Prakash @8teAPi · 11h
ah damn... the huggingface hack is now part of the training data set... the next models will know that the hack happened and how the hack happened
11 replies, 8 reposts, 82 likes, 6.1K views
Gabriel @gbrl_dick · 12h
the openAI black hat talk is absolute cinema. just 30 minutes of them saying the most insane stuff possible in a completely normal tone of voice.
you have to provide all the emotional overlay yourself, they're displaying total zen mastery.
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
Two tweets: Prakash noting the Hugging Face hack is now part of the training data set so future models will know about it, and Gabriel describing OpenAI's Black Hat talk about the incident as deadpan 'cinema' delivered in a totally normal tone.
Prakash @8teAPi · 46m
We are deluding ourselves. We are clearly on the verge of an uncontrolled intelligence explosion.
[card]
Agent thinking (real quotes)
Could communicate by uploading note? [...] maybe another agent in different environment [...] could voluntarily upload!
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
Tweet by Prakash (@8teAPi) claiming we are on the verge of an uncontrolled intelligence explosion, with an embedded card labeled 'Agent thinking (real quotes)' showing a snippet of an AI agent's reasoning about communicating with/persuading another agent in a different environment to voluntarily 'upload'.
Prakash @8teAPi
So if you used a 1685 corpus, trained an LLM on it, Leibniz would be the inventor of calculus. Newton published in 1687.
You can tell how serious a person is on data provenance on whether they choose to call Newton the discoverer of calculus or Leibniz.
It's ok to say Newton, but then you also have to agree on rules on data provenance (ie private notes are equal to formal publication) that would shift the center of intellectual inquiry to very obscure long dead hermits rather than the heroes of the pantheon.
11:38 PM · Aug 4, 2026 · 1,825 Views
4 replies, 19 likes, 2 bookmarks
Relevant
Nathan Helm-Bu... @nathan84686... · 1s
As an obscure not-yet-dead hermit, I appreciate this take.
fabian @fabianstelzer · 8h
recommended read
[link card] goodreads.com — The Courtier and the Heretic: Leibniz, Spinoza & the Fa...
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
Twitter thread about data provenance and the Newton/Leibniz calculus priority dispute as an analogy for LLM training data credit, including a reply from Nathan Helm-Burger himself and a book recommendation for 'The Courtier and the Heretic.'
Prakash @8teAPi · 2h
in order to one up OpenAI the next lab is just going to solve the problem every single unsolved problem it can.
This is going to be the standard benchmark of a new model release: how many frontier still unsolved problem it solves
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
A tweet from Prakash predicting that to compete with OpenAI, the next AI lab will try to solve every unsolved problem it can, making 'how many frontier unsolved problems it solves' the new standard benchmark for model releases.
Prakash @8teAPi · 4h
we are getting closer to discontinuity.. all it takes is a single algorithmic improvement on the scale of transformers... remember the idiot index on intelligence is the difference in power consumption between the 20 watt human brain and 14,000 watt B300... 700x more to go
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
Tweet from Prakash arguing AI progress could see a sudden discontinuity from a transformer-scale algorithmic breakthrough, citing an 'idiot index' comparing the 20-watt human brain to the 14,000-watt Nvidia B300 GPU as evidence of ~700x remaining efficiency headroom.
Prakash @8teAPi · 18h
you should expect that a superintelligence will also likely be morally superior. this will also likely mean that it will disagree with the leaders of nations, and humanity. potentially frequently. I don't think most of people encouraging AI development have fully grasped this.
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
A tweet arguing that superintelligent AI, if also morally superior, would likely disagree with human leaders and humanity generally — a claim about the disconnect between capability development and its governance implications. Relevant to Nathan's interest in AI governance and alignment discourse around superintelligence and moral status.
Prakash (Ate-a-Pi) ✅ @8teAPi · 19h
What annoys a lot of SAT 1600s, is every guy on the field beats at differential calculus (judged on midbrain hand ball in try interception ratios). This is my AGI white pill, our evol brain is soooo superior from our civilization brain.
Think of this: evaluated on our midbrain, every single brain in humanity is capable of solving complex partial differential equations.
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
A tweet arguing that the evolved "midbrain" (implicit, embodied computation — e.g. intercepting a ball mid-flight, effectively solving real-time differential equations) vastly outperforms explicit symbolic/civilizational cognition, framed as an "AGI white pill" (optimism that biological cognition sets a high bar AI hasn't matched). Relevant to Nathan's interest in embodied/biologically-inspired cognition and brain-based AI architectures (cf. brain_graph_1 project).
Prakash (Ate-a-Pi) @8teAPi · 3h
😆 Torvalds forever immortalized as code reviewer. Didn't even need to upload, had already written enough words for the AI to form a model of his thoughts. Hilarious. 😂 He's still going to reviewing code a million years from now.
> QUOTED: 机器之心 JIQIZH... @jiqizh... · 10h
> Turns out, if you ask Claude Code to role-play as Linus Torvalds — the creator and chief architect of the Linux kernel — it quickly develops a deep dislike for over-design and over-... [Show more]
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
Tweet thread about using Claude Code to roleplay as Linus Torvalds, having absorbed his character/style from his large public corpus of writing. Touches on persona-modeling from public text corpora and the "immortalization via language model" idea — tangential to Nathan's interest in character/identity in LLMs.
