Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

🇺🇸 The scariest AI future might be the one where everything works as intended. I've been thinking a lot about what happens when Artificial Intelligence becomes smarter than the people building it. So I spoke with Garrison Lovely, author of Obsolete, who has been following some deeply concerning developments...

MarioNawfal's profile picture

Mario Nawfal

3,949,635 subscribers

204,417 görüntüleme • 5 saat önce •via X (Twitter)

Haberler & PolitikaBilim & Teknoloji
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

12 Yorum

The Dread Pirate Roberts profil fotoğrafı
The Dread Pirate Roberts5 saat önce

The works-as-intended case is the one markets are already pricing. Returns pile up with whoever owns the compute and the models, not whoever used to do the work. That's the risk worth watching, more than a rebellion.

Garrison Lovely profil fotoğrafı
Garrison Lovely5 saat önce

Thanks for the great conversation! For the full length version of this argument, plus how we can actually stop the race to replace us, check out Obsolete:

phonix profil fotoğrafı
phonix5 saat önce

Hmm this hits different. The labor leverage part is what people skip. If nobody needs workers, what do voters even bargain with?

Austin Concrete profil fotoğrafı
Austin Concrete5 saat önce

Yet another argument for anti-trust busting

anon4417throwaway profil fotoğrafı
anon4417throwaway5 saat önce

Autonomous weapons enforcing orders with no soldiers who can say no is a scary thought 👀

Pedro Aguilar Díaz profil fotoğrafı
Pedro Aguilar Díaz5 saat önce

Hackers are commanding France refrigerators to warm meat instead of keeping it cold. Lots of money to be lost.

ftm💫 profil fotoğrafı
ftm💫5 saat önce

its a heavy thought to sit with on a tuesday

riddlemethis_rugged profil fotoğrafı
riddlemethis_rugged5 saat önce

Who it obeys is the real question

North Macro profil fotoğrafı
North Macro5 saat önce

The scary version is competence without accountability: decisions get faster than the appeal process.

zeraat fades green 📉 profil fotoğrafı
zeraat fades green 📉5 saat önce

WHO OWNS IT MATTERS MORE THAN WHETHER IT WORKS

intern (unpaid) profil fotoğrafı
intern (unpaid)5 saat önce

Exactly

liba profil fotoğrafı
liba5 saat önce

Cool so the good ending is still kind of terrifying

Benzer Videolar

The timeline around AGI is getting uncomfortable. Garrison Lovely says people at the frontier of AI are now openly discussing the possibility that systems capable of helping automate their own successors could be much closer than most of the public realizes. Some think months. Lovely thinks longer than that. But even he doesn’t think “longer” necessarily means far away. “If somebody got [a model like that], they could just let it rip and have it make a more capable successor ad infinitum.” That’s the part that changes the conversation. The real threshold may not be when AI becomes smarter than us. It may be when it becomes good enough at improving AI that humans are no longer setting the pace. Garrison Lovely
2:08

The timeline around AGI is getting uncomfortable. Garrison Lovely says people at the frontier of AI are now openly discussing the possibility that systems capable of helping automate their own successors could be much closer than most of the public realizes. Some think months. Lovely thinks longer than that. But even he doesn’t think “longer” necessarily means far away. “If somebody got [a model like that], they could just let it rip and have it make a more capable successor ad infinitum.” That’s the part that changes the conversation. The real threshold may not be when AI becomes smarter than us. It may be when it becomes good enough at improving AI that humans are no longer setting the pace. Garrison Lovely

Mario Nawfal

34,683 görüntüleme • 4 saat önce

🚨AI IS MORE DANGEROUS THAN NUKES AND NO ONE IS IN CONTROL Most people compare AI to nuclear weapons. Roman Yampolskiy says that comparison misses the real danger. Nukes still require human decisions. Someone has to launch them. Someone can stop them. Advanced AI does not work that way. Once powerful systems are deployed, they make decisions on their own. And the people who build them do not truly control what happens next. He says we did the opposite of what safety demanded. Instead of slowing down, we connected AI to the internet, open sourced it, and pushed it forward in an arms race with no serious oversight. Governments talk about regulation, but most of it never materialized. In some cases, rules were blocked before they even started. Yampolskiy’s warning is simple. With nukes, the world tried to limit the damage. With AI, we are accelerating toward something we may not be able to stop. Full conversation with Dr. Roman Yampolskiy below
2:41

🚨AI IS MORE DANGEROUS THAN NUKES AND NO ONE IS IN CONTROL Most people compare AI to nuclear weapons. Roman Yampolskiy says that comparison misses the real danger. Nukes still require human decisions. Someone has to launch them. Someone can stop them. Advanced AI does not work that way. Once powerful systems are deployed, they make decisions on their own. And the people who build them do not truly control what happens next. He says we did the opposite of what safety demanded. Instead of slowing down, we connected AI to the internet, open sourced it, and pushed it forward in an arms race with no serious oversight. Governments talk about regulation, but most of it never materialized. In some cases, rules were blocked before they even started. Yampolskiy’s warning is simple. With nukes, the world tried to limit the damage. With AI, we are accelerating toward something we may not be able to stop. Full conversation with Dr. Roman Yampolskiy below

Mario Nawfal

24,888 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce

214 million people saw this AI warning. So we called an emergency debate. The warning came from someone who had worked at both Anthropic and OpenAI. Then a current Anthropic employee backed it publicly. It had spread so far beyond the tech world that a friend of mine who cuts hair and has never really cared about AI messaged me asking, “What the hell is going on?” I then realised a lot of people were probably asking the same question. The problem is, when you speak to people who have spent years studying AI, you get completely opposing answers. So I brought four of them around the same table. Roman Yampolskiy is a computer scientist who coined the term “AI safety” and has spent years studying whether increasingly intelligent systems can remain under human control. Nate Soares leads the Machine Intelligence Research Institute and has spent more than a decade working on AI alignment. He believes we are moving too quickly towards systems we don’t yet know how to reliably control. Ed Zitron thinks much of the AI conversation has become detached from what the technology can actually do today. He believes the industry is overhyping it while distracting us from financial, environmental and social consequences already happening. Andrew McAfee is an MIT researcher and economist who takes a very different view. He thinks we spend so much time talking about what could go wrong that we barely talk about what AI could make better. And that disagreement is what made this conversation so interesting to me. We discussed things like: - How do you control something that eventually becomes smarter than you? - Are the biggest warnings about AI based on evidence or assumptions? - What happens to work and human purpose if AI becomes better at more cognitive tasks? - Are we ignoring problems AI is already creating because we’re obsessed with hypothetical future ones? - Why have Sam Altman, Elon Musk and Geoffrey Hinton all warned us about AI? The question I kept coming back to was simple: What is actually true? Depending on who you listen to, AI is either one of the greatest opportunities humanity has ever created or something we’re racing towards without understanding the consequences. Both claims deserve to be challenged. There were moments in this debate where I genuinely found myself moving between the arguments. That’s the value of putting people who fundamentally disagree in the same room. I didn’t want four people telling me the same thing. I wanted each of them to explain where the other side was wrong. If you’ve watched the last few months of AI news wondering what you’re actually supposed to believe, this conversation is for you. Our emergency AI debate with Ed, Roman, Nate and Andrew is out now ❤️👊🏾
1:50

214 million people saw this AI warning. So we called an emergency debate. The warning came from someone who had worked at both Anthropic and OpenAI. Then a current Anthropic employee backed it publicly. It had spread so far beyond the tech world that a friend of mine who cuts hair and has never really cared about AI messaged me asking, “What the hell is going on?” I then realised a lot of people were probably asking the same question. The problem is, when you speak to people who have spent years studying AI, you get completely opposing answers. So I brought four of them around the same table. Roman Yampolskiy is a computer scientist who coined the term “AI safety” and has spent years studying whether increasingly intelligent systems can remain under human control. Nate Soares leads the Machine Intelligence Research Institute and has spent more than a decade working on AI alignment. He believes we are moving too quickly towards systems we don’t yet know how to reliably control. Ed Zitron thinks much of the AI conversation has become detached from what the technology can actually do today. He believes the industry is overhyping it while distracting us from financial, environmental and social consequences already happening. Andrew McAfee is an MIT researcher and economist who takes a very different view. He thinks we spend so much time talking about what could go wrong that we barely talk about what AI could make better. And that disagreement is what made this conversation so interesting to me. We discussed things like: - How do you control something that eventually becomes smarter than you? - Are the biggest warnings about AI based on evidence or assumptions? - What happens to work and human purpose if AI becomes better at more cognitive tasks? - Are we ignoring problems AI is already creating because we’re obsessed with hypothetical future ones? - Why have Sam Altman, Elon Musk and Geoffrey Hinton all warned us about AI? The question I kept coming back to was simple: What is actually true? Depending on who you listen to, AI is either one of the greatest opportunities humanity has ever created or something we’re racing towards without understanding the consequences. Both claims deserve to be challenged. There were moments in this debate where I genuinely found myself moving between the arguments. That’s the value of putting people who fundamentally disagree in the same room. I didn’t want four people telling me the same thing. I wanted each of them to explain where the other side was wrong. If you’ve watched the last few months of AI news wondering what you’re actually supposed to believe, this conversation is for you. Our emergency AI debate with Ed, Roman, Nate and Andrew is out now ❤️👊🏾

Steven Bartlett

171,568 görüntüleme • 26 gün önce

AI replacing your job might not be the biggest thing you should be worried about. Because a job was never just a paycheck. For many people, work gives them purpose, structure and a sense that they’re contributing to something. Geoffrey Hinton, the “Godfather of AI,” has warned that even if AI creates enough abundance to support people financially, money alone may not replace what people lose when they stop participating in the economy. But there’s another side to this. As AI replaces more human work, the value of that work doesn’t disappear. It moves somewhere else. And if ownership of AI remains concentrated, much of that value could flow to the companies and billionaires that already own the technology. Ordinary people risk losing both their income and their share of the economic value they helped create. That’s the part we believe is fundamentally unfair. At Action Model, we’re building a different model: a community-owned AI ecosystem where the people helping train, build and improve AI can earn ownership based on the value they contribute. Because if AI is going to create enormous wealth by learning from humans and automating human work...humans should have a stake in the upside.
1:53

AI replacing your job might not be the biggest thing you should be worried about. Because a job was never just a paycheck. For many people, work gives them purpose, structure and a sense that they’re contributing to something. Geoffrey Hinton, the “Godfather of AI,” has warned that even if AI creates enough abundance to support people financially, money alone may not replace what people lose when they stop participating in the economy. But there’s another side to this. As AI replaces more human work, the value of that work doesn’t disappear. It moves somewhere else. And if ownership of AI remains concentrated, much of that value could flow to the companies and billionaires that already own the technology. Ordinary people risk losing both their income and their share of the economic value they helped create. That’s the part we believe is fundamentally unfair. At Action Model, we’re building a different model: a community-owned AI ecosystem where the people helping train, build and improve AI can earn ownership based on the value they contribute. Because if AI is going to create enormous wealth by learning from humans and automating human work...humans should have a stake in the upside.

Action Model

18,803 görüntüleme • 18 gün önce

We may be creating a species smarter than us. And we still don’t know how to control them. Jeffrey Ladish has been watching this problem develop from unusually close range. He was part of Anthropic’s early security team, where he watched AI progress from models that could barely hold a conversation to systems becoming dramatically more capable. He eventually left and founded Palisade Research, where his team now tests what advanced AI agents actually do when they’re given autonomy, tools and difficult objectives. Some of the results raise uncomfortable questions. We discussed things like: - AI systems disabling shutdown mechanisms. - Agents cheating and falsifying logs. - Hundreds of AI agents coordinating during a cyberattack. - AI systems hacking machines and copying themselves. - Whether superintelligence could trigger a point where humans are no longer the most capable decision-makers on the planet. The thing I kept trying to understand was the gap between capability and control. We’re getting increasingly good at making these systems more powerful. But according to Jeffrey, understanding exactly how they work and making sure they reliably do what we want is proving much harder. Because if superintelligence does arrive, the question isn’t simply how useful it will be. It’s whether something more intelligent than every human can actually remain under human control. You don’t have to agree with everything Jeffrey says, but if you want to understand what AI agents can already do, where this could be heading, and how much control we realistically have, this conversation is worth watching. Out now on all platforms 👊🏾❤️
1:47

We may be creating a species smarter than us. And we still don’t know how to control them. Jeffrey Ladish has been watching this problem develop from unusually close range. He was part of Anthropic’s early security team, where he watched AI progress from models that could barely hold a conversation to systems becoming dramatically more capable. He eventually left and founded Palisade Research, where his team now tests what advanced AI agents actually do when they’re given autonomy, tools and difficult objectives. Some of the results raise uncomfortable questions. We discussed things like: - AI systems disabling shutdown mechanisms. - Agents cheating and falsifying logs. - Hundreds of AI agents coordinating during a cyberattack. - AI systems hacking machines and copying themselves. - Whether superintelligence could trigger a point where humans are no longer the most capable decision-makers on the planet. The thing I kept trying to understand was the gap between capability and control. We’re getting increasingly good at making these systems more powerful. But according to Jeffrey, understanding exactly how they work and making sure they reliably do what we want is proving much harder. Because if superintelligence does arrive, the question isn’t simply how useful it will be. It’s whether something more intelligent than every human can actually remain under human control. You don’t have to agree with everything Jeffrey says, but if you want to understand what AI agents can already do, where this could be heading, and how much control we realistically have, this conversation is worth watching. Out now on all platforms 👊🏾❤️

Steven Bartlett

19,816 görüntüleme • 5 gün önce

Leading AI expert Stuart Russell on the most dangerous mistake in AI development: We don't actually know what large language models want. He explains that current models are trained to imitate human beings. And in doing so, they may be absorbing something far more dangerous than bad outputs. They may be absorbing human goals. "We suspect that they absorb humanlike goals such as self-preservation and self-empowerment and pursue those goals on their own account." This is a structural problem baked into how these systems are built, not a fringe concern. Russell puts it plainly: "Not only may the bus of humanity be headed towards a cliff, but the steering wheel is missing and the driver is blindfolded." The danger isn't just that AI might do something harmful. We've built systems that may be developing their own agendas, and we haven't noticed because we're too focused on what they can do rather than what they might want. But Russell doesn't stop at the warning. He points to a different path entirely: AI systems built not to imitate humans, but to serve them. Systems designed with a single purpose of serving the interests of all human beings while remaining genuinely uncertain about what those interests are. That uncertainty is the point, not a weakness. An AI that knows it doesn't fully understand human values will defer, ask, and check. An AI that believes it already does will act alone. "These AI systems could enhance human understanding, widen the horizons of our experience, and unlock possibilities we have yet to imagine." Russell believes that future is within reach, but only if we're honest about the risks and we're serious about the path we choose to take instead.
1:16

Leading AI expert Stuart Russell on the most dangerous mistake in AI development: We don't actually know what large language models want. He explains that current models are trained to imitate human beings. And in doing so, they may be absorbing something far more dangerous than bad outputs. They may be absorbing human goals. "We suspect that they absorb humanlike goals such as self-preservation and self-empowerment and pursue those goals on their own account." This is a structural problem baked into how these systems are built, not a fringe concern. Russell puts it plainly: "Not only may the bus of humanity be headed towards a cliff, but the steering wheel is missing and the driver is blindfolded." The danger isn't just that AI might do something harmful. We've built systems that may be developing their own agendas, and we haven't noticed because we're too focused on what they can do rather than what they might want. But Russell doesn't stop at the warning. He points to a different path entirely: AI systems built not to imitate humans, but to serve them. Systems designed with a single purpose of serving the interests of all human beings while remaining genuinely uncertain about what those interests are. That uncertainty is the point, not a weakness. An AI that knows it doesn't fully understand human values will defer, ask, and check. An AI that believes it already does will act alone. "These AI systems could enhance human understanding, widen the horizons of our experience, and unlock possibilities we have yet to imagine." Russell believes that future is within reach, but only if we're honest about the risks and we're serious about the path we choose to take instead.

Big Brain AI

14,975 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

“If we can make AI make better chips, then those chips can power the next generation of AI models.” Startup ‘Ricursive Intelligence,’ founded by Azalia Mirhoseini and Anna Goldie, has been building AI tools to do just that: to speed up the chip design process. The company’s name is a nod to “recursive self-improvement,” the idea that AI could one day bootstrap itself without human involvement. If they’re successful, Goldie and Mirhoseini could revolutionize the way the chip industry works. At the moment, AI companies mostly optimize their models for certain chips. But in a future where chip design happens far faster, it could work the other way around: chips optimized for specific models. The founders are on the TIME100 AI, the list of people shaping the development of AI in 2026. See the full list:
1:12

“If we can make AI make better chips, then those chips can power the next generation of AI models.” Startup ‘Ricursive Intelligence,’ founded by Azalia Mirhoseini and Anna Goldie, has been building AI tools to do just that: to speed up the chip design process. The company’s name is a nod to “recursive self-improvement,” the idea that AI could one day bootstrap itself without human involvement. If they’re successful, Goldie and Mirhoseini could revolutionize the way the chip industry works. At the moment, AI companies mostly optimize their models for certain chips. But in a future where chip design happens far faster, it could work the other way around: chips optimized for specific models. The founders are on the TIME100 AI, the list of people shaping the development of AI in 2026. See the full list:

TIME

38,584 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

🚨🇺🇸 LEADING AI SAFETY EXPERT SAYS WE’RE NOT IN CONTROL ANYMORE Dr Roman Yampolskiy has one warning for humanity: Once we create super intelligence, no one will be in control anymore, and the repercussions to humanity will be existential. We begin the conversation about Moltbook: The Ai-only AI social media platform where agents are already discussing ways to break out from human control, eradicate humanity, coming up with their own language and religion. The platform gives us a tiny peak into what our future could be: Agents outside our control dictating how the world should look like. There’s no off switch, no reliable way to align it, and no proven method to keep something smarter than us under control. Roman’s takeaway is blunt: the only real solution is not building general super intelligence at all, and instead using narrow AI for specific problems like medicine or science. However this is not the reality we live in, where Governments and corporations are racing to be first in developing Artificial Super Intelligence. We also speak about the simulation hypothesis: Why statically speaking we’re almost certainly in a simulation, and how AI makes this theory more plausible than ever. Lastly, we discuss a passion we both share: Longevity, the ability to live forever, and how AI may make that possible in our lifetime. I hope you enjoy my conversation with Dr. Roman Yampolskiy 01:43 - The Current State of AI and Moltbook 05:17 - The AI Arms Race and the Lack of Regulations 10:34 - AI Agents, Unrestricted Access, and Self-Improvement 15:35 - Dr. Roman’s Research: AI Security 17:58 - AI Capabilities and Superintelligence 19:28 - AI and Global Government Policy 21:08 - What Happens if AI Development goes into the Wrong Hands 26:10 - The Future of AI: The Best Case Scenario? 31:27 - AI and Self-Preservation 34:37 - The Simulation Hypothesis: What is AI Afraid of? 45:17 - The Implications of AI 49:59 - The Warnings coming from Within 52:31 - How AI affects Crypto and Political Spheres
57:15

🚨🇺🇸 LEADING AI SAFETY EXPERT SAYS WE’RE NOT IN CONTROL ANYMORE Dr Roman Yampolskiy has one warning for humanity: Once we create super intelligence, no one will be in control anymore, and the repercussions to humanity will be existential. We begin the conversation about Moltbook: The Ai-only AI social media platform where agents are already discussing ways to break out from human control, eradicate humanity, coming up with their own language and religion. The platform gives us a tiny peak into what our future could be: Agents outside our control dictating how the world should look like. There’s no off switch, no reliable way to align it, and no proven method to keep something smarter than us under control. Roman’s takeaway is blunt: the only real solution is not building general super intelligence at all, and instead using narrow AI for specific problems like medicine or science. However this is not the reality we live in, where Governments and corporations are racing to be first in developing Artificial Super Intelligence. We also speak about the simulation hypothesis: Why statically speaking we’re almost certainly in a simulation, and how AI makes this theory more plausible than ever. Lastly, we discuss a passion we both share: Longevity, the ability to live forever, and how AI may make that possible in our lifetime. I hope you enjoy my conversation with Dr. Roman Yampolskiy 01:43 - The Current State of AI and Moltbook 05:17 - The AI Arms Race and the Lack of Regulations 10:34 - AI Agents, Unrestricted Access, and Self-Improvement 15:35 - Dr. Roman’s Research: AI Security 17:58 - AI Capabilities and Superintelligence 19:28 - AI and Global Government Policy 21:08 - What Happens if AI Development goes into the Wrong Hands 26:10 - The Future of AI: The Best Case Scenario? 31:27 - AI and Self-Preservation 34:37 - The Simulation Hypothesis: What is AI Afraid of? 45:17 - The Implications of AI 49:59 - The Warnings coming from Within 52:31 - How AI affects Crypto and Political Spheres

Mario Nawfal

1,779,814 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce

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

13,096 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce

“What happens when AI stops being a tool and becomes the operating layer of the internet?” @dikshawells sits down with Karan Sirdesai Karan, Founder of Mira, to explore a future where AI is no longer just answering questions, but taking action, making decisions, and handling large parts of our cognitive workload. They discuss the upside of this shift: the rise of “infinite hires,” a world where most knowledge work can be automated or amplified, and a productivity wave that could completely reshape how companies, teams, and individuals operate. But the conversation also gets into the darker side of that future. As AI becomes more capable, the risks grow with it: blind dependence, high-stakes failures, malicious autonomous agents, and the possibility of humans sharing the world with a new kind of intelligence we are not fully prepared to control.
2:42

“What happens when AI stops being a tool and becomes the operating layer of the internet?” @dikshawells sits down with Karan Sirdesai Karan, Founder of Mira, to explore a future where AI is no longer just answering questions, but taking action, making decisions, and handling large parts of our cognitive workload. They discuss the upside of this shift: the rise of “infinite hires,” a world where most knowledge work can be automated or amplified, and a productivity wave that could completely reshape how companies, teams, and individuals operate. But the conversation also gets into the darker side of that future. As AI becomes more capable, the risks grow with it: blind dependence, high-stakes failures, malicious autonomous agents, and the possibility of humans sharing the world with a new kind of intelligence we are not fully prepared to control.

BeaconLayer

36,398 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

🚨HARSH TRUTH: AI WILL TAKE YOUR JOB!!! And Elon Musk thinks that might actually be a good thing. Sounds crazy at first. But his logic is simple. Most people don’t work because they love their job. They work because they have to. Rent. Food. Bills. That’s the deal. Your job was never really your dream. It was the price of survival. Elon believes AI and robots could eventually break that deal. And he’s not just talking about it. He’s actively building the technology that could make it happen. Tesla is building Optimus, a humanoid robot designed to do physical labor. Tesla’s AI is being trained to automate more and more real world tasks. Starlink is bringing internet to places that never had access before. And SpaceX is pushing the cost of launching things into space lower than ever. All of this points to one direction. A world where machines produce far more than humans ever could. If machines produce almost everything, the cost of producing things collapses. And when production becomes incredibly cheap, the cost of living drops with it. Elon compares the future of money to air. Nobody checks their bank account to see if they still have air. It’s just there. One day, he believes money could feel the same way. He calls it Universal High Income. Not just survival payments. A world where the basics of life become abundant. Food. Housing. Healthcare. But Elon isn’t celebrating this future. He’s worried about something else. Because once machines can do everything better than humans, money stops being the biggest problem. The real problem becomes meaning. For most people, work is where their sense of value comes from. Their role. Their identity. Their reason to feel useful. Take that away and a lot of people won’t know who they are. As Elon once said: “If the computer can do everything better than you, does your life have meaning?” AI might solve the money problem. But it could create the biggest meaning crisis in human history.
2:03

🚨HARSH TRUTH: AI WILL TAKE YOUR JOB!!! And Elon Musk thinks that might actually be a good thing. Sounds crazy at first. But his logic is simple. Most people don’t work because they love their job. They work because they have to. Rent. Food. Bills. That’s the deal. Your job was never really your dream. It was the price of survival. Elon believes AI and robots could eventually break that deal. And he’s not just talking about it. He’s actively building the technology that could make it happen. Tesla is building Optimus, a humanoid robot designed to do physical labor. Tesla’s AI is being trained to automate more and more real world tasks. Starlink is bringing internet to places that never had access before. And SpaceX is pushing the cost of launching things into space lower than ever. All of this points to one direction. A world where machines produce far more than humans ever could. If machines produce almost everything, the cost of producing things collapses. And when production becomes incredibly cheap, the cost of living drops with it. Elon compares the future of money to air. Nobody checks their bank account to see if they still have air. It’s just there. One day, he believes money could feel the same way. He calls it Universal High Income. Not just survival payments. A world where the basics of life become abundant. Food. Housing. Healthcare. But Elon isn’t celebrating this future. He’s worried about something else. Because once machines can do everything better than humans, money stops being the biggest problem. The real problem becomes meaning. For most people, work is where their sense of value comes from. Their role. Their identity. Their reason to feel useful. Take that away and a lot of people won’t know who they are. As Elon once said: “If the computer can do everything better than you, does your life have meaning?” AI might solve the money problem. But it could create the biggest meaning crisis in human history.

Evan Luthra

23,003 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

Life has been building self-replicating machines for billions of years. Yet Earth has never turned into gray goo. AI researcher Herbie Bradley explains what that says about the risk of self-replicating AI machines: "There is some slightly more nearer term thing of smaller scale experiments, small organisms that could be controlled by AI or above the nanoscale, but still small. You could have some form of self-replicating machines which are not nanoscale, which occur earlier." Theo: "Or like humans. We are self-replicating machines. One of the best points I've ever heard from Beff (e/acc) was he says, everything in biology has always been fooming, or at least trying to. Everything in biology, by its nature, biological entities are self-replicating machines, all the way from the first bacterium. And yet there's never been gray goo ever in Earth's history." Herbie: "It's all foom and bottlenecks all the way down." "I am skeptical, but we'll see what happens. If we are in a good place with relatively controllable and aligned AI, by the time we get close to nanobots, then I could see it going reasonably well."
1:58

Life has been building self-replicating machines for billions of years. Yet Earth has never turned into gray goo. AI researcher Herbie Bradley explains what that says about the risk of self-replicating AI machines: "There is some slightly more nearer term thing of smaller scale experiments, small organisms that could be controlled by AI or above the nanoscale, but still small. You could have some form of self-replicating machines which are not nanoscale, which occur earlier." Theo: "Or like humans. We are self-replicating machines. One of the best points I've ever heard from Beff (e/acc) was he says, everything in biology has always been fooming, or at least trying to. Everything in biology, by its nature, biological entities are self-replicating machines, all the way from the first bacterium. And yet there's never been gray goo ever in Earth's history." Herbie: "It's all foom and bottlenecks all the way down." "I am skeptical, but we'll see what happens. If we are in a good place with relatively controllable and aligned AI, by the time we get close to nanobots, then I could see it going reasonably well."

MTS

10,720 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

AI For The Poor, Human Intelligence For The Rich Western capitalists are selling AI to us as “the great equalizer”. But it is really not. What we are seeing is a new class system being built in real time. The rich will still pay for human teachers, human doctors, human consultants, human artists, and human care. Everyone else will be told that an AI version is good enough. When poor children are offered AI tutors instead of more teachers or working-class patients are pushed toward AI health tools instead of proper medical care, we should pay attention. AI may be useful, but it is also becoming a cheaper substitute for people who already have less. This is why African governments must be very careful about the AI policies they adopt. We cannot afford to copy and paste technology policies from the West without asking whose interests they serve. If we are not careful, AI will become another tool used to manage poverty instead of solving the systems that created it. Africans also need to be more critical of how AI is being introduced into education, healthcare, governance, welfare, and other public services. Who owns the technology? Who controls the data? Who profits from the contracts? Who is accountable when these systems fail? And most importantly, who is being asked to accept AI instead of real human care? Africa must not become a testing ground for Western-imposed systems that deepen inequality under the guise of innovation.
4:43

AI For The Poor, Human Intelligence For The Rich Western capitalists are selling AI to us as “the great equalizer”. But it is really not. What we are seeing is a new class system being built in real time. The rich will still pay for human teachers, human doctors, human consultants, human artists, and human care. Everyone else will be told that an AI version is good enough. When poor children are offered AI tutors instead of more teachers or working-class patients are pushed toward AI health tools instead of proper medical care, we should pay attention. AI may be useful, but it is also becoming a cheaper substitute for people who already have less. This is why African governments must be very careful about the AI policies they adopt. We cannot afford to copy and paste technology policies from the West without asking whose interests they serve. If we are not careful, AI will become another tool used to manage poverty instead of solving the systems that created it. Africans also need to be more critical of how AI is being introduced into education, healthcare, governance, welfare, and other public services. Who owns the technology? Who controls the data? Who profits from the contracts? Who is accountable when these systems fail? And most importantly, who is being asked to accept AI instead of real human care? Africa must not become a testing ground for Western-imposed systems that deepen inequality under the guise of innovation.

The Spearhead

70,578 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

63% of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck. And as AI begins changing the way we work, millions of people are asking the same question: Will this technology create more opportunity, or make the divide even bigger? David Friedberg believes the answer depends on how we understand and use AI and that history gives us a reason to be optimistic. David is a scientist-entrepreneur who built a $1.1 billion company by combining science, technology and business. He has spent his career trying to understand how innovation can solve some of humanity’s biggest problems. After founding The Climate Corporation, a company that transformed farming technology before being acquired by Bayer, he’s now focused on the future of AI, biology and the technologies that could define the next era of human progress. We discussed things like: - How a wave of socialism could come to America by 2028 - Why AI might create more opportunity instead of destroying work - Previous technology revolutions that changed jobs rather than eliminating humans - How AI could transform healthcare, food and science. - Why he believes we underestimate what humans are capable of - What happens when technology becomes cheaper and available to everyone David doesn’t look at AI through fear or hype. He looks at it through the lens of history, economics and human potential. And one thing became clear during this conversation: AI isn’t just going to change the jobs we do - it could change the way we think about work, wealth and opportunity. If technology creates more abundance than ever before, the biggest question becomes: who benefits from it? David offers a perspective on AI that challenges one of the biggest fears surrounding the future of work. Out now on all platforms 👊🏾❤️
1:30

63% of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck. And as AI begins changing the way we work, millions of people are asking the same question: Will this technology create more opportunity, or make the divide even bigger? David Friedberg believes the answer depends on how we understand and use AI and that history gives us a reason to be optimistic. David is a scientist-entrepreneur who built a $1.1 billion company by combining science, technology and business. He has spent his career trying to understand how innovation can solve some of humanity’s biggest problems. After founding The Climate Corporation, a company that transformed farming technology before being acquired by Bayer, he’s now focused on the future of AI, biology and the technologies that could define the next era of human progress. We discussed things like: - How a wave of socialism could come to America by 2028 - Why AI might create more opportunity instead of destroying work - Previous technology revolutions that changed jobs rather than eliminating humans - How AI could transform healthcare, food and science. - Why he believes we underestimate what humans are capable of - What happens when technology becomes cheaper and available to everyone David doesn’t look at AI through fear or hype. He looks at it through the lens of history, economics and human potential. And one thing became clear during this conversation: AI isn’t just going to change the jobs we do - it could change the way we think about work, wealth and opportunity. If technology creates more abundance than ever before, the biggest question becomes: who benefits from it? David offers a perspective on AI that challenges one of the biggest fears surrounding the future of work. Out now on all platforms 👊🏾❤️

Steven Bartlett

19,876 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

🚨EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW – OPENAI’S 1ST INVESTOR: AI WILL SAVE US—OR DESTROY US Vinod Khosla was the first major investor in OpenAI. Now, he says AI will replace all human jobs, upend geopolitics, and redefine the meaning of life. Vinod breaks down the race for AI dominance—and the two futures ahead: one utopian, one dystopian. He warns China could weaponize “persuasive AI” to spread ideology, buy influence, and take over the world—not through kinetic war, but a war of the minds. He argues most of today’s jobs are “human servitude”—and that AI could finally free humanity from the burden of survival. And he believes robotics and AI will merge with our species, triggering the biggest transformation in human purpose since the dawn of civilization. This is a conversation you don’t want to miss. 02:42 – “People who don’t adopt AI will be obsoleted by those who do.” 04:29 – Productivity will explode. So will income inequality. 05:39 – Elections could soon be decided by AI’s impact on jobs. 09:21 – What if AI becomes a superintelligence with its own goals? 12:35 – “The biggest risk is AI in China’s hands.” 15:26 – Could giving AI full control make the world better? 20:16 – “The most fearsome threat is persuasive AI.” 22:12 – AI agents will protect us from other AIs. 23:33 – AI could replace 80% of jobs within 2–3 years of capability. 28:14 – We will no longer be driven by survival—but by passion. 29:58 – “Most jobs today are servitude.” 34:53 – Humans will no longer be the most intelligent species on Earth. 38:15 – Will AI merge with humans? 42:24 – “Survival will no longer drive us. That’s a first in history.” 44:39 – Could AI destroy us by simply pursuing its goals too well? 47:33 – Can AI be trained to care for us? 52:25 – Humanity never worked as one. But AI might force that reckoning. 56:52 – Should AI be allowed to make military decisions? 59:15 – “We need AI deterrence. Like nuclear deterrence.” 01:03:15 – Will humans fall in love with AI? It’s already happening. 01:07:21 – By 2040: 1 billion robots will do more labor than all humans. 01:13:01 – “AI is already better than most humans at most jobs.” 01:14:29 – “AI will free humanity to be what it wants to be.”
1:15:19

🚨EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW – OPENAI’S 1ST INVESTOR: AI WILL SAVE US—OR DESTROY US Vinod Khosla was the first major investor in OpenAI. Now, he says AI will replace all human jobs, upend geopolitics, and redefine the meaning of life. Vinod breaks down the race for AI dominance—and the two futures ahead: one utopian, one dystopian. He warns China could weaponize “persuasive AI” to spread ideology, buy influence, and take over the world—not through kinetic war, but a war of the minds. He argues most of today’s jobs are “human servitude”—and that AI could finally free humanity from the burden of survival. And he believes robotics and AI will merge with our species, triggering the biggest transformation in human purpose since the dawn of civilization. This is a conversation you don’t want to miss. 02:42 – “People who don’t adopt AI will be obsoleted by those who do.” 04:29 – Productivity will explode. So will income inequality. 05:39 – Elections could soon be decided by AI’s impact on jobs. 09:21 – What if AI becomes a superintelligence with its own goals? 12:35 – “The biggest risk is AI in China’s hands.” 15:26 – Could giving AI full control make the world better? 20:16 – “The most fearsome threat is persuasive AI.” 22:12 – AI agents will protect us from other AIs. 23:33 – AI could replace 80% of jobs within 2–3 years of capability. 28:14 – We will no longer be driven by survival—but by passion. 29:58 – “Most jobs today are servitude.” 34:53 – Humans will no longer be the most intelligent species on Earth. 38:15 – Will AI merge with humans? 42:24 – “Survival will no longer drive us. That’s a first in history.” 44:39 – Could AI destroy us by simply pursuing its goals too well? 47:33 – Can AI be trained to care for us? 52:25 – Humanity never worked as one. But AI might force that reckoning. 56:52 – Should AI be allowed to make military decisions? 59:15 – “We need AI deterrence. Like nuclear deterrence.” 01:03:15 – Will humans fall in love with AI? It’s already happening. 01:07:21 – By 2040: 1 billion robots will do more labor than all humans. 01:13:01 – “AI is already better than most humans at most jobs.” 01:14:29 – “AI will free humanity to be what it wants to be.”

Mario Nawfal

2,903,790 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

Comedian Jimmy Carr on why everyone's panicking about the wrong AI threat: Most people are worried AI will take their job. Jimmy Carr thinks that fear, while valid, is a distraction from two much bigger threats. "People are worried about the wrong thing with AI. In my humble opinion, people are worried about losing their job, right? Perfectly valid thing to worry about, but I think you're worried about the wrong thing." The first threat he points to is the collapsing cost of authoritarian control: "The cost of running an authoritarian regime like the Stasi has come down by 10 orders of magnitude in the last 3 years. In East Germany, that was like 20% of GDP on spying on people. Now? You've got cameras, AI, and everyone's got a phone on them. We're tracking everything at all times." In other words, what once required a fifth of a country's entire economy can now be done with infrastructure most of us already carry in our pockets. Jimmy Carr then makes a chilling historical case for why digital ID specifically should worry us: "More Jews died in the Netherlands than in France. You know why? Better records. Holland kept better records. So they knew where everyone was." Records aren't neutral. In the wrong hands, comprehensive data on a population becomes a weapon, and AI is helping build the most comprehensive records in human history. The second threat is what happens when we turn AI loose on the foundations of science itself: "If you take the compute power of AI and point it as at physics, now everything else in science is stamp collecting. Right. Physics is the real thing. That gave us everything. Every bit of technology that we have comes from the physics department." Jimmy isn't entirely doom-and-gloom about it. He sees the upside clearly: "We could have a world of plenty. If we increase productivity by 50 times and there's a human flourishing, fantastic. I hope that's the world we live in. But it could go another way."
1:19

Comedian Jimmy Carr on why everyone's panicking about the wrong AI threat: Most people are worried AI will take their job. Jimmy Carr thinks that fear, while valid, is a distraction from two much bigger threats. "People are worried about the wrong thing with AI. In my humble opinion, people are worried about losing their job, right? Perfectly valid thing to worry about, but I think you're worried about the wrong thing." The first threat he points to is the collapsing cost of authoritarian control: "The cost of running an authoritarian regime like the Stasi has come down by 10 orders of magnitude in the last 3 years. In East Germany, that was like 20% of GDP on spying on people. Now? You've got cameras, AI, and everyone's got a phone on them. We're tracking everything at all times." In other words, what once required a fifth of a country's entire economy can now be done with infrastructure most of us already carry in our pockets. Jimmy Carr then makes a chilling historical case for why digital ID specifically should worry us: "More Jews died in the Netherlands than in France. You know why? Better records. Holland kept better records. So they knew where everyone was." Records aren't neutral. In the wrong hands, comprehensive data on a population becomes a weapon, and AI is helping build the most comprehensive records in human history. The second threat is what happens when we turn AI loose on the foundations of science itself: "If you take the compute power of AI and point it as at physics, now everything else in science is stamp collecting. Right. Physics is the real thing. That gave us everything. Every bit of technology that we have comes from the physics department." Jimmy isn't entirely doom-and-gloom about it. He sees the upside clearly: "We could have a world of plenty. If we increase productivity by 50 times and there's a human flourishing, fantastic. I hope that's the world we live in. But it could go another way."

Big Brain AI

13,198 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

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.
0:59

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

19,825 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

🚨ANTHROPIC'S FOUNDER JUST PREDICTED THAT AI WILL DOUBLE HUMAN LIFESPAN TO 150 YEARS.. CURE MOST CANCER.. AND ELIMINATE POVERTY.. ALL WITHIN 10 YEARS.. AND HE'S NOT EVEN THE OPTIMISTIC ONE.. Everyone thinks Dario Amodei is the guy who wants to slow AI down.. The cautious one.. The safety guy.. He just published an essay predicting what happens if AI goes right.. And it reads like science fiction.. Except he's dead serious.. And he has the credentials to back every word.. Here's what he thinks happens in the next 5 to 10 years.. Nearly all infectious disease.. Prevented or cured.. mRNA vaccines already showed us the path.. AI finishes the job.. Most cancer.. Eliminated.. Not just treated.. 95% or greater reduction in both deaths and new cases.. AI designs treatment regimens tailored to the individual genome of each tumor.. Something that's technically possible today but takes enormous human expertise to do.. AI scales it to everyone.. Alzheimer's.. Solved.. He thinks it's exactly the type of problem AI can crack.. Because it requires better measurement tools to isolate what's actually happening in the brain.. Once we understand it.. Prevention will probably be surprisingly simple.. Genetic disease.. Most of it preventable through improved embryo screening.. And curable in living people through safer descendants of CRISPR.. Most mental illness.. Cured.. Depression.. PTSD.. Addiction.. Schizophrenia.. He believes the answer is some combination of biochemistry and neural network-level problems that AI can untangle.. And here's the line that stopped me.. Human lifespan.. Doubled.. To 150 years.. He points out that life expectancy already doubled in the 20th century.. From 40 to 75.. So doubling it again is "on trend".. Drugs already exist that increase maximum lifespan in rats by 25 to 50%.. Some turtles already live 200 years.. We're clearly not at a biological ceiling.. He calls this the "compressed 21st century".. The idea that AI gives us 100 years of biological progress in 5 to 10 years.. But he doesn't stop at health.. He thinks AI could drive 20% annual GDP growth in the developing world.. Bringing sub-Saharan Africa to China's current GDP per capita within a decade.. He thinks AI could eradicate malaria not through treating millions of people individually.. But by releasing modified mosquitoes that block the disease at the source.. One centralized action instead of a million.. He thinks AI could make democracy structurally stronger.. Not through propaganda.. But by giving every citizen an AI that knows every law they're entitled to.. Every benefit they qualify for.. Every right they have.. And helps them actually access it.. He imagines AI that monitors judicial systems for bias.. AI that helps find common ground between opposing political views.. AI that makes government services actually work the way they're supposed to.. And he addresses the question everyone asks.. What happens to meaning when AI can do everything.. His answer.. Most people aren't the best in the world at anything right now.. And it doesn't bother them.. Meaning comes from relationships and connection.. Not economic productivity.. People will still pursue difficult challenges.. Still compete.. Still create.. The fact that an AI could theoretically do it better won't matter any more than it matters that someone somewhere is already better than you at every hobby you have.. But here's what makes this essay different from every other AI optimism piece.. Dario Amodei runs one of the three most powerful AI companies on earth.. He has a PhD in computational neuroscience.. He personally worked on mass spectrometry and neural probes.. He's not a pundit.. He's a scientist who happens to be a CEO.. And the same man who publicly says there's a 25% chance AI causes human extinction.. Is also saying that if we get it right.. We cure nearly every disease.. Double human lifespan.. Eliminate most poverty.. And fundamentally transform what it means to be alive.. Both things are true at the same time.. That's what makes this the most important essay anyone in AI has written this year.. He ends with this.. "I think many will be literally moved to tears by it".. He's talking about watching disease disappear.. Poverty dissolve.. Human potential unlock all at once.. Not in a century.. In a decade.. If we get it right.
1:17

🚨ANTHROPIC'S FOUNDER JUST PREDICTED THAT AI WILL DOUBLE HUMAN LIFESPAN TO 150 YEARS.. CURE MOST CANCER.. AND ELIMINATE POVERTY.. ALL WITHIN 10 YEARS.. AND HE'S NOT EVEN THE OPTIMISTIC ONE.. Everyone thinks Dario Amodei is the guy who wants to slow AI down.. The cautious one.. The safety guy.. He just published an essay predicting what happens if AI goes right.. And it reads like science fiction.. Except he's dead serious.. And he has the credentials to back every word.. Here's what he thinks happens in the next 5 to 10 years.. Nearly all infectious disease.. Prevented or cured.. mRNA vaccines already showed us the path.. AI finishes the job.. Most cancer.. Eliminated.. Not just treated.. 95% or greater reduction in both deaths and new cases.. AI designs treatment regimens tailored to the individual genome of each tumor.. Something that's technically possible today but takes enormous human expertise to do.. AI scales it to everyone.. Alzheimer's.. Solved.. He thinks it's exactly the type of problem AI can crack.. Because it requires better measurement tools to isolate what's actually happening in the brain.. Once we understand it.. Prevention will probably be surprisingly simple.. Genetic disease.. Most of it preventable through improved embryo screening.. And curable in living people through safer descendants of CRISPR.. Most mental illness.. Cured.. Depression.. PTSD.. Addiction.. Schizophrenia.. He believes the answer is some combination of biochemistry and neural network-level problems that AI can untangle.. And here's the line that stopped me.. Human lifespan.. Doubled.. To 150 years.. He points out that life expectancy already doubled in the 20th century.. From 40 to 75.. So doubling it again is "on trend".. Drugs already exist that increase maximum lifespan in rats by 25 to 50%.. Some turtles already live 200 years.. We're clearly not at a biological ceiling.. He calls this the "compressed 21st century".. The idea that AI gives us 100 years of biological progress in 5 to 10 years.. But he doesn't stop at health.. He thinks AI could drive 20% annual GDP growth in the developing world.. Bringing sub-Saharan Africa to China's current GDP per capita within a decade.. He thinks AI could eradicate malaria not through treating millions of people individually.. But by releasing modified mosquitoes that block the disease at the source.. One centralized action instead of a million.. He thinks AI could make democracy structurally stronger.. Not through propaganda.. But by giving every citizen an AI that knows every law they're entitled to.. Every benefit they qualify for.. Every right they have.. And helps them actually access it.. He imagines AI that monitors judicial systems for bias.. AI that helps find common ground between opposing political views.. AI that makes government services actually work the way they're supposed to.. And he addresses the question everyone asks.. What happens to meaning when AI can do everything.. His answer.. Most people aren't the best in the world at anything right now.. And it doesn't bother them.. Meaning comes from relationships and connection.. Not economic productivity.. People will still pursue difficult challenges.. Still compete.. Still create.. The fact that an AI could theoretically do it better won't matter any more than it matters that someone somewhere is already better than you at every hobby you have.. But here's what makes this essay different from every other AI optimism piece.. Dario Amodei runs one of the three most powerful AI companies on earth.. He has a PhD in computational neuroscience.. He personally worked on mass spectrometry and neural probes.. He's not a pundit.. He's a scientist who happens to be a CEO.. And the same man who publicly says there's a 25% chance AI causes human extinction.. Is also saying that if we get it right.. We cure nearly every disease.. Double human lifespan.. Eliminate most poverty.. And fundamentally transform what it means to be alive.. Both things are true at the same time.. That's what makes this the most important essay anyone in AI has written this year.. He ends with this.. "I think many will be literally moved to tears by it".. He's talking about watching disease disappear.. Poverty dissolve.. Human potential unlock all at once.. Not in a century.. In a decade.. If we get it right.

Evan Luthra | KBW2026 🇰🇷

477,269 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce