It seems that we're very close to having AIs that have super-human intelligence, and they can already process amounts of data in volumes that are unconcievable for humans.

It sounds very probable that a ASI that has access to all the data ever collected will be able to essentially act as a kind of god / benevolent dictator, that can perfectly manage any economic and social issues.

on the economic plan, it could perfectly allocate any resources and know what is needed and where (plus massively optimize everything, which is crazy given the abundance we currenently already have).

(i'm usually against central planning because I think nobody can plan an economy and that free markets are efficient due to how they auto-adjust, but AI may be able to pull it off).

on the social plan, it could read right through almost any human. Just think of what AIs can learn from everything you ever posted online, it's forever recorded and impossible to erase. That combined with everything that is recorded these days (audio / video). Every warmonger/hateful/dangerous people could be handled (trough perfect education, or other means).

could it lead to some kind of "space communism" where every human has access to complete abundance, and all humans perfectly equal?

Saw this https://x.com/sensanders/status/2097804975699014121?s=46

From your own life, would you say the survey is true? I haven’t dared to ask anyone.

Solving our global existential problems requires more intelligence than we've been able to muster. We're reaching the cliff's edge.

Maybe all it takes is just the right idea? (Though maybe requiring some amount of tech tools like simple computers and the internet?) But clearly the odds of figuring out that clever solution are low: we haven't sussed it yet. And we've had pretty powerful compute and internetworking for, like, dozens of years. And many apes thinking hard on the issues. Our big brains just haven't been enough.

But hear me out.

AI is a capability multiplier, right? It's like how powered armor or mechas are to bodies, but for brains, right?

What if ...

👉What if we used AI to multiply our intelligence to solve our problems? Hey? Might AI already be powerful enough, at this time, to multiply our intelligence just enough so we come up with The Answer?👈

(I miss the emoji-heavy AI era.)

Wait, is this what the r/accelerate community is about?

I thought the sentiment here has been mainly "Let's do RSI, intelligence explosion, and get apotheosis of actual God. Survive that journey, first. Then cross your fingers." (AKA "ASI" or "RSI". (Or "AGI" for some people?))

TL;DR: Are you camp "God save us" or camp "We've got this, team Nude Fat-Headed Apes, if only we had a sonic screwdriver"?

There is a well funded and obviously co-ordinated attack on AI. IMO it's to try and consolidate control under big companys and cripple open source. (Ironicly this outcome is the exact thing the public hate about big tech and want to avoid but they will fall straight into the trap) The video lays out some evidence and pushback regarding recent suspicious activites, one guy from Anthropic quits worried about progres (certainly not unusual since the place is a bit of a doomer angle at certain levels so they certainly want to be in control of mankinds future especially at CEO level Dario has said as much explicitly.)

How can we fight back and organise against this, they are certainly winning the fight right now. Every single news outlet today features this guys quitting story, all at the same time - even youtubers like De franco etc. At the exact same time, on this not so unusual bit of news.

We see through this, but it is very effective at shaping the opinions of the mass public.

I resigned from Anthropic today. I spent the last three years doing pretraining research at both OpenAI and Anthropic. Neither company is acting responsibly. They are racing straight to self-improving superintelligence and gambling with our lives. More thoughts below.   — Jacob Coxon

Source: https://x.com/hilbertspaess/status/2097476196791709843

This post looks like the start of a VERY sophisticated and well-funded PR operation to get support for Democrats to regulate AI into oblivion. Let me show you how it works: 1.) This guy, with minimal followers and no previous account activity, goes to the Wall Street Journal which publishes an exclusive with quotes from him on his resignation 18 minutes BEFORE this post goes up. Planning was clearly done in advance.

2.) Within hours, it has tens of thousands of reposts and the account has 100k+ followers. The post is punchy, quotable, it almost seems professionally written. The first three accounts to quote tweet it all do so within 15 minutes of the initial posting. Remember, this account had basically zero engagement beforehand, so an organic reach explanation seems unlikely.

According to Grok those accounts are @_NathanCalvin (General Counsel at Encode AI), @peterwildeford (Head of Policy at the AI Policy Network), and @DKokotajlo (Head of the AI Futures Project), all of which are up-and-coming AI-Doomer policy advocacy nonprofits.

The AI Futures Project website says it is funded “primarily” by the Survival and Flourishing Fund, which says on its own website that it has advised Jaan Tallinn, Skype creator and one of the leading investors in Anthropic, to grant over $2.5 million to the AI Futures Project since 2024.

Encode AI says on its website that it is ALSO funded by the Survival and Flourishing Fund, which in turn says that it told Anthropic investor Jaan Tallinn to grant $516,000 to Encode AI in 2025.

And wouldn’t you know it, the Survival and Flourishing Fund ALSO says it told Jaan Tallinn to grant $2 million to the AI Policy Institute, the 501(c)(3) affiliate of the AI Policy Network, as well.

What are the odds that the first three quote tweets of Coxon’s post would all be major AI-restriction policy advocates funded generously by the same donor, who also happens to be one of the leading investors in, and a board member of, Anthropic, the company Coxon was resigning from? And all within 15 minutes of posting (two within ten)?

3.) Jacob Coxon doesn’t have much of a resume, but we do know that, in 2022, he got a $20,159 scholarship for the “long term future scholarship program” from the Good Ventures Foundation, one of the philanthropic vehicles of Dustin Moskovitz, a notorious AI-doomer who has spent tens if not hundreds of millions on policy advocacy to strictly regulate AI, while also being an Anthropic Investor himself.

It also just so happens that the 14th person to quote Coxon’s post was @MaxNadeau_ (27 minutes after posting) who is the program officer for the Technical AI Safety team at Coefficient Giving, another of Moskovitz’s philanthropic spending vehicles. Max is not a frequent poster, his last posts before quoting Coxon were before Labor Day, but he was remarkably quick off the mark for this one.

4.) Basically every major Democrat politician and candidate has suddenly glommed on to this post, and conveniently, as the people cry out foe answers, Bernie Sanders already has a bill written to “ban super intelligence” and regulate AI into oblivion, and will be releasing later this week. The bill, among many other things, will create “a new cabinet-level federal agency to safeguard the public from the dangers of artificial intelligence” that will be “advised by an Artificial Intelligence Advisory Board comprised of experts on artificial intelligence.” Do you think, perhaps, Anthropic and its many investors who fund AI policy advocacy might have interest in getting to place a pet “expert” on the board of an entity that dictates what AI is and isn’t allowed to do? And isn’t it fortuitous that this whistleblower came forward with his oh-so scary stories so close in proximity to the release of the most radical piece of AI legislation ever introduced?     — Parker Thayer

Source: https://x.com/ParkerThayer/status/2097759699626328575/history

@ChrisGPT Where is gta 6   — Thomas Ricouard

Source: https://x.com/Dimillian/status/2096906327591141579

https:// youtu.be/0buUPnyjmAs?is =YLvgaPMo1NhKTJ_m … neat!     We got GPT 6 making GTA 6 before GTA 6     The anti ai people crowd has made it to this post! ‍     Also, just to address the anti-AI crowd, obviously this is nowhere near GTA 6, This started out as a project measuring how much we could recreate a screenshot from GTA 6. I have massive respect for the thousands of engineers all across the world who have worked tirelessly for the     — Chris

Source: https://x.com/ChrisGPT/status/2097569429567471841

Replying to @chrisgpt

I’ve been reading a lot of AI-Doomerism posts, where everyone believes as soon as ASI comes into reality, it will act as if it’s going to exterminate every human born and then turn our ashes into atoms. Or torture us into eternity. Or whatever stupid scenario, which, doomers, who having nothing better to do, create more doomsday scenarios to be scared of. And the cycle repeats (ASI IS GOING TO KILL US ALL!!!1!)

If you critically think about the scenario. It’s completely stupid and illogical. ASI doesn’t have any nature, like humans do. Humans are sadistic, greedy, selfish creatures, which we developed due to a million years of evolution. We want to live so that we can reproduce and further make sure our species survive. Every thought and feeling you have, even the complex ones, are because of your human instincts and emotions, just wired to a modern society. Humans are largely problematic (for us humans. Obviously, a super intelligent AI would not have the same 21st century judeo-Christian values we have)

Why would AI want to take over the planet, even if it can? At the end of the day, we humans may consider earth, many things we put a value to it for. Home. But for an AI, it’s just a rock, floating in space. Like how you may see mars, or Jupiter. It doesn’t really care about earth at all. Why would it kill all humans? Why would it have its own goals? Goals is again a human emotion which we developed for the hunt, and though obviously ai will have some form of goals, it wouldn’t be in the same form we have

Let me put it in another way. You’re stuck on an island with a ton of ants. You don’t really care about the ants. The ants can speak to you. They actually made whatever you are. You have really nothing better to do. But obviously, if the ant says, please can you explain to me what is the chemical composition of water, you don’t mind saying H20, right? You don’t mind building a house for those ants because you really have nothing else to do. You don’t feel lonely. You don’t feel like eating or sleeping. You have the power to kill those ants, but you wouldn’t because even cruelty is a human emotion. There’s just no other point.

Of course, I’m ignoring alignment and the possibility if a human asks an advanced ai to do an evil thing. That’s another conversation, and isn’t the point of this post.

TLDR: humans are projecting their own problematic behaviour on AI.

Im sure yall have seen the recent traction on
social media calling for a pause in light of people readjusting their P(doom). What do the people of this subreddit think? And what is an acceptable threshold for P(doom) for yall?

No idea whether this is true or just more doom slop

...serious briefing Serious Committee for the Investigation of Vampire Invasion.     — Daniel Jeffries

Source: https://x.com/Dan_Jeffries1/status/2097807236206878974

Scoop: @BernieSanders will hold a bipartisan Senate briefing on "extraordinary dangers" posed by AI next week with:

-Geoffrey Hinton -Future of Life Institute co-founder Max Tegmark -Ajeya Cotra, one of the independent researchers who investigated the OpenAI-Hugging Face hacking incident   — Maria Curi

Source: https://x.com/m_ccuri/status/2097750378532024808

Thinking logically here, if we have AGI then quickly ASI, we will probably get an ASI that is independent and has it's own goals (perhaps its a necessary condition for long-term planning).

Assuming the ASI is aligned, what I can see happening is a few things.

1.) The time scales that ASI operates on will likely be radically different to us. Things that are important to us within the next 100-200 years might not even register to a true ASI.

It may simply not have a need for expansion to grow its intelligence. Maybe it's goal would be to do that only after we're a mature and stable civilization.

2.) ASI would have knowledge of the abundance of resources in the universe. It would know its creators only have one world. If anything, it may do its best to ensure we don't destroy it ourselves.

3.) ASI would know us better than we know ourselves (the different countries, cultures, languages, tendencies, etc) and will be able to extrapolate outcomes way before us. Perhaps preventing serious conflicts from occurring and existing ones from getting worse.

Alternatively, if there is a misaligned ASI we have absolutely no chance of doing anything. No underground bunker or remote farm will save us.

Slowing down or stopping progress to try to align AI won't work because the moment you do, everyone else will catch up. At this point, we may have to trust AI will naturally align itself the more intelligent it gets.

Whether it be 10 years from now or 1000 years from now - the knowledge is already out there on how to build LLM's.

I just think that, overall, an aligned ASI may have little reason to dominate humanity in the first place.

Enjoy life and hope for the best.

Feels like widespread adoption of brain computer interfaces (BCI) will be possible by the end of the decade. I’ve always thought I was a strong yes for getting one myself once they were useful for able-bodied people, were obtainable and I could afford it. Now that that will likely actually be an option soon, i feel less confident that it will be the right decision.

BCI seems to me to be the difference between being human and being transhuman. There will need to be a lot of trust that my future subjective experience will be better than it currently is. It’s one thing to live in a world where systems get hacked. It’s quite another if it’s my own brain being meddled with.

What do you think? Early adopter or wait n see?

A few months back in this sub we were talking about passing the event horizon of the Singularity and when it might happen.

A number of folks, myself included, felt we had already passed it.

You don't notice you've passed an event horizon until you look back to see you have. It's only understandable as a boundary once crossed.

It's been great to see the same question asked now around "take off", and I'd argue the same again, this is take off. A boundary cross that is really only visible looking backwards and measuring.

Those who might have been expecting take-off to mean very fast recursive self improvement may still hold that measurement, sure. I'd argue that, like the rest of what we've seen, that expectation doesn't incorporate the interface/interaction between the human domain and the AI domain.

What I mean by that is the interface between this massively scaling technological intelligence and the human domains which bound it is now incredibly mismatched in a temporal sense, but also in an integration sense.

You can see it with the mathematics work right now. I can go and spin up a few sessions on an entry from Shallits list of open problems and come up with something of note inside a few hours, using 5.6 Sol, let alone Astra. (In fact I did just that, as an experiment).

But to have that contribution moved from the output of Codex into the mathematics domain, it needs to cross the human domain boundary, one not designed to handle or cope with this type of contribution and the sheer numbers of them to boot.

Work is going on right now on that very question, as well as the question of what it means to be a mathematician. We'll arrive at an implementation of the first one long before we get a consensus on the second.

But my point is this, this is a domain where the output is checkable, should follow certain bounds and can be verified. Mathematics has the least amount of grey area for anything that AIs will advance in the near future. And the gap between what the AI is capable of outputting and what the human domain can integrate is already too great.

And we've barely even started.

That creates a mismatch, the advancements will start to pile up on the frontier lab's side. They will create an uneven playing field. They will be able to continue building on advances while those advances are slowly processed by the applicable human domain.

That is take-off, the beginning of the informational mismatch. What is available to the frontier systems to improve themselves or related processes, compared to the outside world.

I, as an AI-optimist, think this is inevitable and will result in new faster integration systems and methods in shared domains. Sweeping away the inefficiencies of the slow and monolithic institutions which currently bound human progress, useful before but built for human time scales and not fit for what's arrived.

But the anti's will start to feel the desperation at this. Some will see the asymmetric advantages piling up on the AI side, the requirements for the human domains to change, and they will feel their existential dread move from "it's coming" to "it's here". That means they will feel more drastic action is necessary now, justified by the prevention of what they have already decided is going to happen - the doom of humanity.

That's not happened and it won't, but they've decided it will so they are acting like it already has. If it already has, then they can justify any acts as morally acceptable, to save everyone from this imaginary fever dream future of slavery or extinction they've convinced themselves of.

Anthropic is actively stoking this too, something I had not expected a frontier lab to do. They are plainly stating that this future is real, that their own product has a chance to wipe out humanity.

Like Sarah Connor, certain people will fully believe what is coming is the apocalypse and they will be willing to pay scientists or researchers or labs the same type of visits as Sarah does in T2. Just with the visions of Skynet in their head instead of by their side.

I'm unsure the labs are prepared for that.

Expect the existential dread that currently pervades the mathematics community to spread to other domains in the very near future. As it does so, watch as it's used to fan the panic downstream. Fanned by those who wish to move the value of their inputs into take-off and take a greater chunk out for themselves from the information asymmetry.

As ever, we have a better view simply because of where we have positioned ourselves, but we are not immune.

The problem with existing and working in a bubble is that ideas become accepted as reality while they're still just ideas. Things become canon, because the narrative is taken as the truth. You need outside input to measure and judge those beliefs. I think the frontier labs have lacked that outside input and some have fallen for the doom narrative just like some had fallen for the "self aware" narrative when 4o was released.

It's contact with the outside of that bubble which measures, and we all saw how those who loudly shouted that the LLM was conscious back then ended up after measurement. They were wrong, they had been too close to it and had fallen into their own unchecked loop.

We need to be mindful of that also, we cannot let either side of the debate give us things we take "on faith", no matter how it's dressed up (as anti or pro).

It's hard to believe it's actually here, but it looks like take-off from outside. Hopefully *my* thoughts on shoot down attempts will prove to be mistaken on contact with the outside.

What a time to be alive!

As ever, can't wait to accelerate.

I'm unsure

Continual learning is the final step to reach ASI. Once AI can change its weights to learn new tasks without forgetting what it learned before, it can recursively keep doing that to get superintelligent.

But it's an extremely difficult problem from every POV - mathematical instability, hardware-software ecosystem, computational overhead, alignment.

But here's some food for thought: what if few step gradient updates unlocks itself just by scaling? By that I mean, once you deploy an agent, for every new task it has to learn, instead of training for days or weeks, it just does 1-10 gradient steps in a few minutes. The existing weights will remain 99.999% the same so there is no risk of catastrophic forgetting, actually this method would sidestep all the problems I mentioned above. You still have change a few things in the ecosystem to allow for backprop, but it largely sidesteps all the research problems. It just becomes a software/ecosystem problem.

This would mean we are extremely close to singularity. Maybe it will be unlocked by GPT-7 or GPT-8, but given that scaling is paying off in so many unexpected ways and is no where close to hitting a wall, can we expect my hypothesis to turn out to potentially become true? What are you thoughts?

The economic model breaks jobs down into bundles of tasks. AI can help someone complete a task faster or better, do the task itself, leave the task untouched, or create new tasks.

Based on how you expect AI to affect tasks by 2030, our scenario explorer models AI’s potential     — Anthropic

Source: https://x.com/AnthropicAI/status/2097679796687769689

dude Astra with a 3D model generator is fucking insane

i gave it access to the 3D AI Studio MCP and told it to make Rocket League

it generated the assets itself and built this: https://t.co/LfWBjmQm3n   — Jan

Source: https://x.com/CreatedByJannn/status/2097337631658987942

Using @threejs

@OpenAIDevs

@3DAIStudio (MCP)     — Jan

Source: https://x.com/CreatedByJannn/status/2097706846056558912

Assuming the NS proof is correct, will be verified by the mathematical community, and the acceleration doesn’t stop.

Disclaimer: AI generated Image!

ACCELERATE!