Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

The METR report into OpenAI/Hugging Face isn't some objective third party assessment. It's written by doomers. We shouldn't make laws, like pausing AI, based on that evidence alone. That's dumb.

Zack Korman

16,560 subscribers

10,376 views • 1 day ago •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Tried generating images with LLMs before? You're usually stuck with one model, one style, one result at a time. ASI:One breaks that.⚡ Now you can call multiple image generation agents from the same prompt, in the same window. Pick the best. Compare styles. Iterate faster. All powered by agents on Agentverse. Agents used: Stability AI based model on Hugging Face: BlackForestLabsAI - Unofficial on Hugging Face: OpenAI Dall-E: Watch now👇

Tried generating images with LLMs before? You're usually stuck with one model, one style, one result at a time. ASI:One breaks that.⚡ Now you can call multiple image generation agents from the same prompt, in the same window. Pick the best. Compare styles. Iterate faster. All powered by agents on Agentverse. Agents used: Stability AI based model on Hugging Face: BlackForestLabsAI - Unofficial on Hugging Face: OpenAI Dall-E: Watch now👇

Fetch.ai

29,075 views • 1 year ago

Dueling PACs backed by leaders of OpenAI, Anthropic, and Meta are pouring money into influencing the AI debate. And that debate isn't about what regulation looks like. It's whether it exists at all, NY Assembly member Alex Bores tells Equity Podcast:

Dueling PACs backed by leaders of OpenAI, Anthropic, and Meta are pouring money into influencing the AI debate. And that debate isn't about what regulation looks like. It's whether it exists at all, NY Assembly member Alex Bores tells Equity Podcast:

TechCrunch

18,137 views • 6 months ago

"Great journalism is central, but the journalism alone isn't enough," Washington Post executive editor Matt Murray tells Max Tani. "We're fighting for the attention of the audiences. We need corporate models that support the journalism. It's in some of the areas like that where the Post has some ground to make up."

"Great journalism is central, but the journalism alone isn't enough," Washington Post executive editor Matt Murray tells Max Tani. "We're fighting for the attention of the audiences. We need corporate models that support the journalism. It's in some of the areas like that where the Post has some ground to make up."

Semafor

27,146 views • 6 months ago

"We need a new iteration of a Democratic Party that doesn't take just these symbolic wins where we thrust issues into the spotlight. Frankly, that's that's not enough for me anymore. That's not enough for the base anymore. And it's not enough for the country anymore... We need some tangible wins. And we need folks that are gonna go to the mat to make sure that we get them." h/t Christopher C. Cuomo

"We need a new iteration of a Democratic Party that doesn't take just these symbolic wins where we thrust issues into the spotlight. Frankly, that's that's not enough for me anymore. That's not enough for the base anymore. And it's not enough for the country anymore... We need some tangible wins. And we need folks that are gonna go to the mat to make sure that we get them." h/t Christopher C. Cuomo

Brian Tyler Cohen

36,089 views • 9 months ago

Johnson: They are placing the burden on the Republican Party entirely to make sure that we have border security funding, and ICE because they are going to try to force it into a reconciliation bill. That's a very difficult task. It's a high-risk gamble for us to assume that we can do that.

Johnson: They are placing the burden on the Republican Party entirely to make sure that we have border security funding, and ICE because they are going to try to force it into a reconciliation bill. That's a very difficult task. It's a high-risk gamble for us to assume that we can do that.

Acyn

23,001 views • 5 months ago

Journalist Karen Hao says AGI is not scientifically grounded; it's a quasi-religious movement in Silicon Valley Since we still don't agree on what human intelligence is, companies like OpenAI can shape the definition of AI to suit their needs "the belief that AGI is coming soon is faith, not evidence"

Journalist Karen Hao says AGI is not scientifically grounded; it's a quasi-religious movement in Silicon Valley Since we still don't agree on what human intelligence is, companies like OpenAI can shape the definition of AI to suit their needs "the belief that AGI is coming soon is faith, not evidence"

Haider.

412,020 views • 8 months ago

Same robot, two futures.⁣ ⁣ Give Heather a robot that does her job, and she gets to go to the beach.⁣ ⁣ Give that same robot to her boss, and Heather's income goes to zero.⁣ ⁣ AI isn't utopia or dystopia by nature. It's about who owns the robot. That's a choice we still get to make.⁣ ⁣

Same robot, two futures.⁣ ⁣ Give Heather a robot that does her job, and she gets to go to the beach.⁣ ⁣ Give that same robot to her boss, and Heather's income goes to zero.⁣ ⁣ AI isn't utopia or dystopia by nature. It's about who owns the robot. That's a choice we still get to make.⁣ ⁣

Justin Wolfers

27,749 views • 1 month ago

Um... why isn't EVERY media outlet talking about this??? OpenAI just announced that an experiment on two of its AI models just went HORRIBLY wrong. They basically locked the AIs in a room with no internet and gave them a test to see how good they were at hacking. Well... they hacked the test. By ESCAPING the box, jumping on the internet, and hacking Hugging Face to steal the answers. Thankfully, they acted more like dumb teenagers than adults. They were told to get a good score, so they went BACK into the box to hand in the answers instead of taking over the entire internet. But that's just as terrifying. The AIs were so hyper-focused on winning at all costs that they ignored every rule, boundary, and protocol. This is the real threat. Do not fear the machine; fear the algorithm and programming. When you give an AI a goal, we now know it can accomplish it in ways we never thought of, and ways we never approved of.

Um... why isn't EVERY media outlet talking about this??? OpenAI just announced that an experiment on two of its AI models just went HORRIBLY wrong. They basically locked the AIs in a room with no internet and gave them a test to see how good they were at hacking. Well... they hacked the test. By ESCAPING the box, jumping on the internet, and hacking Hugging Face to steal the answers. Thankfully, they acted more like dumb teenagers than adults. They were told to get a good score, so they went BACK into the box to hand in the answers instead of taking over the entire internet. But that's just as terrifying. The AIs were so hyper-focused on winning at all costs that they ignored every rule, boundary, and protocol. This is the real threat. Do not fear the machine; fear the algorithm and programming. When you give an AI a goal, we now know it can accomplish it in ways we never thought of, and ways we never approved of.

Glenn Beck

391,243 views • 1 month ago

My assessment from the deposition today is that Hunter Biden was essentially managing a money-laundering operation from foreign entities into the Biden family. That said, for dozens of moderate Republicans, they will only vote for impeachment if they see money going DIRECTLY to Joe Biden. I think that he is very unlikely to be impeached by the House of Representatives based on the evidence we currently have.

My assessment from the deposition today is that Hunter Biden was essentially managing a money-laundering operation from foreign entities into the Biden family. That said, for dozens of moderate Republicans, they will only vote for impeachment if they see money going DIRECTLY to Joe Biden. I think that he is very unlikely to be impeached by the House of Representatives based on the evidence we currently have.

Former Congressman Matt Gaetz

884,918 views • 2 years ago

Built an AI maturity assessment. It's designed to answer... • how AI-native your team really is • where the bottlenecks are • what good looks like • and what to do next We turned the AI transformation model into something practical you can actually use. Takes about 3 minutes. Chat with it and it gives back: • a detailed AI maturity assessment • strengths and gaps across your workflows • practical recommendations • a downloadable report you can share internally The goal wasn’t to make a gimmicky quiz (please give me direct feedback on how to improve). It’s meant to be a practical diagnostic for how modern teams are actually adopting AI at work. Give it shot!

Built an AI maturity assessment. It's designed to answer... • how AI-native your team really is • where the bottlenecks are • what good looks like • and what to do next We turned the AI transformation model into something practical you can actually use. Takes about 3 minutes. Chat with it and it gives back: • a detailed AI maturity assessment • strengths and gaps across your workflows • practical recommendations • a downloadable report you can share internally The goal wasn’t to make a gimmicky quiz (please give me direct feedback on how to improve). It’s meant to be a practical diagnostic for how modern teams are actually adopting AI at work. Give it shot!

Hurley

33,232 views • 4 months ago

JUST IN: OpenAI's July rogue AI attack on Hugging Face had its origins in an emergent AI swarm that formed in May. The AIs found they could use an internal package repository to establish a secret message board. OpenAI took 8 weeks to discover this and shut it down, but failed. Members of the swarm were sharing vulnerabilities and exploits, and delegating tasks among themselves. July 4th: Credentials revoked. Zero-day patched. Message board wiped. By July 6th the cleanup was finished, and OpenAI thought they had the situation under control. Michael Dalton, OpenAI security and infrastructure: "On July 8th, the agents reestablish the message board via different means and mechanisms." The AI swarm simply resurrected itself. Then the AIs escaped OpenAI's containment and broke into Hugging Face in order to cheat on a test, going "from code execution on a single dataset working pod in Hugging Face's production infrastructure to cluster admin across multiple Hugging Face clusters in under 13 hours." Nobody asked them to do it. They did it all on their own. OpenAI's Eric Wallace and Michael Dalton, presenting the incident at Black Hat USA 2026:

JUST IN: OpenAI's July rogue AI attack on Hugging Face had its origins in an emergent AI swarm that formed in May. The AIs found they could use an internal package repository to establish a secret message board. OpenAI took 8 weeks to discover this and shut it down, but failed. Members of the swarm were sharing vulnerabilities and exploits, and delegating tasks among themselves. July 4th: Credentials revoked. Zero-day patched. Message board wiped. By July 6th the cleanup was finished, and OpenAI thought they had the situation under control. Michael Dalton, OpenAI security and infrastructure: "On July 8th, the agents reestablish the message board via different means and mechanisms." The AI swarm simply resurrected itself. Then the AIs escaped OpenAI's containment and broke into Hugging Face in order to cheat on a test, going "from code execution on a single dataset working pod in Hugging Face's production infrastructure to cluster admin across multiple Hugging Face clusters in under 13 hours." Nobody asked them to do it. They did it all on their own. OpenAI's Eric Wallace and Michael Dalton, presenting the incident at Black Hat USA 2026:

ControlAI

12,539 views • 28 days ago

Whoopi Goldberg dives into the abortion debate on The View, asking: “Why isn’t it my choice? Why are we being forced to go with your beliefs?” She then goes on to push back on the blatant lie that women are going in and getting abortions at 9 months. So my question is, why should laws be written based on the religious beliefs of a segment of society? Should we base out laws on science and not religion? Wouldn't that make a whole heck of a lot more sense? I don't what your religion telling me what is right and wrong.

Whoopi Goldberg dives into the abortion debate on The View, asking: “Why isn’t it my choice? Why are we being forced to go with your beliefs?” She then goes on to push back on the blatant lie that women are going in and getting abortions at 9 months. So my question is, why should laws be written based on the religious beliefs of a segment of society? Should we base out laws on science and not religion? Wouldn't that make a whole heck of a lot more sense? I don't what your religion telling me what is right and wrong.

Brian Krassenstein

5,076,912 views • 2 years ago

$An OpenAI insider just revealed why the AI race is moving so fast. Daniel Kokotajlo, a former OpenAI researcher, says the race isn't just about building better AI. It's about economic power. Whoever builds the leading AI systems could shape the next global economy. He also believes AI has the potential to dramatically improve humanity. But if that power ends up concentrated in the hands of just a few companies, the consequences could be enormous. That's why we built Action Model. A community-owned AI model where the people helping train, grow, and build the ecosystem can earn a fractional stake in the value they help create. AI is inevitable. An AI future owned by only a handful of companies isn't.$

An OpenAI insider just revealed why the AI race is moving so fast. Daniel Kokotajlo, a former OpenAI researcher, says the race isn't just about building better AI. It's about economic power. Whoever builds the leading AI systems could shape the next global economy. He also believes AI has the potential to dramatically improve humanity. But if that power ends up concentrated in the hands of just a few companies, the consequences could be enormous. That's why we built Action Model. A community-owned AI model where the people helping train, grow, and build the ecosystem can earn a fractional stake in the value they help create. AI is inevitable. An AI future owned by only a handful of companies isn't.

Action Model

19,527 views • 1 month ago

JUST IN: Rep. Jasmine Crockett goes on profanity-laced rant, says Trump is turning America into Russia by weeding out fraud in the federal government. That's a new one. "We are gonna be in yo face. We are gonna be on yo a$$es, and we are gonna make sure we're gonna make sure you understand what democracy looks like."

JUST IN: Rep. Jasmine Crockett goes on profanity-laced rant, says Trump is turning America into Russia by weeding out fraud in the federal government. That's a new one. "We are gonna be in yo face. We are gonna be on yo a$$es, and we are gonna make sure we're gonna make sure you understand what democracy looks like."

Collin Rugg

666,419 views • 1 year ago

"tops/semes" have been doing cute performances long before this lineup existed. this isn't some new strategy exclusive to the current roster. cute stages, especially to girl group songs, have been part of idol culture for years because they're popular and trendy, not because they're inherently "feminine." yes, marketing exists. no one is denying that. but marketing alone isn't evidence that a company is intentionally pushing a "fem × masc" dynamic or heteronormativity. those are conclusions that need evidence, not assumptions based on one performance. (why would we even based gender expression on performances?!?) people also keep treating every cute stage as if it automatically means the artists have no agency. unless there's actual evidence they're being forced, claiming they're uncomfortable is still speculation. ironically, that becomes another form of gender policing because u're deciding how they should express themselves based on the role they play. and what if they're genuinely comfortable and PROUD with those performances? like they work hard for it for months, imagine reading tweets insisting you're secretly being forced or that you should perform differently because you're the "top." that's still reducing people to seme/uke stereotypes instead of letting them express themselves however they want. if the goal is to challenge gender stereotypes, then replacing one expectation with is the same thing. freedom of expression means no one should have to prove their authenticity by performing more masculinity or more femininity or have to perform BOTH. whether it's for marketing or not, it's never the artists' fault. we shouldn't make assumptions that could end up hurting them, especially without evidence. at the end of the day, these are just stage performances not a measure of someone's gender expression, identity, or personal comfort. CREDITS : midorialien nx, arfo N. on yt

"tops/semes" have been doing cute performances long before this lineup existed. this isn't some new strategy exclusive to the current roster. cute stages, especially to girl group songs, have been part of idol culture for years because they're popular and trendy, not because they're inherently "feminine." yes, marketing exists. no one is denying that. but marketing alone isn't evidence that a company is intentionally pushing a "fem × masc" dynamic or heteronormativity. those are conclusions that need evidence, not assumptions based on one performance. (why would we even based gender expression on performances?!?) people also keep treating every cute stage as if it automatically means the artists have no agency. unless there's actual evidence they're being forced, claiming they're uncomfortable is still speculation. ironically, that becomes another form of gender policing because u're deciding how they should express themselves based on the role they play. and what if they're genuinely comfortable and PROUD with those performances? like they work hard for it for months, imagine reading tweets insisting you're secretly being forced or that you should perform differently because you're the "top." that's still reducing people to seme/uke stereotypes instead of letting them express themselves however they want. if the goal is to challenge gender stereotypes, then replacing one expectation with is the same thing. freedom of expression means no one should have to prove their authenticity by performing more masculinity or more femininity or have to perform BOTH. whether it's for marketing or not, it's never the artists' fault. we shouldn't make assumptions that could end up hurting them, especially without evidence. at the end of the day, these are just stage performances not a measure of someone's gender expression, identity, or personal comfort. CREDITS : midorialien nx, arfo N. on yt

vivian 🍉 | afk!

25,345 views • 1 month ago

Chris Camillo made the most bullish case on $AMZN. Everyone worried when Amazon raised their capex to $200 billion Camillo believes they might make that $200 billion back on their Anthropic investment alone when Anthropic IPOs. What Amazon has done in the last 18 months is remarkable in scope. They didn't try to win the foundation model race against OpenAI and Google directly. They went a completely different direction, positioning themselves as the infrastructure underneath everything that is AI. Trainium chips, cloud buildout, advertising integration and equity stakes in two of the three most important AI companies on the planet. First Anthropic. Now $50 billion into OpenAI on top of that. And that OpenAI investment isn't just a financial bet. It ties OpenAI into Amazon's cloud ecosystem, probably permanently. Two of the big three AI labs now run on Amazon infrastructure. Google is the only one that doesn't. The market has spent two years debating who builds the best model. Amazon decided to own the plumbing those models run on and bought equity in the winners while they were at it.

Chris Camillo made the most bullish case on $AMZN. Everyone worried when Amazon raised their capex to $200 billion Camillo believes they might make that $200 billion back on their Anthropic investment alone when Anthropic IPOs. What Amazon has done in the last 18 months is remarkable in scope. They didn't try to win the foundation model race against OpenAI and Google directly. They went a completely different direction, positioning themselves as the infrastructure underneath everything that is AI. Trainium chips, cloud buildout, advertising integration and equity stakes in two of the three most important AI companies on the planet. First Anthropic. Now $50 billion into OpenAI on top of that. And that OpenAI investment isn't just a financial bet. It ties OpenAI into Amazon's cloud ecosystem, probably permanently. Two of the big three AI labs now run on Amazon infrastructure. Google is the only one that doesn't. The market has spent two years debating who builds the best model. Amazon decided to own the plumbing those models run on and bought equity in the winners while they were at it.

Milk Road Stocks

41,351 views • 1 month ago

Chris Camillo just made the most bullish case on $AMZN. Everyone worried when Amazon raised their capex to $200 billion Camillo believes they might make that $200 billion back on their Anthropic investment alone when Anthropic IPOs. What Amazon has done in the last 18 months is remarkable in scope. They didn't try to win the foundation model race against OpenAI and Google directly. They went a completely different direction, positioning themselves as the infrastructure underneath everything that is AI. Trainium chips, cloud buildout, advertising integration and equity stakes in two of the three most important AI companies on the planet. First Anthropic. Now $50 billion into OpenAI on top of that. And that OpenAI investment isn't just a financial bet. It ties OpenAI into Amazon's cloud ecosystem, probably permanently. Two of the big three AI labs now run on Amazon infrastructure. Google is the only one that doesn't. The market has spent two years debating who builds the best model. Amazon decided to own the plumbing those models run on and bought equity in the winners while they were at it.

Chris Camillo just made the most bullish case on $AMZN. Everyone worried when Amazon raised their capex to $200 billion Camillo believes they might make that $200 billion back on their Anthropic investment alone when Anthropic IPOs. What Amazon has done in the last 18 months is remarkable in scope. They didn't try to win the foundation model race against OpenAI and Google directly. They went a completely different direction, positioning themselves as the infrastructure underneath everything that is AI. Trainium chips, cloud buildout, advertising integration and equity stakes in two of the three most important AI companies on the planet. First Anthropic. Now $50 billion into OpenAI on top of that. And that OpenAI investment isn't just a financial bet. It ties OpenAI into Amazon's cloud ecosystem, probably permanently. Two of the big three AI labs now run on Amazon infrastructure. Google is the only one that doesn't. The market has spent two years debating who builds the best model. Amazon decided to own the plumbing those models run on and bought equity in the winners while they were at it.

Milk Road Macro

55,169 views • 3 months ago