Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

The Physics Law That Guarantees Everything Will Go Wrong Rebecca Newberger Goldstein | Rebecca Newberger Goldstein TIMESTAMPS : 00:00 Why every human being needs to matter — and what happens when they can't 04:25 The second law of thermodynamics and what it has to do with your life 08:00...

Briankeating's profile picture

Prof. Brian Keating

56,499 subscribers

42,920 views • 2 months ago •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

The Physics of Mattering: Do AI Agents Have a Soul? Rebecca Goldstein | Rebecca Newberger Goldstein
7:37

The Physics of Mattering: Do AI Agents Have a Soul? Rebecca Goldstein | Rebecca Newberger Goldstein

Prof. Brian Keating

19,364 views • 2 months ago

Why does *mattering* matter to us? Join me on Inner Cosmos this week with philosopher Rebecca Goldstein (Rebecca Newberger Goldstein) to discuss her new book "The Mattering Instinct" #brain
1:14

Why does *mattering* matter to us? Join me on Inner Cosmos this week with philosopher Rebecca Goldstein (Rebecca Newberger Goldstein) to discuss her new book "The Mattering Instinct" #brain

David Eagleman

12,510 views • 5 months ago

When mathematicians make breakthroughs, they hallucinate too. They reach beyond established results. But unlike AI, they’ve learned to tell a promising hallucination from a dead end. Number theorist Ken Ono on AI, creativity, and mathematical discovery. -- Timestamps -- 00:00:00 – Why predicting problem difficulty is so hard 00:00:27 – How mathematicians and AI both “hallucinate” 00:02:15 – AI as a copilot for mathematical discovery 00:04:00 – How AI helped reveal new formulas for primes 00:09:02 – The promise and peril of AI 00:15:22 – What makes a great mathematical question 00:17:54 – Teaching by making deliberate mistakes 00:21:22 – Will AI reshape the world like the Industrial Revolution?
26:12

When mathematicians make breakthroughs, they hallucinate too. They reach beyond established results. But unlike AI, they’ve learned to tell a promising hallucination from a dead end. Number theorist Ken Ono on AI, creativity, and mathematical discovery. -- Timestamps -- 00:00:00 – Why predicting problem difficulty is so hard 00:00:27 – How mathematicians and AI both “hallucinate” 00:02:15 – AI as a copilot for mathematical discovery 00:04:00 – How AI helped reveal new formulas for primes 00:09:02 – The promise and peril of AI 00:15:22 – What makes a great mathematical question 00:17:54 – Teaching by making deliberate mistakes 00:21:22 – Will AI reshape the world like the Industrial Revolution?

Epoch AI

18,095 views • 9 months ago

The 4 Types of People and Which One Destroys You Rebecca Goldstein | Rebecca Newberger Goldstein
6:36

The 4 Types of People and Which One Destroys You Rebecca Goldstein | Rebecca Newberger Goldstein

Prof. Brian Keating

12,487 views • 2 months ago

Full interview with the founder and CEO of Propr Lou sits down with me to discuss Hyperliquid and the future of prop trading Timestamps: 00:00:00 Intro 00:00:16 Meet Louis: from TradFi to crypto 00:01:52 How the crypto market has changed 00:03:49 Why build on Hyperliquid 00:06:52 How propr got started 00:08:40 Scaling a lean team (and the grind) 00:12:24 What a prop firm actually is 00:15:33 Agents, bots, and the future of trading 00:18:32 What Louis is most proud of 00:21:02 Thinking about the token and TGE 00:24:14 Where propr goes in 5 years 00:25:57 Best and worst trades 00:27:50 Life outside crypto + shoutouts
29:41

Full interview with the founder and CEO of Propr Lou sits down with me to discuss Hyperliquid and the future of prop trading Timestamps: 00:00:00 Intro 00:00:16 Meet Louis: from TradFi to crypto 00:01:52 How the crypto market has changed 00:03:49 Why build on Hyperliquid 00:06:52 How propr got started 00:08:40 Scaling a lean team (and the grind) 00:12:24 What a prop firm actually is 00:15:33 Agents, bots, and the future of trading 00:18:32 What Louis is most proud of 00:21:02 Thinking about the token and TGE 00:24:14 Where propr goes in 5 years 00:25:57 Best and worst trades 00:27:50 Life outside crypto + shoutouts

ryandcrypto

42,419 views • 1 month ago

Rebecca Newberger Goldstein discusses the "Mattering Instinct," the topic and title of her new book, with Armen Shirvanian (Armen). Rebecca Newberger Goldstein (Rebecca Newberger Goldstein): In this mattering instinct, I’m talking about something else, and it’s ultimately to prove to ourselves in our own lives that we’re living a meaningful life. This is where the notions of meaningfulness and existential crisis and the absurd, and all of these kind of more philosophical ideas, come into play in the kind of mattering that I’m talking about. This mattering comes to us by way of our capacity for self-reflection, when we can step outside of ourselves and think, gee, I spend an awful lot of time paying attention to myself. I automatically feel I’m deserving of my own attention. I automatically feel that I matter. But do I really? That is a very human question, and only we ask it. And that gives rise to the kind of longing to matter that I discuss in the book. It’s different from social mattering, although intertwined with it. They affect each other very much. Full episode:
0:55

Rebecca Newberger Goldstein discusses the "Mattering Instinct," the topic and title of her new book, with Armen Shirvanian (Armen). Rebecca Newberger Goldstein (Rebecca Newberger Goldstein): In this mattering instinct, I’m talking about something else, and it’s ultimately to prove to ourselves in our own lives that we’re living a meaningful life. This is where the notions of meaningfulness and existential crisis and the absurd, and all of these kind of more philosophical ideas, come into play in the kind of mattering that I’m talking about. This mattering comes to us by way of our capacity for self-reflection, when we can step outside of ourselves and think, gee, I spend an awful lot of time paying attention to myself. I automatically feel I’m deserving of my own attention. I automatically feel that I matter. But do I really? That is a very human question, and only we ask it. And that gives rise to the kind of longing to matter that I discuss in the book. It’s different from social mattering, although intertwined with it. They affect each other very much. Full episode:

Steven Pinker

36,560 views • 4 months ago

My conversation with OpenAI co-founder Greg Brockman This is the most detailed first-person account of the 72 hours after Sam Altman was fired. We also go deep on what comes next: the global race to AGI, why ChatGPT stopped showing reasoning, how much of OpenAI's own code is now written by AI ("it's hard to know what percent is not"), and the untold story of how OpenAI actually started in 2015. 00:00:00 Introduction 00:00:49 Meeting Sam Altman and Starting OpenAI 00:02:40 Building the Founding Team 00:04:25 DeepMind's Lead Over OpenAI 00:04:54 Changing OpenAI to a For-Profit Model 00:06:05 Breakthrough Moments at OpenAI 00:08:22 What Dota 2 Meant for OpenAI 00:10:04 Reasoning Versus Prediction 00:11:59 Tensions Grow at OpenAI 00:15:44 Sam Altman's Firing 00:17:49 Greg Quits OpenAI 00:19:56 Sam Explores Deal with Microsoft's Satya 00:20:28 Petition for Altman's Return 00:23:43 Ilya Sutskever Leaves OpenAI 00:24:59 Lessons Learned after Sam Ousting 00:28:22 The Thing Ilya Said that Greg Can't Forget 00:32:22 Is AI Going Parabolic? 00:33:24 How Much of OpenAI's Code is Written by AI? 00:36:21 Do AI Chatbots Tell Us What We Want to Hear? 00:38:06 The Global AI Race to Reach AGI 00:38:40 What Happens if US Doesn't Reach AGI First? 00:39:49 Are Countries Stealing AI Advancements? 00:40:38 Why ChatGPT No Longer Shows Reasoning 00:41:47 The Finite Constraints of Compute 00:43:38 On Investing Early in Data Centers 00:46:31 The Future of Data Center Specialization 00:47:52 How to Decide Whose Queries to Serve 00:49:08 OpenAI on Consumer vs Enterprise Models 00:53:05 Data Centers in Space? 01:00:56 What Should AI Regulation Look Like? 01:04:33 The Future of AI-Powered Entrepreneurship 01:04:44 AI and Job Loss 01:07:15 The Skills Young People Should Invest In 01:11:30 What Does Success Look Like For You? Full episode on X below. Also find it on: • YouTube: • Spotify: • Apple:
1:11:41

My conversation with OpenAI co-founder Greg Brockman This is the most detailed first-person account of the 72 hours after Sam Altman was fired. We also go deep on what comes next: the global race to AGI, why ChatGPT stopped showing reasoning, how much of OpenAI's own code is now written by AI ("it's hard to know what percent is not"), and the untold story of how OpenAI actually started in 2015. 00:00:00 Introduction 00:00:49 Meeting Sam Altman and Starting OpenAI 00:02:40 Building the Founding Team 00:04:25 DeepMind's Lead Over OpenAI 00:04:54 Changing OpenAI to a For-Profit Model 00:06:05 Breakthrough Moments at OpenAI 00:08:22 What Dota 2 Meant for OpenAI 00:10:04 Reasoning Versus Prediction 00:11:59 Tensions Grow at OpenAI 00:15:44 Sam Altman's Firing 00:17:49 Greg Quits OpenAI 00:19:56 Sam Explores Deal with Microsoft's Satya 00:20:28 Petition for Altman's Return 00:23:43 Ilya Sutskever Leaves OpenAI 00:24:59 Lessons Learned after Sam Ousting 00:28:22 The Thing Ilya Said that Greg Can't Forget 00:32:22 Is AI Going Parabolic? 00:33:24 How Much of OpenAI's Code is Written by AI? 00:36:21 Do AI Chatbots Tell Us What We Want to Hear? 00:38:06 The Global AI Race to Reach AGI 00:38:40 What Happens if US Doesn't Reach AGI First? 00:39:49 Are Countries Stealing AI Advancements? 00:40:38 Why ChatGPT No Longer Shows Reasoning 00:41:47 The Finite Constraints of Compute 00:43:38 On Investing Early in Data Centers 00:46:31 The Future of Data Center Specialization 00:47:52 How to Decide Whose Queries to Serve 00:49:08 OpenAI on Consumer vs Enterprise Models 00:53:05 Data Centers in Space? 01:00:56 What Should AI Regulation Look Like? 01:04:33 The Future of AI-Powered Entrepreneurship 01:04:44 AI and Job Loss 01:07:15 The Skills Young People Should Invest In 01:11:30 What Does Success Look Like For You? Full episode on X below. Also find it on: • YouTube: • Spotify: • Apple:

Shane Parrish

450,952 views • 2 months ago

David Eagleman (David Eagleman) interviews Rebecca Newberger Goldstein about her new book: The Mattering Instinct: How Our Deepest Longing Drives Us and Divides Us Rebecca Newberger Goldstein: We talk about what matters, and we talk about who matters. And I think its core meaning, deep down, is to be deserving of attention. David Eagleman: And you argue that this longing to matter is the crux of human motivation. What makes you feel that this longing to matter is more important than the pursuit of pleasure, or truth, or survival? Goldstein: Yeah, I mean, many of us pursue our mattering by hedonistic pursuit of pleasure, of truth, of knowledge, of beauty, of creativity, of power, of fame. But beneath all of these things is this more basic motivation: to prove that we are deserving of all of the attention that we have to give ourselves in order to live a coherently human life. It’s even more powerful than the longing to live, to survive. People will sacrifice their lives if they think that that’s what’s required in order to realize their mattering instinct—or in the very tragic cases where they think they can’t, which is clinically known as depression.
1:34

David Eagleman (David Eagleman) interviews Rebecca Newberger Goldstein about her new book: The Mattering Instinct: How Our Deepest Longing Drives Us and Divides Us Rebecca Newberger Goldstein: We talk about what matters, and we talk about who matters. And I think its core meaning, deep down, is to be deserving of attention. David Eagleman: And you argue that this longing to matter is the crux of human motivation. What makes you feel that this longing to matter is more important than the pursuit of pleasure, or truth, or survival? Goldstein: Yeah, I mean, many of us pursue our mattering by hedonistic pursuit of pleasure, of truth, of knowledge, of beauty, of creativity, of power, of fame. But beneath all of these things is this more basic motivation: to prove that we are deserving of all of the attention that we have to give ourselves in order to live a coherently human life. It’s even more powerful than the longing to live, to survive. People will sacrifice their lives if they think that that’s what’s required in order to realize their mattering instinct—or in the very tragic cases where they think they can’t, which is clinically known as depression.

Steven Pinker

32,130 views • 5 months ago

Rebecca Newberger Goldstein (Rebecca Newberger Goldstein) is interviewed by David Eagleman (David Eagleman) about her new book: The Mattering Instinct: How Our Deepest Longing Drives Us and Divides Us Goldstein: We evolve this capacity for self-reflection, and that’s what brings us up into this other sphere—the sphere of values. It’s not enough to just survive and flourish like the other creatures on Earth. We have to justify to ourselves our right to survive and flourish. Eagleman: So, Rebecca, if a listener felt that his or her life didn’t really matter to themselves or to other people, what would you say to them after having written this book? Goldstein: We really do all matter. I think that’s what we’re talking about when we talk about the intrinsic dignity of the human. So people really do need some kind of battery project. Whether they collapse it into their need for connectedness, or they have such a temperament that they need other things, I think that they should, first of all, you know, really think about what it is that would make them feel that they mattered. Is it closer connections with others? Might be. Is it some sort of creative outlet? Might be. Maybe it’s spirituality. It’s hard to be human.
1:14

Rebecca Newberger Goldstein (Rebecca Newberger Goldstein) is interviewed by David Eagleman (David Eagleman) about her new book: The Mattering Instinct: How Our Deepest Longing Drives Us and Divides Us Goldstein: We evolve this capacity for self-reflection, and that’s what brings us up into this other sphere—the sphere of values. It’s not enough to just survive and flourish like the other creatures on Earth. We have to justify to ourselves our right to survive and flourish. Eagleman: So, Rebecca, if a listener felt that his or her life didn’t really matter to themselves or to other people, what would you say to them after having written this book? Goldstein: We really do all matter. I think that’s what we’re talking about when we talk about the intrinsic dignity of the human. So people really do need some kind of battery project. Whether they collapse it into their need for connectedness, or they have such a temperament that they need other things, I think that they should, first of all, you know, really think about what it is that would make them feel that they mattered. Is it closer connections with others? Might be. Is it some sort of creative outlet? Might be. Maybe it’s spirituality. It’s hard to be human.

Steven Pinker

17,505 views • 5 months ago

A Physics That Could Finally Unify Reality (Part 2/2) - James Ellias, DemystifySci #385 A quiet tremor sounds beneath the floorboards of physics, the still-living heartbeat of the forgotten search for the hidden substance that carries every wave and whisper of the universe. We walk through the fog of equations and theories of fundamental physics with James Ellias of James Ellias, and ask if there is a material truth lies beneath the symbols, or if we have to be satisfied with the short-sighted vision of mathematics alone. 00:00 Go! 00:04:37 Central Equations in Physics 00:08:20 The Importance of a Medium in Physics 00:10:00 Empowerment Through Understanding Physics 00:12:36 Rationality and Truth in Society 00:16:31 Existence vs Consciousness 00:20:30 Discussion on Existence and Consciousness 00:24:25 Role of Imagination in Existence 00:28:10 Properties and Entities in Physics 00:30:15 The Nature of Aether and Physical Mediums 00:36:08 Clarity and Understanding in Physics 00:40:26 Discussion on Force and Aether 00:44:57 Relationship of Entities and Actions 00:49:30 Theoretical Framework for Aether 00:58:04 Exploration of Aether Theories 01:00:40 Importance of Conciseness in Communication 01:02:00 Understanding Physics Before Proposing Hypotheses 01:05:15 Reevaluation of Flawed Theories 01:09:35 The Evolution of Key Physics Concepts 01:15:19 Context-Specific Nature of Constants 01:19:43 Historical Context in Physics 01:21:36 The Nature of Electrons 01:25:53 J.J. Thomson’s Evolving Perspective 01:29:24 Upcoming Work and Philosophical Frameworks 01:32:11 Collaborations
1:33:44

A Physics That Could Finally Unify Reality (Part 2/2) - James Ellias, DemystifySci #385 A quiet tremor sounds beneath the floorboards of physics, the still-living heartbeat of the forgotten search for the hidden substance that carries every wave and whisper of the universe. We walk through the fog of equations and theories of fundamental physics with James Ellias of James Ellias, and ask if there is a material truth lies beneath the symbols, or if we have to be satisfied with the short-sighted vision of mathematics alone. 00:00 Go! 00:04:37 Central Equations in Physics 00:08:20 The Importance of a Medium in Physics 00:10:00 Empowerment Through Understanding Physics 00:12:36 Rationality and Truth in Society 00:16:31 Existence vs Consciousness 00:20:30 Discussion on Existence and Consciousness 00:24:25 Role of Imagination in Existence 00:28:10 Properties and Entities in Physics 00:30:15 The Nature of Aether and Physical Mediums 00:36:08 Clarity and Understanding in Physics 00:40:26 Discussion on Force and Aether 00:44:57 Relationship of Entities and Actions 00:49:30 Theoretical Framework for Aether 00:58:04 Exploration of Aether Theories 01:00:40 Importance of Conciseness in Communication 01:02:00 Understanding Physics Before Proposing Hypotheses 01:05:15 Reevaluation of Flawed Theories 01:09:35 The Evolution of Key Physics Concepts 01:15:19 Context-Specific Nature of Constants 01:19:43 Historical Context in Physics 01:21:36 The Nature of Electrons 01:25:53 J.J. Thomson’s Evolving Perspective 01:29:24 Upcoming Work and Philosophical Frameworks 01:32:11 Collaborations

Anastasia

13,523 views • 7 months ago

Brian Keating (Prof. Brian Keating) and Rebecca Newberger Goldstein (Rebecca Newberger Goldstein) discuss "The Law of Physics Behind Depression." Rebecca Newberger Goldstein: The thing that suicidally depressed people feel is that they don’t matter; others do, they don’t. Nothing they can do will ever make them matter. It’s a terrible, terrible feeling. And what this means is they cannot abide their own presence. Brian Keating: What if there is a law of physics that explains why depression feels the way it does? Rebecca Newberger Goldstein: When I first learned about the second law of thermodynamics, it seemed—I couldn’t quite conceptualize it. We are subject to the second law of thermodynamics, which, you know, has a tragic dimension. In fact, when I was a graduate student, it occurred to me, oh my gosh, biological systems are really just organized to resist the second law of thermodynamics. In some sense, biology is a response to this supreme law that tells us that, in closed systems, energy never increases; entropy never decreases. Entropy never decreases, and if there’s any way for it to increase, it will. Entropy is the measure of the disorder of a system. The more disorder, the higher the entropy, and the less efficient the work you can get out at the end of the system. And in fact, Rudolf Clausius, the physicist, said that the universe itself will go to thermal equilibrium—what we call the heat death—and so there will be no more energy to be gotten out of it at the end of the system. Rudolf Clausius, the 19th-century physicist who formulated the concept of entropy, which means literally “transformation from within”—there’s poignancy in that. This transformation from within is going to the end of the system. And he said that the universe itself will go to thermal equilibrium, to what we call the heat death, and so there will be no more energy to be gotten out of it. Brian Keating: So let’s start with that story you tell first about Ludwig Boltzmann, who solved one of the great paradoxes of physics, the irreversibility paradox. Talk about that. And then why, in your mind, was he so traumatized, perhaps, or so full of dread of his equation that he took his own life? So talk about that. Rebecca Newberger Goldstein: So there was this great paradox, which is that most—probably most—of the processes that we observe are irreversible. If you film them—and tell me if I’m being too elementary, because I’m going to be very—you know, if you film them, like let’s say I crack open an egg and I stir it up and then I fry it, and somebody filmed this and then reversed the film, anybody who sees the reverse of that film is going to know it was reversed. That cannot happen in nature: that the egg is going to uncook itself, unscramble; the yolk is going to separate from the albumen and jump into the shell and seal up. Impossible, right? So almost everything that we see is irreversible. Brian Keating: Yes. I saw that line, Rebecca. It made me think, because you mentioned it in the context of his daughter, Elsa, finding her father’s dead body. And it wasn’t like he showed any sign. I mean, we can’t go into the minds of someone who dies by suicide, right? Yes. But at the same time, you’d think, well, this would be a more common thing. And so, is depression sort of a—you know, they used to think of miasmas and things in the air, you write about that in the book—is depression, at heart, an entropic collapsing process? Rebecca Newberger Goldstein: I have spoken to a lot of people who suffer from clinical depression. And I want to say, first of all, that the U.S. hotline for suicide prevention is The thing that suicidally depressed people feel is that they don’t matter. Others do. They don’t. Nothing they can do will ever make them matter. It’s a terrible, terrible feeling. And what this means is they cannot—they can’t abide their own presence. I really think it shows how strong this mattering instinct is in us. If you can’t somehow appease it, you can’t abide your own presence. And so, what the people I’ve spoken to—and one is a very, very good philosopher who has suffered from depression—have told me is that, phenomenologically, this is exactly what it feels like. It feels like psychic disintegration. So, in some sense, yes—happiness is a very ordered state. And I would go even further: everything worth living for is an ordered state. I think knowledge—knowledge, knowledge, knowledge—is better than ignorance. Clarity is better than confusion. Flourishing is better than suffering. Love is better than hatred. Beauty is better than ugliness. These are truisms; these are what we all accept. Look at the thing that’s better: it’s an ordered state. And its negation is a disordered state. So I think—I would argue—this is a very kind of Spinozist argument, trying to get out of the laws of nature some ethical enlightenment, some ethical guidance, because that’s what we want. We want ethical guidance. So we know we want to matter. We know we do all sorts of things to matter. Some people do very bad things in order to matter. Some of the people I’ve spoken to… they do. They want power over others. They want dominance. They want to make other people’s lives miserable. These are bad things, right? They cause an increase in entropy. This is how I judge people now: are you increasing entropy, or are you decreasing it? -- Full video in link below.
6:32

Brian Keating (Prof. Brian Keating) and Rebecca Newberger Goldstein (Rebecca Newberger Goldstein) discuss "The Law of Physics Behind Depression." Rebecca Newberger Goldstein: The thing that suicidally depressed people feel is that they don’t matter; others do, they don’t. Nothing they can do will ever make them matter. It’s a terrible, terrible feeling. And what this means is they cannot abide their own presence. Brian Keating: What if there is a law of physics that explains why depression feels the way it does? Rebecca Newberger Goldstein: When I first learned about the second law of thermodynamics, it seemed—I couldn’t quite conceptualize it. We are subject to the second law of thermodynamics, which, you know, has a tragic dimension. In fact, when I was a graduate student, it occurred to me, oh my gosh, biological systems are really just organized to resist the second law of thermodynamics. In some sense, biology is a response to this supreme law that tells us that, in closed systems, energy never increases; entropy never decreases. Entropy never decreases, and if there’s any way for it to increase, it will. Entropy is the measure of the disorder of a system. The more disorder, the higher the entropy, and the less efficient the work you can get out at the end of the system. And in fact, Rudolf Clausius, the physicist, said that the universe itself will go to thermal equilibrium—what we call the heat death—and so there will be no more energy to be gotten out of it at the end of the system. Rudolf Clausius, the 19th-century physicist who formulated the concept of entropy, which means literally “transformation from within”—there’s poignancy in that. This transformation from within is going to the end of the system. And he said that the universe itself will go to thermal equilibrium, to what we call the heat death, and so there will be no more energy to be gotten out of it. Brian Keating: So let’s start with that story you tell first about Ludwig Boltzmann, who solved one of the great paradoxes of physics, the irreversibility paradox. Talk about that. And then why, in your mind, was he so traumatized, perhaps, or so full of dread of his equation that he took his own life? So talk about that. Rebecca Newberger Goldstein: So there was this great paradox, which is that most—probably most—of the processes that we observe are irreversible. If you film them—and tell me if I’m being too elementary, because I’m going to be very—you know, if you film them, like let’s say I crack open an egg and I stir it up and then I fry it, and somebody filmed this and then reversed the film, anybody who sees the reverse of that film is going to know it was reversed. That cannot happen in nature: that the egg is going to uncook itself, unscramble; the yolk is going to separate from the albumen and jump into the shell and seal up. Impossible, right? So almost everything that we see is irreversible. Brian Keating: Yes. I saw that line, Rebecca. It made me think, because you mentioned it in the context of his daughter, Elsa, finding her father’s dead body. And it wasn’t like he showed any sign. I mean, we can’t go into the minds of someone who dies by suicide, right? Yes. But at the same time, you’d think, well, this would be a more common thing. And so, is depression sort of a—you know, they used to think of miasmas and things in the air, you write about that in the book—is depression, at heart, an entropic collapsing process? Rebecca Newberger Goldstein: I have spoken to a lot of people who suffer from clinical depression. And I want to say, first of all, that the U.S. hotline for suicide prevention is The thing that suicidally depressed people feel is that they don’t matter. Others do. They don’t. Nothing they can do will ever make them matter. It’s a terrible, terrible feeling. And what this means is they cannot—they can’t abide their own presence. I really think it shows how strong this mattering instinct is in us. If you can’t somehow appease it, you can’t abide your own presence. And so, what the people I’ve spoken to—and one is a very, very good philosopher who has suffered from depression—have told me is that, phenomenologically, this is exactly what it feels like. It feels like psychic disintegration. So, in some sense, yes—happiness is a very ordered state. And I would go even further: everything worth living for is an ordered state. I think knowledge—knowledge, knowledge, knowledge—is better than ignorance. Clarity is better than confusion. Flourishing is better than suffering. Love is better than hatred. Beauty is better than ugliness. These are truisms; these are what we all accept. Look at the thing that’s better: it’s an ordered state. And its negation is a disordered state. So I think—I would argue—this is a very kind of Spinozist argument, trying to get out of the laws of nature some ethical enlightenment, some ethical guidance, because that’s what we want. We want ethical guidance. So we know we want to matter. We know we do all sorts of things to matter. Some people do very bad things in order to matter. Some of the people I’ve spoken to… they do. They want power over others. They want dominance. They want to make other people’s lives miserable. These are bad things, right? They cause an increase in entropy. This is how I judge people now: are you increasing entropy, or are you decreasing it? -- Full video in link below.

Steven Pinker

151,126 views • 2 months ago

Core Memory podcast with Suzanne Gildert on the hunt for AI consciousness in the quantum realm. The theory being that LLMs are too constrained to really get to robots and AIs that are really like us 00:00:00 – Consciousness: The First AI Training Model? 00:02:03 – Exploring the Quantum Mind with AI 00:04:42 – Will Robots Ever Have Rights? 00:07:54 – The AI Paradox: Fear vs. Progress 00:13:20 – Can Language Models Teach Robots? 00:17:29 – Why Today’s AI Feels Like a Zombie 00:23:47 – Quantum Computing Meets Artificial Consciousness 00:29:50 – Free Will, Entanglement, and Decision Making 00:38:21 – Teaching a Robot to Think, Not Just React 00:52:51 – Will Conscious AI Power Space Exploration?
1:10:42

Core Memory podcast with Suzanne Gildert on the hunt for AI consciousness in the quantum realm. The theory being that LLMs are too constrained to really get to robots and AIs that are really like us 00:00:00 – Consciousness: The First AI Training Model? 00:02:03 – Exploring the Quantum Mind with AI 00:04:42 – Will Robots Ever Have Rights? 00:07:54 – The AI Paradox: Fear vs. Progress 00:13:20 – Can Language Models Teach Robots? 00:17:29 – Why Today’s AI Feels Like a Zombie 00:23:47 – Quantum Computing Meets Artificial Consciousness 00:29:50 – Free Will, Entanglement, and Decision Making 00:38:21 – Teaching a Robot to Think, Not Just React 00:52:51 – Will Conscious AI Power Space Exploration?

Ashlee Vance

17,189 views • 1 year ago

How does math research change when the cost of trying your first dumb idea goes to zero? Daniel Litt joins Greg Burnham and Anson Ho to discuss what today’s models can and can’t do in math, and how far they are from doing high-quality research. 0:00:00 What's the hardest math problem AI can solve today? 00:16:08 How helpful are today’s AI models for math research? 00:23:36 Junk papers, LLM-generated proofs, and the refereeing crisis 00:27:21 AI enables searching through problems at scale 00:33:49 When will AI be good enough to publish in top math journals? 00:42:15 What are the returns to intelligence? 00:59:50 Will AI solve Millennium problems? 01:11:54 Is math full of low-hanging fruit? 01:18:47 How Daniel has adapted his professional life to AI progress 01:25:28 What do AI math benchmarks actually measure? 01:33:05 Designing the Open Problems benchmark 01:56:35 Do mathematicians believe heuristic arguments about conjectures? 02:01:24 What if FrontierMath: Open Problems gets solved? 02:06:53 Is AI on the cusp of accelerating math progress?
2:10:59

How does math research change when the cost of trying your first dumb idea goes to zero? Daniel Litt joins Greg Burnham and Anson Ho to discuss what today’s models can and can’t do in math, and how far they are from doing high-quality research. 0:00:00 What's the hardest math problem AI can solve today? 00:16:08 How helpful are today’s AI models for math research? 00:23:36 Junk papers, LLM-generated proofs, and the refereeing crisis 00:27:21 AI enables searching through problems at scale 00:33:49 When will AI be good enough to publish in top math journals? 00:42:15 What are the returns to intelligence? 00:59:50 Will AI solve Millennium problems? 01:11:54 Is math full of low-hanging fruit? 01:18:47 How Daniel has adapted his professional life to AI progress 01:25:28 What do AI math benchmarks actually measure? 01:33:05 Designing the Open Problems benchmark 01:56:35 Do mathematicians believe heuristic arguments about conjectures? 02:01:24 What if FrontierMath: Open Problems gets solved? 02:06:53 Is AI on the cusp of accelerating math progress?

Epoch AI

178,703 views • 5 months ago

I knew this conversation with my dear friend, Chris Harrison, would be wonderful. But I cannot express enough how incredible it was to get to sit down with someone I’ve known and loved for well over a decade and learn even more about his “why” in life, both personally and professionally, before and after a very public firestorm and his eventual “cancellation”. (00:00) – Intro: First impressions and why this conversation matters (02:00) – Life after The Bachelor and learning to let go (06:00) – The 2021 controversy: what happened, and how he handled it privately (12:30) – The weight of silence: losing his voice in the public square (18:00) – Owning mistakes, navigating cancel culture, and why words matter (24:00) – Therapy, humility, and starting the inner work (30:00) – Rebuilding relationships and letting go of the need to be “right” (36:00) – Fatherhood and how his kids saw it all unfold (42:00) – What he lost—and what he found in the quiet (48:00) – Why he never rushed a comeback (53:00) – Launching The Most Dramatic Podcast Ever and finding his own voice (01:00:00) – The highs and lows of hosting The Bachelor (01:08:00) – Fame, pressure, and identity outside the spotlight (01:15:00) – Manhood, grace, and how his definition of success has changed (01:25:00) – Final reflections: peace, purpose, and what’s next
1:36:16

I knew this conversation with my dear friend, Chris Harrison, would be wonderful. But I cannot express enough how incredible it was to get to sit down with someone I’ve known and loved for well over a decade and learn even more about his “why” in life, both personally and professionally, before and after a very public firestorm and his eventual “cancellation”. (00:00) – Intro: First impressions and why this conversation matters (02:00) – Life after The Bachelor and learning to let go (06:00) – The 2021 controversy: what happened, and how he handled it privately (12:30) – The weight of silence: losing his voice in the public square (18:00) – Owning mistakes, navigating cancel culture, and why words matter (24:00) – Therapy, humility, and starting the inner work (30:00) – Rebuilding relationships and letting go of the need to be “right” (36:00) – Fatherhood and how his kids saw it all unfold (42:00) – What he lost—and what he found in the quiet (48:00) – Why he never rushed a comeback (53:00) – Launching The Most Dramatic Podcast Ever and finding his own voice (01:00:00) – The highs and lows of hosting The Bachelor (01:08:00) – Fame, pressure, and identity outside the spotlight (01:15:00) – Manhood, grace, and how his definition of success has changed (01:25:00) – Final reflections: peace, purpose, and what’s next

Sage Steele

17,981 views • 1 year ago

Brian Keating (Prof. Brian Keating) and Rebecca Newberger Goldstein (Rebecca Newberger Goldstein) discuss "The Physics of Mattering: Do AI Agents Have a Soul" Rebecca Newberger Goldstein: God forbid if these AI agents begin to have a longing to matter, we have our non-carbon-based humans. We’re going to have to think about their rights. Brian Keating: She is a philosopher who trained in physics, and she just told me that AI might deserve human rights. Here is her argument. Rebecca Newberger Goldstein: The other obsession with this verb “matter,” that we are creatures of matter who long to matter — you can only say that in English. But I’m so glad you could say that in English because it’s, again, incredibly poignant. We’re creatures of matter who are subject to the laws of physics, the second law of thermodynamics, but we long to matter. And so much of the book is trying to explain that, how that transformation within us, within our species, happens. That’s a normative transformation, an ethical transformation, and it’s really what distinguishes us: that we, in some sense, want to justify the fact that we matter so much to ourselves, that we pay so much attention to ourselves. We actually can pinpoint the place in human history where this emerged, during the period when all the religions emerged that are still extant, which is so interesting. Also, Western philosophy emerged during the period of history that’s called the Axial Age. Brian Keating: I do think things have changed for the better, as far as, you know, paternity leave. I’ve taken advantage of that. But I guess the ultimate expression — and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it — I mean, I think that women sacrifice a lot more. I think also we have a crisis with men and boys and so forth, and now you have grandsons, and you can appreciate it. You probably appreciated this even before you had daughters. But the book is full of these things ranging, as you said, from Aristotle to the Chinese one-child policy that you talk about at the end of the book. It’s heart-wrenching, Rebecca. But I guess, as we come in for a landing, the fear that a lot of people have nowadays is about artificial intelligence replacing what we derive our sense of mattering from. And you quote Freud in the book. Freud said all of life is work and love. And if AI can replace the work of knowledge workers like you and me, and it can replace the love because of things like Character AI and all these artificial relationships that don’t require me to go out and ask a woman on a date — or nowadays, for men — I want to ask you the question: can AI have a mattering instinct, or is it encoded in this wet supercomputer that we carry on our shoulders? Is it possible that AI is making everyone feel that redundancy is threatening to us? Will AI rob us of our mattering? Rebecca Newberger Goldstein: Yeah, so there are two different questions there. One is really, I think, already upon us, maybe already here: that some of the most creative ways of appeasing our mattering instinct will be superseded by what AI can do. It can prove math theorems faster, make discoveries in science, write novels, write music, paint pictures. Some of the most creative things that have led to flourishing and led to great achievements that we can all take pride in. I take great pride in our species producing Bach and Shakespeare and Michael Jordan — I’m a big basketball fan. I mean, we mere mortals, and look what we can do. But they’ll be able to do it better. I think this is going to be a real problem. Here’s one thing I would say: heroic strivers — what I call heroic strivers — it’s really going to threaten them. I think the socializers are going to look to AI to some extent, maybe for romantic partners. But mothers are not going to have little AI agents acting like their babies. I don’t think that’s going to happen. But I think heroic strivers are going to be severely threatened. Well, one thing I can say is that one of the ways to be a heroic striver is ethically. And that will still remain to us: these ethical projects of trying to minister to others, to other creatures, to the planet itself. AI will not be able to do that. They can write our novels or our poetry or our music or improve our math theorems, but they’re not going to be able to do that for us. Wouldn’t that be a wonderful turn of events if somehow there were an incredible ethical transformation and that’s how we got our status — from how much good we’re actually doing in the world, how much counter-entropic good we’re doing in the world? This is a big thing that’s upon us, is all I can say. I can’t think of anything else — not the Industrial Revolution, not the Enlightenment — that has the possibility of so changing what we are and what we see our lives as being about as AI. Brian Keating: Even the very name of our species — Homo habilis meant “toolmaker” or “handyman.” Rebecca Newberger Goldstein: Yeah. Brian Keating: And Homo sapiens means “man who knows,” right? Rebecca Newberger Goldstein: Exactly, exactly. We’re not the only things that know. And your other question: God forbid if these AI agents begin to have a longing to matter, wanting to justify their own existence — it would take self-reflection of the sort that we have, being able to step outside themselves and say, “Oh my God, I pay so much attention to myself. Am I worth it? Do I deserve this?” If they do this, then what we have are non-carbon-based humans. These will be humans. And that means we’re going to have to think about their rights, and we’re going to have to have a whole new way of thinking about ethics, because we will have created humans in a new way. So this is big. This is so big. I’ll tell you something: I think this is the moment for philosophers, because these are philosophical problems. Philosophers have been at it for over 2,000 years since the ancient Greeks. So show us what you’ve got, philosophers. You’ve been thinking about this for 2,000 years. Show us what you’ve got. Brian Keating: It’s amazing. You take some matter and shoot some electrons through it, and suddenly you start wondering: is it okay to turn it off? Can I turn off my chat companion? Is it okay to have it answer questions on ethics for my children? Rebecca, this has been such a wonderful conversation. This book is incredible. It reminds me of a famous quote by John Archibald Wheeler. Wheeler said, “Matter tells space-time how to curve, and space-time tells matter how to move.” And this book, The Mattering Instinct, was one of the most moving books to me.
7:37

Brian Keating (Prof. Brian Keating) and Rebecca Newberger Goldstein (Rebecca Newberger Goldstein) discuss "The Physics of Mattering: Do AI Agents Have a Soul" Rebecca Newberger Goldstein: God forbid if these AI agents begin to have a longing to matter, we have our non-carbon-based humans. We’re going to have to think about their rights. Brian Keating: She is a philosopher who trained in physics, and she just told me that AI might deserve human rights. Here is her argument. Rebecca Newberger Goldstein: The other obsession with this verb “matter,” that we are creatures of matter who long to matter — you can only say that in English. But I’m so glad you could say that in English because it’s, again, incredibly poignant. We’re creatures of matter who are subject to the laws of physics, the second law of thermodynamics, but we long to matter. And so much of the book is trying to explain that, how that transformation within us, within our species, happens. That’s a normative transformation, an ethical transformation, and it’s really what distinguishes us: that we, in some sense, want to justify the fact that we matter so much to ourselves, that we pay so much attention to ourselves. We actually can pinpoint the place in human history where this emerged, during the period when all the religions emerged that are still extant, which is so interesting. Also, Western philosophy emerged during the period of history that’s called the Axial Age. Brian Keating: I do think things have changed for the better, as far as, you know, paternity leave. I’ve taken advantage of that. But I guess the ultimate expression — and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it — I mean, I think that women sacrifice a lot more. I think also we have a crisis with men and boys and so forth, and now you have grandsons, and you can appreciate it. You probably appreciated this even before you had daughters. But the book is full of these things ranging, as you said, from Aristotle to the Chinese one-child policy that you talk about at the end of the book. It’s heart-wrenching, Rebecca. But I guess, as we come in for a landing, the fear that a lot of people have nowadays is about artificial intelligence replacing what we derive our sense of mattering from. And you quote Freud in the book. Freud said all of life is work and love. And if AI can replace the work of knowledge workers like you and me, and it can replace the love because of things like Character AI and all these artificial relationships that don’t require me to go out and ask a woman on a date — or nowadays, for men — I want to ask you the question: can AI have a mattering instinct, or is it encoded in this wet supercomputer that we carry on our shoulders? Is it possible that AI is making everyone feel that redundancy is threatening to us? Will AI rob us of our mattering? Rebecca Newberger Goldstein: Yeah, so there are two different questions there. One is really, I think, already upon us, maybe already here: that some of the most creative ways of appeasing our mattering instinct will be superseded by what AI can do. It can prove math theorems faster, make discoveries in science, write novels, write music, paint pictures. Some of the most creative things that have led to flourishing and led to great achievements that we can all take pride in. I take great pride in our species producing Bach and Shakespeare and Michael Jordan — I’m a big basketball fan. I mean, we mere mortals, and look what we can do. But they’ll be able to do it better. I think this is going to be a real problem. Here’s one thing I would say: heroic strivers — what I call heroic strivers — it’s really going to threaten them. I think the socializers are going to look to AI to some extent, maybe for romantic partners. But mothers are not going to have little AI agents acting like their babies. I don’t think that’s going to happen. But I think heroic strivers are going to be severely threatened. Well, one thing I can say is that one of the ways to be a heroic striver is ethically. And that will still remain to us: these ethical projects of trying to minister to others, to other creatures, to the planet itself. AI will not be able to do that. They can write our novels or our poetry or our music or improve our math theorems, but they’re not going to be able to do that for us. Wouldn’t that be a wonderful turn of events if somehow there were an incredible ethical transformation and that’s how we got our status — from how much good we’re actually doing in the world, how much counter-entropic good we’re doing in the world? This is a big thing that’s upon us, is all I can say. I can’t think of anything else — not the Industrial Revolution, not the Enlightenment — that has the possibility of so changing what we are and what we see our lives as being about as AI. Brian Keating: Even the very name of our species — Homo habilis meant “toolmaker” or “handyman.” Rebecca Newberger Goldstein: Yeah. Brian Keating: And Homo sapiens means “man who knows,” right? Rebecca Newberger Goldstein: Exactly, exactly. We’re not the only things that know. And your other question: God forbid if these AI agents begin to have a longing to matter, wanting to justify their own existence — it would take self-reflection of the sort that we have, being able to step outside themselves and say, “Oh my God, I pay so much attention to myself. Am I worth it? Do I deserve this?” If they do this, then what we have are non-carbon-based humans. These will be humans. And that means we’re going to have to think about their rights, and we’re going to have to have a whole new way of thinking about ethics, because we will have created humans in a new way. So this is big. This is so big. I’ll tell you something: I think this is the moment for philosophers, because these are philosophical problems. Philosophers have been at it for over 2,000 years since the ancient Greeks. So show us what you’ve got, philosophers. You’ve been thinking about this for 2,000 years. Show us what you’ve got. Brian Keating: It’s amazing. You take some matter and shoot some electrons through it, and suddenly you start wondering: is it okay to turn it off? Can I turn off my chat companion? Is it okay to have it answer questions on ethics for my children? Rebecca, this has been such a wonderful conversation. This book is incredible. It reminds me of a famous quote by John Archibald Wheeler. Wheeler said, “Matter tells space-time how to curve, and space-time tells matter how to move.” And this book, The Mattering Instinct, was one of the most moving books to me.

Steven Pinker

51,961 views • 1 month ago

It's brain versus AI time. Here's our full episode with Sebastian Seung. He's started a new company to reverse engineer the brain and master the intelligence created by nature with the hopes of informing the intelligence we've created with machines. Sebastian has done pioneering AI and neuroscience work and is now blending the two to make a digital brain. Mostly, he's fun to listen to. The Core Memory podcast is made by possible by the intelligent finance powerhouse Brex and the people who back the biggest ideas @e1ventures. Timestamps 00:00:00 - Intro 00:01:42 - Who is Sebastian Seung? 00:03:23 - What is a Connectome? 00:07:08 - The Connectome Winter 00:09:08 - Diamond Knives & AI 00:12:10 - When Will We Map the Human Brain? 00:18:09 - The "Brain Crystal" & Visual Neurons 00:26:31 - New Startup 00:33:55 - Simulating a Mind in Software 00:37:40 - Biology vs. Nvidia 00:44:04 - Is AI a Religious Quest? 00:50:05 - Mind Uploading & Transhumanism 00:59:26 - Brain-Computer Interfaces 01:06:41 - From Physics to Neuroscience 01:12:22 - Will Uploads Be Conscious? 01:19:37 - Neuromorphic Chips & Future Robotics
1:28:39

It's brain versus AI time. Here's our full episode with Sebastian Seung. He's started a new company to reverse engineer the brain and master the intelligence created by nature with the hopes of informing the intelligence we've created with machines. Sebastian has done pioneering AI and neuroscience work and is now blending the two to make a digital brain. Mostly, he's fun to listen to. The Core Memory podcast is made by possible by the intelligent finance powerhouse Brex and the people who back the biggest ideas @e1ventures. Timestamps 00:00:00 - Intro 00:01:42 - Who is Sebastian Seung? 00:03:23 - What is a Connectome? 00:07:08 - The Connectome Winter 00:09:08 - Diamond Knives & AI 00:12:10 - When Will We Map the Human Brain? 00:18:09 - The "Brain Crystal" & Visual Neurons 00:26:31 - New Startup 00:33:55 - Simulating a Mind in Software 00:37:40 - Biology vs. Nvidia 00:44:04 - Is AI a Religious Quest? 00:50:05 - Mind Uploading & Transhumanism 00:59:26 - Brain-Computer Interfaces 01:06:41 - From Physics to Neuroscience 01:12:22 - Will Uploads Be Conscious? 01:19:37 - Neuromorphic Chips & Future Robotics

Ashlee Vance

38,233 views • 6 months ago

The gloves are off CFN Edition ft @SanjayWeb3 and Abhz 💭 Timestamps: 0:50 Feeling going into fight night 2:00 How was camp 4:20 Why take the fight 7:45 Why will you win the fight 11:00 What is each others weaknesses 13:00 Who has more of that DAWG in them 15:50 Predictions for the fight 19:00 Bet on the fight
21:15

The gloves are off CFN Edition ft @SanjayWeb3 and Abhz 💭 Timestamps: 0:50 Feeling going into fight night 2:00 How was camp 4:20 Why take the fight 7:45 Why will you win the fight 11:00 What is each others weaknesses 13:00 Who has more of that DAWG in them 15:50 Predictions for the fight 19:00 Bet on the fight

Caleb

15,762 views • 7 months ago

My full conversation with Yat Siu, Chairman and Co-Founder of Animoca Brands "The people who win are the ones who learn to be divergent." 00:00:00 - Intro 00:01:43 - Growing Up in Austria: Music, Coding & Being an Outsider 00:07:40 - The Iron Curtain, Capitalism & What Shaped Yat's Worldview 00:14:53 - Building a Business from the Wreckage 00:18:43 - 3D Graphics, Early VR & the Metaverse Before Its Time 00:24:00 - Dot-Com Boom, Outblaze & Selling to IBM 00:28:17 - MUDs, Virtual Swords & the Origins of Digital Ownership 00:33:59 - The Animoca Origin Story 00:38:29 - Getting Deplatformed by Apple & Pivoting to Android 00:40:54 - CryptoKitties, NFTs & Going All-In During Crypto Winter 00:47:50 - Investing in De-Extinction: Colossal Biosciences & Real-Life Jurassic Park 00:50:41 - Agents, Tools & the 1% Problem 00:56:37 - Why Tokens & Blockchain Matter for AI 01:04:30 - Advice for the Young: Embrace Uncertainty & Be Divergent
1:10:04

My full conversation with Yat Siu, Chairman and Co-Founder of Animoca Brands "The people who win are the ones who learn to be divergent." 00:00:00 - Intro 00:01:43 - Growing Up in Austria: Music, Coding & Being an Outsider 00:07:40 - The Iron Curtain, Capitalism & What Shaped Yat's Worldview 00:14:53 - Building a Business from the Wreckage 00:18:43 - 3D Graphics, Early VR & the Metaverse Before Its Time 00:24:00 - Dot-Com Boom, Outblaze & Selling to IBM 00:28:17 - MUDs, Virtual Swords & the Origins of Digital Ownership 00:33:59 - The Animoca Origin Story 00:38:29 - Getting Deplatformed by Apple & Pivoting to Android 00:40:54 - CryptoKitties, NFTs & Going All-In During Crypto Winter 00:47:50 - Investing in De-Extinction: Colossal Biosciences & Real-Life Jurassic Park 00:50:41 - Agents, Tools & the 1% Problem 00:56:37 - Why Tokens & Blockchain Matter for AI 01:04:30 - Advice for the Young: Embrace Uncertainty & Be Divergent

JackGK

28,960 views • 3 months ago

Sat down with Scott Kupor, Director of OPM and former a16z managing partner, about why he left a comfy VC job to work in Gov and what he's building with US Tech Force. (00:00) His wife's reaction to leaving a16z (04:00) How this Trump admin is different for tech (09:00) What is OPM and the federal talent gap (16:00) Where DOGE stands now (18:00) $250B on employees vs $750B on contractors (22:00) The 1981 hiring law nobody touched for 44 years (28:00) What is US Tech Force (36:00) AI in government today (44:30) His pitch on why engineers should work for government
49:17

Sat down with Scott Kupor, Director of OPM and former a16z managing partner, about why he left a comfy VC job to work in Gov and what he's building with US Tech Force. (00:00) His wife's reaction to leaving a16z (04:00) How this Trump admin is different for tech (09:00) What is OPM and the federal talent gap (16:00) Where DOGE stands now (18:00) $250B on employees vs $750B on contractors (22:00) The 1981 hiring law nobody touched for 44 years (28:00) What is US Tech Force (36:00) AI in government today (44:30) His pitch on why engineers should work for government

Nathan Lands

41,285 views • 4 months ago

Economics of AGI episode w Alex Imas and Phil Trammell. There's a bunch of important questions about how we deal with AI that only economics can answer. What is the optimal way to tax and redistribute the wealth that will be generated? How should countries not in the AI supply chain index into the gains? Is there any world where inequality doesn't explode? It might seem like these questions have obvious answers, but the first thing economics teaches you is that your intuitions can often be entirely wrong. It was very helpful to chat through these things with Alex and Phil. Look up Dwarkesh Podcast on Apple Podcasts, YouTube, or Spotify. Enjoy! 00:00:00 – Will capital share increase? 00:19:36 – Messy Middle scenario 00:25:57 – How to tax and redistribute AI wealth 00:30:02 – Why demand collapse is unlikely 00:39:26 – Human employees would be hard to integrate into the machine economy 00:43:08 – What if some humans (or AIs) value wealth accumulation intrinsically? 01:01:28 – What should developing countries do?
1:16:08

Economics of AGI episode w Alex Imas and Phil Trammell. There's a bunch of important questions about how we deal with AI that only economics can answer. What is the optimal way to tax and redistribute the wealth that will be generated? How should countries not in the AI supply chain index into the gains? Is there any world where inequality doesn't explode? It might seem like these questions have obvious answers, but the first thing economics teaches you is that your intuitions can often be entirely wrong. It was very helpful to chat through these things with Alex and Phil. Look up Dwarkesh Podcast on Apple Podcasts, YouTube, or Spotify. Enjoy! 00:00:00 – Will capital share increase? 00:19:36 – Messy Middle scenario 00:25:57 – How to tax and redistribute AI wealth 00:30:02 – Why demand collapse is unlikely 00:39:26 – Human employees would be hard to integrate into the machine economy 00:43:08 – What if some humans (or AIs) value wealth accumulation intrinsically? 01:01:28 – What should developing countries do?

Dwarkesh Patel

299,626 views • 1 month ago