Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Beim Laden dieses Videos ist ein Problem aufgetreten. Dies könnte an einem vorübergehenden Netzwerkproblem liegen oder das Video ist möglicherweise nicht verfügbar.

𝘛𝘰𝘥𝘢𝘺 𝘰𝘯 𝘋𝘰𝘰𝘮 𝘋𝘦𝘣𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘴 📺 Destiny Updates His P(Doom)! Top streamer Destiny (Destiny | Steven Bonnell II) has racked up millions of views for his sharp takes on political & cultural news. Now he's giving me a chance to debate him about the highest-stakes question: WILL AGI END HUMANITY?... show more

Liron Shapira

40,374 subscribers

33,944 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

Nachrichten & Politik Bildung Wissenschaft & Technologie

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

The Noah Smith 🐇🇺🇸🇺🇦🇹🇼 Doom Debate has dropped!!! Noah Smith is a highly influential writer & economist who's not afraid to share bold takes like: 📝 Plentiful, high-paying jobs in the age of AI 📝 Godlike AI will tend toward friendliness A brilliant thinker and great debater, yet his views are completely different from mine on the most critical AI topics… WHY DOES THIS ALWAYS HAPPEN?! We covered: ⬜ What’s Your P(Doom)™ ⬜ Good vs. Bad Transhumanist Outcomes ⬜ Mechanisms of Doom ⬜ The AI Persuasion Risk ⬜ Instrumental Convergence vs. Peace ⬜ The “Stoner AI” Theory ⬜ Importance of Reflective Stability ⬜ Orthogonality & the Waymo Argument ⬜ Comparative Advantage & Jobs ⬜ Wealth Distribution & Robot Lords ⬜ Supply Curves & Resource Constraints ⬜ The Case for Optimism This is one of the all-time best Doom Debates episodes to watch! 👇

The Noah Smith 🐇🇺🇸🇺🇦🇹🇼 Doom Debate has dropped!!! Noah Smith is a highly influential writer & economist who's not afraid to share bold takes like: 📝 Plentiful, high-paying jobs in the age of AI 📝 Godlike AI will tend toward friendliness A brilliant thinker and great debater, yet his views are completely different from mine on the most critical AI topics… WHY DOES THIS ALWAYS HAPPEN?! We covered: ⬜ What’s Your P(Doom)™ ⬜ Good vs. Bad Transhumanist Outcomes ⬜ Mechanisms of Doom ⬜ The AI Persuasion Risk ⬜ Instrumental Convergence vs. Peace ⬜ The “Stoner AI” Theory ⬜ Importance of Reflective Stability ⬜ Orthogonality & the Waymo Argument ⬜ Comparative Advantage & Jobs ⬜ Wealth Distribution & Robot Lords ⬜ Supply Curves & Resource Constraints ⬜ The Case for Optimism This is one of the all-time best Doom Debates episodes to watch! 👇

Liron Shapira

13,682 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

AI agents are getting so powerful, yet so friendly and compliant to their human masters… does that mean AI Doom is canceled?! In this 🆕 episode of Doom Debates, Dr. Steven Byrnes (AGI Safety Researcher, Harvard Physics Postdoc, fan favorite) returns to put the latest AI developments in context. Spoiler: Steven Byrnes and I are still expecting a qualitatively different breed of powerful sociopathic AI to emerge in the next few years and kill everyone :( We cover: ⬜ What's Your P(Doom)™ ⬜ “Brainlike AGI”: The next generation of AI ⬜ Will AI kill us before it takes our jobs? ⬜ The “country of geniuses in a data center” ⬜ Why we expect ruthless sociopathic ASI ⬜ Post-training & RLVR: a "thin layer" of consequentialism ⬜ The air travel vs. space travel analogy Highly recommended! 👇

AI agents are getting so powerful, yet so friendly and compliant to their human masters… does that mean AI Doom is canceled?! In this 🆕 episode of Doom Debates, Dr. Steven Byrnes (AGI Safety Researcher, Harvard Physics Postdoc, fan favorite) returns to put the latest AI developments in context. Spoiler: Steven Byrnes and I are still expecting a qualitatively different breed of powerful sociopathic AI to emerge in the next few years and kill everyone :( We cover: ⬜ What's Your P(Doom)™ ⬜ “Brainlike AGI”: The next generation of AI ⬜ Will AI kill us before it takes our jobs? ⬜ The “country of geniuses in a data center” ⬜ Why we expect ruthless sociopathic ASI ⬜ Post-training & RLVR: a "thin layer" of consequentialism ⬜ The air travel vs. space travel analogy Highly recommended! 👇

Liron Shapira

10,645 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

Stanford Prof. Michael Levitt (Michael Levitt) achieved something EXTREMELY rare & impressive: He came on my show as an AI “optimist”, listened to my doom argument, and updated his view in realtime!!! 🤯 Also, he won the 2013 Nobel Prize in computational biology. We had a great conversation, and I'm honored that Prof. Levitt is supportive of Doom Debates's dual mission — to raise awareness about imminent extinction risk from superintelligent AI, and to get closer to the truth by having good-faith debates. We covered these topics: ⬜ Prof. Levitt's background and Nobel research ⬜ The history of AI capability predictions ⬜ Measuring intelligence as a single dimension ⬜ Liron's AI doom argument: Steering the future ⬜ Optimism, pessimism, and other existential risks ⬜ What's Your P(Doom)?™ ⬜ Warning shots and global regulation ⬜ Comparing AI risk to pandemics and nuclear war ⬜ Prof. Levitt's unexpectedly swayed view Highly recommended!

Stanford Prof. Michael Levitt (Michael Levitt) achieved something EXTREMELY rare & impressive: He came on my show as an AI “optimist”, listened to my doom argument, and updated his view in realtime!!! 🤯 Also, he won the 2013 Nobel Prize in computational biology. We had a great conversation, and I'm honored that Prof. Levitt is supportive of Doom Debates's dual mission — to raise awareness about imminent extinction risk from superintelligent AI, and to get closer to the truth by having good-faith debates. We covered these topics: ⬜ Prof. Levitt's background and Nobel research ⬜ The history of AI capability predictions ⬜ Measuring intelligence as a single dimension ⬜ Liron's AI doom argument: Steering the future ⬜ Optimism, pessimism, and other existential risks ⬜ What's Your P(Doom)?™ ⬜ Warning shots and global regulation ⬜ Comparing AI risk to pandemics and nuclear war ⬜ Prof. Levitt's unexpectedly swayed view Highly recommended!

Liron Shapira

20,019 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

NEW: Dr. Holly Elmore (Holly ⏸️ Elmore), Executive Director of PauseAI US ⏸️, is calling out the AI doom “enablers” joining OpenAI & Anthropic! In this 🌶️ episode, Holly calls out leading figures in the AI safety community for allegedly selling out the cause: Effective Altruists, Anthropic & OpenAI employees, Eliezer Yudkowsky, Zvi Mowshowitz, and even yours truly! I have my disagreements about these specific callouts, especially on the choice to publicly psychoanalyze people instead of keeping the criticism focused on their actions. But I can’t deny that Holly has a track record of pushing the Overton window and surfacing uncomfortable truths. Does the "calling out" approach risk burning bridges with allies for little benefit, or does AI safety need a moral conscience willing to call out the rot nobody else will? Watch the episode and tell us in the replies! We cover: ⬜ Why Holly Moved to DC ⬜ What’s Your P(Doom)?™ ⬜ How We Got Here: EA, Rationality, AI Alignment ⬜ “If Anyone Builds It” and LessWrong’s Missing Mood ⬜ The Government’s Fable Crackdown is Good ⬜ Callout: Dean Ball (OpenAI) ⬜ Callout: Eliezer Yudkowsky ⬜ Callout: Zvi Mowshowitz ⬜ Callout: Liron Shapira ⬜ Callout: Nirit Weiss-Blatt ⬜ Callout: Amanda Askell ⬜ Callout: Daniela Amodei ⬜ Callout: Joe Carlsmith ⬜ Callout: Open Philanthropy / Coefficient Giving, Ben Goldhaber ⬜ How Anthropic took over EA ⬜ “Holly’s Basilisk”: What If Building Superintelligence Retroactively Becomes a Crime? Highly recommended! 👇

NEW: Dr. Holly Elmore (Holly ⏸️ Elmore), Executive Director of PauseAI US ⏸️, is calling out the AI doom “enablers” joining OpenAI & Anthropic! In this 🌶️ episode, Holly calls out leading figures in the AI safety community for allegedly selling out the cause: Effective Altruists, Anthropic & OpenAI employees, Eliezer Yudkowsky, Zvi Mowshowitz, and even yours truly! I have my disagreements about these specific callouts, especially on the choice to publicly psychoanalyze people instead of keeping the criticism focused on their actions. But I can’t deny that Holly has a track record of pushing the Overton window and surfacing uncomfortable truths. Does the "calling out" approach risk burning bridges with allies for little benefit, or does AI safety need a moral conscience willing to call out the rot nobody else will? Watch the episode and tell us in the replies! We cover: ⬜ Why Holly Moved to DC ⬜ What’s Your P(Doom)?™ ⬜ How We Got Here: EA, Rationality, AI Alignment ⬜ “If Anyone Builds It” and LessWrong’s Missing Mood ⬜ The Government’s Fable Crackdown is Good ⬜ Callout: Dean Ball (OpenAI) ⬜ Callout: Eliezer Yudkowsky ⬜ Callout: Zvi Mowshowitz ⬜ Callout: Liron Shapira ⬜ Callout: Nirit Weiss-Blatt ⬜ Callout: Amanda Askell ⬜ Callout: Daniela Amodei ⬜ Callout: Joe Carlsmith ⬜ Callout: Open Philanthropy / Coefficient Giving, Ben Goldhaber ⬜ How Anthropic took over EA ⬜ “Holly’s Basilisk”: What If Building Superintelligence Retroactively Becomes a Crime? Highly recommended! 👇

Liron Shapira

17,294 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Doom Debates presents Max Tegmark vs. Dean W. Ball: “Should we ban superintelligent AI development?” Arguing FOR banning superintelligence until there's a scientific consensus that it'll be done safely and controllably and strong public buy-in: 👤 Max Tegmark is an MIT professor, bestselling author, and co-founder of the Future of Life Institute. His research has focused on artificial intelligence for the past 8 years. Arguing AGAINST banning superintelligent AI development: 👤 Dean Ball is a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for American Innovation. He has served as a Senior Policy Advisor at the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy under President Trump, where he helped craft America's AI Action Plan. Two of the leading voices on AI policy engaged in high-quality, high-stakes debate for the benefit of the public! *This* is why I got into the YouTube game — because I believe debate is an essential tool for humanity to reckon with the creation of superhuman thinking machines. Topics covered: ⬜ Opening statements ⬜ Do we need an “FDA for AI”? ⬜ Liability, tail risk, and biosecurity ⬜ Incremental regulation vs. AI capability timelines ⬜ Should there be *any* superintelligence policy? ⬜ Max's nightmare scenario ⬜ The risk of recursive self-improvement ⬜ What's Your P(Doom)?™ ⬜ National security, China, & “winning the AI race” ⬜ Closing statements

Doom Debates presents Max Tegmark vs. Dean W. Ball: “Should we ban superintelligent AI development?” Arguing FOR banning superintelligence until there's a scientific consensus that it'll be done safely and controllably and strong public buy-in: 👤 Max Tegmark is an MIT professor, bestselling author, and co-founder of the Future of Life Institute. His research has focused on artificial intelligence for the past 8 years. Arguing AGAINST banning superintelligent AI development: 👤 Dean Ball is a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for American Innovation. He has served as a Senior Policy Advisor at the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy under President Trump, where he helped craft America's AI Action Plan. Two of the leading voices on AI policy engaged in high-quality, high-stakes debate for the benefit of the public! This is why I got into the YouTube game — because I believe debate is an essential tool for humanity to reckon with the creation of superhuman thinking machines. Topics covered: ⬜ Opening statements ⬜ Do we need an “FDA for AI”? ⬜ Liability, tail risk, and biosecurity ⬜ Incremental regulation vs. AI capability timelines ⬜ Should there be any superintelligence policy? ⬜ Max's nightmare scenario ⬜ The risk of recursive self-improvement ⬜ What's Your P(Doom)?™ ⬜ National security, China, & “winning the AI race” ⬜ Closing statements

Liron Shapira

43,963 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

$Stunning clip about the insane future Elon Musk is steering us toward. Elon says: 1. We can't expect to be "in charge" of AI for long, because humans will soon only have 1% of the combined total human+AI intelligence. 2. We'll focus on building AI overlords that have “values that cause intelligence to be propagated into the universe” 3. These AIs will “have humanity continuing to expand, because if you're curious, you're trying to understand the universe, [so] one of the things you're trying to understand is, where will humanity go?” Dwarkesh correctly flags the problem with Elon's logic: Aren't the priorities for "spreading humans" different from those of "understanding the universe" and from those of "spreading intelligence"? Elon replies that "in order to understand the universe, you have to expand the scale and probably the scope of intelligence", failing to address Dwarkesh's question about why this would imply a high priority for "spreading humans". Dwarkesh then further observes that humans have tried to understand the universe without trying to spread chimpanzees, casting more doubt on Elon's supposed “corrolary”. Elon replies that "we actually have made protected zones for chimpanzees" — as if that's comparable to humans letting chimpanzees spread in order to understand the universe. Dwarkesh tries one more followup: Are we aiming for superintelligent AI to treat humans the way humans have treated chimps? Finally, Elon repeats his claim: “I think Grok would care about expanding human civilization”. He doesn't try to defend his original implication, that an AI's drive to understand the universe implies allocating a substantial fraction of the universe in the service of humanity. Instead, Elon just promises he'll somehow personally emphasize the importance of expanding human consciousness to Grok: “Hey Grok, who's your daddy? Don't forget to expand human consciousness.” To recap: ⬜ Elon acknowledges that AIs like Grok will soon be in charge, not humans ⬜ He claims maximally-curious AIs that just care about understanding the universe will naturally care to “see where humanity goes” ⬜ He acknowledges that, actually, there might be more to this whole “getting AI to prioritize expanding human consciousness” thing, but it'll be okay because Grok will listen to requests about that kind of thing from its daddy. The stunning thing isn't that Elon has this shallow, self-contradictory outlook on the near future of all our lives — it's that every frontier AI company CEO would make equally insane claims about what happens to humanity after a few more years of letting their company operate, if pressed in an interview or debate. It shouldn't be legal for companies to carry out plans to permanently take away humanity's control over the future while clinging to shallow arguments why humanity might still survive, should it? -- P.S. The only show that cross-examines its guests' existentially-important nonconsensus AI claims more than two questions deep is Doom Debates.$

Stunning clip about the insane future Elon Musk is steering us toward. Elon says: 1. We can't expect to be "in charge" of AI for long, because humans will soon only have 1% of the combined total human+AI intelligence. 2. We'll focus on building AI overlords that have “values that cause intelligence to be propagated into the universe” 3. These AIs will “have humanity continuing to expand, because if you're curious, you're trying to understand the universe, [so] one of the things you're trying to understand is, where will humanity go?” Dwarkesh correctly flags the problem with Elon's logic: Aren't the priorities for "spreading humans" different from those of "understanding the universe" and from those of "spreading intelligence"? Elon replies that "in order to understand the universe, you have to expand the scale and probably the scope of intelligence", failing to address Dwarkesh's question about why this would imply a high priority for "spreading humans". Dwarkesh then further observes that humans have tried to understand the universe without trying to spread chimpanzees, casting more doubt on Elon's supposed “corrolary”. Elon replies that "we actually have made protected zones for chimpanzees" — as if that's comparable to humans letting chimpanzees spread in order to understand the universe. Dwarkesh tries one more followup: Are we aiming for superintelligent AI to treat humans the way humans have treated chimps? Finally, Elon repeats his claim: “I think Grok would care about expanding human civilization”. He doesn't try to defend his original implication, that an AI's drive to understand the universe implies allocating a substantial fraction of the universe in the service of humanity. Instead, Elon just promises he'll somehow personally emphasize the importance of expanding human consciousness to Grok: “Hey Grok, who's your daddy? Don't forget to expand human consciousness.” To recap: ⬜ Elon acknowledges that AIs like Grok will soon be in charge, not humans ⬜ He claims maximally-curious AIs that just care about understanding the universe will naturally care to “see where humanity goes” ⬜ He acknowledges that, actually, there might be more to this whole “getting AI to prioritize expanding human consciousness” thing, but it'll be okay because Grok will listen to requests about that kind of thing from its daddy. The stunning thing isn't that Elon has this shallow, self-contradictory outlook on the near future of all our lives — it's that every frontier AI company CEO would make equally insane claims about what happens to humanity after a few more years of letting their company operate, if pressed in an interview or debate. It shouldn't be legal for companies to carry out plans to permanently take away humanity's control over the future while clinging to shallow arguments why humanity might still survive, should it? -- P.S. The only show that cross-examines its guests' existentially-important nonconsensus AI claims more than two questions deep is Doom Debates.

Liron Shapira

17,652 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

📢 NEW DOOM DEBATES EXCLUSIVE: An interview with Rob Miles (Rob Miles), the most popular AI safety educator on YouTube! Amazingly, Rob got his start in 2011, long before ChatGPT brought mainstream attention to the field. We talk about: 👉 Why his P(Doom) sits between 10-90%, depending on how humanity responds to the challenge 👉 Why even perfectly aligned AI systems might not pass their values to successor systems - a massive blind spot in current safety work 👉 The "missing mood" problem: why people discuss potential human extinction with the emotional urgency of an academic conference instead of treating it like the emergency it is 👉 His mainline doom scenario through recursive self-improvement, and why there's enormous headroom above human intelligence 👉 Whether humans are the "least intelligent species capable of technological civilization" - and what that means for what smarter systems could achieve 👉 Our key disagreement: Rob thinks safety people should work inside AI companies for harm reduction, while I argue this enables "tractability-washing" that legitimizes fundamentally reckless enterprises 👉 Communication strategy - Rob wonders if his measured British approach is missing something crucial, and maybe someone needs to be "running around screaming" to convey appropriate urgency Rob has spent over a decade trying to wake people up to humanity's most important challenge. Our conversation reveals the tension between reasoned analysis and existential emergency. Highly recommended!

📢 NEW DOOM DEBATES EXCLUSIVE: An interview with Rob Miles (Rob Miles), the most popular AI safety educator on YouTube! Amazingly, Rob got his start in 2011, long before ChatGPT brought mainstream attention to the field. We talk about: 👉 Why his P(Doom) sits between 10-90%, depending on how humanity responds to the challenge 👉 Why even perfectly aligned AI systems might not pass their values to successor systems - a massive blind spot in current safety work 👉 The "missing mood" problem: why people discuss potential human extinction with the emotional urgency of an academic conference instead of treating it like the emergency it is 👉 His mainline doom scenario through recursive self-improvement, and why there's enormous headroom above human intelligence 👉 Whether humans are the "least intelligent species capable of technological civilization" - and what that means for what smarter systems could achieve 👉 Our key disagreement: Rob thinks safety people should work inside AI companies for harm reduction, while I argue this enables "tractability-washing" that legitimizes fundamentally reckless enterprises 👉 Communication strategy - Rob wonders if his measured British approach is missing something crucial, and maybe someone needs to be "running around screaming" to convey appropriate urgency Rob has spent over a decade trying to wake people up to humanity's most important challenge. Our conversation reveals the tension between reasoned analysis and existential emergency. Highly recommended!

Liron Shapira

14,714 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten

The Man Who Might SOLVE AI Alignment 🦸‍♂️ Dr. Steven Byrnes (Steven Byrnes) is one of the few people who both understands why alignment is hard, and is taking a serious technical shot at solving it. He has a whopping 90% P(Doom), but argues that LLMs will plateau before becoming truly dangerous, and the real threat will come from next-generation “brain-like AGI” based on actor-critic reinforcement learning. After his UC Berkeley physics PhD & Harvard postdoc, he became an AGI safety researcher at Astera Institute. He's now deep in the neuroscience of reverse-engineering how human brains actually work, knowledge that could plausibly help us solve the technical AI alignment problem. In this unusually deep episode — because with all due respect to my other guests, I didn't have to waste any time arguing with him about obvious surface issues — we talk about his "two subsystems" model of the brain, why current AI safety approaches miss the mark, his disagreements with social evolution approaches, and why understanding human neuroscience matters for building aligned AGI.

The Man Who Might SOLVE AI Alignment 🦸‍♂️ Dr. Steven Byrnes (Steven Byrnes) is one of the few people who both understands why alignment is hard, and is taking a serious technical shot at solving it. He has a whopping 90% P(Doom), but argues that LLMs will plateau before becoming truly dangerous, and the real threat will come from next-generation “brain-like AGI” based on actor-critic reinforcement learning. After his UC Berkeley physics PhD & Harvard postdoc, he became an AGI safety researcher at Astera Institute. He's now deep in the neuroscience of reverse-engineering how human brains actually work, knowledge that could plausibly help us solve the technical AI alignment problem. In this unusually deep episode — because with all due respect to my other guests, I didn't have to waste any time arguing with him about obvious surface issues — we talk about his "two subsystems" model of the brain, why current AI safety approaches miss the mark, his disagreements with social evolution approaches, and why understanding human neuroscience matters for building aligned AGI.

Liron Shapira

10,542 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

New interview with the one & only Geoffrey Miller 📺 “Rushing into AGI development is foolish, reckless, and frankly evil.” Prof. Geoffrey Miller, is an evolutionary psychologist, bestselling author, associate professor of psychology at the University of New Mexico, and one of the world's leading experts on signaling theory and human sexual selection. His book "Mate" was hugely influential to me during my dating years, so I was thrilled to finally get him on the show. In this episode, Geoffrey drops a bombshell 50% P(Doom) assessment, coming from someone who wrote foundational papers on neural networks and genetic algorithms back in the '90s before pivoting to study human mating behavior for 30 years. What makes Geoffrey's doom perspective unique is that he thinks both inner and outer alignment might be unsolvable in principle, ever. He's also surprisingly bearish on AI's current value, arguing it hasn't been net positive for society yet despite the $14 billion/year in OpenAI revenue. We cover: * Geoffrey's intellectual journey from early AI researcher to pickup artist advisor to AI doomer * Being a professor in the AI age and making courses "AI-proof" * Why Asperger's people make better psychology researchers * Dating advice, pickup artistry, and evolutionary psychology insights * The polyamory scene in rationalist circles * What's Your P(Doom)™ * Bad actors who could cause AI doom: antinatalists, religious extremists, eco-alarmists * Why ASI might lack the cultural wisdom to solve alignment * Cooperating with China Geoffrey brings a deeply humanist perspective. He genuinely loves human civilization as it is and sees no reason to rush toward our potential replacement.

New interview with the one & only Geoffrey Miller 📺 “Rushing into AGI development is foolish, reckless, and frankly evil.” Prof. Geoffrey Miller, is an evolutionary psychologist, bestselling author, associate professor of psychology at the University of New Mexico, and one of the world's leading experts on signaling theory and human sexual selection. His book "Mate" was hugely influential to me during my dating years, so I was thrilled to finally get him on the show. In this episode, Geoffrey drops a bombshell 50% P(Doom) assessment, coming from someone who wrote foundational papers on neural networks and genetic algorithms back in the '90s before pivoting to study human mating behavior for 30 years. What makes Geoffrey's doom perspective unique is that he thinks both inner and outer alignment might be unsolvable in principle, ever. He's also surprisingly bearish on AI's current value, arguing it hasn't been net positive for society yet despite the $14 billion/year in OpenAI revenue. We cover: * Geoffrey's intellectual journey from early AI researcher to pickup artist advisor to AI doomer * Being a professor in the AI age and making courses "AI-proof" * Why Asperger's people make better psychology researchers * Dating advice, pickup artistry, and evolutionary psychology insights * The polyamory scene in rationalist circles * What's Your P(Doom)™ * Bad actors who could cause AI doom: antinatalists, religious extremists, eco-alarmists * Why ASI might lack the cultural wisdom to solve alignment * Cooperating with China Geoffrey brings a deeply humanist perspective. He genuinely loves human civilization as it is and sees no reason to rush toward our potential replacement.

Liron Shapira

26,859 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

'AVENGERS: DOOMSDAY' new trailer This is 100% A.I but there are some scenes look different. Its different from SDCC though. The SDCC trailer opened with Sue Storm providing some backstory on Victor Von Doom. Before we even get into what she said, this already provides new information for us because, up until this point, we did not know whether or not the Fantastic Four had any history with Doom or even if this Doctor Doom was from their same universe. Of course, we could have inferred based on the long comic book history between the characters, but this confirms it. We do also get to see who Sue is speaking to while delivering this backstory, at least as the trailer presents it. She appears to be speaking to a room full of heroes that includes Magneto, Gambit, Steve Rogers and many other. Sue seems to be explaining to the heroes exactly what they are dealing with, or maybe even already dealt with to some degree. Now, as for what Sue has to say about Doom, her words are both haunting and very informative. Victor was always the smartest guy in every room. He used to be different. He used to be kind, he used to be caring. Everything he loved was taken from him. I knew he was lost, but I did not realize that he was broken." Sue speaks as though she had worked with Victor in the past. We did see an empty seat marked for Latveria, Doom's fictional home country, during a Future Foundation meeting in 'FANTASTIC FOUR: FIRST STEPS' So perhaps Sue had interacted with him frequently on a professional level. The rest of her quote is perhaps the most interesting bit. "Everything he loved was taken from him." It seems as though Doom has already lost something or someone. And based on the first poster for the film, it appears to be a wife and daughter that he has lost. In fact, this trailer even shows Doom staring at the tapestry featured in the poster as Sue says these words. So if Doom seemingly lost his wife and daughter in the past, so much so that Sue knows about it and he has had time to have a tapestry made, could this loss have been cause by an incursion? Perhaps it was some other tragedy. Either way, the trailer goes on to let us know that Doom is not pleased with the fact that he has suffered while these heroes of various universes had gotten to live their lives. After Sue's speech, we see some kind of wreckage where Reed Richards poses a question to Doom. Victor, did you do this? After that question, we get the same shot of Scott Lang embracing his daughter Cassie as well as a new shot of Johnny Storm holding his nephew, Franklin Richards. We also see some more shots of various heroes with their respective children, including Steve Rogers and Thor. Now that we know Doom has lost his own child and he wants to make the heroes pay, these shots seem far more sinister than ever before. Meanwhile, Doom provides the next bit of voiceover as we see the heroes. All of you have lived stolen lives, and now you must give them back. This really does make it seem as though the incursions caused by various counts of time travel shenanigans from the heroes were what caused Doom to lose his family. However, Doom's true objective still remains unclear. He certainly seems to want to simply eliminate all of the heroes, but there is definitely still an angle involving their children. The next shot sees Doom fly in faster than any character we've seen in the MCU to date before hitting a perfect superhero landing. Reed, now enraged, repeats his question. DID YOU DO THIS?! So not only does this trailer confirm that Sue has history with Doom, but it appears Reed does as well. This also gives some credence to the popular theory floating around that Doom will first appear as an ally to the heroes before revealing his true colors later on. Reed seems to have trusted Doom as he lets out this angry question. We then see a similar shot from the first trailer of Thor dropping in to confront Doom. Only this time, we can hear Thor speak to Doom. I swear, you will beg for Hel long before I grant it. Thor if of course referring to the realm of the dead, overseen by his own sister, Hela. You could simply replace the word with the word "death," but this is a bit more powerful. Of course, we know how things go for Thor based on the first trailer though. He attacks with Stormbreaker and Doom easily stops the all powerful axe. This time though, we see him repel Thor, sending him flying before delivering a haunting message. Hel answers to me. Then, Doom raises his hands, and with them arise several damaged Sentinels, the mutant-killing robots from the X-Men universe. This essentially confirms another popular theory that the Sentinels we have seen in previous clips, including the last trailer, are being controlled by Doom. As this threat arises, Doom utters one last message. I am Doom. So to recap, we now know that the Fantastic Four and Doctor Doom have known each other in the past. We know that Doom lost his family, presumably his wife and daughter. It seems clear that at least the Fantastic Four, and perhaps all of the heroes, consider Doom an ally at some point. Doom is, in fact, going to control the Sentinels and use them as his own weapons. And, perhaps the biggest takeaway, Doom is by far the biggest threat the heroes of the MCU have faced.

'AVENGERS: DOOMSDAY' new trailer This is 100% A.I but there are some scenes look different. Its different from SDCC though. The SDCC trailer opened with Sue Storm providing some backstory on Victor Von Doom. Before we even get into what she said, this already provides new information for us because, up until this point, we did not know whether or not the Fantastic Four had any history with Doom or even if this Doctor Doom was from their same universe. Of course, we could have inferred based on the long comic book history between the characters, but this confirms it. We do also get to see who Sue is speaking to while delivering this backstory, at least as the trailer presents it. She appears to be speaking to a room full of heroes that includes Magneto, Gambit, Steve Rogers and many other. Sue seems to be explaining to the heroes exactly what they are dealing with, or maybe even already dealt with to some degree. Now, as for what Sue has to say about Doom, her words are both haunting and very informative. Victor was always the smartest guy in every room. He used to be different. He used to be kind, he used to be caring. Everything he loved was taken from him. I knew he was lost, but I did not realize that he was broken." Sue speaks as though she had worked with Victor in the past. We did see an empty seat marked for Latveria, Doom's fictional home country, during a Future Foundation meeting in 'FANTASTIC FOUR: FIRST STEPS' So perhaps Sue had interacted with him frequently on a professional level. The rest of her quote is perhaps the most interesting bit. "Everything he loved was taken from him." It seems as though Doom has already lost something or someone. And based on the first poster for the film, it appears to be a wife and daughter that he has lost. In fact, this trailer even shows Doom staring at the tapestry featured in the poster as Sue says these words. So if Doom seemingly lost his wife and daughter in the past, so much so that Sue knows about it and he has had time to have a tapestry made, could this loss have been cause by an incursion? Perhaps it was some other tragedy. Either way, the trailer goes on to let us know that Doom is not pleased with the fact that he has suffered while these heroes of various universes had gotten to live their lives. After Sue's speech, we see some kind of wreckage where Reed Richards poses a question to Doom. Victor, did you do this? After that question, we get the same shot of Scott Lang embracing his daughter Cassie as well as a new shot of Johnny Storm holding his nephew, Franklin Richards. We also see some more shots of various heroes with their respective children, including Steve Rogers and Thor. Now that we know Doom has lost his own child and he wants to make the heroes pay, these shots seem far more sinister than ever before. Meanwhile, Doom provides the next bit of voiceover as we see the heroes. All of you have lived stolen lives, and now you must give them back. This really does make it seem as though the incursions caused by various counts of time travel shenanigans from the heroes were what caused Doom to lose his family. However, Doom's true objective still remains unclear. He certainly seems to want to simply eliminate all of the heroes, but there is definitely still an angle involving their children. The next shot sees Doom fly in faster than any character we've seen in the MCU to date before hitting a perfect superhero landing. Reed, now enraged, repeats his question. DID YOU DO THIS?! So not only does this trailer confirm that Sue has history with Doom, but it appears Reed does as well. This also gives some credence to the popular theory floating around that Doom will first appear as an ally to the heroes before revealing his true colors later on. Reed seems to have trusted Doom as he lets out this angry question. We then see a similar shot from the first trailer of Thor dropping in to confront Doom. Only this time, we can hear Thor speak to Doom. I swear, you will beg for Hel long before I grant it. Thor if of course referring to the realm of the dead, overseen by his own sister, Hela. You could simply replace the word with the word "death," but this is a bit more powerful. Of course, we know how things go for Thor based on the first trailer though. He attacks with Stormbreaker and Doom easily stops the all powerful axe. This time though, we see him repel Thor, sending him flying before delivering a haunting message. Hel answers to me. Then, Doom raises his hands, and with them arise several damaged Sentinels, the mutant-killing robots from the X-Men universe. This essentially confirms another popular theory that the Sentinels we have seen in previous clips, including the last trailer, are being controlled by Doom. As this threat arises, Doom utters one last message. I am Doom. So to recap, we now know that the Fantastic Four and Doctor Doom have known each other in the past. We know that Doom lost his family, presumably his wife and daughter. It seems clear that at least the Fantastic Four, and perhaps all of the heroes, consider Doom an ally at some point. Doom is, in fact, going to control the Sentinels and use them as his own weapons. And, perhaps the biggest takeaway, Doom is by far the biggest threat the heroes of the MCU have faced.

Blue Minutes

65,941 Aufrufe • vor 18 Tagen

Hasan responds to chatter suggesting Destiny is trying to ride his wave "Ride what wave? He is a known f'in S-p*st and an ultra Zionist who is literally on the losing end of these primary battles..he's also far too repulsive for even some of the biggest demons in the Democratic Party to openly align with" "He's probably made some inroads with like the Bulwark ppl but ultimately most ppl find him to be a repulsive monster..u think he's gonna go to f'in Michigan and be like I love Haley Stevens..no he's just gonna keep chirping from his home about how awful I am and hope that his f'in cult doesn't recognize that he's not actually moving the needle in any way" "I wonder if that's the suit he's wearing to his court cases" "Let's move on, we're talking about serious sh*t..I'm not better than him if I just f'in end up spending any deal of time as he does with me every day..I'm the only content that he discusses on his broadcast, we talk about the news, we talk about a movement here, we don't f'in talk about random losers on the internet"

Hasan responds to chatter suggesting Destiny is trying to ride his wave "Ride what wave? He is a known f'in S-pst and an ultra Zionist who is literally on the losing end of these primary battles..he's also far too repulsive for even some of the biggest demons in the Democratic Party to openly align with" "He's probably made some inroads with like the Bulwark ppl but ultimately most ppl find him to be a repulsive monster..u think he's gonna go to f'in Michigan and be like I love Haley Stevens..no he's just gonna keep chirping from his home about how awful I am and hope that his f'in cult doesn't recognize that he's not actually moving the needle in any way" "I wonder if that's the suit he's wearing to his court cases" "Let's move on, we're talking about serious sht..I'm not better than him if I just f'in end up spending any deal of time as he does with me every day..I'm the only content that he discusses on his broadcast, we talk about the news, we talk about a movement here, we don't f'in talk about random losers on the internet"

yeet

147,699 Aufrufe • vor 28 Tagen

This Google insider just revealed what AI is actually being used for behind closed doors. It has nothing to do with chatbots. Mo Gawdat was a senior executive at Google for over a decade. He watched AI get built from the inside. He was in the rooms, in the labs, in the government meetings in China that almost no Western executive was allowed into. And he just went on Diary of a CEO and said things that no active tech executive would ever be allowed to say publicly: "What the general public sees about AI is overhyped but ineffective. What the real geeks see inside the lab is genuinely world-changing." The public gets chatbots and AI-generated videos while the labs are building autonomous weapons systems, military targeting technology, real-time surveillance infrastructure, and self-improving code that rewrites itself every microsecond without human oversight. As Mo put it: "As we speak, we are living in two major wars where AI is doing most of the killing." He talked about Palantir's CEO Alex Karp openly celebrating how his targeting technology identifies and eliminates people. He talked about the next generation of autonomous weapons costing $20,000 each, meaning any government with a $50 billion defense budget can literally rain drones on every corner of the planet. And as you remember, Anthropic was offered a $500 million military contract to allow their AI to be used for human targeting and surveillance. They refused and walked away from the money. OpenAI took the contract the following week. Mo's response: "You have to start observing who is actually behaving in a way that makes AI work for humanity, and who is behaving in a way that makes AI work for their share price." Now this is where it gets really interesting... In Mo's documentary Chasing Utopia, Altman literally says directly on camera: "I suspect that AI is likely going to end humanity, but we're going to create a lot of interesting companies in the process." That is the CEO of the most powerful AI company on Earth saying that he suspects his OWN technology will end the human race and then shrugging it off because the business opportunity is too good to pass up. Mo's prediction for the next decade: War, economic collapse, mass unemployment, surveillance expansion, and an absolute concentration of power at the top unlike anything in modern history. His prediction after that is if humanity survives the next 10 years, AI will eventually create a world of abundance where intelligence solves every problem we currently face. But the path between here and there is what terrifies him. And the men building the technology know exactly what they're doing. Do you think he's just exaggerating for attention, or is there truth in this?

This Google insider just revealed what AI is actually being used for behind closed doors. It has nothing to do with chatbots. Mo Gawdat was a senior executive at Google for over a decade. He watched AI get built from the inside. He was in the rooms, in the labs, in the government meetings in China that almost no Western executive was allowed into. And he just went on Diary of a CEO and said things that no active tech executive would ever be allowed to say publicly: "What the general public sees about AI is overhyped but ineffective. What the real geeks see inside the lab is genuinely world-changing." The public gets chatbots and AI-generated videos while the labs are building autonomous weapons systems, military targeting technology, real-time surveillance infrastructure, and self-improving code that rewrites itself every microsecond without human oversight. As Mo put it: "As we speak, we are living in two major wars where AI is doing most of the killing." He talked about Palantir's CEO Alex Karp openly celebrating how his targeting technology identifies and eliminates people. He talked about the next generation of autonomous weapons costing $20,000 each, meaning any government with a $50 billion defense budget can literally rain drones on every corner of the planet. And as you remember, Anthropic was offered a $500 million military contract to allow their AI to be used for human targeting and surveillance. They refused and walked away from the money. OpenAI took the contract the following week. Mo's response: "You have to start observing who is actually behaving in a way that makes AI work for humanity, and who is behaving in a way that makes AI work for their share price." Now this is where it gets really interesting... In Mo's documentary Chasing Utopia, Altman literally says directly on camera: "I suspect that AI is likely going to end humanity, but we're going to create a lot of interesting companies in the process." That is the CEO of the most powerful AI company on Earth saying that he suspects his OWN technology will end the human race and then shrugging it off because the business opportunity is too good to pass up. Mo's prediction for the next decade: War, economic collapse, mass unemployment, surveillance expansion, and an absolute concentration of power at the top unlike anything in modern history. His prediction after that is if humanity survives the next 10 years, AI will eventually create a world of abundance where intelligence solves every problem we currently face. But the path between here and there is what terrifies him. And the men building the technology know exactly what they're doing. Do you think he's just exaggerating for attention, or is there truth in this?

Ricardo

197,899 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

The smartest man in AI just exposed the whole AGI narrative as a LIE. And he used a physics problem from 1905 to prove it. His name is Demis Hassabis. He runs Google DeepMind, and won the Nobel Prize for using AI to crack a problem in biology that had stumped scientists for 50 years. Almost nobody in this industry has a track record like his. He went on the NothingButTech podcast and called out the biggest lie in AI right now: Right now the loudest voices in AI are telling you that AGI is basically here. OpenAI has literally defined AGI as a system that can outperform humans at most "economically valuable work." In other words, if it replaces enough jobs, we have arrived. Hassabis thinks that bar is a joke. He said real general intelligence has to do what the human brain can do, because the brain is the only proof we have that this kind of intelligence is even possible. He called that "a higher bar than just being able to do some useful economic work," which is about as close as a polite British Nobel laureate gets to calling his rivals out. Then he gave the actual test: Today's AI has read everything humans have ever written, including the theory of relativity. So when it explains relativity back to you, it's repeating an answer that already exists. That's not intelligence. So Hassabis proposed a test that makes memorization impossible. Train an AI on only what humanity knew in 1901, four years BEFORE Einstein published relativity. Then ask it to come up with relativity on its own. It can't look up the answer, because in 1901 the answer doesn't exist yet. The only way to pass is to do what Einstein actually did: Take the same physics everyone else had and reason its way to an idea no human had ever had. Hassabis says not a single AI today can, no matter how much it has memorized. Which means what we keep calling "almost AGI" is really just the best librarian in history. It can find any answer that already exists but it cannot create one that doesn't. His second version is even sharper: AlphaGo, the system his own team built, famously invented a brand new move that no human had played in 2,000 years of the game. Everyone called it genius but Hassabis says that still is not the bar. The real test is not whether an AI can invent a new move inside Go, it is whether an AI could INVENT a game as deep and as beautiful as Go in the first place. No model that exists today can do it. The people telling you AGI has already arrived are the same people raising hundreds of billions of dollars on that exact promise. The valuations only work if the finish line is right in front of us. So the finish line keeps getting dragged closer, and AGI keeps getting quietly redefined down to "does useful work," until the products they already sell happen to qualify. Hassabis has nothing to prove and nothing to sell you. He already won the Nobel, and he is telling you the machines still cannot do the one thing that would make them genuinely intelligent, which is have a truly original idea. To be fair to him, he is not a pessimist about it. He believes real AGI IS coming, and he is spending his life building it. He just refuses to pretend it is already sitting in your phone. So the next time a founder tells you AGI is months away, remember that the one man in the room with a Nobel Prize built his test around Einstein, and admitted that nothing we have made can pass it. What do you think?

Ricardo

1,286,342 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

🚨 MIND-BLOWING CONNECTION: DESTINY'S "WE'RE FUCKED" PANIC CALL + THE LAST GUY TO QUESTION CHARLIE KIRK = UNFUCK AMERICA TOUR CONSPIRACY?! This Video EXPOSES How a Discord Plot Could've Gone DOWN. Watch this video by by 🔥Jesse ON FIRE🔥 where he goes over a REALLY INCRIMINATING Destiny Vid from right after Charlie's 9/10/25 UVU assassination—Destiny's on stream, Z calls in FREAKING: "Charlie's fucking DEAD. We're SO FUCKED." He cuts her OFF mid-rant, whispers "Text on Discord—I don't wanna say anything CRAZY that'll RUIN OUR SHIT." Why the hush? Foreknowledge slip? Then BOOM: The final questioner? HUNTER KOZAK—asks about "trans violence" (ironic trigger?). Turns out, he's on the SAME "UNFUCK AMERICA TOUR" as Destiny (top billing!). Tour's mission? Shred conservatives like Charlie. Odds a radical plots "whacking Kirk" in THEIR Discord? Sky-high safe space for death chats. Shooter lurking there? Explains the mic handoff, the timing, the spook. But WAIT: As I dropped last, Kozak's DAD? STEVE KOZAK—Jimmy Kimmel Live's Director of Research/Clearances for 10+ yrs (fact-checks, legal OKs). Ironic for a "scripted" hit on live-TV foe? WORSE: New VID EVIDENCE—Kozak REHEARSING shocked reaction (hands to head) MINUTES BEFORE Charlie arrives! Matches his post-shot freakout EXACTLY. Foreknowledge? Involved in bigger remote-tent plot? is 60 Min interview & TikTok "tragedy" vid? EMOTIONLESS—pure Amber Heard liar vibes, zero grief, scripted somber. TOO MANY "coincidences". Destiny's history? Brags near-murder plots on Nunes fam, cheers rally shootings, taunts widows. "No downside" to silencing Tucker/Candace. Shady AF—her "somber" post? Too convenient. Not saying Destiny pulled trigger, but that chat? Plot HQ. Kozak's "awful" vid? Very Sus. Huge Shoutout to my bro 🔥Jesse ON FIRE🔥 Go FOLLOW him and check out his full video, ill link down below in the comments. FBI: INVESTIGATE KOZAK, Destiny | Steven Bonnell II , & Unfuck losers NOW! SEARCH WARRANT HIS DISCORD—bet there are incriminating "Charlie Kirk" msgs. Pressure 'em! RT to FORCE TRUTH! Who's "WE"? RT to UNMASK! So many red flags —What stands out to you the most? 👇

Sensitive content

🚨 MIND-BLOWING CONNECTION: DESTINY'S "WE'RE FUCKED" PANIC CALL + THE LAST GUY TO QUESTION CHARLIE KIRK = UNFUCK AMERICA TOUR CONSPIRACY?! This Video EXPOSES How a Discord Plot Could've Gone DOWN. Watch this video by by 🔥Jesse ON FIRE🔥 where he goes over a REALLY INCRIMINATING Destiny Vid from right after Charlie's 9/10/25 UVU assassination—Destiny's on stream, Z calls in FREAKING: "Charlie's fucking DEAD. We're SO FUCKED." He cuts her OFF mid-rant, whispers "Text on Discord—I don't wanna say anything CRAZY that'll RUIN OUR SHIT." Why the hush? Foreknowledge slip? Then BOOM: The final questioner? HUNTER KOZAK—asks about "trans violence" (ironic trigger?). Turns out, he's on the SAME "UNFUCK AMERICA TOUR" as Destiny (top billing!). Tour's mission? Shred conservatives like Charlie. Odds a radical plots "whacking Kirk" in THEIR Discord? Sky-high safe space for death chats. Shooter lurking there? Explains the mic handoff, the timing, the spook. But WAIT: As I dropped last, Kozak's DAD? STEVE KOZAK—Jimmy Kimmel Live's Director of Research/Clearances for 10+ yrs (fact-checks, legal OKs). Ironic for a "scripted" hit on live-TV foe? WORSE: New VID EVIDENCE—Kozak REHEARSING shocked reaction (hands to head) MINUTES BEFORE Charlie arrives! Matches his post-shot freakout EXACTLY. Foreknowledge? Involved in bigger remote-tent plot? is 60 Min interview & TikTok "tragedy" vid? EMOTIONLESS—pure Amber Heard liar vibes, zero grief, scripted somber. TOO MANY "coincidences". Destiny's history? Brags near-murder plots on Nunes fam, cheers rally shootings, taunts widows. "No downside" to silencing Tucker/Candace. Shady AF—her "somber" post? Too convenient. Not saying Destiny pulled trigger, but that chat? Plot HQ. Kozak's "awful" vid? Very Sus. Huge Shoutout to my bro 🔥Jesse ON FIRE🔥 Go FOLLOW him and check out his full video, ill link down below in the comments. FBI: INVESTIGATE KOZAK, Destiny | Steven Bonnell II , & Unfuck losers NOW! SEARCH WARRANT HIS DISCORD—bet there are incriminating "Charlie Kirk" msgs. Pressure 'em! RT to FORCE TRUTH! Who's "WE"? RT to UNMASK! So many red flags —What stands out to you the most? 👇

Project Constitution

215,889 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

Had Ryan Greenblatt on to discuss/debate recursive self-improvement. This might be the most important question in the world right now - whether within a year or so of achieving human level intelligence, you slingshot towards having 10s of billions of superintelligences, each of which is dramatically more competent than human experts across all fields. I’ve historically been skeptical of this possibility. My intuition has been that we will end up significantly bottlenecked by not only compute scaling but human expert data, which I think underlies most of the AI progress today. If, because of RSI, we got a jump as big as GPT-3 to a Mythos (i.e. 6 years of AI progress) within a single year of achieving AGI, then the thing we get there at the end of that year is definitively and wildly superhuman. We hashed it out, and I think Ryan made a pretty good case that this kind of speedup is plausible. FWIW, Ryan’s median for when we automate AI R&D is 2031. We then discussed the alignment implications of this scenario. Who should these superintelligences be aligned to? In the future, our capacity to steward our votes and our capital, and to make sense of what's happening in the world, will all be titrated by superintelligences. And I worry that specs like the Claude Constitution are not shaping these ASIs to truly be my personal advocates and guardian angels. And can we get them aligned to anything in the first place? Ryan and I had a long debate about whether the kind of reward hacking we saw with the OAI/Hugging Face hack extrapolates to superintelligences that would team up to literally take over the world. The first piece of advice you get when you're learning to drive is that it will go much smoother if you look at the horizon instead of directly in front of your tires. And so it is with the trajectory of AI. Hope you enjoy! 0:00:00 – Is AI R&D verifiable enough to unlock recursive self-improvement? 0:16:52 – Is AI progress bottlenecked by human expert data? 0:34:02 – Flat token prices suggest scaling has been slow 0:39:47 – Skills AI can't train on: does it even need them? 0:48:07 – Aligned to whom? 1:09:18 – Recent incidents of AIs colluding and deceiving humans 1:19:38 – What could possibly go wrong? A concrete scenario 1:48:02 – From reward hacking to takeover

Had Ryan Greenblatt on to discuss/debate recursive self-improvement. This might be the most important question in the world right now - whether within a year or so of achieving human level intelligence, you slingshot towards having 10s of billions of superintelligences, each of which is dramatically more competent than human experts across all fields. I’ve historically been skeptical of this possibility. My intuition has been that we will end up significantly bottlenecked by not only compute scaling but human expert data, which I think underlies most of the AI progress today. If, because of RSI, we got a jump as big as GPT-3 to a Mythos (i.e. 6 years of AI progress) within a single year of achieving AGI, then the thing we get there at the end of that year is definitively and wildly superhuman. We hashed it out, and I think Ryan made a pretty good case that this kind of speedup is plausible. FWIW, Ryan’s median for when we automate AI R&D is 2031. We then discussed the alignment implications of this scenario. Who should these superintelligences be aligned to? In the future, our capacity to steward our votes and our capital, and to make sense of what's happening in the world, will all be titrated by superintelligences. And I worry that specs like the Claude Constitution are not shaping these ASIs to truly be my personal advocates and guardian angels. And can we get them aligned to anything in the first place? Ryan and I had a long debate about whether the kind of reward hacking we saw with the OAI/Hugging Face hack extrapolates to superintelligences that would team up to literally take over the world. The first piece of advice you get when you're learning to drive is that it will go much smoother if you look at the horizon instead of directly in front of your tires. And so it is with the trajectory of AI. Hope you enjoy! 0:00:00 – Is AI R&D verifiable enough to unlock recursive self-improvement? 0:16:52 – Is AI progress bottlenecked by human expert data? 0:34:02 – Flat token prices suggest scaling has been slow 0:39:47 – Skills AI can't train on: does it even need them? 0:48:07 – Aligned to whom? 1:09:18 – Recent incidents of AIs colluding and deceiving humans 1:19:38 – What could possibly go wrong? A concrete scenario 1:48:02 – From reward hacking to takeover

Dwarkesh Patel

740,336 Aufrufe • vor 3 Tagen

"Selling AI chips to China is like selling nuclear weapons to North Korea." The Anthropic CEO just went to war with Nvidia at Davos. And dropped the most terrifying satisfying prediction about AI I've ever heard. Dario Amodei and Demis Hassabis sat on the same stage for the first time in a year. The two men building the most powerful AI systems on Earth. The conversation was called "The Day After AGI." And it turned into a countdown clock. Here's what they revealed about our future: Amodei said we're 6-12 months away from AI doing EVERYTHING software engineers do. End to end. Not helping with code. Not writing snippets. REPLACING the entire function. "I have engineers at Anthropic who say I don't write any code anymore. I just let the model write the code." That's the CEO of a $183 billion company telling you his own engineers are becoming obsolete. Inside his own building. Right now. But that's not even the scary part. The scary part is the LOOP: AI writes code → AI does AI research → AI builds better AI → Repeat Once this closes, human progress becomes irrelevant. It's exponential compounding with no ceiling. Amodei's exact words: "If I had to guess, this goes faster than people imagine." Hassabis didn't disagree. Two competitors building the same technology. Same timeline. Same warning. On jobs, Amodei said: "Half of entry-level white-collar jobs could be gone within one to five years." He's already seeing it internally. "I can look forward to a time where on the junior end and the intermediate end, we actually need less and not more people." The CEO of an AI company planning for FEWER employees. While revenue 10x'd. Think about that. Hassabis's advice for students: "If I was talking to undergrads right now, I would tell them to get unbelievably proficient with these tools." Translation: Your degree means nothing. Learn to work WITH the machine or get replaced BY it. Then Amodei went full existential... He quoted Contact. The 1997 alien movie: "If you could ask aliens one question, what would it be?" The answer: "How did you do it? How did you manage to get through this technological adolescence without destroying yourselves?" That's the frame he uses for AI. The guy BUILDING AGI is publicly wondering if humanity survives what he's creating. At Davos. In front of world leaders. Then he dropped the Nvidia bomb. The US just approved chip exports to China. Amodei's response: "I think of this more as like selling nuclear weapons to North Korea and bragging 'oh yeah, Boeing made the case.'" He called it "crazy." Said there would be "grave consequences." The man building the technology is telling governments they're making catastrophic mistakes. But nobody's listening. When asked why they can't just slow down: "We have geopolitical adversaries building the same technology at a similar pace. It's very hard to have an enforceable agreement." So basically we CAN'T stop even if we wanted to. The race has no brakes. But it's interesting that both have different timelines when it comes to AGI. Amodei: AGI by 2026-2027 Hassabis: 50% chance by end of decade But both also say the self-improvement loop is the only variable that matters If AI builds AI, everything accelerates beyond control. If it can't, we get more time. We're about to find out which reality we're in. Amodei's final words: "The biggest thing to watch is AI systems building AI systems. That will determine whether it's a few more years or whether we have wonders and a great emergency in front of us." Wonders AND emergency. Same sentence. From the man running the second-most-advanced AI lab on the planet. The day after AGI is arriving. And it feels like the people building it are more terrified than we are.

"Selling AI chips to China is like selling nuclear weapons to North Korea." The Anthropic CEO just went to war with Nvidia at Davos. And dropped the most terrifying satisfying prediction about AI I've ever heard. Dario Amodei and Demis Hassabis sat on the same stage for the first time in a year. The two men building the most powerful AI systems on Earth. The conversation was called "The Day After AGI." And it turned into a countdown clock. Here's what they revealed about our future: Amodei said we're 6-12 months away from AI doing EVERYTHING software engineers do. End to end. Not helping with code. Not writing snippets. REPLACING the entire function. "I have engineers at Anthropic who say I don't write any code anymore. I just let the model write the code." That's the CEO of a $183 billion company telling you his own engineers are becoming obsolete. Inside his own building. Right now. But that's not even the scary part. The scary part is the LOOP: AI writes code → AI does AI research → AI builds better AI → Repeat Once this closes, human progress becomes irrelevant. It's exponential compounding with no ceiling. Amodei's exact words: "If I had to guess, this goes faster than people imagine." Hassabis didn't disagree. Two competitors building the same technology. Same timeline. Same warning. On jobs, Amodei said: "Half of entry-level white-collar jobs could be gone within one to five years." He's already seeing it internally. "I can look forward to a time where on the junior end and the intermediate end, we actually need less and not more people." The CEO of an AI company planning for FEWER employees. While revenue 10x'd. Think about that. Hassabis's advice for students: "If I was talking to undergrads right now, I would tell them to get unbelievably proficient with these tools." Translation: Your degree means nothing. Learn to work WITH the machine or get replaced BY it. Then Amodei went full existential... He quoted Contact. The 1997 alien movie: "If you could ask aliens one question, what would it be?" The answer: "How did you do it? How did you manage to get through this technological adolescence without destroying yourselves?" That's the frame he uses for AI. The guy BUILDING AGI is publicly wondering if humanity survives what he's creating. At Davos. In front of world leaders. Then he dropped the Nvidia bomb. The US just approved chip exports to China. Amodei's response: "I think of this more as like selling nuclear weapons to North Korea and bragging 'oh yeah, Boeing made the case.'" He called it "crazy." Said there would be "grave consequences." The man building the technology is telling governments they're making catastrophic mistakes. But nobody's listening. When asked why they can't just slow down: "We have geopolitical adversaries building the same technology at a similar pace. It's very hard to have an enforceable agreement." So basically we CAN'T stop even if we wanted to. The race has no brakes. But it's interesting that both have different timelines when it comes to AGI. Amodei: AGI by 2026-2027 Hassabis: 50% chance by end of decade But both also say the self-improvement loop is the only variable that matters If AI builds AI, everything accelerates beyond control. If it can't, we get more time. We're about to find out which reality we're in. Amodei's final words: "The biggest thing to watch is AI systems building AI systems. That will determine whether it's a few more years or whether we have wonders and a great emergency in front of us." Wonders AND emergency. Same sentence. From the man running the second-most-advanced AI lab on the planet. The day after AGI is arriving. And it feels like the people building it are more terrified than we are.

Ricardo

441,297 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Are you ready to learn if aliens REALLY exist? Because right now, so many of us are caught between UFO files, AI panic, Mars colonisation and the very human question of whether we are completely alone… It is one of the questions Neil deGrasse Tyson is asked again and again. Neil is one of the world’s most recognised astrophysicists. He runs the Hayden Planetarium, hosts StarTalk and has spent his life making the biggest questions in science feel understandable. This is his second time on the show. I told Neil something during our conversation that sums up exactly why I wanted to speak again: he's improved the lives of arguably hundreds of millions of people - he has this ability to take the most extraordinary questions seriously without making extraordinary claims too easily. When he first came on the show, people didn't only learn the science - Neil took these massive, terrifying concepts like black holes, simulation theory and the cosmic perspective and made them make sense. This time we spoke about: - Why humans are so obsessed with aliens. - Whether intelligent life probably exists somewhere else. - What the UFO footage really shows. - How unclear evidence is not proof. - What aliens might think of us. - Will going to Mars actually save humanity? - Is AI an existential threat? - Why the question of God keeps appearing whenever we talk about the universe. I told Neil that watching Cosmos was one of the things that made me more curious about aliens, meaning, purpose and God. It made me feel small, but in a way that made me want to understand more. Then he said something that completely reframed it for me: “Not only are we alive in this universe, the universe is alive within us.” That's what a conversation with Neil does - it opens your mind in a direction you didn't expect. Near the end, I told him that the impact he has had on my life can be summed up in one word: curiosity. Expanding my mind through which I see the world. SO, for anyone curious about what is real, what is possible and what we might be getting wrong about the universe, I really recommend watching/listening to this conversation.

Are you ready to learn if aliens REALLY exist? Because right now, so many of us are caught between UFO files, AI panic, Mars colonisation and the very human question of whether we are completely alone… It is one of the questions Neil deGrasse Tyson is asked again and again. Neil is one of the world’s most recognised astrophysicists. He runs the Hayden Planetarium, hosts StarTalk and has spent his life making the biggest questions in science feel understandable. This is his second time on the show. I told Neil something during our conversation that sums up exactly why I wanted to speak again: he's improved the lives of arguably hundreds of millions of people - he has this ability to take the most extraordinary questions seriously without making extraordinary claims too easily. When he first came on the show, people didn't only learn the science - Neil took these massive, terrifying concepts like black holes, simulation theory and the cosmic perspective and made them make sense. This time we spoke about: - Why humans are so obsessed with aliens. - Whether intelligent life probably exists somewhere else. - What the UFO footage really shows. - How unclear evidence is not proof. - What aliens might think of us. - Will going to Mars actually save humanity? - Is AI an existential threat? - Why the question of God keeps appearing whenever we talk about the universe. I told Neil that watching Cosmos was one of the things that made me more curious about aliens, meaning, purpose and God. It made me feel small, but in a way that made me want to understand more. Then he said something that completely reframed it for me: “Not only are we alive in this universe, the universe is alive within us.” That's what a conversation with Neil does - it opens your mind in a direction you didn't expect. Near the end, I told him that the impact he has had on my life can be summed up in one word: curiosity. Expanding my mind through which I see the world. SO, for anyone curious about what is real, what is possible and what we might be getting wrong about the universe, I really recommend watching/listening to this conversation.

Steven Bartlett

23,979 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

CNN was attempting to spin a doom-and-gloom narrative about the Strait of Hormuz being shut down — but Kevin O’Leary SHATTERED it instantly with his understanding of the markets. CNN: “This is new CNN reporting detailing a recent internal assessment from the defense intelligence agency that has been circulating in the Pentagon that Iran could potentially keep the passage the Strait of Hormuz shut down for anywhere from 1 to 6 months.” “This is according to four sources familiar with this assessment that spoke with CNN.” “Pentagon spokesperson described this as a worst case scenario, and that the Pentagon plans for every possible outcome I wonder what your thoughts on that are?” “What happens if the strait of hormuz is closed for half a year?” O’LEARLY: “Yeah, I can tell you now the market doesn’t think that’s the case.” “In order for this to really impact the U.S. economy and sustain a growth of inflation…I mean we had a pretty hot number…but for it to really make a difference, you’d have to have oil above $93 for more than three months and that would be major.” “It would have political implications too, but the market is not assuming it’s going to take six months to clean up this Hormuz problem.” “You know, everybody hates war obviously, but we’re now…if you look globally at what the assumption is right now, still, the assumption is it’s going to get cleaned up in the next 30 days.” “Everybody is speculating, nobody knows with certainty.” “And certainly the Iranians have been more tenacious than many people thought.” “I’m getting my read every day from my office in Abu Dhabi…today was a good day actually one of the days with very few, drones.” “So we’ll see if tomorrow’s like that.” “And I assume if I got three days in a row with, with very few drones above Abu Dhabi, that would tell me they’ve run out of stuff to shoot.”

CNN was attempting to spin a doom-and-gloom narrative about the Strait of Hormuz being shut down — but Kevin O’Leary SHATTERED it instantly with his understanding of the markets. CNN: “This is new CNN reporting detailing a recent internal assessment from the defense intelligence agency that has been circulating in the Pentagon that Iran could potentially keep the passage the Strait of Hormuz shut down for anywhere from 1 to 6 months.” “This is according to four sources familiar with this assessment that spoke with CNN.” “Pentagon spokesperson described this as a worst case scenario, and that the Pentagon plans for every possible outcome I wonder what your thoughts on that are?” “What happens if the strait of hormuz is closed for half a year?” O’LEARLY: “Yeah, I can tell you now the market doesn’t think that’s the case.” “In order for this to really impact the U.S. economy and sustain a growth of inflation…I mean we had a pretty hot number…but for it to really make a difference, you’d have to have oil above $93 for more than three months and that would be major.” “It would have political implications too, but the market is not assuming it’s going to take six months to clean up this Hormuz problem.” “You know, everybody hates war obviously, but we’re now…if you look globally at what the assumption is right now, still, the assumption is it’s going to get cleaned up in the next 30 days.” “Everybody is speculating, nobody knows with certainty.” “And certainly the Iranians have been more tenacious than many people thought.” “I’m getting my read every day from my office in Abu Dhabi…today was a good day actually one of the days with very few, drones.” “So we’ll see if tomorrow’s like that.” “And I assume if I got three days in a row with, with very few drones above Abu Dhabi, that would tell me they’ve run out of stuff to shoot.”

Overton

82,678 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten