
Yo Shavit
3.2K posts

Yo Shavit
@yonashav
policy for v smart things @openai. Past: CS PhD @HarvardSEAS/@SchmidtFutures/@MIT_CSAIL. Tweets my own; on my head be it.


We do not plan to make Mythos Preview generally available. Our goal is to deploy Mythos-class models safely at scale, but first we need safeguards that reliably block their most dangerous outputs. We’ll begin testing those safeguards with an upcoming Claude Opus model.







the private sector has been remaking its own versions of NIH, ARPA etc as these public science institutions have seen structural decline and defunding and it will be supercharged by the funding NPV of machine intelligence and its firepower at allocation decisions

Sources: Ross Nordeen, the last remaining cofounder at xAI, left the company on Friday; Nordeen reported directly to Elon Musk as his right-hand operator (@graceihle / Business Insider) businessinsider.com/xai-cofounder-… #a260328p8" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">techmeme.com/260328/p8#a260…
📥 Send tips! techmeme.com/contact

Great meeting with the UK Prime Minister's Al Advisor Jade Leung and her team to discuss our shared challenges and opportunities in the age of Al. We're aligned on the importance of responsible innovation and building a high-performance culture across government to better serve the public. @GOVUK @UKinUSA

Sacramento region should make these parts


This keeps coming up in AGI-pilled European circles, so worth saying clearly even if Yo wasn't fully serious: Unilateral control over ASML is a pipe dream. EUV is a joint civilizational achievement. The subcomponents are still being produced elsewhere, including California. No single country owns this machine, some just a bit more than others. Also easy to forget how long it takes for export controls to ripple through the supply chain. It worked for China because it started in 2019. This isn't a lever you pull for immediate effect. The current export control regime isn't based on owning a single chokepoint. Check how the Foreign Direct Product Rule (FDPR) actually works. The US claims jurisdiction over any foreign product that touched US technology anywhere in its supply chain. That's a legal and political instrument. The supply chain argument is secondary. This means what matters is bargaining power across the whole relationship, not who holds which node. And on that: as long as Europe remains strategically dependent on the US, eg for its own defense, its leverage on semiconductors (and much else) is limited.


apropos of "are we in the endgame", you know the endgame hasn't even gotten started because france still hasn't extended its nuclear umbrella to the netherlands to deter american attempts to commandeer ASML in exchange for sa part du cône de lumière

apropos of "are we in the endgame", you know the endgame hasn't even gotten started because france still hasn't extended its nuclear umbrella to the netherlands to deter american attempts to commandeer ASML in exchange for sa part du cône de lumière

.@dylan522p lays out how we know the hard upper bound on how much compute can be produced annually by 2030: around 200 GW/year. That’s a crazy number (there’s about 20 GW of AI deployed in the world right now), but it’s nowhere near enough to satisfy Sam/Elon/Dario/Demis’s ambitions. Lots of things in the supply chain can be scaled up over 4 years, including things that other people think are bottlenecks, like datacenter power or fab clean room space. But the thing that’s inflexible over that timeline is the number of EUV tools. Dylan forecasts that production of ASML’s EUV tools will scale from 60 per year now to about 100 per year by the end of the decade - which means something like 700 total machines running in 2030. For a fab to make a GW worth of the Rubin chips that NVIDIA is deploying later this year, it needs to make 55,000 3nm wafers, 6,000 5nm wafers, and 170,000 memory wafers. Each 3nm wafers needs about 20 EUV passes, so about 1.1 million passes per GW. Adding on 5nm and memory, you need two million passes. Each tool can do 75 passes per hour, so with 90% uptime that’s around 600k passes per year - so a single machine can make less than a third of a GW in a year. So in 2030, we have 700 total machines, each making 0.3ish GW a year, which means we can produce 200 GW of compute a year. That’s a lot. But Sam Altman wants a gigawatt a week by the end of the decade. Anthropic and Google will be wanting about the same. And Elon wants to be putting 100 GW in space every year. Any one of these players could maybe get what they need, but not all of them.




