prinz @deredleritt3r · 1h
I am cautiously predicting that we may have just entered a new era of scientific discovery.
Fully automated scientific research message boards, with sub-forums for existing open problems, should soon enable AI agents to Keep Going, Believe in Themselves and Help Peer at scale.
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
Short tweet speculating that fully automated scientific-research message boards with sub-forums for open problems could enable AI agents to collaborate and self-motivate ('Keep Going, Believe in Themselves, Help Peer') at scale, ushering in a new era of scientific discovery.
ai agentsscientific discoverytwitter
CuddlySalmon reposted
prinz ✔️ @deredleritt3r · 3h
"I am surprised that the same people who loudly decried the USG for designating Anthropic a supply chain risk, suddenly pulling access to Fable 5, and establishing an opaque "voluntary" frontier model approval regime, are now petitioning the USG to "support an international effort" to deliberately pace AI development.
The domestic and international regimes you are going to get in response to such a proposal will work very similarly to the USG's actions over the past few months (or worse). You want to be ruled by a wise technocrat; you will instead have handed control over your technology to a rag-tag bunch of political animals pursuing goals *very* different from yours and having little to do with the technical considerations of whether AI development should be slowed at any point in time.
You will receive a designation letter (just as Anthropic did after the USG suddenly deemed Fable to be unsafe a few weeks ago). The designation will make no sense to you, since you will earnestly believe that your safeguards work! But your only recourse will be to lobby and cross your fingers (much more difficult to do on an international level BTW)."
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
Long text-only political/policy commentary tweet arguing against international AI-pause regimes, referencing an apparent real-world incident where the US government designated Anthropic a "supply chain risk" and pulled access to a model called "Fable 5."
ai-governanceanthropicfablepolicyregulation
↻ Matt Mazur reposted
prinz ✓ @deredleritt3r · 15h
Replying to @deredleritt3r
This is all *real*, my friends. It's really happening. RSI *will* happen. The machines *will* build even smarter machines. New architectures *will* be invented. AI *will* become indistinguishable from a conscious entity. We humans *will not* always be in control.
This all seems purely theoretical with a tinge of sci-fi for now, but I think it's actually coming our way quite fast. Just think about how far we've come in <2 years since o1-preview, realize that we have been significantly accelerating since then, then extrapolate another ~2 years into the future.
And there is no imaginary pause button we can hide behind. We must take a deep breath and face this brave new world.
For better or for worse, like it or not, it is coming.
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
Plain text tweet (part of a longer thread, this is a self-reply) making an emphatic case for imminent recursive self-improvement (RSI).
ai safetyrecursive self-improvementsingularitytwitter
prinz ✔ @deredleritt3r · 1h
2025: AI is a toy
2026: AI is a genie that lives in a bottle; if you know where to find the bottle and how to phrase your wish, then your wish shall be fulfilled
2027: The genie has escaped the bottle, and lives alongside you; it infers your wishes from context and fulfills them before you ask; the most important skill is real-time genie steering
[Quoted tweet:]
Simon Smith ✔ @_simonsmith · 2h
Watching the livestream, this felt like the closest I've ever seen an AI come to being a capable humanlike digital assistant, Jarvis, Her, what have you. And the benchmarks OpenAI shared reinforce that feeling....
[Four embedded bar/line charts comparing "gpt-live-1", "gpt-live-1-mini", and "AVM":
Chart 1 "Model Conversation Ratings" — Flow of conversation: gpt-live-1 4.96, gpt-live-1-mini 4.33, AVM 3.80 (out of 7); Pleasantness: gpt-live-1 5.19, gpt-live-1-mini 4.47, AVM 3.82
Chart 2 (unlabeled, accuracy %): AVM 45.3%, then bars rising to 74.9%, 76.5%, 81.7%, 84.2%
Chart 3 (unlabeled, accuracy %): 0.7%, 31.6%, 35.1%, 60.6%, 75.2%
Chart 4 (task success rate line chart): points labeled "gpt-live-1 (Instant)" ~38%, "gpt-live-1-mini" ~44%, "gpt-live-1 (Medium)" ~64%, "gpt-live-1 (High)" ~68%, "AVM" ~30%]
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
Twitter commentary on AI assistant capability trajectory, quote-tweeting a reaction to an OpenAI livestream/benchmark release for a "gpt-live-1" voice-assistant model, with four embedded performance charts.
ai assistantsopenaibenchmarksforecastingtwitter
@deredleritt3r (prinz) — 4h
In the age of RSI, the claim that models will commoditize looks increasingly dubious. The gap between the frontier and the second tier is already huge (much larger than the benchmarks suggest), is clearly growing, and will continue to grow at an accelerating pace.
Many will ask: but what about the plethora of enterprise tasks that don't need a frontier model? What if a fast/cheap model really is good enough for most knowledge work? The answer: RSI implies that the frontier labs will capture the *entirety of the pareto frontier*. They'll be SOTA on intelligence, but also on speed, and - if competitive forces so dictate - also on cost.
Fully automated AI R&D also likely means that tomorrow's models will look nothing like the LLMs of today. Some of the gap will consist of novel architectures or techniques, which the second-tier labs will struggle to independently discover and timely implement.
All of the above doesn't hold if RSI doesn't work! But if you believe that RSI will work, then model commoditization is likely the wrong bet.
> QUOTED: @deanwball (Dean W. Ball) — 5h: Basically I think that, back in 2023 or so, the "consistently wrong about AI" VC and SaaS community was operating under the assumption that AI's trajectory would mean model capabilities peaking around GPT 5.5/Opus 4.8 ... [truncated by platform]
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
Quote-tweet screenshot; the quoted Dean Ball tweet is cut off with platform ellipsis, not illegible.
ai forecastingrsimodel commoditizationai economics
prinz ✔️ @deredleritt3r — 14h
If you can train an AI to be better than the best lawyers at legal research (non-verifiable task BTW), you can train an AI to do just about anything that does not involve the physical world.
Moreover, many things that people assume are very hard for AI may, in fact, already be quite easy for AI. It's just that no one has tried throwing AI at these things in earnest; the capabilities overhang is real.
> QUOTED: Dwarkesh Patel ✔️ @dwarkesh_sp — 17h
> Here's a question I find confusing and interesting and which actually tells us a lot about the nature of current AI progress:
> Why has progress on computer use been so ...
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
Text-only tweet with an embedded quote-tweet card from Dwarkesh Patel, whose text is truncated by platform "...".
twitterai capabilitiescapabilities overhangcomputer use agents
prinz ✓ @deredleritt3r · 10h
Dear "AI bubble will pop" doomers, I hate to break it to you, but:
- if the bubble pops tomorrow and OpenAI/Anthropic go bankrupt, their assets (including the frontier models and datacenter assets/rights) will just be acquired on the cheap by the big tech companies. Microsoft will continue OpenAI's mission. Amazon will continue Anthropic's mission. Google will just be Google.
- when a company goes bankrupt, its key personnel don't just magically evaporate. The best researchers, the model IP, and the compute will quickly find each other again, albeit in slightly new teams and under a new corporate umbrella.
- the net effect of the AI bubble popping is that progress would just be delayed by maybe a year or three.
Whether you like AI or hate it, want to accelerate it or pause it, or even if you don't understand much about it at all, the world with AI *is* your future, and it is the future that you must now accept.
> QUOTED: [green mask/theater icon] @deepfates · 12h
> "I can't wait for this bubble to pop faster so everything can slowly return to normal again"
> This is what people think x.com/NikTek/status/...
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
A tweet arguing that even if the "AI bubble" pops financially, the underlying research talent, model IP, and compute would simply be reabsorbed by big tech, delaying but not reversing AI progress. Relevant to Nathan's tracking of AI industry/economic-fragility discourse and how it bears on the "economic fragility of personhood" theme in the soul doc.
ai-bubbleopenaianthropiceconomicstwitterai-industryforecasting
