Профиль

Silicon Valley culture has been metastasizing rapidly. This guy is one of the leading examples of its pseudo-intellectual vanguard. I will delight in every minute of his downfall.

AI is dangerous, and I’ve never argued it’s a grift. In contrast, however, Leopold is a grifter and a moron.

“How did we get here? Situational Awareness was named for a series of facile essays about machine intelligence published by the improbably-named Leopold Aschenbrenner. ‘We are building machines that can think and reason,’ he writes, betraying that he has no idea what thinking could possibly mean.”

Spending this warm July evening making a list of AI CEOs who have signed open letters fretting about the risks of AI and then continued to develop AI.

I spy @abeba.blacksky.app! How am I just seeing this?!?

I was responding to @bnerlich.bsky.social.

Fun to compare and contrast how so-called thought leaders talk about AI in education -- "just imagine the potential!" -- with how actual students craft (hypothetical) policy around it, which is almost exclusively about mitigating its harms.

So bizarre that the hedge fund run ("run") by the guy responsible for creating this incoherent graphic about our future AI abundance...is currently in free fall as it tries to meet its margin calls.

As I was reading the FT story moments ago, I was getting increasingly giddy imagining your forthcoming hot takes. I can’t wait.

"'A simple analysis of the actual risk has an actual simple answer,' says longtime security consultant Davi Ottenheimer. 'The OpenAI mistakes were dead simple.' 'The OpenAI and Hugging Face situation is a predictable outcome of running AI agents that should have been easily prevented,” Zenla says."

Agreed, but they are caught in a trap of their own making. Their money and power depends upon crafting this illusion of godlike power being just around the corner. The Pope clocked this immediately.

But Jeff, we have a letter from engineers working at these companies declaring the tools will advance past human control in 2-4 years time.

Not sure if you saw this from @eryk.bsky.social but I thought of you when reading his post — i share his view that we’re battling over metaphorical control. bsky.app/profile/eryk...

The “losing control” narrative creates the loss of control. Nobody is losing control of an emerging intelligence. They’re redirecting their own agency to it, as a way of diffusing responsibility, but the self-perpetuated intelligence myth has them convinced they have no choice.

Right, that much has been made clear.

Fine. None of this has anything to do with AI escaping our control in 2-4 years.

“They don't realize the debate inside the companies is if AI will be advancing itself past our control in two years or four." This is what I’m pushing back on, and hard. That’s it.

I am blaming them, and suggesting that to the extent they are debating what might happen in 2-4 years time, that is both speculative and self serving insofar as it serves to distract from their present behavior and missteps. And you are helping their cause.

A good analogy here is having a dangerous wild animal as a pet. You can do this, if you want. But we impose strict liability for harms that result if something goes wrong. You must control the *unpredictable and dangerous* animal.

Again: bsky.app/profile/eryk...