2026-09-12
1 小时 37 分钟Today, I'm chatting with three of my AI researcher friends, from whom I learn a lot every time we talk,
and who also happen to be at somewhat open-ish labs and companies, so you guys can actually say things on the record.
I'm joined by Baron Millich, who is the CTO of Zyphra, which is developing open-source models.
John Schulman, who is the chief scientist at Thinking Machines,
previously the co-founder of OpenAI, led the RLHF work that led to ChetGPT.
And Charlie O'Neill, who is head of model training at Base10.
The first question I have, if we're in 2036, it's been 10 years,
and we don't have like billions of crazy super intelligences that are running around
that have like radically transformed the world, what is the most likely reason that that doesn't end up being the case?
Other than sort of exogenous political shocks or like there's a war or they banned AI or something.
But what is the most likely technical reason that we don't, like 2036 isn't like a crazy alien super intelligence world?
I mean, like my reason would just be like, it's got to be this sort of...
Like there's been a classic thing, almost like Marvex Paradox, right?
Where like we see like, you know...
We think of the AI being like, if it can do this, it's going to be amazing, right?
Like, if it can solve these hard math problems, if it can win a chess, blah, blah.
And then it solves these things and then it's, like, not that impactful.
Obviously, it's somewhat impactful, but, like, not everything.
It's like, if somehow that continues and, like, there's never, like, the true, like, spark of generalization
that occurs, I think that could lead to, like, the AI just being, like,