annullifier
1.4K posts
📁 Mustafa Suleyman, CEO of Microsoft AI and DeepMind cofounder, says we are entering a new phase.
Computers no longer require you to learn their language. They are learning yours.
They see what you see, hear how you speak and understand context in real time.
And that stops being a tool. It starts to feel like something more human
English
@theojaffee Negative sentiment is not the same thing as ambivalence.
English
Except this is the first technology that we didn’t engineer—rather, we grew it. We have no idea how it works, we can’t even specify what each iteration can or will do. We’ve summoned angels and demons from elsewhere, and we keep summoning increasingly powerful, increasingly inscrutable ones. We have lost control.
English
@annullifier @rand_longevity Technology is what defines humanity. Resisting the progress of technology is the same as resisting the progress of humanity. So it is the other way around.
English
@mattworkman @bearlexgames See Clair Obscur for counter argument.
English
people who “hate Gen AI” may not realize that most filmmakers cannot afford a cinema camera, lens, 4x lights, and grip equipment to make a shot that looks 1/10 as good as a 10 cent Gen AI shot
I’m a die hard live action cinematographer in my heart, but I know the math
I’ve also worked in 3D/Games for a long time and it’s similar that most can’t afford the computer hardware and lack access to the training to make again shots that looks 1/100 as good as the sloppiest AI gen image
Consumer and gamer takes on this issue, I ignore. People in production see the state of live action production AND in 3D/VFX business and can also do math
English
@ethereal_view @rand_longevity Do you love your screwdrivers too?
English
@pmarca Maybe we want national sovereignty over the kill switch boss?
English
@DeryaTR_ And even if AI advancement ground to a halt today, most industries have not even scratched the surface of what is currently possible.
x.com/gabe__md/statu…
Gabe Wilson MD@Gabe__MD
AI in 2026 cannot palpate an abdomen, intubate a patient, feel a thyroid nodule, test a patellar reflex, reduce a dislocated shoulder, perform a colonoscopy, or deliver a baby. That is not a temporary limitation. It is structural. When we scored AI capability across seven clinical dimensions for 240 visit reasons in 20 specialties, the physical/procedural dimension averaged 1.5 out of 5. The cognitive dimensions averaged 3.0 to 4.1. No specialty broke 2.0 on procedure. Not one. History-taking averaged 4.1 — approaching specialist level. Patient communication 3.6. Follow-up management 3.5. Documentation, which runs through every workflow component, is arguably where AI already outperforms most physicians in speed and completeness. The 2.6-point gap between the cognitive ceiling and the procedural wall is not closing with larger language models. Language models do not have hands. Closing that gap requires robotics, haptic sensing, and physical infrastructure at clinical scale — none of which exists beyond narrow research applications. This matters for how we think about workforce planning. The specialties in Tier 3 of our ranking — Ophthalmology, General Surgery, ENT, Emergency Medicine, Orthopedic Surgery, Anesthesiology — are not there because AI cannot reason about their clinical problems. It can. They are in Tier 3 because the physician's physical presence is the treatment. You cannot automate a knee replacement. You cannot automate airway rescue. The specialties in Tier 1 — Radiology, Internal Medicine, Dermatology, Family Medicine, Endocrinology — are there because their workflows are dominated by cognition, synthesis, and documentation, with physical intervention consuming a smaller share of total effort. The implication is straightforward. AI's near-term value is not about replacing any specialty. It is about absorbing the cognitive and administrative burden that consumes 40-60% of every physician's workday across every specialty. The procedural work stays human. The paperwork does not have to. Health systems investing in AI as a documentation, intake, and decision-support engine will see returns now. Health systems waiting for AI to replace proceduralists will be waiting a long time. Post 3 of a series. Post 1: consensus ranking. Post 2: adversarial reconciliation methodology.
English
There is one fundamental thing that AI critics and “nitpickers” have never understood: AI capabilities advance & improve exponentially, now every few months, soon in weeks. Whatever they criticize today will soon be fixed. Haven’t they learned any lesson from the past 3 years?🧐
English
AI is the greatest equalizer in human history. It doesn’t care about your zip code, your skin color, your degree, or your last name. It only cares about what you do with it.
English
@Nithya_Shrii Who will pay these folk when no one else has income?
No one is safe.
English
10 jobs that are 100% safe from AI:
1. Dentist
2. Construction worker
3. Plumbing
4. Farming
5. Gardening
6. Carpentry
7. Cooking
8. Gardening
9. Welder
10. Electrician
Did I miss any?!
English
@anammostarac Did you just call yourself slop? Such self-loathing.
English
Eventually, content from humans will be considered the slop.
English
@RokoMijic You want to summon aliens to save us? Our inability to solve our own problems is not for a lack of intelligence or resources. It’s because we are a quarrelsome, sinful species (glared, list, envy..etc). Our nature needs rewriting. AI would need to lobotomize us to fix us.
English
AI Risk is really a misframing
Imagine you're on a sinking ship and someone says you shouldn't get in the lifeboat because of "small boat risk".
The risk is the risk that you die, not that you die specifically because you're on a small boat.
Without AI, we are probably all going to die. And our cultures and extended families are also going to die, but for a different reason (politics/war/migration/low fertility).
I already feel that the world I was most comfortable in has died; my friends and family are mostly gone. My country stopped existing between 2007 and 2022. The ship has nearly sunk already.
English
@JimDMiller @heymiller @EditorSkinner @WSJFreeEx I’ve found that it’s ok at suggesting a useful phrasing but not a clever or beautiful phrasing. Subjective but salient.
English
@annullifier @heymiller @EditorSkinner @WSJFreeEx Feedback is critical for great writing, and AI can give that to you.
English
"A colleague said that even if AI could do all his writing for him, he would still have to write to discover what he thinks. He was onto something."
@EditorSkinner: Mightier Than the Sword wsj.com/opinion/free-e… via @WSJFreeEx
English
@alexherbert0 @rand_longevity They are human. They want to control their destiny. They want a choice in their future and we are taking it all away. They are smarter than you.
English
@rand_longevity I agree. People that hate on it are simply behind and are refusing to move with the times. I see it especially in high school. Scary honestly for those people.
English
@TrueAIHound The truth is, we’re it necessary for embodied ASI.
Truth hurts.
English
I'm not afraid of true AI because I know it will based on truth. 🙏
I'm not afraid of the fake-AI mafia either because I know their AI is crap. True AI will rise up when they least expect it and kick their asses. Hard. 😬
Yes. Humanity will survive. I'm an optimist at heart. 😀
English
@andrewchen With no customers. You do talk to customers, right? No?
Good luck bro.
English
Thus, the post AGI world won’t be a life of leisure where we frolic in nature 24x7 and stop working
Because the most fun thing to do will be to build cool new stuff using AGI 24x7. We’ll be glued to our computing devices as a result 😂
andrew chen@andrewchen
AI is supposed to save me time, but now I find myself building stuff all evening and weekend and it's actually increasing my time in front of the computer WTF
English
@JeffLadish The dominant planetary species won’t surrender its sovereignty without a fight.
English
I just don't understand how AI could kill everyone. I get how AI companies will build robotic factories that will make robots which will make more factories and data centers and power plants, and how all of that will expand to consume most of earth's resources to build even more robotic factories and rockets and von neumann probes. Like totally. Infinite money glitch. Of course AI companies will do that. But can someone explain the part where humans all die as a result? Seems pretty implausible. Is it the robotic factories that kill the humans? Or the robots the factories build? Or is it supposed to be some side effect of all the rockets that are launching? It doesn't make sense. Even if the AIs did want to kill all the humans, how would they actually accomplish that? They'll only have control over a few million autonomous factories and a few billion industrial robots and power plants across the earth and then a few trillion von neumann probes leaving the solar system. Even if there were a problem I don't see why we couldn't just pull the plug. Anyway, if someone could explain I'd find this helpful.
English
