Michael DeKort

@Tesla and @Elon Musk just admitted they were never able to build a driverless system-I said this 8 years ago and explained exactly why - linkedin.com/posts/activity…

@Winterrose Why? Hitting to close to your grifter home?

nuke garry marcus

@stephenasmith That didn’t age well

Watching my golf and seeing Rory McILROY falling about by the seams. Bad enough he lost a 6-Shot lead on Saturday, walking into Sunday as a co-leader, but now he’s missing gimme’s, surrending the lead to Cameron Young, who’s now got a 2-Shot lead. Not Good. Not Good at all

@Matt_Pinner Honey

Answer without Google… What food can never spoil, even after thousands of years?

@MilkRoadAI Scaling to create core functionality is a desperate joke. If lying, hyping and manipulative humans ever create AGI it will work right away. Scaling will then only make it work faster.

The CEO of Google DeepMind just went on record saying he disagrees with one of the most respected AI researchers in the world. Demis Hassabis, the man behind AlphaFold, AlphaGo, and Google's entire AI operation publicly pushed back against Yann LeCun's claim that large language models are a dead end for artificial intelligence. LeCun, who left Meta earlier this year to start his own AI lab, has been saying for years that LLMs cannot reason, cannot plan, and will never get us to human-level intelligence. Hassabis disagrees, and he said so directly. His position is that scaling laws are still working, foundation models are still getting more capable, and whatever AGI ends up looking like, LLMs will be a central part of it, not something that gets replaced. He does say there is roughly a 50/50 chance that one or two additional breakthroughs will be needed beyond scaling alone, things like better memory, long-term planning, and world models. But the core disagreement with LeCun is clear, Hassabis believes the current architecture is sound and the current path leads somewhere real. Two Nobel-recognized researchers, two founding figures of modern AI, now publicly on opposite sides of the most important technical question in the industry.

@GaryMarcus @vkhosla Yes but you should focus on Khosla’s desperation here. When people purposefully avoid the details of the specific subject matter at hand they are tacitly ceding your points. Attacking you personally and lying to do so makes that case even stringer. He is a grifter.

@vkhosla Wow. My understanding is that Uber uses our core IP regularly. Coming from you this defamatory. I ask that you retract it.

The hardest part to take seriously is the appeal for trust from someone whose history gives people reasons to question his candor and thoughtfulness. More like a popularity hound. His two startups achieved little other than scam Uber but you fancy yourself an aficionado while most credible people I know dismiss your rants.

@TrueAIHound Bingo. Extreme ignorance and arrogance of mankind to think it solves this so easily the lying, hyping and thinking scaling does a thing demonstrates this. AGI will be discovered by accident. It will work on day one with scaling only making it work faster.

My position on this matter is radical but clear. AGI will be solved but it will be a neuroscience solution. No technique or method invented by the AI community since the inception of the field, is relevant to solving AGI. This includes symbolic AI and deep neural nets. From the beginning, the AI community has conflated automation with intelligence and never looked back. Consequently, they will fail to solve the mystery of intelligence. Not that I'm complaining, mind you. They deserve to fail. Miserably. 😀

@GaryMarcus Why do you give them the satisfaction. We criticize people. Some lash out because they have no valid response. You own them at that point. Tell them their response is tacit acceptance of your point and move on. If they keep it up block them. Don’t let them own you.

Wow, time for a social media detox. Just today - a call for violence against me - insults (that’s every day) - flagrant lies about my credentials - claims that I advocated violence when i repeatedly called for boycotts rather than violence - complaints that I was too negative - complaints that I was too positive Seeya when I seeya.

@GirthyB Somebody got Liberace hand me downs.

Damn it you know you’re old when Axle Rose looks like a grandma singing at church and you remember when they first hit MTV. Getting old sucks💯😪

@SheaSerrano Tee time

question for the golfers: this is my first time watching the masters what does the “1:44” next to mcilroy’s name mean what what about the numbers for other names? (i know what the “-4” or whatever means i’m talking about the 68 and 12 and so on) thanks

@BarryOnHere LeBron doesn’t belong there. Surely not if you think Brady isn’t.

It can't be overstated how horrible it is for NFL discourse that Tom Brady won 7 rings. For the rest of time every QB debate will be reduced to "HE HAS FEWER RINGS THAN BRADY, HE'S NOT THE GOAT" and it sucks. Especially since Brady was NOT A GREAT PLAYOFF QUARTERBACK. Brady is way more Bill Russell than he is LeBron/Jordan/Gretzky. Ask yourself, in a sport where winning in the playoffs is heavily correlated with great QB efficiency, how does a QB with the most playoff wins have such mediocre efficiency? Ask why is Brady the only QB in the modern era with 3+ rings that gets WORSE in the playoffs compared to the regular season! It's luck! Being the luckiest doesn't make you the greatest and Brady is proof of that.

@GaryMarcus There is value in this. Use it. When folks lie, misrepresent or ignore things it’s tacit capitulation.

I will never get used to the sheer number of people who lie about me.

@wil_da_beast630 Yeah. Tiger came up short in regular and major wins. No other stats overcomes that.

Flip the top two. The Tiger never caught The Bear.

@DougWahl1 Entitled. Ban. No pardon capability.

SHE TOOK HER PHONE ON THE COURSE! Kai Trump is coming under criticism, and possibly facing a life-time ban from Augusta National after posting several pictures. Phones are prohibited at the Masters! Those who break the rule are restricted from ever coming back. Your Thoughts?

@GerberKawasaki Yeah. Because he cares about needles human Guinea pigs he was willing to kill to train on crashes.

I’ve bought Tesla FSD on 4 different Tesla vehicles. I don’t think it’s unfair to return the $10k to owners and let us pay by the month instead. This is 5 years of beta testing and waiting for it to be “sentient” - Elon made the promises we all relied on. $TSLA

@GerberKawasaki You are confusing better tech and results for good. Seem the scaling issues? It will get worse. You are making the same mistake you made with Tesla. Buying the hype and not doing your homework.

I take Waymo and just marvel at how much better it is the Tesla FSD. I wish my Tesla drove like a waymo but it doesn’t. No question we’ve hit a wall. What will it take for it to actually move from level 2 to 3-4? I want it to work but I think Tesla has to rethink the approach. $TSLA

@elonmusk You are a reckless grifter. Over 60 dead needlessly with this grossly negligent camera only tech. No active ranging, severe environmental issues etc. The negatives far outweigh the positives. How often do needless human Guinea pigs disengage to save the system and themselves?

Tesla self-driving saves a lot of lives – the statistics are unequivocal. That doesn’t mean it’s perfect, of course. Even when we improve safety 10X, saving 90% of the million lives lost in auto accidents every year, Tesla will still get sued for the 10% who did die. The 90% who are still alive mostly won’t even know that Tesla saved them. Nonetheless, it is the right thing to do.

@FredLambert @elonmusk This is what desperate grifters do

This is one of the most disingenuous things I've heard @elonmusk say. It's wrong and dangerous. Tesla is being sued — and in some cases has already lost or settled — over crashes where the plaintiffs argue that Autopilot or FSD actively contributed to the crash. Not that the system failed to save a driver who would have died anyway, but that the system made a mistake a reasonable human driver wouldn’t have made, or that Tesla’s marketing led drivers to trust the system in situations where it wasn’t capable. Those are two very different categories: 1. A crash FSD couldn’t prevent (driver error, pedestrian darting out, another car running a red light). 2. A crash FSD caused — either by making a perception or planning error, or by lulling an over-confident driver into not paying attention to a situation the system couldn’t handle. Musk is conflating the two. He’s rhetorically moving every FSD crash into category one so that every lawsuit looks like an ungrateful family suing the company that tried to save their loved one.

@SLGALLUN As they should. Waymo is misleading the public. Will never be as good as a human due to a fatally flawed development approach.

#Waymo Robot Car Testing Ends in NYC After Permits Expire | THE CITY — #NYC News thecity.nyc/2026/04/06/way…

@TeslaXplored The design is fundamentally and fatally flawed. Camera only cannot measure distance and has significant environmental issues. Defies basic physics.

Funny how I was so naive and took Elons claims at face value. Should’ve known better since I’ve been following Tesla since 2019!! Yet, I’m still called a Tesla hater. When I’m just a Tesla realist. $tsla

@ThoNg676733 Nice but nowhere near Grace

This is probably as close to the original as I've heard. Phenomenal!😍🔥