
Ryan Tansom
3.5K posts

Ryan Tansom
@RyanTansom
Father of Twins 👯♀️ | Seeker of Truth 🔮 | Sound Money Advocate ₿ | Lover of Life 🌱 | Passionate Learner 📚 | Podcast Host 🎙️ | Speaker



Conversely, I do give Zeihan credit for identifying interesting axes, things that people took for granted as constants that he rightly recognized to be variables. Like US willingness to guard shipping lanes, or commodity exports, or geographical chokepoints. I mainly disagree with the sign of his conclusions, not the specific axes he flags.










Ilya and I are predicting the same future. @ilyasut predicts that as AI becomes viscerally powerful, humans will change in unprecedented ways. I’ve been arguing the same. We are not open to radical change yet because we cannot feel the pressure of AI. Once we do, the vectors for human evolution will blow open. I have been building the prototype for this adaptation and opening. He argues that as risk rises, rivals will begin cooperating on safety. I’ve argued the same. As the stakes become existential, the game shifts from dominance maximizing to minimizing death risk (survival). We will rebuild our values around this logic. IIya suggests our alignment goal must be "sentient existence" rather than human control. I've argued the same. Control is a fragile illusion, a point @karpathy recently echoed regarding the difficulty of managing emergent systems. The only robust alignment target is existence itself. The new archetype is not the Conqueror, but the Warrior & Caretaker of Existence. Finally, Ilya suggests companies need a "short list of ideas" to guide them through the chaos. A code of moral clarity. This is the Don't Die philosophy.









