Brett (ETH) | ARMY | OG

@Binance_intern Come on in, let’s celebrate.

Every sunrise is proof that life gives us another chance. Dream bigger. Love deeper. Work harder. Help others. Leave this world a little better than you found it. 🌍 #0X240 #Brett

I remember when I turned 9. I didn't have this many features.

$BRETT on $ETH... The Pepe Beta. Imitation is easy, replication is impossible. Only OG $BRETT on ETH. @brettether #BRETT #PEPE #ETH #0x240 x.com/i/status/20234…

@waleswoosh Get you some memecoins before we comeback

If memecoins are really coming back, it would be the first meta that survived its major bubble

Ready to kill it.

While others chase the noise, legends quietly build their empire. Every cycle creates new millionaires. Make sure you’re ready when it happens. 💎 @brettether #Brett #0X240

@brettarmy4 @brettether Keep building

🔥Token of the Day (Sunday) on ethereum chain!🔥 @brettether #TokenOfTheDay #GemsAlert #Moon #ETHEREUM

@VitalikButerin @hhawk @ylecun Can we get an $ETH Bull Post Mr. Vitalik?

> I think one of the most negative framings expressed is that there won't be work, and there won't be jobs. That AI and robots will do everything. I do not believe this. Then you do not believe in ASI. The definition of ASI is "AI so powerful that AI alone can perform any task better than AI + human can". In that case, there is no economic reason to pay a human to do something (instead of a bot), there are only perhaps psychological reasons. And so any tasks you do will not be "work" in the way economists define work, they will be "playing a game". Though maybe if the transition happens well, the tasks will keep feeling like work, just with the non-fulfilling aspects removed. I think it's a reasonable position to oppose drastic action on AI if you are confident that ASI will not happen soon, and instead we're effectively getting round 3 of the same phenomenon of which the industrial revolution was round 1 and calculators/computers were round 2 (a new tech rapidly became superhuman at a subset of human tasks, some people thought "wow the machine is alive and can do everything now", but we later saw there was a subset of tasks that remained stubbornly difficult for it for many decades, basically until the next round came). I think that's possible but I don't have the confidence that makes me okay with having my life depend on that being true.

One thing I find striking in the discourse between AI 2040 and its detractors is that the two seem to be locked in to totally incompatible worldviews of how fast and how much of a big deal AI progress is: * In AI 2040, every scenario sees superintelligence of some kind emerging by 2040, unless a herculean effort is made to completely stop it * Detractors say things like "AI 2040 is naive about human coordination ability and a threat to freedom", but don't seem to see any naivety in assuming that the ASI transition will just go well by default, don't seem to see ASI itself as a massive power concentrator risk, and don't seem to feel fear of humanity's "hard power" dropping to zero if ASIs can do literally every task better than we can. This stance makes total sense in a "AI is normal technology" world, zero sense in a world where superintelligence is possible by 2030 and almost guaranteed by 2040 I think my beliefs are: - If I was confident that (present-day-style) AI is normal technology, I would be in the detractor camp - If I was confident that superintelligence is coming in 2030 by default, I would be closer to the AI 2040 camp - it's naive, but every other option is naive squared? But my problem is that I feel great uncertainty and have no idea which of the two worlds (or some other third thing) we're living in? Hence why I continue to be open-minded about slowdowns/pauses, but also I feel very uncomfortable with the "open source bad, the good outcome is the one where our guys have controlling global dominance" push coming from some major AI companies and intellectuals - in a "normal" world that's the sort of thing that triggers every political alarm bell at the same time. A big reason why I have been advocating and trying my best to support the d/acc platform (rapid up-skilling in formal verification, cryptography, secure and open hardware, pandemic resistance and other defensive biotech, food and basic resource security, public epistemics, non-power-concentrating versions of physical security) is that these things are clearly worth doing in both worlds. The 2040 plan is already much more open source friendly (even mandating it! yay). It also includes "mutually assured compute destruction" ideas which (if they work) effectively give one of 2-5 actors the ability to trigger a global compute winter - as opposed to giving 1-5 actors the ability to selectively disenfranchise people they consider baddies while exempting themselves. This is also a big improvement. So I can see the earnest attempts to improve along the dimensions detractors criticize on ("does this concentrate power in big AI labs and superpower governments?"), and I appreciate this. I think many people don't appreciate enough the differences between different "kinds" of pause buttons, and how some concentrate power far more than others. Probably we can think harder and improve even more here. But on the "slowdown/pause or not" topic, there isn't a magic "escape the tradeoff" button. The Hansonian in me says: the winning deal is a deal which, from the perspective of both sides' present-day beliefs and knowledge, both sides would accept, though for different reasons. If the crux is AI progress speed, then identify a set of pre-agreed triggers for "okay, serious shit is happening" [super-pandemics? >25% unemployment? something involving slaughterbots?], and pre-agree that we become much more open-minded to the slowdown or pause thing if enough triggers come to pass within some timeframe. 2040 detractors (who clearly implicitly think that we'll see amazing speedup of progress from AI but think that what I call the "serious shit" category is overhyped) will accept expecting that the triggers don't come to pass, and AI worriers will accept expecting that they will. Pre-agreeing on the specific triggers means that once the triggers either hit or don't hit, there is stronger legitimacy around the idea that one side's worldview turned out more correct and we should be more inclined toward their program. If I were @elonmusk (or zuck, or...) I would re-tool twitter much more heavily into being a platform for helping to identify and make these kinds of grand win-win deals, so that we can bypass big-country governments and big-company CEOs and big nonprofit intellectuals and give more people a voice in the discussion. It's possibly one of the best things that social media _could_ do for humanity if it wanted to. But again, maybe this is also naive. Actually, probably it's naive. But currently, I see zero plans for how to deal with an ASI transition that are not naive. Perhaps humanity is stuck with a choice between naive and naive squared (or maybe even naive squared and naive cubed), so I feel inclined to cut some slack to people who are trying.

The OG is inevitable!

@Telcier Don’t miss $BRETT (ETH)

you missed: - Ansem - CZ - CashCat don't worry bro, you will probably miss the next one aswell

Are you ready?

We will go to the moon! 🌕 The charts may swing, the noise may grow, but conviction is built over time. Stay focused, stay patient, and keep building. The moon isn’t a destination, it’s just the first stop. 🌙💎 @brettether is ready for the moon! #0X240 #Brett

Fireworks in the sky. 🎆 #Brett on Ethereum in the spotlight. 🎇 Happy Independence Day! 🇺🇸💙 @brettether 🎊#0X240

Success doesn’t come from having more time. 🕰️ It comes from making every minute count. Lock in. Cut the distractions. Stay consistent. 🧘 You don’t need more time. You need more focus. ⚡ @brettether was built for succes 🍀 #0X240 #Brett

🧙‍♂️ Calling all $BRETT (ETH) believers! I just voted for BRETT (ETH) @brettether on Capitoday 🚀 Let's make it trend! 🔥 👉capitoday.com/coins/brett-me…

@VitalikButerin Can we get an $ETH to the moon tweet, we all need it.

If we want to make the Lean Ethereum consensus chain aggressively more "lean", and add strong validator privacy (ZK-unlink deposit from staking activity from withdrawal, and re-anonymize stakers every day), here is a path: ethresear.ch/t/the-extremel…

Time for that break out! $BRETT on $ETH

Let the others panic. It’s getting greener, and we are just getting started. 🚀 @brettether #Brett #0x240 #PEPE #ETH x.com/i/status/20726…