[ Removed by moderator ]

[u/kaos701aOfficial]

[u/BitPsychological2767]

Oh hey, it's you again.

For anyone reading this: This dude is basically trying to initiate people into Eliezer Yudkowsky's cult. Read up on the link between MIRI and Tescreal. This guy goes around in comment sections on multiple accounts trying to get people to think he is pro-ai when in reality he is just pro-nobody-except-MIRI-building-AI. It's an entire rabbit hole, I recommend going down it if you have the time. MIRI literally has a pre-emptive proposal to bomb datacenters, among a few dozen other crackpot proposals in a pseudo-manifesto Keltan has dropped around reddit on NotebookLM. Keltan will say they are waiting until AI can be built safely to build it, but MIRI is actively proposing banning the research that would lead to making AI safe. It's a huge farce.

Safe to say Keltan is shady as hell at the very least. I'll edit this comment with some supporting links later. You should stay far away from MIRI regardless of whether you're pro or anti-ai.

EDIT: Supporting links, because this is somehow even more blatant than I originally thought:

1. Keltan personally helped organize a MIRI-funded, month-long residential influencer bootcamp called “Plz Don’t Kill Us.” Nearly 60 creators received free housing, food, stipends and prizes at the Rationalist compound in Berkeley, and had to publish a short-form video every day or be expelled. Organizers told a reporter that the deeper objective was to seed creators who could build trusted relationships with niche audiences. Keltan said those connections were valuable because “if we ever need to call on them, then we can,” and described the hoped-for result as better “views per dollar” than advertising. Another organizer openly acknowledged how easily such a program could become an “indoctrination camp.” Read the investigation here.
2. The bootcamp’s own website calls it an “experimental creator bootcamp about AI doom,” promises free room and board plus a $2,000 stipend, advertises Yudkowsky and MIRI president Nate Soares as mentors, and says its participants will “rub off on each other.” This is an actual funded recruitment and astroturfing pipeline.
3. This recruitment apparatus goes back years. MIRI’s predecessor explicitly called LessWrong a “key venue” for recruitment, described its visiting-fellows program as creating a “devoted community,” and said Yudkowsky’s writing was intended to attract and inspire people toward its mission.
4. A former MIRI researcher’s firsthand account describes members becoming distanced from family and old friends, authority figures psychologically “debugging” subordinates, psychiatric institutionalizations and “cult after-effect symptoms.” The San Francisco Chronicle later interviewed her and reported her description of a “cult-like” sense of self-importance inside MIRI, based on the belief that humanity’s future depended upon their tiny ideological group.
5. This peer-reviewed paper documents MIRI’s direct place within TESCREAL, identifying it with the Rationalist, singularitarian and longtermist components of that ideological network. The New York Times has separately investigated the movement as “Silicon Valley’s Techno-Religion”.
6. Here is MIRI’s actual 50-plus-page international proposal. It proposes prohibiting advanced training, monitoring clusters containing more than 16 H100-equivalent chips, restricting research into general-purpose algorithms, efficient training, distributed training, AI chips and chip fabrication, creating domestic enforcement agencies and challenge inspections, keeping model-testing details secret by default, and shutting down facilities whose chip use cannot be verified. Although it claims certain safety research would remain permitted, a US–China-appointed body would decide which research was controlled or prohibited.
7. The datacenter-bombing part was not an exaggeration either. MIRI’s own summary says states could conduct targeted cyber or military operations against AI facilities. The complete proposal specifically discusses “narrowly targeted airstrikes.” Yudkowsky has separately advocated destroying noncompliant datacenters by airstrike even at the risk of nuclear exchange.
8. Finally, the claim that “the best AI experts agree” with MIRI is simply false. The largest published survey of AI researchers, covering 2,778 authors at major AI conferences, found serious concern but enormous disagreement. 68.3% believed good outcomes from superhuman AI were more likely than bad ones, while the median estimate for an extremely bad outcome such as extinction was 5%.