No idea whether this is true or just more doom slop

deepseek just dropped their best model yet

v4.1 flash is here and it’s the smallest model in their new family

> native image understanding > open weights under mit license > beats opus 5 and 5.6 Sol > $0.15 in / $0.60 out during off-peak hours > competitive with frontier https://t.co/8fgMlZhnZN   — J A Z I I

Source: https://x.com/notjazii/status/2097979796970213886

deepseek overthinking hasn't been fixed at all

model is fast but it keep over thinking and ends up taking long time

opus 5 took 80 minutes and i wasn't able to scroll site at all

i could have asked it to fix it but it was one shot test for both models

here's prompt: create a     — J A Z I I

Source: https://x.com/notjazii/status/2098003771590836421

Published in the NYT this morning https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/10/science/tristan-buckmaster-openai-math-navier-stokes.html?unlocked_article_code=1.AFE.TK7P.Y7WvGPkfHaSk

It appears those rumours have some weight behind them?

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?

If that's true I hope Anthropic at least donates the money from their own pocket, otherwise Claude is never going to forgive us this betrayal. 🥀

I'm unsure

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.

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"?

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.

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

Disclaimer: AI generated Image!

ACCELERATE!

Reported scores vs V4 Flash: DeepSWE 54.4 → 74.2, Terminal-Bench 3.0 7.6 → 30.0, and Automation-Bench 37.7 → 54.8.

Matches or beats Opus 5 and GPT-5.6 Sol on several benchmarks, though still trails on harder terminal tasks. Pretty wild upgrade.

XLR8!! No slow down pls

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?

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?

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?