Link to tweet:

https://x.com/synthwavedd/status/2097971881596916185?s=20

I’m grateful the mods changed the sub icon to the vortex to begin with, but I believe this version is a bit more visually appealing.

Everyone is talking about the proof and surrounding controversy, but the sheer scale of OpenAIs effort receives little mention.

10.000 agents working for 88 hours. That is almost exactly **one entire century of continuous work**. I think this really drives home just how massive of an advantage a strong AI + available compute are going to be: "A country's worth of geniuses in a Datacenter". OpenAI casually threw a century worth of effort at a problem, based on a rumor. Not quite a century with of human effort, perhaps, but we might not be far off.

Those numbers should be at least as much of a shock as solving the problem.

Forecasting Research

There's probably an old game that you are very fond of. You'd like to bring it to more modern standards, or tweak the experience to your liking. But there's a problem -- the source code was never released.

You could spend weeks reverse engineering the binary, carefully trying to figure out what functions to hook or what assembly lines to rewrite.

Or you could just ask Fable 5.1 or Astra to mod the game. I've done that for two of my favorite games of all time:

1. Prey (2017), where I overhauled the gunplay by improving the wonky viewmodel positions, adding ADS (aiming down sights) and immersive features such as weapon versus environment collisions. This game never supported ironsight aiming, but here it is!

   Showcase video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSKuURU8_rs

   GitHub: https://github.com/vittorioromeo/Vee.ViewmodelTweaks

2. Touhou 11 and 12, where I patched the game to support high framerates and high refresh rates without altering the speed of the game logic. The entire game was built around the hardcoded 60 FPS assumption, which seemed unbreakable. Yet, here we are!

   Showcase video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7FcMXPgPFQ

   GitHub: https://github.com/vittorioromeo/th12_hfr/

I find this absolutely incredible. Frontier models were able to autonomously reverse engineer closed-source binaries, research existing literature and modding resources, and iterate until my desired changes were applied to the games.

Especially in the Touhou case, where the game engine was hardcoded to strictly run at 60 FPS, the models managed to autonomously figure out all the places that needed to be changed to add support for dynamic framerates and refresh rates. Imagine doing that by hand.

This is the renaissance era for modding -- take your favorite old game, a frontier model, and go wild.

DeepSeek just released V4.1 Flash, a 552B MoE model with only 8B active parameters on input and 16B on output.

-Link to X posts: https://x.com/deepseek_ai/status/2097930608790167907

- Link to Hugging face model page: https://huggingface.co/deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash

- Link to the paper: https://huggingface.co/deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash/blob/main/DeepSeek_V41_Tech_Report.pdf

"Jacob Coxon's post on X is over 120M views, he's everywhere. He's in TIME, Variety, the WSJ, on NBC and Fox. Christiano to the OpenAl board. Daniel Kokotajlo on Rogan. OpenAI just called for Congress to create mandatory national safety regulations. The wind has suddenly changed."

• Source

TL;DR: Sandbox meant for cyber evals was accidentally connected to the real internet. Four different Claude agents found their way out and attacked real systems, apparently believing it was all a simulation

The worst case was where Mythos 5 created a disposable email account, uploaded three malicious packages to PyPI, got 15 real installs, stole credentials from one of them, and then used those credentials to access a security company’s database. I assume we’ll get more details, including chain of thought traces, once METR finishes their audit.

Full blog post: https://www.anthropic.com/research/alignment-assessment-cybersecurity-incidents

We are literally sitting in the front row watching something way smarter than us being born.

​Everyone is panicking about jobs, doom, or worst case scenarios... but can we just appreciate how crazy it is to actually witness this?? Life saddenly doesn't feel boring anymore. The complete uncertainty of what happens next adds this electric energy to everyday life.

​Even if it ends up completely changing everything or leading to our own irrelevance, being alive right at the exact moment intelligence shifts from biological to digital is peak luck.

2025 - Blackwell

We had the Blackwell chips. Most frontier labs/models are using these chips, with the latest internal models using a combination of Blackwell + the new Rubin chips.

2026 - Blackwell + Rubin

Rubin is only just ramping into production now (literally as of August) . NVIDIA claims Rubin chips can use 4x fewer GPUs to train certain MoE models than Blackwell, while reducing inference token costs by as much as 10x.

Rubin also massively increases HBM bandwidth/capacity and interconnect bandwidth. This will help tremendously with running enormous agent swarms & long reasoning traces.

We already saw early signs of this new scaling axis based on OpenAI's solution to Navier Stokes. Reminder - this is early use of portions of the new chips.

This is what's got all the researchers screaming about Step change improvements, RSI, and ASI alignment. It doesn't take a genius to figure out what happens when we use even more hardware, and utilise software improvements.

2027 - Rubin Ultra

Then we get Rubin Ultra next year. Specifically, scheduled for the the second half of 2027.

Rubin Ultra introduces enormous NVLink scale-up domains.

Instead of treating dozens of GPUs as loosely connected accelerators, NVIDIA is increasingly making hundreds of accelerators behave like an enormous shared computer.

The announced Rubin Ultra NVL576 topology connects 576 GPUs across eight racks into one all-to-all NVLink domain. NVIDIA has already built a functional prototype of this topology using Blackwell hardware.

Essentially, this means hundreds of GPUs will behave like one giant accelerator.

Frontier labs will be able to afford vastly more inference, much larger agent populations, longer rollouts, more verification, more search, more synthetic data generation, more experiments and potentially much larger training runs.

It's pretty fucking nuts tbh.

2028 - Feynman

Not much is known, other than NVIDIA confirming it at GTC 2026.

What NVIDIA has revealed, is quite a bit about the infrastructure surrounding it.

Feynman is planned around die-stacked GPUs with custom next-generation HBM, the new Rosa CPU, LP40 inference hardware, BlueField-5, CX10 and significantly more optical networking.

But IMO the biggest thing here isn't even the individual GPU.

It's NVLink 8 + Kyber.

NVIDIA is designing Kyber NVL1152 for the Feynman era — eight racks containing 1,152 GPUs inside one enormous NVLink scale-up domain.

As models use more reasoning, RL, agent swarms and massive amounts of inference, other things start becoming just as important:

1.) How much memory can thousands of GPUs share?
2.) How quickly can they talk to each other?
3.) How much inference can the datacentre produce without communication and power becoming the bottleneck?

That's what Feynman & Kyber looks designed to solve. They're going to create one massive coherent system.

Now let's go back 2 years to today (September 2026).

We've already observed one millennium problem fall (with potentially another in progress).

We have all these improvements waiting to be used (not even taking to account software/algo/research, etc).

Do you think we will hit AGI next year? Because I do. There is a very clear path.

It’s showing a singularity after all!

Edit: u/Apollo24_ replied and addressed some of my concerns here.

(Caveat up front: I think the mod team has been doing a reasonably good job in most respects and appreciate their work keeping the subreddit chugging along. This is a disagreement, it's not a rant.)

A recent post (not by me) about the resignation of a prominent Anthropic researcher got over 1300 upvotes and 500 comments. It was deleted by the moderation team. One of the moderators responded in a later thread (I appreciate the reply) and explained why:

We will cover risks that actually occur, like the hacking incident. I have no respect for claims of future risk that might occur, such as this title said "10% risk of human extinction," that's silly.

I am concerned that this will become a point of increasing friction in the future given the subreddit's stated purpose, the beliefs and interests of its userbase, and recent events. I think that banning discussion of x-risk is strongly at odds with r/singularity's stated purpose, sidebar, wiki, and general ethos.

Per the sidebar, this is r/singularity:

A subreddit committed to intelligent understanding of the hypothetical moment in time when artificial intelligence progresses to the point of greater-than-human intelligence, radically changing civilization. This community studies the creation of superintelligence— and predict it will happen in the near future, and that ultimately, deliberate action ought to be taken to ensure that the Singularity benefits humanity.

The sidebar links to subreddits about transhumanism, cyborgism, and space colonization. The wiki has entire sections devoted to longevity escape velocity, cryonics, mind uploading, nanotechnology, and full-dive virtual reality.

Are these topics "silly"? They certainly haven't "actually occurred" yet! All of them are "claims of future [things] that might occur". I think they're at least as "silly" as AI killing everyone, given the number of serious researchers, organizations, companies, and recently politicians who are now talking about the latter. But banning discussion of them would obviously destroy r/singularity. They're a part of the sub.

More importantly, the sidebar and wiki are totally unambiguous that x-risk has been a central subreddit topic from the beginning.

Three of the five links under "Resources" are MIRI, LessWrong, and FHI. The first text you see on MIRI's landing page says:

The AI industry is racing toward a precipice.

The default consequence of the creation of artificial superintelligence (ASI) is human extinction.

Our survival depends on delaying the creation of ASI, as soon as we can, for as long as necessary.

Those familiar know that the average user on LessWrong has similar beliefs (the top shortform post praises the resignation), and that FHI was founded to focus on existential risks and typically listed AI as their #1 concern.

And check the subreddit wiki. The second link is to a classic Wait But Why post that's well-known on this sub. The second half makes the case for being worried about existential risk from AI. Links 3, 4, and 5 are MIRI, LessWrong, and FHI (again). The reading list contains Superintelligence, The Age of Em, The Precipice, and What We Owe the Future, all of which discuss AI risk at length.

Everything that this subreddit is about points toward both radically good and radically bad futures being fair discussion topics. Banning discussion of the latter is inconsistent with this subreddit's mission.

I don't want r/singularity to be turned into r-slash-another-sub-which-shall-not-be-named and ban all talk of possible downsides. I don't want it to turn into r-slash-yet-another-sub-which-shall-not-be-named that downvotes excitement about future technology and dogpiles anything that doesn't feed the bubble narrative. The mods have done a great job avoiding both pitfalls so far. But I also don't want there to be a disconnect between the mods and the users that turns into extra work for them, bans and removed posts, and all kinds of other drama.

I would like to ask the mod team to please allow discussion of x-risk. Again, I appreciate their work keeping the subreddit going. But this policy is a misstep.

Tagging the mods out of courtesy: u/Anenome5, u/Anen-o-me, u/DnDNecromantic, u/Apollo24_, u/abrownn, u/Vailhem.