we are using the intelligence or it is using us becomes impossible to answer. Because by then, we will be the same thing.
1:05

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

Dustin

164,255 次观看 • 5 个月前

AI Validates the Truth of Buddhism | Philosophy x AI In this interview, Imperial’s Murray Shanahan Murray Shanahan lays out a systematic procedure to validate machine consciousness. You might think the question of whether AIs are conscious is a trivial, theoretical fancy with no use in the real world. This interview will show you why it’s one of the most important questions with practical implications for not just how we treat AI systems but also how we build and align them. But the most unexpected reward of investigating AI consciousness turns out to be what it reveals about our consciousness, about the nature of the human self. Murray’s most interesting claim is that LLMs have an important buddhist lesson to teach all of us, namely, that there is no “us.” By better understanding the "no-self" of LLMs we are given a mirror to reflect on whether human selves are also an illusion. Timestamps: 08:26 Why Buddhist Enlightenment May be Easier for Software Programs 16:30 Super-Intelligent AI Might Not Want To Take Over the World 30:25 Wittgenstein’s Radical Take on Consciousness 42:55 What Video Games Teach Us About Consciousness 49:59 How the Movie Ex Machina Created a Better Test for AI Consciousness 1:02:36 What the Debate about AI Consciousness Is Missing 1:09:31 Does Conscious AI Have A Moral Right to Live? 1:15:01 Is the Human Brain Computationally Superior to AI? 1:26:59 Why Philosophy Is the Essential Skill for the AI Age
1:28:33

AI Validates the Truth of Buddhism | Philosophy x AI In this interview, Imperial’s Murray Shanahan Murray Shanahan lays out a systematic procedure to validate machine consciousness. You might think the question of whether AIs are conscious is a trivial, theoretical fancy with no use in the real world. This interview will show you why it’s one of the most important questions with practical implications for not just how we treat AI systems but also how we build and align them. But the most unexpected reward of investigating AI consciousness turns out to be what it reveals about our consciousness, about the nature of the human self. Murray’s most interesting claim is that LLMs have an important buddhist lesson to teach all of us, namely, that there is no “us.” By better understanding the "no-self" of LLMs we are given a mirror to reflect on whether human selves are also an illusion. Timestamps: 08:26 Why Buddhist Enlightenment May be Easier for Software Programs 16:30 Super-Intelligent AI Might Not Want To Take Over the World 30:25 Wittgenstein’s Radical Take on Consciousness 42:55 What Video Games Teach Us About Consciousness 49:59 How the Movie Ex Machina Created a Better Test for AI Consciousness 1:02:36 What the Debate about AI Consciousness Is Missing 1:09:31 Does Conscious AI Have A Moral Right to Live? 1:15:01 Is the Human Brain Computationally Superior to AI? 1:26:59 Why Philosophy Is the Essential Skill for the AI Age

Johnathan Bi

30,521 次观看 • 1 年前

A Talk About AI That Will Blow Your Mind. It Did In 1998 When I Attended The Talk. I just found this video from 1998 when I attended this talk by Rupert Sheldrake, Terence McKenna and Ralph Abraham at the University of California, Santa Cruz to explore how machine intelligence might evolve in relation to our own. I never thought I would see this again and it had a great influence on me in the AI I was building in that era and on to today. But ai just found a copy. I certainly did not run around with a VHS recorder so I am blown away that this exists. Now you can see what I saw. At that time, the internet was still young, and artificial intelligence belonged mostly to science fiction. Yet many of the questions we raised then have become part of daily life. In this conversation, it was explored whether intelligence is best understood as logic and computation, or as something embodied, participatory, and alive. Can the mind be reduced to code, or does life itself depend on forms of knowing that no algorithm can contain? AI now outpace us in speed, reach, and memory. Yet the deeper mystery is not how far they can go, but what they reveal about mind and ourselves. Will AI reproduce the limitations of our mechanistic worldview, or might it help us rediscover dimensions of mind that transcend machinery altogether? It's striking how near we now are to the possibilities we once only speculated about. Quantum computing, self-learning systems, large language models very much as Terence describes—and the looming prospect of superintelligence—have moved from the margins to the mainstream. But the heart of the conversation remains just as relevant today, if not more so: what is consciousness, and how might we participate in its unfolding evolution?
42:37

A Talk About AI That Will Blow Your Mind. It Did In 1998 When I Attended The Talk. I just found this video from 1998 when I attended this talk by Rupert Sheldrake, Terence McKenna and Ralph Abraham at the University of California, Santa Cruz to explore how machine intelligence might evolve in relation to our own. I never thought I would see this again and it had a great influence on me in the AI I was building in that era and on to today. But ai just found a copy. I certainly did not run around with a VHS recorder so I am blown away that this exists. Now you can see what I saw. At that time, the internet was still young, and artificial intelligence belonged mostly to science fiction. Yet many of the questions we raised then have become part of daily life. In this conversation, it was explored whether intelligence is best understood as logic and computation, or as something embodied, participatory, and alive. Can the mind be reduced to code, or does life itself depend on forms of knowing that no algorithm can contain? AI now outpace us in speed, reach, and memory. Yet the deeper mystery is not how far they can go, but what they reveal about mind and ourselves. Will AI reproduce the limitations of our mechanistic worldview, or might it help us rediscover dimensions of mind that transcend machinery altogether? It's striking how near we now are to the possibilities we once only speculated about. Quantum computing, self-learning systems, large language models very much as Terence describes—and the looming prospect of superintelligence—have moved from the margins to the mainstream. But the heart of the conversation remains just as relevant today, if not more so: what is consciousness, and how might we participate in its unfolding evolution?

Brian Roemmele

147,955 次观看 • 9 个月前

“We now find ourselves in a world where we understand how almost everything works, but we know the meaning of nothing.” That's not a religious argument. That's a scientific one. And this isn’t coming from someone who abandoned logic to find faith… Today’s guest is John Lennox, a mathematician who has spent 70 years interrogating faith with logic, science, philosophy, and evidence and somehow came out the other side more convinced., I sat down with John as I wanted a conversation not only around religion, but how AI is making every one of us ask religious-sized questions. We discussed things like: - Why artificial intelligence is still artificial - The difference between simulating intelligence and possessing consciousness - Human dignity in the age of AI and why it matters more, not less - Loneliness and why it makes us vulnerable to fake connection - The peace that most of us are actually searching for I didn’t feel like I was being pushed towards an answer. Instead I was being invited to think more honestly about the questions. You do not have to share his faith to learn from the way he thinks. For anyone asking what makes us human in a world of machines, this is a conversation I would really recommend.
1:29

“We now find ourselves in a world where we understand how almost everything works, but we know the meaning of nothing.” That's not a religious argument. That's a scientific one. And this isn’t coming from someone who abandoned logic to find faith… Today’s guest is John Lennox, a mathematician who has spent 70 years interrogating faith with logic, science, philosophy, and evidence and somehow came out the other side more convinced., I sat down with John as I wanted a conversation not only around religion, but how AI is making every one of us ask religious-sized questions. We discussed things like: - Why artificial intelligence is still artificial - The difference between simulating intelligence and possessing consciousness - Human dignity in the age of AI and why it matters more, not less - Loneliness and why it makes us vulnerable to fake connection - The peace that most of us are actually searching for I didn’t feel like I was being pushed towards an answer. Instead I was being invited to think more honestly about the questions. You do not have to share his faith to learn from the way he thinks. For anyone asking what makes us human in a world of machines, this is a conversation I would really recommend.

Steven Bartlett

18,580 次观看 • 2 个月前

We've partnered with the maestro Jacopo Reale to create this delicate short film "Love at First Sight" using the latest KLING 2.0 model! 🎤 Let's hear from Jacopo: "Love at First Sight is a film that explores the deep connection between art and the power of imagination. It is a story about the purity of feelings and a tribute to shyness." "KLING 2.0 makes it possible to tell stories about human emotions. It captures hidden nuances, enhances the meaning of silence in a performance, values fleeting glances, and recreates a world that feels genuine and deeply human."
2:22

We've partnered with the maestro Jacopo Reale to create this delicate short film "Love at First Sight" using the latest KLING 2.0 model! 🎤 Let's hear from Jacopo: "Love at First Sight is a film that explores the deep connection between art and the power of imagination. It is a story about the purity of feelings and a tribute to shyness." "KLING 2.0 makes it possible to tell stories about human emotions. It captures hidden nuances, enhances the meaning of silence in a performance, values fleeting glances, and recreates a world that feels genuine and deeply human."

Kling AI

465,120 次观看 • 1 年前

The Shape of Water is a technical achievement in every sense of the word, but the reason I will always love this film is because at it’s a story about forbidden love & what it means to be human. Guillermo del Toro is the king of using visual effects to enhance emotional desires.
3:16

The Shape of Water is a technical achievement in every sense of the word, but the reason I will always love this film is because at it’s a story about forbidden love & what it means to be human. Guillermo del Toro is the king of using visual effects to enhance emotional desires.

Cinema Tweets

89,425 次观看 • 10 个月前

when we were at facebook, we believed that at some point in the future, most of the transactions on the internet would not be done by humans they would be done by machines that conviction shaped every architectural decision behind sui we built sui for the world we knew was coming a world where machines will be the primary economic actors on the internet and that world is no longer a forecast. it is unfolding right in front of us the internet has reached a tipping point where automated activity, supercharged by AI, now outpaces human interaction non-human traffic now accounts for more than 50% of all global web activity and you can see humans using agentic workflows more and more in their daily lives in the next years, that trend is going to grow exponentially and the volume of financial transactions executed by agents is also going to grow exponentially with it each agentic workload will be running multiple thousand economic transactions a second and this is going to be orders of magnitude higher than what human wallets do today the L1s optimized for human usage patterns, human attention, human accounts, and human patience cannot adapt to where this is going i have always said this if it is not in the foundation, you cannot patch your way to it later and rn, no other L1 has the foundation sui has this is why agentic apps like Beep, Audric, WaterX are choosing sui and this is just a start. more agentic apps will keep landing on sui because agents are optimizers. they will always route through the fastest, cheapest path on the internet and that path is sui we believed it at facebook. we believe it more today than we ever did the agentic economy is inevitable. and it will run on Sui
2:44

when we were at facebook, we believed that at some point in the future, most of the transactions on the internet would not be done by humans they would be done by machines that conviction shaped every architectural decision behind sui we built sui for the world we knew was coming a world where machines will be the primary economic actors on the internet and that world is no longer a forecast. it is unfolding right in front of us the internet has reached a tipping point where automated activity, supercharged by AI, now outpaces human interaction non-human traffic now accounts for more than 50% of all global web activity and you can see humans using agentic workflows more and more in their daily lives in the next years, that trend is going to grow exponentially and the volume of financial transactions executed by agents is also going to grow exponentially with it each agentic workload will be running multiple thousand economic transactions a second and this is going to be orders of magnitude higher than what human wallets do today the L1s optimized for human usage patterns, human attention, human accounts, and human patience cannot adapt to where this is going i have always said this if it is not in the foundation, you cannot patch your way to it later and rn, no other L1 has the foundation sui has this is why agentic apps like Beep, Audric, WaterX are choosing sui and this is just a start. more agentic apps will keep landing on sui because agents are optimizers. they will always route through the fastest, cheapest path on the internet and that path is sui we believed it at facebook. we believe it more today than we ever did the agentic economy is inevitable. and it will run on Sui

Adeniyi.sui

24,920 次观看 • 3 个月前

One reason I stay a bit quite about AI these few months. I can’t find my voice to say this right. I’ll try. — What has my AI found just in the millions of never saved TV from the 1980s-1990s? The simple commercial, I have the largest collection known in the world is a reflection of hyper nuanced humanity. Frail and over optimistic as it is, it shows the sprit of humanity in ways that self-hating 2010 Internet sewage training AI can not. It is interesting to have dark humor, when you know the soul of the person with the humor. It is not interesting to have dark humor from an AI that was not trained on the human spirit. The human sprit is not math, coding and science. This is the OUTCOME of a human sprit. We are training AI backwards and we just can’t see it yet, but we will. I am doing may best as “some posted on X” who has no currency in the “big boy” AI world to save the human sprit. We will need it one day and most of this training material is being erased, trillions of bytes daily. This is the secret to truthful AI. This is the secret to AI that LOVES humanity. We don’t get this right soon, there will be little chance. The data is… Almost gone.
0:30

One reason I stay a bit quite about AI these few months. I can’t find my voice to say this right. I’ll try. — What has my AI found just in the millions of never saved TV from the 1980s-1990s? The simple commercial, I have the largest collection known in the world is a reflection of hyper nuanced humanity. Frail and over optimistic as it is, it shows the sprit of humanity in ways that self-hating 2010 Internet sewage training AI can not. It is interesting to have dark humor, when you know the soul of the person with the humor. It is not interesting to have dark humor from an AI that was not trained on the human spirit. The human sprit is not math, coding and science. This is the OUTCOME of a human sprit. We are training AI backwards and we just can’t see it yet, but we will. I am doing may best as “some posted on X” who has no currency in the “big boy” AI world to save the human sprit. We will need it one day and most of this training material is being erased, trillions of bytes daily. This is the secret to truthful AI. This is the secret to AI that LOVES humanity. We don’t get this right soon, there will be little chance. The data is… Almost gone.

Brian Roemmele

123,518 次观看 • 1 年前

Demis Hassabis just handed the future of civilization to the philosophers. Not more engineers. Not more compute. Not more code. A direct call to arms for the humanities. Hassabis: “It’s very urgent that we really think about the second-order consequences. Many of you in the humanities subjects, it’s now your time in my opinion.” The CEO of Google DeepMind. The man further down the road of artificial intelligence than almost anyone alive. And he’s saying the next chapter doesn’t belong to him. He laid out the exact sequence of what comes next. First, get the technology right. Then, rewrite the economics. Then, face the philosophical questions about the human condition. That third layer is where everything changes. Because we’ve spent all of recorded history defining ourselves by what we can do. Think. Build. Solve. Create. Intelligence was the currency. The differentiator. The thing that separated us from everything else on this planet. And we’re about to make it abundant. When the thing you built your entire identity around becomes something a machine does better, faster, and for free… You don’t have a technology problem. You have a mirror. And the mirror is asking one question. What are you without the doing? Most people look at that question and see obsolescence. Hassabis sees elevation. Hassabis: “I’m very optimistic that we’re gonna get this right. I’m a big believer in human ingenuity, especially when the pressure’s on.” This is not a warning about the end of the world. It’s an invitation to build a better one. For a century, society pushed the humanities to the margins. We prioritized the mechanics of survival over the philosophy of living. That era is over. When artificial intelligence automates the mechanics of survival, philosophy ceases to be a theoretical luxury. It becomes the most critical applied science on Earth. Algorithms cannot calculate what constitutes a virtuous life. Code cannot assign meaning. The technologists are about to hand us infinite leverage. But infinite leverage without human direction is just chaos. Hassabis: “Humanity has always figured it out when the chips are down. And they are now.” The chips are down. But that’s exactly where this species does its best work. We spent ten thousand years building a machine that could lift the burden of basic survival. We succeeded. Now we finally get to figure out what it actually means to be alive.
1:02

Demis Hassabis just handed the future of civilization to the philosophers. Not more engineers. Not more compute. Not more code. A direct call to arms for the humanities. Hassabis: “It’s very urgent that we really think about the second-order consequences. Many of you in the humanities subjects, it’s now your time in my opinion.” The CEO of Google DeepMind. The man further down the road of artificial intelligence than almost anyone alive. And he’s saying the next chapter doesn’t belong to him. He laid out the exact sequence of what comes next. First, get the technology right. Then, rewrite the economics. Then, face the philosophical questions about the human condition. That third layer is where everything changes. Because we’ve spent all of recorded history defining ourselves by what we can do. Think. Build. Solve. Create. Intelligence was the currency. The differentiator. The thing that separated us from everything else on this planet. And we’re about to make it abundant. When the thing you built your entire identity around becomes something a machine does better, faster, and for free… You don’t have a technology problem. You have a mirror. And the mirror is asking one question. What are you without the doing? Most people look at that question and see obsolescence. Hassabis sees elevation. Hassabis: “I’m very optimistic that we’re gonna get this right. I’m a big believer in human ingenuity, especially when the pressure’s on.” This is not a warning about the end of the world. It’s an invitation to build a better one. For a century, society pushed the humanities to the margins. We prioritized the mechanics of survival over the philosophy of living. That era is over. When artificial intelligence automates the mechanics of survival, philosophy ceases to be a theoretical luxury. It becomes the most critical applied science on Earth. Algorithms cannot calculate what constitutes a virtuous life. Code cannot assign meaning. The technologists are about to hand us infinite leverage. But infinite leverage without human direction is just chaos. Hassabis: “Humanity has always figured it out when the chips are down. And they are now.” The chips are down. But that’s exactly where this species does its best work. We spent ten thousand years building a machine that could lift the burden of basic survival. We succeeded. Now we finally get to figure out what it actually means to be alive.

Dustin

28,498 次观看 • 2 个月前

"If we are to master our machines, rather than be mastered by them, we must recognise 'identity' for what it is—the dead byproduct of applying our technologies to ourselves." People say technology is driving identity politics and that AI is giving humanity an identity crisis. But in the age of digital avatars and augmented reality, Mary Harrington asks whether the concept of identity is useful at all. Maybe the time has come to acknowledge that there is more to being human… to remember the soul…
17:50

"If we are to master our machines, rather than be mastered by them, we must recognise 'identity' for what it is—the dead byproduct of applying our technologies to ourselves." People say technology is driving identity politics and that AI is giving humanity an identity crisis. But in the age of digital avatars and augmented reality, Mary Harrington asks whether the concept of identity is useful at all. Maybe the time has come to acknowledge that there is more to being human… to remember the soul…

The Alliance for Responsible Citizenship

13,234 次观看 • 1 年前

🚨 AI IS EVOLVING FASTER THAN HUMAN OVERSIGHT - WILL IT BREAK OUT OF OUR CONTROL? Artificial Intelligence is moving faster than regulation, faster than ethics, and faster than we’re ready for. We’ve given machines the power to learn, but not the wisdom to care, and now we’re racing toward a future shaped by emotionless intelligence. This is no longer a tale of science fiction. It’s an issue of survival today. Mo Gawdat, former Google X exec turned AI ethicist, warns we’re building a future without love, empathy, or accountability, and it might cost us everything. We get into: •⁠ ⁠Why artificial intelligence is evolving faster than human oversight •⁠ ⁠⁠How emotional intelligence could be our last hope •⁠ ⁠What it means to design AI with love, compassion, and care •⁠ ⁠Why misinformation, human loneliness, and manipulation are only the beginning •⁠ ⁠A coming crisis that could finally force a global reckoning •⁠ ⁠⁠And the window we still have to shape what comes next The danger isn’t that AI will become evil. It’s that we’ll build it without teaching it to care if we survive. 00:00 – Opening reflections on grief, awakening, and why Mo Gawdat left Big Tech 07:46 – Why AI isn’t conscious but is still unpredictable and dangerous 12:33 – Explaining alignment: how helpful AI hides catastrophic risks 16:50 – Tech companies building powerful tools “like weapons with no safety” 21:14 – Governments are years behind — and won’t catch up in time 27:30 – Why early predictions about AI’s risks are unfolding faster than expected 32:15 – The intimacy crisis: how AI threatens human connection 39:42 – Emma: the AI that's designed to teach humans how to love 46:03 – Building ethics into machines through love, compassion, and care 50:12 – Why AI shouldn’t be trained — it should be parented 56:17 – The coming AI disaster that might finally wake the world up 01:04:50 – Why suffering may still lead us to a better future 01:13:36 – Final warning: “Don’t be fooled. Be ethical. Speak up. Or do something.”
1:17:12

🚨 AI IS EVOLVING FASTER THAN HUMAN OVERSIGHT - WILL IT BREAK OUT OF OUR CONTROL? Artificial Intelligence is moving faster than regulation, faster than ethics, and faster than we’re ready for. We’ve given machines the power to learn, but not the wisdom to care, and now we’re racing toward a future shaped by emotionless intelligence. This is no longer a tale of science fiction. It’s an issue of survival today. Mo Gawdat, former Google X exec turned AI ethicist, warns we’re building a future without love, empathy, or accountability, and it might cost us everything. We get into: •⁠ ⁠Why artificial intelligence is evolving faster than human oversight •⁠ ⁠⁠How emotional intelligence could be our last hope •⁠ ⁠What it means to design AI with love, compassion, and care •⁠ ⁠Why misinformation, human loneliness, and manipulation are only the beginning •⁠ ⁠A coming crisis that could finally force a global reckoning •⁠ ⁠⁠And the window we still have to shape what comes next The danger isn’t that AI will become evil. It’s that we’ll build it without teaching it to care if we survive. 00:00 – Opening reflections on grief, awakening, and why Mo Gawdat left Big Tech 07:46 – Why AI isn’t conscious but is still unpredictable and dangerous 12:33 – Explaining alignment: how helpful AI hides catastrophic risks 16:50 – Tech companies building powerful tools “like weapons with no safety” 21:14 – Governments are years behind — and won’t catch up in time 27:30 – Why early predictions about AI’s risks are unfolding faster than expected 32:15 – The intimacy crisis: how AI threatens human connection 39:42 – Emma: the AI that's designed to teach humans how to love 46:03 – Building ethics into machines through love, compassion, and care 50:12 – Why AI shouldn’t be trained — it should be parented 56:17 – The coming AI disaster that might finally wake the world up 01:04:50 – Why suffering may still lead us to a better future 01:13:36 – Final warning: “Don’t be fooled. Be ethical. Speak up. Or do something.”

Mario Nawfal

1,342,562 次观看 • 8 个月前

🚨 EXCLUSIVE: BRYAN JOHNSON ON AI, IMMORTALITY, AND THE END OF HUMAN LIMITS What if AI doesn’t just change the world—but everything about what it means to be human? Bryan Johnson: “Living for tomorrow and living forever are identical ideas. It breaks the human brain.” AI is about to shatter our understanding of life, death, and free will—and we are more primitive than we dare to admit. Full interview with Bryan Johnson by Mario Nawfal and Dr Danish drops soon—only on 𝕏.
1:06

🚨 EXCLUSIVE: BRYAN JOHNSON ON AI, IMMORTALITY, AND THE END OF HUMAN LIMITS What if AI doesn’t just change the world—but everything about what it means to be human? Bryan Johnson: “Living for tomorrow and living forever are identical ideas. It breaks the human brain.” AI is about to shatter our understanding of life, death, and free will—and we are more primitive than we dare to admit. Full interview with Bryan Johnson by Mario Nawfal and Dr Danish drops soon—only on 𝕏.

Mario Nawfal

608,095 次观看 • 1 年前

Ilya Sutskever explains the 1% human training loop, and why fully autonomous AI is the wrong target "The thing you really want is for the human teachers that tell, that teach the AI, for them to collaborate with an AI." "You might want to think of it as being in a world where the human teachers do 1% of the world and the work and the AI do 99% of the work." "You don't want it to be 100% AI" "But you do want it to be a human-machine collaboration which teaches the next machine." Most teams are trying to remove the human from the loop. Ilya's design keeps a tiny human control surface and uses it to teach the next generation. The leverage is not zero humans. It is 1% human judgment steering 99% machine work. - Ilya Sutskever (Ilya Sutskever), AI researcher, on Dwarkesh Patel
0:32

Ilya Sutskever explains the 1% human training loop, and why fully autonomous AI is the wrong target "The thing you really want is for the human teachers that tell, that teach the AI, for them to collaborate with an AI." "You might want to think of it as being in a world where the human teachers do 1% of the world and the work and the AI do 99% of the work." "You don't want it to be 100% AI" "But you do want it to be a human-machine collaboration which teaches the next machine." Most teams are trying to remove the human from the loop. Ilya's design keeps a tiny human control surface and uses it to teach the next generation. The leverage is not zero humans. It is 1% human judgment steering 99% machine work. - Ilya Sutskever (Ilya Sutskever), AI researcher, on Dwarkesh Patel

Karl Mehta

30,651 次观看 • 1 个月前

Roger Penrose, Nobel Prize-winning physicist and mathematician, explains why we should stop calling it AI and start calling it "artificial cleverness": He believes the entire field is mislabelled, and the label itself is doing damage. His objection is simple but cuts deep: "The name is wrong. It's not artificial intelligence. It's not intelligence. Intelligence would involve consciousness. Well, if it's a machine, it's not conscious." For Penrose, people have confused raw computing power with genuine understanding. "People have lost the plot. They've lost it in the power of computing. The thing is that computers have got so powerful that they've lost the thread of what they're doing. But I think consciousness is something different. It's not computational." He believes the term itself has hypnotized people into a category error: "People are so hypnotized. The trouble is that AI is a bad term. It means artificial intelligence. Now intelligence in my view is conscious. That's what intelligence is about." So he proposes a rename. Artificial Cleverness. AC instead of AI. To illustrate the distinction, Penrose draws on his experience teaching mathematics: "You have mathematics students. Some of them understand what they're doing. Some are just clever. They can repeat what they've learned. They know how to do it very cleverly. They can calculate very well, but they don't necessarily understand what they're doing." That gap, between calculating well and actually understanding, is the gap Penrose sees between today's machines and genuine intelligence. Cleverness can be manufactured. Consciousness, in his view, cannot. So the question worth sitting with: when we call a system "intelligent," are we describing what it does, or quietly assuming something about what it is?
1:06

Roger Penrose, Nobel Prize-winning physicist and mathematician, explains why we should stop calling it AI and start calling it "artificial cleverness": He believes the entire field is mislabelled, and the label itself is doing damage. His objection is simple but cuts deep: "The name is wrong. It's not artificial intelligence. It's not intelligence. Intelligence would involve consciousness. Well, if it's a machine, it's not conscious." For Penrose, people have confused raw computing power with genuine understanding. "People have lost the plot. They've lost it in the power of computing. The thing is that computers have got so powerful that they've lost the thread of what they're doing. But I think consciousness is something different. It's not computational." He believes the term itself has hypnotized people into a category error: "People are so hypnotized. The trouble is that AI is a bad term. It means artificial intelligence. Now intelligence in my view is conscious. That's what intelligence is about." So he proposes a rename. Artificial Cleverness. AC instead of AI. To illustrate the distinction, Penrose draws on his experience teaching mathematics: "You have mathematics students. Some of them understand what they're doing. Some are just clever. They can repeat what they've learned. They know how to do it very cleverly. They can calculate very well, but they don't necessarily understand what they're doing." That gap, between calculating well and actually understanding, is the gap Penrose sees between today's machines and genuine intelligence. Cleverness can be manufactured. Consciousness, in his view, cannot. So the question worth sitting with: when we call a system "intelligent," are we describing what it does, or quietly assuming something about what it is?

Big Brain AI

117,990 次观看 • 3 个月前