I understand that no one can over power you unless you give in to it. However, I don't believe this is what we are trying to advocate here. Political agreement to control nuclear power started when we saw collectively the dire consequences of it — crossing my fingers it will stay that way. But the innovation of AI, super intelligence, is too fast without brakes, no guard rails, no safety net. I am not against AI, I believe it is useful. It has its purpose. I also believe that AI like any other tools, it can be used to change lives for positive or negative. But it does not mean you become completely ignorant of the possible catastrophic power it can have if we are not careful. This is not your doomsday conspiracy, it is already here. Otherwise, these creators of AI would not come out to warn us. You do not give Swiss knife to a kid and we are doing just that. 🥺 I'd suggest make time to listen to the podcast and let know your thoughts.

The creators of AI are deluded materialists who, in their insane hubris, have first convinced themselves that through the powers of advanced widgetization and commodification, that they have replicated the human soul, or even created a captive god. They are fools and the sooner we cast them off, the better. Also, policies that have constrained the advent of nuclear power generation are quite possibly the single greatest travesty of the modern era, prolonging human immersion in many parts of the world. While the world is objectively way better than it was 100 years ago, it is a general impoverishment of our minds that obstructs and obscures just how much better it should be today, everywhere. Anyone who claims to care about the environment, human welfare, the subjugation of the poor and disposed, or the future of humanity but who opposes globally scaled nuclear power is either very sadly confused, or a particularly dangerous liar.

btw, did you watch or listen to the podcast? It's what the note is about.

could I ask what made you believe that ALL of the AI creators are 'deluded materialist'? Are you referring to the AI god fathers or the silicon valley creators like openAI? I can see plenty of generalisation in there and I wonder where it is coming from? I'd be keen to know. Lastly, so what do you suggest we do of the dangers of AI? Or do you NOT believe that AI does not pose a threat at all?

correction: I meant, do you believe if AI pose a threat to humanity? If yes, what do you suggest? If no, what made you believe so? I am curious of your thoughts. ☺️

Yes, it is a generalization, but one that I also believe to be fairly universally applicable in this case. There is a certain philosophical underpinning here - essentially to believe is “machine intelligence” one must internal debase their assessment of human intelligence. I do not believe is “machine intelligence” and “artificial intelligence” is an oxymoron. The map, not matter how rich and detailed and immersive, can never be territory. Similarly the tool is not the talent. Saying “the machine is so smart” is like saying “this calculator is good at Math” or “my POSCA paint pens are really good at art.” The machine or tool is an inert object outside of the human operator. As to what nebulous and generalized “existential dangers” that AI may pose (note, AI people never make this specific, always generalized), perhaps there is not much that can be done other than actively opting out of engagement with these systems when you can. Thats what the individual can do. Beyond that, I don’t think of “what should be done” (ie appealing to be centralized decision authority - as this the same thinkings that leveraged the fear of nuclear weapons to profane the blessing of nuclear power while only INCREASING the number of nuclear weapons in play) - but I do think it terms of what I think will happen. And what I think will happen is this. OpenAI and Anthropic are AI service provider / hardware buyer duopolies that rest atop Nvidia as the hardware producer monopoly. OpenAI and Anthropic are perpetually insolvent and have no path to profitability - they are capital destruction machines fueled by fiat VC slush. Eventually the bill will come due and all services that are dependent on OpenAI or Anthropic will either be squeezed to death by cost increases or while die when OpenAI and Anthropic collapse financially. They may be bailed out by the government, but this will truly set us on the path we of realtime USD currency debasement, with the government bankrupt itself entirely. SO, I think AI can only be a useful technology if it’s true costs are borne by the market around it. After the collapse of OpenAI and Anthropic (and general stock market value destruction), the costs of AI will not longer have “free money” lined up to paper over. Individuals and companies will have to operate their AI decentralized at the compute level. And this recognition of costs will ensure that AI, where is it used, will be used in a way that adds value for humanity. Short of this AI is just another fiat malinvestment. The tool itself and fear of the tool will both be leveraged by people who bear not actual costs to attempt to lock in their control over others who are too lazy or immiserated to understand that they can opt out (though opting out has its own costs). They don’t actually have the resources to achieve this…unless of course they can conquer your mind first, as this is the ultimate force multiplier.

I’ll keep doing my thing regardless, that’s a given. But we’re already pretty unstable as a society and this potentially accelerates the point where ill feelings spill into mass violence, we’re already seeing it.

I’m thinking more of how life for those with the access to the compute will differ to those without, if progress for those people is exponential, along with steady decline for those without I foresee violence. I can be zen and pretend it’s all in my mind but history often shows a different outcome when the general population is majorly stressed. It is what it is.

I understand where you're coming from. It appears to me that you are advocating for self agency which I also share on my content too. 🙏 Some people are not as mature as some who have awakened. Otherwise, the world would not be the way it is now. The acknowledgement of one's agency does not dismiss that 1. people do not have the same experience as you nor view the world the way you do. 2. people do not always have the best interest at heart for you 3. Self agency starts from "knowing" that you have a choice and that there is another way. Unfortunately, some don't. "Raising awareness" and helping people to find their agency is a start. I don't believe you wake up "knowing what you know now" in an instant? You search, you are curious and you have awaken. Some people stay on the sleep state. I don't think raising awareness is inherently fear mongering. I believe your perception can determine that, either you use that info to awaken, help and guide others or dismiss it and do nothing about it. There are already cases of suicide case and lawsuits about chatbots. The danger is real and it is staring right before us. You can take that info as you will. great chat btw. tc ☺️🫂

I think there are studies showing the younger generation who grew up in the social media era have decline their critical thinking and also highly likely to experience loneliness and mental health issues vs those generations ahead of them. It does not mean the generations before them do not experience the above but it speaks a lot of the influence of social media let alone AI.🥺😬

Low-end models for "the compute" are coming out with lesser and lesser hardware requirements. Granite-4-350M is surprisingly adequate. I foresee political violence, too, its already happening at the margins, but I don't think AI changes the dynamic. Maybe a slight acceleration if those middleclass sinecures start popping for realz.