Vitalik Buterin on Warpcast

Vitalik Buterin pfp

Vitalik Buterin

https://twitter.com/WSJTech/status/1755774564896756101 This feels very counterproductive? Like, from an "AI safety" perspective, scaling current techniques to even bigger compute -> earlier superintelligence -> more risk. And from an "AI openness" perspective, it increases the divide between megacorps and plebs.

42 replies

127 recasts

591 reactions

Les Greys pfp

I feel like this smashes very good with @vgr post today. https://warpcast.com/vgr/0xe66d76a6

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

BORED.eth pfp

At this point it just feels like propaganda trying to siphon American tax dollars to OpenAI as some kind of national defense weapon…

1 reply

0 recast

6 reactions

:omer pfp

e/acc perspective: faster agi = better?

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

matthewb.eth pfp

Agreed, it feels like an absurd amount of capital for a singular entity to potentially deploy, corporate or otherwise.

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

Martin pfp

@koeppelmann.eth

Counterproductive for whom? It seems you assume that Sam has the same goals as you. My take is that he overestimates his own abilities and underestimates the complexity of human needs and wants, thus coming to the wrong conclusion: that more power for him is also good for humanity.

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Ford Perfect pfp

Counterproductive for humanity, not for the few...

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

David Salami pfp

@david-of-earth

I suspect you don’t even need $7trillion dollars to get to AGI

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Lex Sokolin pfp

This reads like ego to me. You can’t centrally plan the right industry structure. Imagine a $7T telecom fund in 2000.

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Art Vandal pfp

AI safety is a concern. But I don't see how this (specifically) widens the gap between corporations and plebs more so than any capitalist investment. Having an abundance of AI chips will only make them more affordable and lower the costs of AI cloud services.

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Trung Thanh (David) Nguyen pfp

Trung Thanh (David) Nguyen

Try TrustKeys with Web3 and AI

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

freeman pfp

This is Silicon Valley. It’s never about safety or openness. It’s only about the money. The only path forward is decentralized AI with Bittensor and Morpheus

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Johannes Kares pfp

To put this in perspective. The GDP of Germany, the 3rd largest economy in the world, is less than 5 trillion.

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

syentist pfp

> earlier super intelligence -> more risk Why? Seems like an unfair default framing Earlier super intelligence = automated crop production, faster therapies for chronic illnesses, life extension, colonisation of near space etc all of which dramatically extend humanities p(survival beyond the next 100 years)

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Chetan Kale pfp

That gap is what he is targeting, not good imo

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Trish🫧 pfp

I don’t have a wsj subscription anymore so read elsewhere. Absolutely no mention of the harm being done to people in the countries like Congo where the resources to make semiconductors are abundant. It feels deeply problematic and dystopian. Especially because isn’t he a hardcore prepper. Did WSJ mention anything?

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Nico pfp

definitely has room for opening that divide on the other hand, any investment in diversifying semiconductor production can be a good thing

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Greg Robinson pfp

There are luckily some rate limiters to AI infra growth: Land, power, water, roads, permitting, transformers, switchgear, etc. The question is if the “AI openness” movement can organize and deploy infrastructure capital faster than the Investment Grade balance sheets can.

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Rhett Shipp pfp

Is it possible the second isn’t true because it introduces more competition into the chip supply chain?

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

MisterSweetTreat pfp

MisterSweetTreat

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction