8 captures, most recent first.
🔁 Peter N. Salib reposted
Kevin A. Bryan @Afinetheorem [Follow]
*Every* high level researcher I have asked has said minimal RSI in '27ish and "AI can do anything a human can do on a computer" by '29 at the latest. These are not people selling me anything.
8:06 PM · Jul 28, 2026 · 2,248 Views
💬3 🔁6 ❤️47 🔖9
Relevant ⌄
Alec Stapp @AlecStapp · 13h
yup, and most policymakers are still very unaware this is the consensus view (insofar as they even understand what RSI means)
💬 🔁 ❤️8 📊447 🔖
prinz @deredleritt3r · 12h
Would you happen to know what "minimal RSI" means in this context?
💬1 🔁 🖤2 📊409 🔖
Kevin A. Bryan @Afinetheorem · 11h
Minimal RSI meaning at least some key conceptual breakthroughs in the following model are proposed and implemented independently by the previous model. My example here is "an AI comes up with Chinchilla law and reallocates effort in next training run"-level breakthroughs.
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
A quote/reply thread with visible repost attribution at top ("Peter N. Salib reposted"), profile photos show Kevin A. Bryan with a dog. No images beyond avatars.
ai-safetyrsitimelinesgovernancetwitter
```
Elizabeth Barnes @BethMayBarnes Sometimes people outside the field say things like "The AI situation can't be that bad, there must be experts who are on top of it". As "an expert", I would like to be clear that we are
*not... [truncated] [4 reposts, 47 likes, 1.7K views] Ryan Greenbl... @RyanPGreenbl... · 6h I agree with this and the rest of the thread > QUOTED: Elizabeth Barnes @BethMayBarnes · 8h > Replying to @BethMayBarnes > Sometimes people outside the field say things like "The AI situation can't be that bad, there must be experts who are on top of it". As "an expert", I would like to be clear that we are *not... [truncated]
```
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
A widely-viewed thread from METR's Elizabeth Barnes bluntly stating that AI safety experts are not "on top of" the risks — likely extinction-level capable systems within a few years, chaotic lab practices, and chronic under-resourcing of independent safety orgs like METR relative to development pace. Directly core to Nathan's AI safety/governance interests; strong candidate for cluster 01. Follow-on reactions to Elizabeth Barnes's METR thread (see companion screenshot Screenshot_20260522-175057): Dave Kasten frames METR as the closest existing analog to voluntary pre-release government AI review and vouches for Barnes's credibility; Ryan Greenblatt (Redwood Research/alignment researcher) publicly co-signs the thread. Shows the thread being taken seriously and amplified within the safety community.
twitterelizabeth barnesmetrai safetyx-riskgovernancetimelineslab practicesryan greenblattdave kastenai governancepolicy
Chris Painter (@ChrisPainterYup) · Apr 8:
"I think many many more people would truly care about existential AI safety, and behave as though they truly care, if they believed AI capabilities will develop as far and as fast as many people currently working on existential AI safety do"
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
A short opinion tweet arguing public/professional apathy toward x-risk AI safety is largely a function of differing capability-timeline beliefs rather than differing values — a common framing in the AI safety community about the "belief gap" driving the "caring gap."
twitterai safetyx-risktimelinespublic perception
Ethan Mollick @emollick
There are now over a half dozen extremely well-funded companies from famous AI researchers building alternative approaches to AI, betting LLM-based technologies hit a wall. The overall effect is that there are now more pathways than ever for keeping AI development moving forward.
12:36 AM · Mar 10, 2026 · 20.9K Views
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
Ethan Mollick observing that multiple well-funded startups are betting against pure LLM scaling and pursuing alternative architectures, framed as increasing overall AI progress redundancy. Relevant to Nathan's tracking of AI progress/timelines and architecture diversity (parallels his own brain_graph_1 work as an alternative-architecture bet).
twitterai progressai architecturetimelinesethan mollickllm scaling
Seth Karten @sethkarten · 14h
I only had a 3 month lead over karpathy on auto research. This might change my timelines...
I had previously considered this NeurIPS to be the last NeurIPS manageable by human reviewers. I take that back.
Now COLM is the last... NeurIPS will be hit with more useful research than it can handle with review demand
Either way, GPU demand this year will skyrocket as you are not limited by your management of research agents, but the number of gpus per agent
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
Follow-on commentary in the same "autoresearch" thread (see prior screenshot), a researcher revising AI-driven-research timelines downward and predicting academic peer review will be overwhelmed by AI-generated research volume. Relevant to Nathan's tracking of AI R&D automation and singularity-r indicators.
twitterai r&d automationautonomous research agentspeer reviewtimelinessingularity tracking
Steve Bachelor reposted
Eliezer Yudkowsky @allTheYud · 8h
Replying to @RatOrthodox
Debate doesn't help. Eg, OpenPhil running their change-our-views contest and incredibly predictably awarding $50,000 to essays arguing for lower AI risks and longer timelines, the opposite of the direction they later predictably updated.
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
Yudkowsky arguing that public debate/contests don't reliably change institutional AI-risk views, citing Open Philanthropy's "change our views" essay contest as an example where the winning arguments (lower risk, longer timelines) ran opposite to Open Phil's later actual belief updates. Relevant to the archive's AI governance/safety cluster.
ai-safetyai-governancetwitteryudkowskyopenphiltimelines
Peter Wildeford... @peterwildef... · 6h
real
> QUOTED (image of document text, with "Mid 2025" struck through and replaced by "Early 2026" in red):
Early 2026 [was: Mid-2025]: Stumbling Agents
The world sees its first glimpse of AI agents.
Advertisements for computer-using agents emphasize the term "personal assistant": you can prompt them with tasks like "order me a burrito on DoorDash" or "open my budget spreadsheet and sum this month's expenses." They will check in with you as needed: for example, to ask you to confirm purchases.⁸ Though more advanced than previous iterations like Operator, they struggle to get widespread usage.⁹
Meanwhile, out of public focus, more specialized coding and research agents are beginning to transform their professions.
The AIs of 2024 could follow specific instructions: they could turn bullet points into emails, and simple requests into working code. In 2025, AIs function more like employees. Coding AIs increasingly look like autonomous agents rather than mere assistants: taking instructions via Slack or Teams and making substantial code changes on their own, sometimes saving hours or even days.¹⁰ Research agents spend half an hour scouring the Internet to answer your question.
The agents are impressive in theory (and in cherry-picked examples), but in practice unreliable. AI twitter is full of stories about tasks bungled in some particularly hilarious way. The better agents are also expensive; you get what you pay for, and the best performance costs hundreds of dollars a month.¹¹ Still, many companies find ways to fit AI agents into their workflows.¹²
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
A retrospective note on the "AI 2027" forecast document (the "Stumbling Agents" section), with someone editing the original "Mid-2025" heading to "Early 2026" and Peter Wildeford endorsing the correction as "real" — i.e. the forecast's agent-capability timeline was roughly accurate but ran about 6-9 months later than predicted. Directly relevant to Nathan's interest in tracking empirical progress against AI forecasting/singularity models.
ai-2027forecastingai-agentstimelinespeter-wildefordtwittersingularity-tracking
Daniel West @DanielCWest · 18h
I'm misaligned with conservative cautious risk averse non-adventurous humans, I can't stand them. Their lack of curiosity about the unknown gives me claustrophobia. If they got their way nothing would ever happen, reality would be at a standstill
[1 reply, 1 like, 66 views]
Daniel West @DanielCWest · 18h
When I realized the gravity of the situation and realized that regardless of what happens that the future, (uncertain on timelines) would be very alien and unpredictable, it did genuinely horrify and shock me. I don't blame the people who still can't accept this
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
Two tweets from an accelerationist voice expressing contempt for risk-averse people and describing being shocked/horrified by the alienness of a future AI-driven timeline. Relevant to Nathan's tracking of AI-risk discourse and psychological reactions to transformative-AI timelines.
twitterai accelerationismai riskfuturismtimelines
