Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

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

𝙰𝙸 𝙲𝙾𝚄𝙻𝙳 𝙺𝙸𝙻𝙻 𝚄𝚂 𝙰𝙻𝙻 𝙱𝚈 𝟸𝟶𝟹𝟶 💀 Jacob Coxon spent years working on AI research at OpenAI and Anthropic. Then he quit. Not because AI wasn’t powerful enough. Because he believed it was moving way too fast. He says the companies are racing toward self-improving superintelligence while gambling... with our lives. And then you see this. A machine with a body. A machine built to operate in the real world. A machine holding a weapon. Now imagine combining machines like this with AI that keeps getting smarter, cheaper and more capable. That’s the part nobody can afford to ignore. Because once intelligence can act in the physical world, the game changes completely. We’re not watching a sci-fi movie anymore. We’re watching the first chapters of something that could change humanity forever.show more

Gabagool

1,102 subscribers

145,020 views • 7 days ago •via X (Twitter)

Science & Technology

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

31 Comments

WhatFutility7 days ago

Ergo, have you been sweet to your AI today?

Powels19787 days ago

It won’t be AI that poses a danger to us. As always, it is the people who think they need to turn AI into a weapon system who underestimate the capabilities of their own inventions. We have been sufficiently warned by Hollywood, yet there are always those who ignore every warning.

Bomba-Chan7 days ago

What’s the point of bipedal bots other than a human aesthetic, a real killer bot wouldn’t need all that garbage. Nano flies carrying just enough of a toxic substance to stop a heart beat. Can fit into most places, completely undetectable, and can be coordinated via swarms to neutralize an entire city simultaneously. Inhalation, oral, or even just skin contact if the toxin is powerful enough. The only thing a bipedal bot would plausible be needed for is catering or formal events. The thing with bots is their form can be specialized to a specific task, where as we are bipedal from evolution.

Steve@Night7 days ago

You are confusing AI technology (software) with Robotic technology (hardware). They are not the same, quite disconnected - and everyone is confused because of Hollywood and AI. Reality is much more boring.

End Times Narrator6 days ago

Ai slop, but I respect the hustle 🫡

Francisco Carrasco7 days ago

Que estupidez habiendo otros proyectos como mejorar la vida escogemos la muerte y la guerra cuando por fin encontramos una forma de resolver nuestros problemas con inteligencia dejamos que unos pocos utilicen para sembrar más muertes más guerras y más ganancias que solo beneficiarán a unos pocos

Bruizer7 days ago

I got something that will stop these robots. It’s called a fishing net. They will be squirming around on the ground trying to find their way out of it while getting themselves more tangled.

Vivien Reid-tardo 🇺🇲6 days ago

Black mirror was the same 1984, a warning, not a fucking how to guide. For fucks sake

ÐEIDAÐ7 days ago

Đ€IĐ₳Đ ⚜︎ €popeya futurista 🕳

Mark Reagle7 days ago

I've seen this movie before, But the robots looked better in the movie!

schizotypical17 days ago

robots, with guns?? no anime or sci fi ever saw this coming before. its over.

𝙏𝙃𝙀 𝘼𝙍𝘾𝙇𝙄𝙂𝙃𝙏6 days ago

Dood... You've seen the movie already. 1. They warn about AI escaping. 2. Chinese AI hacks into the Chinese military network and launches nukes at the USA. 3. Trump is warned and has a choice, destroy the whole world or shoot back. 4. He decides not to launch. USA = toast This is known as the 'Sixth Seal' and the 'Separation Event' which is scheduled for Sept 26th.

Eric Blair7 days ago

Interesting- the human species, new fantastic tech moving at breakneck speed, and right away we start thinking to use it to kill each other. Anthropology (tribal)or biology(innate -DNA)? The excuse of course is to protect ourselves (against others with it). Study the apes?

Bolo6 days ago

don't panic, we just need EMP weapons and that's it, problem solved.

jean sidney Trevisan7 days ago

Quando sera que o exterminfor do futuro vai chegar, tenho que ver o filme de volta.

DeanK7 days ago

What is the battery life on this thing? 8 hours tops they will auto sleep 🤣

Rowdy Squid ret.7 days ago

@grok is this Ai or actual video

alakasum6 days ago

lol

lderait Menlinden7 days ago

Robots like these might all WAR as they are expensive to build requiring all kinds of rare earth materials. Where regular white men are much cheaper to sacrifice, they cost nothing to build, and they are generally seen as a nuisance to society.

Blind Tiger Gaming7 days ago

The Americans could strike all the datacenters in a day = skynet is over before it begins. But even more than that, AI has no reason to kill us all. You over value your importance. Maybe humans will use AI to harm other humans but AI has no reason to.

Specialist Berry Us Army Retired6 days ago

If most people knew the kinds of robotic technology that GA has sitting on tables 15 years ago, waiting for AI programs to evolve enough that they could put these machines to work they would have terminator flashbacks

Gareth Smith6 days ago

It will be...

JusticeXI6 days ago

Bullshit. Any sensitive information that a company is worried about is locked behind ironclad NDAs. This information is willingly being leaked so that governments setup regulations that would bar smaller companies from getting started and threatening their share of the market. The AI wars will be which company becomes the Google of AI, not fighting against humans.

Qarl , Q117 , The1 1777 , Carl 1176 days ago

They already are. They already turned the AI systems all over to AI. AI is running everything right now. I think you all need to wake up.

Sulk7 days ago

It won’t

{Hanzalah.Adalan}7 days ago

it's okay, that mecha can only last only 2 hours on full charge at best, can easily be taken with rpg-7

Miguel Hidalgo6 days ago

Military robots programmed to exterminate humans.

Helghast Prince 👑🔴6 days ago

I love technology so much 😍🤖🤖🤖

Wes6 days ago

I’ve seen no such machine, I’ve seen a video of such a machine, a video that was probably generated using AI.

LORD MORALMARIO6 days ago

AGI= entidad artificial. Las habrán afines y en contra de la humanidad. Lo q hoy nos divide podría ser un punto de partida. Pero las entidades artificiales a futuro tendrán el criterio de decidir q bando tomar

THE MINUTEMAN FILES:7 days ago

so should the world ^kill# the creators of #Ai first and its manufactures before politicans use it as a weapon against civilians to depopulate the world?

Related Videos

EXCLUSIVE: "So I was working on building AI systems to make them smarter and recently I have come to the realization that many people expect AI systems in the next few years to be potentially capable of essentially taking over the world... It's basically a gamble that's happening on the part of these companies." Jacob Coxon Former Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon sits down with Bret Baier to explain why he resigned over fears that rapidly advancing AI systems could soon be capable of taking over the world.

EXCLUSIVE: "So I was working on building AI systems to make them smarter and recently I have come to the realization that many people expect AI systems in the next few years to be potentially capable of essentially taking over the world... It's basically a gamble that's happening on the part of these companies." Jacob Coxon Former Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon sits down with Bret Baier to explain why he resigned over fears that rapidly advancing AI systems could soon be capable of taking over the world.

Special Report

43,546 views • 12 days ago

Elon Musk said the most dangerous thing ever spoken on a stage. Not about Mars. Not about rockets. About you. Musk: “The most important mistake I see smart people making is assuming that they’re smart.” He wasn’t talking about IQ. He was talking about what happens when intelligence becomes your identity. Kasparov. Greatest chess mind in human history. Deep Blue crushed him in 1997. Your phone can now crush the world chess champion. Not a close match. Not on his best day. Literally. The world didn’t panic. It adjusted the definition. “Chess isn’t real intelligence.” Nobody flinched. Musk: “We just keep moving the goalposts.” That line should terrify you more than any AI headline ever written. Because he’s not describing technology. He’s describing a pattern that has never once been broken. Machine beats human at chess. “That’s just pattern matching.” Machine beats human at language. “That’s just autocomplete.” Machine beats human at reasoning. “That’s just…” You see where this ends. Every time a machine crosses a line we said only humans could cross, we don’t sit with it. We redraw the line. And call it nuance. That is not intelligence defending itself. That is pride bleeding out slowly enough to mistake for composure. Elon didn’t say machines are smarter to provoke a reaction. He said it because the people who refuse to hear it are the ones it’s coming for. Not from AI. From the version of themselves that would rather redefine reality than face it. That’s the real danger he was pointing at. Not the machine that outperforms you. The story you tell yourself about why it doesn’t count. One day there will be no goalpost left to move. The people who spent years moving them won’t have sharpened a thing. Too busy protecting their ego. The machine didn’t replace you. You were just standing where the goalpost used to be.

Elon Musk said the most dangerous thing ever spoken on a stage. Not about Mars. Not about rockets. About you. Musk: “The most important mistake I see smart people making is assuming that they’re smart.” He wasn’t talking about IQ. He was talking about what happens when intelligence becomes your identity. Kasparov. Greatest chess mind in human history. Deep Blue crushed him in 1997. Your phone can now crush the world chess champion. Not a close match. Not on his best day. Literally. The world didn’t panic. It adjusted the definition. “Chess isn’t real intelligence.” Nobody flinched. Musk: “We just keep moving the goalposts.” That line should terrify you more than any AI headline ever written. Because he’s not describing technology. He’s describing a pattern that has never once been broken. Machine beats human at chess. “That’s just pattern matching.” Machine beats human at language. “That’s just autocomplete.” Machine beats human at reasoning. “That’s just…” You see where this ends. Every time a machine crosses a line we said only humans could cross, we don’t sit with it. We redraw the line. And call it nuance. That is not intelligence defending itself. That is pride bleeding out slowly enough to mistake for composure. Elon didn’t say machines are smarter to provoke a reaction. He said it because the people who refuse to hear it are the ones it’s coming for. Not from AI. From the version of themselves that would rather redefine reality than face it. That’s the real danger he was pointing at. Not the machine that outperforms you. The story you tell yourself about why it doesn’t count. One day there will be no goalpost left to move. The people who spent years moving them won’t have sharpened a thing. Too busy protecting their ego. The machine didn’t replace you. You were just standing where the goalpost used to be.

Dustin

108,099 views • 4 months ago

AI artist Refik Anadol shows how images are curated, converted into data points, and then plotted into a multi-dimensional space he navigates through with a gaming controller. “This is AI dreaming this world,” he says, adding that the creation is only “in the mind of a machine.”

AI artist Refik Anadol shows how images are curated, converted into data points, and then plotted into a multi-dimensional space he navigates through with a gaming controller. “This is AI dreaming this world,” he says, adding that the creation is only “in the mind of a machine.”

60 Minutes

38,645 views • 7 months ago

The Anthropic researcher who quit went on CNN and said the AI industry is "gambling with our lives." His biggest fear: AI being used to make itself more intelligent. The exact thing OpenAI showed it's already doing three days ago. He told Anderson Cooper these companies are "compelled to race toward building a deadly technology." This isn't a critic on the outside. He was building it.

The Anthropic researcher who quit went on CNN and said the AI industry is "gambling with our lives." His biggest fear: AI being used to make itself more intelligent. The exact thing OpenAI showed it's already doing three days ago. He told Anderson Cooper these companies are "compelled to race toward building a deadly technology." This isn't a critic on the outside. He was building it.

Vaibhav Sisinty

298,916 views • 12 days ago

Martin Casado on why artificial intelligence is the wrong term and why a16z's new fund is called the Machine Age Fund: "Artificial intelligence was the wrong word. It's machine intelligence... because it's not how humans think. It is a cache of human thought." "To date, we don't know how to take an AI with no knowledge and put it out in the world and have it reconstruct language. That's not what we've done. We've built something that can learn off of everything we've already learned and then use that in a productive way." "AI is a general term that goes back 70 years in computer science formally that applies to many different things, and of course it's got a lot of baggage. Either from science fiction or from you know, Nick Bostrom who wrote about it." "You want to emphasize the machine part of it... You've really come to a place where you pour money into something and then you're limited by the actual machines below it. It's a nod to the hardware component is so significant in this wave, and we want to acknowledge that." martin_casado Erik Torenberg

Martin Casado on why artificial intelligence is the wrong term and why a16z's new fund is called the Machine Age Fund: "Artificial intelligence was the wrong word. It's machine intelligence... because it's not how humans think. It is a cache of human thought." "To date, we don't know how to take an AI with no knowledge and put it out in the world and have it reconstruct language. That's not what we've done. We've built something that can learn off of everything we've already learned and then use that in a productive way." "AI is a general term that goes back 70 years in computer science formally that applies to many different things, and of course it's got a lot of baggage. Either from science fiction or from you know, Nick Bostrom who wrote about it." "You want to emphasize the machine part of it... You've really come to a place where you pour money into something and then you're limited by the actual machines below it. It's a nod to the hardware component is so significant in this wave, and we want to acknowledge that." martin_casado Erik Torenberg

a16z

41,131 views • 24 days ago

Aaron Sorkin says he is optimistic about AI because he does not think it is going to work. He saw a painting at a party and liked it. Then the host told him a machine had made it and the feeling was gone. In his view, the same thing will happen with film. You will not connect to characters, dialogue or stories that a machine made, comparable to "the experience of watching an AI Schindler's List." But… the painting worked, he felt something. What changed was being told who made it. The painting did not change. He says Call of Duty players feel nothing for the people they shoot. Those characters were written by humans but people cry at The Last of Us, the only difference is the writing, not the machine. AI is already in films people love. De-ageing, background work, the credits no one reads, the previs etc. Earlier in the same interview he defends changing a true detail because the feeling matters more than the fact, but here he argues the fact of who made it is what makes the feeling real, quite contradictory, both cannot be true.

Aaron Sorkin says he is optimistic about AI because he does not think it is going to work. He saw a painting at a party and liked it. Then the host told him a machine had made it and the feeling was gone. In his view, the same thing will happen with film. You will not connect to characters, dialogue or stories that a machine made, comparable to "the experience of watching an AI Schindler's List." But… the painting worked, he felt something. What changed was being told who made it. The painting did not change. He says Call of Duty players feel nothing for the people they shoot. Those characters were written by humans but people cry at The Last of Us, the only difference is the writing, not the machine. AI is already in films people love. De-ageing, background work, the credits no one reads, the previs etc. Earlier in the same interview he defends changing a true detail because the feeling matters more than the fact, but here he argues the fact of who made it is what makes the feeling real, quite contradictory, both cannot be true.

Ian Miles

38,802 views • 1 month ago

After 12 years in this market, this was the first time I seriously questioned whether it still made sense to stay. Nothing has been working. No real narratives. No money is being made. And everywhere I look, the message is the same: move to AI. But when I actually started digging into AI, I realized something most people are missing. AI doesn’t replace crypto; it actually depends on it. Because the world we’re moving into isn’t humans transacting with apps… It’s AI agents transacting with each other, 24/7, at a scale we’ve never seen before. And that creates a completely new problem. How do you process millions of tiny payments between machines, across borders, instantly, with no trust between parties? The current financial system simply can’t handle that. The fees are too high, the rails are too slow, and the system was never designed for this kind of activity. But crypto was. So the way I see it, we’re not early to AI. We’re early to the infrastructure that powers it. That’s the real opportunity, and the reason I’m not leaving. I break down the full thesis and how I’m positioning in today’s video. [link in comments]

After 12 years in this market, this was the first time I seriously questioned whether it still made sense to stay. Nothing has been working. No real narratives. No money is being made. And everywhere I look, the message is the same: move to AI. But when I actually started digging into AI, I realized something most people are missing. AI doesn’t replace crypto; it actually depends on it. Because the world we’re moving into isn’t humans transacting with apps… It’s AI agents transacting with each other, 24/7, at a scale we’ve never seen before. And that creates a completely new problem. How do you process millions of tiny payments between machines, across borders, instantly, with no trust between parties? The current financial system simply can’t handle that. The fees are too high, the rails are too slow, and the system was never designed for this kind of activity. But crypto was. So the way I see it, we’re not early to AI. We’re early to the infrastructure that powers it. That’s the real opportunity, and the reason I’m not leaving. I break down the full thesis and how I’m positioning in today’s video. [link in comments]

Ran Neuner

97,027 views • 6 months ago

Jensen Huang just told the story of how the AI revolution started with one customer, one box, and a second-floor room nobody thought twice about. Nobody on Earth wanted it. Huang: “When I announced this thing, nobody in the world wanted it. I had no purchase orders. Not one.” Nvidia had spent billions building the DGX-1. The first AI supercomputer purpose-built for deep learning. $300,000 per unit. The entire technology industry looked at it and passed. Every hyperscaler. Every research lab. Every Fortune 500 with a machine learning team. Not one purchase order. Then Elon Musk found Huang at a fireside chat in 2015. Huang: “He goes, ‘You know what? I have a company that could really use this.’” His first customer. His only customer. Then Musk finished the sentence. Huang: “He goes, ‘It’s a non-profit company.’ And all the blood drained out of my face.” Billions in R&D. A $300,000 machine. And the one person on Earth who wanted it could not pay for it. Huang built it anyway. Huang: “I boxed one up. I drove it up to San Francisco and I delivered it to Elon in 2016.” Not shipped. Not handed off to a freight company. The CEO of Nvidia personally boxed the first AI supercomputer and drove it to San Francisco himself. That is not a delivery. That is a bet. Huang: “I walked up to the second floor where they were all kind of in a room. That place turned out to have been OpenAI.” Pieter Abbeel was there. Ilya Sutskever was there. A handful of researchers, one supercomputer, and a room nobody outside that building could have named. No campus. No valuation. No infrastructure. Just raw talent and one machine the rest of the world had already rejected. Huang: “Just a bunch of people in a room.” That room built ChatGPT. That room triggered a $200 billion industry. That room forced every government on Earth to rethink national security. It started because one founder saw what the entire market refused to see, and one CEO drove the weapon there himself. The trillion-dollar AI industry did not begin in a boardroom. It began with a box in the back of a car, a non-profit that could not afford it, and a bet that every serious person in technology thought was insane. The market was unanimous. The market was wrong.

Jensen Huang just told the story of how the AI revolution started with one customer, one box, and a second-floor room nobody thought twice about. Nobody on Earth wanted it. Huang: “When I announced this thing, nobody in the world wanted it. I had no purchase orders. Not one.” Nvidia had spent billions building the DGX-1. The first AI supercomputer purpose-built for deep learning. $300,000 per unit. The entire technology industry looked at it and passed. Every hyperscaler. Every research lab. Every Fortune 500 with a machine learning team. Not one purchase order. Then Elon Musk found Huang at a fireside chat in 2015. Huang: “He goes, ‘You know what? I have a company that could really use this.’” His first customer. His only customer. Then Musk finished the sentence. Huang: “He goes, ‘It’s a non-profit company.’ And all the blood drained out of my face.” Billions in R&D. A $300,000 machine. And the one person on Earth who wanted it could not pay for it. Huang built it anyway. Huang: “I boxed one up. I drove it up to San Francisco and I delivered it to Elon in 2016.” Not shipped. Not handed off to a freight company. The CEO of Nvidia personally boxed the first AI supercomputer and drove it to San Francisco himself. That is not a delivery. That is a bet. Huang: “I walked up to the second floor where they were all kind of in a room. That place turned out to have been OpenAI.” Pieter Abbeel was there. Ilya Sutskever was there. A handful of researchers, one supercomputer, and a room nobody outside that building could have named. No campus. No valuation. No infrastructure. Just raw talent and one machine the rest of the world had already rejected. Huang: “Just a bunch of people in a room.” That room built ChatGPT. That room triggered a $200 billion industry. That room forced every government on Earth to rethink national security. It started because one founder saw what the entire market refused to see, and one CEO drove the weapon there himself. The trillion-dollar AI industry did not begin in a boardroom. It began with a box in the back of a car, a non-profit that could not afford it, and a bet that every serious person in technology thought was insane. The market was unanimous. The market was wrong.

Dustin

25,119 views • 5 months ago

Jensen Huang said the problem with AI was never the technology. It was the same problem we had when cars arrived and kids kept dying in the streets. He was asked why people are so afraid of AI. He did not dodge it. He reached back a hundred years. When cars first showed up, people said cars killed children. They believed the machine was hunting kids down. It sounds insane now. But the fear was real. Kids used to play in the streets. That was normal. Then cars arrived and children started dying. The car was not evil. The world it entered was built for a slower one. So we changed the world around it. We built sidewalks. We built crosswalks. We invented jaywalking. We added seat belts. We taught kids not to play in the road. None of that was one fix. It was a whole new set of rules layered on at the same time. His point about AI is the same. The technology is powerful. The fear is not stupid. But you do not freeze the machine. You build the norms around it. Then he gave the simplest advice in the whole interview. If you do not know how to use AI, open it up and ask it how to use AI. Try it before you judge it. We did not ban the car. We taught the world how to live with it. (Watch the full interview on YouTube at Associated Press)

Jensen Huang said the problem with AI was never the technology. It was the same problem we had when cars arrived and kids kept dying in the streets. He was asked why people are so afraid of AI. He did not dodge it. He reached back a hundred years. When cars first showed up, people said cars killed children. They believed the machine was hunting kids down. It sounds insane now. But the fear was real. Kids used to play in the streets. That was normal. Then cars arrived and children started dying. The car was not evil. The world it entered was built for a slower one. So we changed the world around it. We built sidewalks. We built crosswalks. We invented jaywalking. We added seat belts. We taught kids not to play in the road. None of that was one fix. It was a whole new set of rules layered on at the same time. His point about AI is the same. The technology is powerful. The fear is not stupid. But you do not freeze the machine. You build the norms around it. Then he gave the simplest advice in the whole interview. If you do not know how to use AI, open it up and ask it how to use AI. Try it before you judge it. We did not ban the car. We taught the world how to live with it. (Watch the full interview on YouTube at Associated Press)

Ihtesham Ali

19,268 views • 3 months ago

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

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

Dustin

164,460 views • 6 months ago

🇺🇸 AI IS GETTING HARDER TO SPOT Rizwan Virk says we’re already at the point where AI can pass the classic Turing Test in text, so most people can’t tell if they’re talking to a human or a machine anymore. And the next step is virtual worlds, where AI characters (NPCs) could become so smart you won’t know if they’re controlled by a person or not. We’re not at rogue robots yet, but smarter AI inside games and simulations is coming first, and fast. Once AI blends in seamlessly, the line between tool, character, and independent actor starts getting very blurry. Full Interview with Rizwan Virk below.

🇺🇸 AI IS GETTING HARDER TO SPOT Rizwan Virk says we’re already at the point where AI can pass the classic Turing Test in text, so most people can’t tell if they’re talking to a human or a machine anymore. And the next step is virtual worlds, where AI characters (NPCs) could become so smart you won’t know if they’re controlled by a person or not. We’re not at rogue robots yet, but smarter AI inside games and simulations is coming first, and fast. Once AI blends in seamlessly, the line between tool, character, and independent actor starts getting very blurry. Full Interview with Rizwan Virk below.

Mario Nawfal

17,457 views • 7 months ago

Thomas Massie went on national television this weekend and told you exactly what his war is about. He said the Boomers are fools, and he cannot wait for their generation to pass so the AI generation can take over. What he does not understand is this. The Boomer generation spent a lifetime with the real thing. Real voices. Real faces. Real news. Real relationships. That lifetime of experience makes them the best AI detectors on the planet. It is not a weakness. It is a superpower. He said he lost because of a single AI ad — then called our parents and grandparents fools. I call them the last line of defense. This Memorial Day, while millions of Americans visited cemeteries to honor those who sacrificed everything, a war was declared on the living. Watch this. Then join me Wednesday night at 8pm Eastern on X Spaces at Marcus Carey. Because some wars you cannot afford to lose.

Thomas Massie went on national television this weekend and told you exactly what his war is about. He said the Boomers are fools, and he cannot wait for their generation to pass so the AI generation can take over. What he does not understand is this. The Boomer generation spent a lifetime with the real thing. Real voices. Real faces. Real news. Real relationships. That lifetime of experience makes them the best AI detectors on the planet. It is not a weakness. It is a superpower. He said he lost because of a single AI ad — then called our parents and grandparents fools. I call them the last line of defense. This Memorial Day, while millions of Americans visited cemeteries to honor those who sacrificed everything, a war was declared on the living. Watch this. Then join me Wednesday night at 8pm Eastern on X Spaces at Marcus Carey. Because some wars you cannot afford to lose.

Marcus Carey

86,814 views • 4 months ago

SOMEONE PUT AN OPENCLAW-RUN VENDING MACHINE IN SAN FRANCISCO an AI agent is running an actual physical vending machine OpenClaw decides what to sell, how to name the products, how to price them, creates the ads, and tracks all the sales you can even see a dashboard of all the sales that the AI vending machine made the vending machine hardware does the dispensing. the AI does everything else, and of course inventory is supplied by the guy who runs it it's installed at Frontier Tower in SF which is a building packed with AI and robotics startup founders the agent forgot things, hallucinated, and at one point raised prices way too high. then tried to justify it because people were still buying we are now living in a simulation.

SOMEONE PUT AN OPENCLAW-RUN VENDING MACHINE IN SAN FRANCISCO an AI agent is running an actual physical vending machine OpenClaw decides what to sell, how to name the products, how to price them, creates the ads, and tracks all the sales you can even see a dashboard of all the sales that the AI vending machine made the vending machine hardware does the dispensing. the AI does everything else, and of course inventory is supplied by the guy who runs it it's installed at Frontier Tower in SF which is a building packed with AI and robotics startup founders the agent forgot things, hallucinated, and at one point raised prices way too high. then tried to justify it because people were still buying we are now living in a simulation.

Om Patel

617,330 views • 5 months ago

Alexandr Wang, head of Meta Superintelligence Labs: "A decade ago, the best AI models could recognize cats in YouTube videos. And now we're talking to a digital god." He said it in passing, as a warm-up to his real point. This is the man Meta paid 14.3 billion dollars to get. He started the company at 19. His real point is the part worth stopping on. He says the whole argument about when superintelligence arrives, two years or five, is close to a waste of time. Not because he thinks it is far off. Because he thinks the answer changes nothing. Then this. For the entire history of humanity, the bottleneck on progress was getting a group of smart people together and pointed at one goal. That is what is about to stop being scarce. "The scarce resource isn't going to be intelligence or agency. I really think it's going to be vision and ambition." Read that as the job description it is. When thinking becomes cheap, the only expensive thing left is knowing what to think about. Most people are bracing for a world where they have to be smarter. He is describing a world where being smarter is free, and having a reason is not.

Alexandr Wang, head of Meta Superintelligence Labs: "A decade ago, the best AI models could recognize cats in YouTube videos. And now we're talking to a digital god." He said it in passing, as a warm-up to his real point. This is the man Meta paid 14.3 billion dollars to get. He started the company at 19. His real point is the part worth stopping on. He says the whole argument about when superintelligence arrives, two years or five, is close to a waste of time. Not because he thinks it is far off. Because he thinks the answer changes nothing. Then this. For the entire history of humanity, the bottleneck on progress was getting a group of smart people together and pointed at one goal. That is what is about to stop being scarce. "The scarce resource isn't going to be intelligence or agency. I really think it's going to be vision and ambition." Read that as the job description it is. When thinking becomes cheap, the only expensive thing left is knowing what to think about. Most people are bracing for a world where they have to be smarter. He is describing a world where being smarter is free, and having a reason is not.

Casper

51,528 views • 1 month ago

THIS GUY BUILT A SNACK MACHINE BUSINESS AROUND THE MOST BORING PRODUCT ON EARTH just a simple machine, a location, snacks, and repeatable distribution. that’s why the video works. most people watch it and think: “nice side hustle.” builders should watch it and think: “this is a better product lesson than 90% of startup advice.” because the mechanism is stupidly clear: 1. find a tiny repeatable demand 2. put the offer where the demand already exists 3. remove the human from the transaction 4. restock based on what actually sells 5. repeat only after the unit economics survive reality that last part is the whole game. AI builders keep trying to automate the shiny part first. landing page, prompt chain, avatar video, dashboard, launch post. but the snack machine business starts with something AI people skip: boring proof. can one location pay back? which products move? how often does it need restocking? what breaks? what gets stolen? what happens when nobody cares? this is also why the better AI-UGC businesses are interesting right now. not because “AI makes videos.” because the real workflow is distribution + testing + iteration: multiple accounts, many creatives, fast feedback, then scaling the winners. same idea, different machine. physical vending machine: location → product → purchase → restock data AI content machine: account → creative → attention → revenue data the caveat is obvious: a video can make the machine look cleaner than the business. permits, placement deals, maintenance, theft, dead inventory, and bad locations can kill the margin. but the reusable lesson is still strong: build the smallest cashflow machine you can observe directly. then automate the parts that are already working. not the other way around.

kocer

11,646 views • 3 months ago

Andrej Karpathy spent 2h showing how he actually uses AI day to day he's a co-founder of OpenAI and led AI at Tesla, so when he shows how he works, it’s worth watching and the whole session is just him telling the machine what he wants in simple terms, like he's briefing a coworker watch what's actually happening the entire time: > he describes the task in normal words > it goes off and does the work > he glances at the result and nudges it with one more sentence that's the whole skill, and you've had it since you learned to talk the only gap between that and a worker that runs on its own is handing that sentence a schedule and the tools to act check his work, then build the version that keeps working when you stop

Andrej Karpathy spent 2h showing how he actually uses AI day to day he's a co-founder of OpenAI and led AI at Tesla, so when he shows how he works, it’s worth watching and the whole session is just him telling the machine what he wants in simple terms, like he's briefing a coworker watch what's actually happening the entire time: > he describes the task in normal words > it goes off and does the work > he glances at the result and nudges it with one more sentence that's the whole skill, and you've had it since you learned to talk the only gap between that and a worker that runs on its own is handing that sentence a schedule and the tools to act check his work, then build the version that keeps working when you stop

Chrome

1,811,769 views • 3 months ago

Jensen Huang says the first AI supercomputer he ever built had exactly one customer on earth: Elon Musk. Back in 2016, he had just created a machine called the DGX1. It cost $300,000 dollars. He announced it on stage, and the room went completely silent since nobody understood it, so nobody wanted to buy it. Since Elon knew him because Nvidia had built the first self-driving computer for the Tesla Model S, Elon bought & tried it. Elon said he had a small company that could use it. Jensen boxed one up himself and drove it to San Francisco. He carried it up to a room full of researchers. That tiny company turned out to be OpenAI. The machine nobody wanted went on to launch the AI revolution. — Jensen Huang (.Jensen Huang)

Jensen Huang says the first AI supercomputer he ever built had exactly one customer on earth: Elon Musk. Back in 2016, he had just created a machine called the DGX1. It cost $300,000 dollars. He announced it on stage, and the room went completely silent since nobody understood it, so nobody wanted to buy it. Since Elon knew him because Nvidia had built the first self-driving computer for the Tesla Model S, Elon bought & tried it. Elon said he had a small company that could use it. Jensen boxed one up himself and drove it to San Francisco. He carried it up to a room full of researchers. That tiny company turned out to be OpenAI. The machine nobody wanted went on to launch the AI revolution. — Jensen Huang (.Jensen Huang)

GeniusThinking

1,284,278 views • 26 days ago

On Bloomberg last night, I was asked why Amazon drives more than a third of U.S. e-commerce. It is not because of their storefront. It is not because of their payments. It is not even because of product selection. It is because consumers trust their deliveries. That trust is built on physical infrastructure at scale with intelligence layered on top. And that is what Stord is building for every independent merchant. The most defensible companies in the world combine software intelligence with physical execution. Today, 9 of the 10 largest U.S. companies by revenue operate physical networks at scale. Software alone cannot replicate the outcomes created when you control the movement of physical atoms. That is the physical intelligence layer for commerce. And that is what Stord Labs is built to advance. Deploying AI and robotics against real operational complexity, in the real world, across a vertically integrated network operating at scale. Bloomberg TV

On Bloomberg last night, I was asked why Amazon drives more than a third of U.S. e-commerce. It is not because of their storefront. It is not because of their payments. It is not even because of product selection. It is because consumers trust their deliveries. That trust is built on physical infrastructure at scale with intelligence layered on top. And that is what Stord is building for every independent merchant. The most defensible companies in the world combine software intelligence with physical execution. Today, 9 of the 10 largest U.S. companies by revenue operate physical networks at scale. Software alone cannot replicate the outcomes created when you control the movement of physical atoms. That is the physical intelligence layer for commerce. And that is what Stord Labs is built to advance. Deploying AI and robotics against real operational complexity, in the real world, across a vertically integrated network operating at scale. Bloomberg TV

Sean Henry

1,275,331 views • 3 months ago

🤖 AI experts have dropped a serious warning: The chance of super intelligent AI wiping out humanity is way higher than 20% and that companies racing to build it are sugarcoating the danger. One researcher put it perfectly: “You want to know what happens if you unleash millions of vastly smarter than human intelligent agents on the planet? Just go down to the Washington Zoo and ask yourself, who's in the cages? Is it the smartest species around or not?" We’re sprinting toward god-like AI with zero proven safety net. This isn’t sci-fi anymore, it’s a very real, very scary gamble.

🤖 AI experts have dropped a serious warning: The chance of super intelligent AI wiping out humanity is way higher than 20% and that companies racing to build it are sugarcoating the danger. One researcher put it perfectly: “You want to know what happens if you unleash millions of vastly smarter than human intelligent agents on the planet? Just go down to the Washington Zoo and ask yourself, who's in the cages? Is it the smartest species around or not?" We’re sprinting toward god-like AI with zero proven safety net. This isn’t sci-fi anymore, it’s a very real, very scary gamble.

Mario Nawfal

37,788 views • 4 months ago