u/Mindrust

This person does not sound very intelligent. You dodged a bullet IMO.

It's more pro-AI than most subreddits, outside of r/accelerate which unfortunately leans way too far into "pro-AI" to the extent they'd rather risk human extinction than to think about the consequences of powerful technology.

Doesn't help that the mod there is a borderline religious zealot who will ban anyone who says anything that is "decel", which basically means anything that disagrees with their world view.

India has to be one of the worst places on Earth to have a panic attack as a woman around a horde of men

XLR8

Redditors are dumb, that’s your answer. At least half of them are unemployed cynical losers or naive young people who feel entitled to free shit.

And this is all ignoring the fact that right now, OpenAI provides a free version of ChatGPT anyone can use.

Wow, the fact that this is so highly upvoted is incredible. It's 100% bullshit.

I always thought r/accelerate went too crazy in the opposite direction with policing every single comment even if it was not low-effort and banning people for thoughtful discussion, but this sub needs at least some policing.

It's gotten out of hand. 70% of the comments in these threads contribute almost nothing but 1 liner snarky comments. There's gotta be some more strict rules about low-effort replies/posts.

Effective altruist.

Yeah I personally don't get it. If AI is going to be as powerful as we all expect, then that also means it has the potential to be very dangerous. Not sure why people don't factor this in or ignore it.

I do think LLMs and RSI will be very strong in verifiable domains (RLVR is proving effective and still being scaled up), but I'm not so confident about what the rate of progress looks like in non-verifiable domains.

It's also really hard to say at this point where the current paradigm will hit diminishing returns. It could be that the Oak approach has a slower start but a much higher ceiling in terms of capability. Time will tell.

The money comes from distributing compute and permit fees in the AI 2040 Plan A scenario:

Now that the United States is limited in the number of total robots it can build, it must choose how to allocate this capacity between companies. They decide to use the free market via a cap-and-trade system. Permits to build robots or compute are sold to the highest bidder and can be freely traded.

The permits also give the government much-needed revenue. In 2032, the US has a cap of 80M robots and 5 billion H100-equivalent GPUs. The market is so desperate for more robots and compute that permits become the expensive binding constraint, costing on the order of $200k per robot permit and $10k per chip permit, allowing the US government to collect roughly ten times the 2025 US federal revenue in permit fees (a total of $50T in FY2032).¹⁰⁵ In 2034, when the AIs and robots will be even more capable and valuable, the permits generate $180T.¹⁰

How is he a grifter?

It's fine to disagree with someone's views, but to me he seems to genuinely believe in existential risk from AI.

He literally resigned from OpenAI because he lost confidence they would responsibility handle AI safety. I'm sure he was getting paid much more handsomely there then what a couple of podcast appearances could muster.

I mean, you can agree or disagree with the plan but it’s a prescription, not a prediction. It’s more like “If leaders of nation states want to reap the benefits of superintelligent AI without the race spiraling out of control, we believe they should follow this plan”.

I keep seeing this phrase “automated coder” - what do they mean exactly? Did the AI 2027 people come up with a strong definition of this and how it differs from what we have currently?

Some people really do lack any kind of imagination

There’s high levels of copium going on in pretty much every major subreddit now.

It's the idea that all the jobs currently are the only jobs that could be." "Imagine in 1750, you're like, well, 98% of us work in farming, and then you come back from the future and you're like, you guys, 2% of people in the 1990s work in farming.

Okay, so let’s say we discover new work that people can do.

What is so unique about that job that it cannot also be automated by a swarm of agents and/or physical robots?

That's my problem with using this argument. It basically assumes we will indefinitely come up with tasks that AI cannot do (either at all or cheaply), and that it will be more cost-effective for humans to do them then AIs.

Maybe there will be jobs like that, I can't predict the future - but do we really think the human economy will not be absolutely dwarfed by the AI economy to the point where the human economy has no significance at all?

The whole point of having these conversations about the future is that it points to scenarios where there will simply never be enough new, economically-significant work to out-sustain their automation.

And yeah, there will always be a market for artists and creatives, because there will always be humans who value human-made things. But there's never going to be enough jobs to go around in those fields to sustain all of Earth's workforce, because talent by its very nature is rare, and will always be in low supply/high demand.

We don't yet have transformative AI for which you can "hand over the keys" of civilization to, which is really whats being talked about here.

I don't think its forced, people actually do this.

Go watch Leopold Aschenbrenner's interview with Dwarkesh Patel on YouTube, and prepare to be heavily annoyed.

What does a memory efficiency breakthrough mean here? KV cache compression?

Sure but I don’t think of those as “AI companies” necessarily. They’re tech companies that invest in AI and have it in their products, but their core streams of revenue do not come from AI.

It’s not just working people, it’s everyone besides investors. Neither OpenAI nor Anthropic are publicly traded companies.

I think he also shifted his attention towards AI because he probably saw the writing on the wall that we were much more likely to achieve AGI before MNT.

Just read Engines of Creation and you’ll get it

Yup. We failed to switch over to nuclear power due to misinformed fears from environmental protectionists and excessive regulation. As a result, energy usage basically flatlined.