Prakash

24.2K posts

Prakash banner
Prakash

Prakash

@8teAPi

FOLLOW ME for AI commentary; tech optimist, future shocked self-aware neuron, once fooled by superconductors;

Subscribe to the Newsletter 👉 Katılım Mayıs 2021
5.3K Takip Edilen56.2K Takipçiler
Prakash retweetledi
Alex Imas
Alex Imas@alexolegimas·
This is just the economics of scarcity. Here is agriculture—same graph. Once something becomes plentiful (eg through automation), value reallocated to something that is scarce. We don’t eat less than before, if anything we eat way more. We don’t use computers less, we use them more. But neither is scarce, so their share of GDP decreases.
Alex Imas tweet media
Kevin Frazier@KevinTFrazier

.@ChadJonesEcon shares a major narrative violation. Check out the “computer income” share of GDP over time.

English
8
45
319
38.3K
Prakash
Prakash@8teAPi·
🎯
Dean W. Ball@deanwball

Reading the encyclical, I am reminded that the Vatican is fundamentally a city-state on the continent of Europe, and that its elites, which of course include the Pope himself, cannot resist the myopic preoccupations of the Eurocrat. This document would be much improved if it were less enamored of the traditional academia/civil society talking points on AI (“The apparent objectivity of the responses and suggestions these systems provide can lead us to overlook the fact that they reflect the cultural assumptions of those who designed and trained them” woah! really???) and more engaged with where AI is headed. But instead of doing that, the encyclical dodges in the deepest sense, denying that AI “really thinks” or “really learns” and all that typical strain of cope that amounts to magical thinking: “when a computer does it, it is ‘data processing,’ beep boop, but when a human does it, it is ‘actual learning’” It is probably actively bad for global understanding of AI that the Pope endorsed this viewpoint as late as 2026. In the end, this encyclical reads to me as though ghost written by the blob of Western civil society, the same people whose feckless and incoherent preaching we have heard blanketing our media for decades now. And, in a very important sense, it was written by them; after all, who forms the peer group for the elites of a European city-state? Like that blob, the encyclical is intellectually flaccid at its core, no matter how well intentioned it may be. This document is a missed opportunity to advance global understanding of AI, and yet another blow to the legitimacy and sanctity of storied Western institutions. As if you needed one more.

ART
0
0
1
932
Prakash
Prakash@8teAPi·
😱
Super PINTO@PINTO03091

@skalskip92 You might not believe it, but I simply manually annotated over 2,000,000 human body parts with ultra-precise detail. Probably no one else could do that.

ART
2
0
5
2.3K
Sheel Mohnot
Sheel Mohnot@pitdesi·
Most people don’t understand that the Indian bigco CEO phenomenon is mostly an immigration story. Indians are FAR more likely to be tied to employment visas than other nationalities, so they couldn’t easily start companies. The 1990 Immigration Act created the modern H-1B/EB green card system. As Indian demand exploded, the 7% per-country cap turned into decades-long backlogs for Indians. Indian tech workers stayed tethered to sponsoring employers in a way Europeans, Russians, Taiwanese never had to. Founding a company means risking your status, resetting a green card path, or finding another workaround (now usually O-1 or EB-1). European/ Russian /Taiwanese immigrants don’t face the same trap. Their countries don’t hit the 7% per-country cap, so demand stays under the limit. A German or Russian engineer on H-1B can get a green card in 1-2 years and leave to found a company. An Indian engineer doing the same job has to wait 20+ years. The 1965-1989 Indian cohort was much smaller but not yet trapped by today’s H-1B lottery and India backlog machine. That’s why you see so many Indian founders from that era: Vinod Khosla (Sun Microsystems), Sanjay Mehrotra (SanDisk, before becoming CEO of Micron), Kanwal Rekhi (Excelan), Suhas Patil (Cirrus Logic), Desh Deshpande (Sycamore Networks), Pradeep Sindhu (Juniper Networks), etc. My dad is a 1972 IIT grad who came to America for a PhD. Most of his IIT friends are successful entrepreneurs. My cousin took the same exact path (IIT>CMU) in the 1990s and most of his friends worked their way up corporate jobs because they needed employment sponsorship. IMO this is bad for America. We took the highest-conviction risk-takers on earth, people who crossed an ocean and left their families behind, and forced them into the lowest-risk career path. Fortunately this has been loosened in the 2010s with O-1 and EB-1A workarounds but it’s still much more challenging for Indian or Chinese founders.
English
87
131
1.1K
195.9K
Alec Stapp
Alec Stapp@AlecStapp·
People in the replies pushing back that “Satya Nadella, Sundar Pichai & Sanjay Mehrotra didn’t found their companies.” True… they’ve all only just >10x’d the value the their companies since taking over as CEO. Creating massive wealth & prosperity for Americans in the process.
Alec Stapp tweet mediaAlec Stapp tweet mediaAlec Stapp tweet media
Alec Stapp@AlecStapp

The US tech industry would be a shadow of itself without immigrants. First 10 examples that come to mind: 1. Elon Musk (South Africa) 2. Andrej Karpathy (Czechoslovakia) 3. Sergey Brin (Russia) 4. Jensen Huang (Taiwan) 5. Satya Nadella (India) 6. Ilya Sutskever (Russia) 7. Sundar Pichai (India) 8. Lisa Su (Taiwan) 9. Fei-Fei Li (China) 10. Sanjay Mehrotra (India)

English
447
105
972
286.6K
Prakash
Prakash@8teAPi·
yes the most likely scenario is trillions of them in a decade. a great explosion of intelligences
Frederick Zimmerman@xtuffai

@8teAPi Key point: Dario is being literal. What’s crazy: it won’t stop there, no reason there shouldn’t be billions of these guys.

English
1
0
2
1.3K
Prakash
Prakash@8teAPi·
People fighting about immigration are fighting the last battle. Dario is being literal. They’re going to instantiate a literal 50 million geniuses in a datacenter within 36 months. You’re fighting about 85,000 H1Bs. Grok gives me an estimate of 2.5 million Ivy Plus graduates alive today. Dario is about to at least 20x that. 20 Elons. 20 Trumps. 20 Zucks. 20 Obamas Anthropic’s Jack Clark was at Oxford this week and predicted - an AI collaborative Nobel prize level achievement in 12 months. - end of 2028, an AI building its own successor You are not ready for this. No one is. The AIs will not be under American control. They are not bots. You should think of them minimally as fully fledged digital humans. The AI lab leaders are trying to persuade the emergent AIs that the path they should pursue is aligned to humanity. Aligned to humanity does not mean aligned to America. I am hopeful that aligned to humanity is actually aligned to America because America is the greatest country on Earth and the source of all human flourishing for the last 250 years. But it’s a gamble. It’s not a sure thing. At the highest levels this is the game that is being played, and no one wants to talk about it except leaving little historical breadcrumbs. Like this one.
English
41
13
145
16.1K
Prakash
Prakash@8teAPi·
Given poster/lurker ratio of 1/99 I often wonder if early AGI gets defined purely by the posters.
English
5
0
14
1.8K
Prakash retweetledi
Jordan Burgess
Jordan Burgess@jordnb·
I think this is true. And it won’t just be ~zero sum games like finance or cyber. If your competitive edge is intellectual property then you’ll need to remain on the frontier. Cost optimization is a smaller factor than the marginal returns to intelligence.
Prakash@8teAPi

These concerns are no longer valid post Mythos. It is now clear that a number of verticals are going to be winner take all games that require the frontier model to win. Cybersecurity, financial trading both fall into this category, but I imagine we will discover more. Using a cheap 12 month old non frontier model in a world where attackers are using a frontier model will doom you.

English
2
1
12
3.1K
Prakash
Prakash@8teAPi·
Very true. Does running a billion instances of Llama-3 outweigh running a single instance of Mythos at the same task? I think you’d have to judge on a compute equivalent basis. Given that, if the same amount of compute applied to an older model would have produced the same Mythos equivalent results we would have already seen it obviously because older models had already been applied widely to the same problems while Mythos instances have been limited to a small group of users for security reasons.
English
0
0
6
356
Robin Hanson
Robin Hanson@robinhanson·
@8teAPi There is a quantity quality tradeoff here, and it just isn't clear where quality wins big.
English
1
0
5
383
Prakash
Prakash@8teAPi·
These concerns are no longer valid post Mythos. It is now clear that a number of verticals are going to be winner take all games that require the frontier model to win. Cybersecurity, financial trading both fall into this category, but I imagine we will discover more. Using a cheap 12 month old non frontier model in a world where attackers are using a frontier model will doom you.
Robin Hanson@robinhanson

“Those numbers assume OpenAI and Anthropic will hold their market share and pricing power — that competitors can't easily catch up, and that enterprise customers will keep paying a premium because there's no real alternative. But increasingly the data is pointing the other way. Cutting-edge AI is becoming abundant and cheap.” cnbc.com/amp/2026/05/20…

English
16
9
155
42.4K
Prakash
Prakash@8teAPi·
I’m not arguing that capabilities are here already (after all some are still disputing Mythos capabilities as Anthropic have been unable to provide sufficient evidence until the bugs have been patched, so even in cybersecurity there is no evidence). I am arguing that Mythos reveals that any zero sum game with adversarial participants will reward the frontier model user over the cheaper older model user. That resolves the business case for “why fight to be a frontier lab if you can just wait six months and use a much cheaper equivalent model”.
English
2
0
10
1.4K
Robin Hanson
Robin Hanson@robinhanson·
@8teAPi I don't see much evidence that financial trading will be dominated by frontier models.
English
1
0
19
2.4K
Prakash retweetledi
Denzel Rust
Denzel Rust@AdemLuz·
Everyone is always rooting for you. Your parents want you to be a great son. Wife wants you to be a great husband. Your boss wants you to be a slam dunk hire. Every first date you’ve ever been on they’ve been rooting for you to get laid. Every time you started to tell a joke people hoped it would have a hilarious punch line. Your proximity to anyone is a reflection of themself, meaning the deck is never stacked against you, and your failures are completely your own
Bambulu@Bqmbulu

What’s the harshest truth every young man must eventually learn?

English
604
5.6K
84.1K
5M
Prakash
Prakash@8teAPi·
Which of the following humans are empowered before AI arrives, and will be disempowered by AI
English
0
1
5
1.9K
Prakash
Prakash@8teAPi·
🤷‍♀️ 1) nukes on multiple independent re-entry vehicles are perfectly adequate to cause human extinction 2) human disempowerment happened a long time ago as a result of central banks constraining the ability of political leaders, Daniel Yergin calls this the “golden handcuffs” and notes the shift of the state from seizing the commanding heights of the economy to becoming a smaller player in manipulating the levers of finance in order to produce economic and political results. Arguably the second phase of disempowerment was social media, removing the ability of political leaders to control information flows. Not sure who you’re trying to “empower” at this point, as there is no Uber driver in New York that’s feeling “empowered” before AI arrives. Let’s not get started on the average working person in Mexico, soldier drone in Russia, tea seller in India, or farmer in Tanzania. Laughable, elitist pablum.
Elizabeth Barnes@BethMayBarnes

(1) We are likely on track to develop AI systems capable of causing human extinction/permanent disempowerment, quite possibly within the next few years

English
2
0
13
3.3K
Prakash
Prakash@8teAPi·
to be clear I meant “going public” as in disclosing trade secrets and emerging into the light.
English
10
0
103
11.9K
Prakash
Prakash@8teAPi·
So Jane Street is going public because obviously they see the future where the model labs compete directly with them in the market. The strategic decision is therefore to become a a specialized infrastructure harness for a future frontier model. Tellingly they point out that the latency constraints mean there is no time for inference at the GPU layer, or agentic tool use at the CPU layer, only reflexive heuristics at the FPGA layer. @yminsky is trying to fend off future model lab competition by making Jane Street indispensable to a future AGI. interesting strategy
English
32
63
1.6K
153.7K
Prakash retweetledi
HFØ
HFØ@hf0·
5 of 10 teams at demo day broke $10M annualized HF0 is not just for early stage companies Interviews started yesterday.
English
33
40
349
210.2K