I had sympathy for cyclists who didn't want to stop at red lights when they used to have to pedal but with ebikes that sympathy is GONE. You are on a VEHICLE, stop at the reds!!

We’re committing a portion of Anthropic’s shares to the Anthropic Public Benefit Fund, a new wholly owned entity dedicated entirely to the public benefit. It will start off with 5% of our shares. For every 50% increase in the company’s value over a set baseline, we can contribute up to an extra 2%, subject to our board’s discretion. In total, this means that roughly 20% of Anthropic’s shares are committed to the public good. Our co-founders have already pledged to donate 80% of their equity, and around half our employees are donating a portion of their equity as part of a donation matching program we’ve run since our founding. In the post below, we share more details about our new fund. anthropic.com/news/public-be…

There's not 1, but 2, rival secessionist groups on Australia's Norfolk Island — both claiming to run the place. Canberra officials struggled to distinguish the difference for months after their unrecognised elections. @FinnianMchugh takes you into this bizarre world politico.com/news/2026/10/17…

I predict that Anthropic is going to announce that they rewrote Linux around March 2027. I.e. they make a completely new OS that they start using for a majority of their agent work.

I like this suggestion from @logangraham. I would be extremely excited to see EA philanthropic money/frontier companies go into partnerships with governments - eg Australia’s - trying to secure the digital infrastructure underpinning many small island nations in the Indo-Pacific. They are often poorly resourced and have a long list of critical concerns that sit higher than cyber until an incident occurs. EG: Vanuatu’s Govt was held ransom following hack in Nov 22, Tonga’s telecomms in Feb 23, Palau in March 24, Solomon Islands in May 24, Palau again in July and Nov 24, PNG this year again. Would be great to see a securing initiative.

Applications are open for Pivotal’s Q1 2027 Research Fellowship 💥 Work with mentors from @AnthropicAI , @GoogleDeepMind, @AISecurityInst, @ApolloResearch, and more. 📍 15 weeks in London (18th Jan - 30th Apr). 💸 £15-18k stipend, travel and housing support Apply by Nov 1: apply.pivo.tl ↓

It's simple

(1/7) I'd like to provide some additional context for the remarks that can be found in this interview. (2/7) My discomfort with the attention being paid to existential risk---and with the ongoing dominance of the public discussion of such risks by a few so-called thought leaders---is that there's an elephant in the room that is being missed. That elephant is the effect of all of this discussion on young people, and indeed the effect---beginning with social media a decade ago---of information technology on young lives broadly speaking. (3/7) I recently read an interview by Jill Lepore in which she reports on discussions that she had recently with a group of college students: "They had just three things to say. One, social media completely destroyed their childhoods. Two, AI is destroying their college education and their likely prospects for employment. And three, what the hell are we all doing?" To add a fourth bullet that I've heard in similar discussions: "I'm not going to have children, because the existential risk is just too high." (4/7) Please contemplate such a statement, those of you who think that it's OK that the public, widely diffused, discussion coming from seemingly authoritative figures is so adamant about existential risk. (5/7) Let me add that I have little interest in a debate about what "superintelligence" might mean, or whether we're currently seeing the emergence of superintelligence. For what it's worth, I would certainly agree that the solution of extremely challenging math problems (for example) exhibits a very impressive form of intelligence, although I would want to argue that such intelligence is impossible to dissociate from the collective of humans that provided data to the machine learning system (which itself has become a kind of collective). (6/7) Such philosophical debates are entertaining and even important, but when they then head in the direction of "when such superintelligence emerges, there's a good chance that it will want to kill all humans", I say "science fiction". Again, I don't think that it's bad to consider such thoughts, but I strongly believe that it's bad for society, and especially young people, for such thoughts, unaccompanied by any serious real-world analysis, to become a dominant form of discourse of the era. (7/7) We are damaging human lives, and the consequences of that damage will no doubt be a major theme of the next several decades.

The JSCAI recommends a new Parliamentary Joint Standing Committee to oversee regulatory changes in response to AI developments. Makes sense given the role delegated legislation will likely play under the Aus AI Standards and other regimes, and the pace of expected change 2/11

Maybe this is paranoid but unless you’re using it for something extremely boring I’m very skeptical of the ultra-cheap pricing on chinese models/infra. You get pretty good competition among legit American providers. Should raise an eyebrow when Chinese pricing makes it seem like they’re not trying to make money and are trying to get you to maximize token throughput I don’t think it’s crazy at all to be worried about Chinese state putting together profiles of users of these models. Not even saying not to use them, I’d personally just pay the premium to use a ZDR american provider (IIRC Novita and Fireworks are good. Fireworks is my go-to)

I think we might lose public key cryptography.

Im so happy we’ve settled on pervert glasses as a headline marker or second mention. Youre never going to recover from someone calling them your “pervert glasses”

It’s an absolutely packed house (and packed media risers) as AI whistleblowers Jacob Coxon (in person) and Daniel Koktoajlo and Alex Turner (remotely) appear to testify before the City Council. (Re posting with corrected names)

This article by YAASPQ—yet another anthropic safety person quits—highlights the extremes of reality distortion. Importantly the author points out that "right now we do not have a complete definition" of alignment. Given how often this word is used by the 10% extinction people this seems important to have settled before arriving at a 10% risk. Critically the author suggests, "Given today’s risks, frontier labs need to run like nuclear-power plants or busy airports, with layers of redundancy and careful, time-consuming planning, so that the occasional and inevitable human error does not open a door to disaster." This is absurd on the face of it. AI is not connected to anything unless humans connect it. It is not being asked to run anything. It does not control any physical world resources, let alone radioactive ones. This is precisely the level of risk aversion that is destructive. We see where this view of nuclear power got us to today—a generation without the benefits and downstream costs vastly higher than anything nuclear. I Quit OpenAI Because Its Culture Is Broken The industry’s approach to safety will guarantee more failures unless something changes. By David Robinson theatlantic.com/technology/2…

The Senator isn't kidding about BAAJA fixing inter-agency issues! If agencies fail to act on interagency dispute resolutions, the head of the agency is banned from traveling more than 25 miles (for business) The more I read BAAJA the better it gets! xitter.cf/SenWhitehouse/status/2…

Funnily enough, I broadly agree with Mr. @DeGatchi. For vulnerabilities like this one which impacts everybody using KVM (read every hyperscaler, every AI lab, every company on the planet really), there should be a fund that pays from all of them. As Vercel we are trying to do our part here. And all credit to @PaulosYibelo for going down the pass of responsible disclosure!

It’s a good bit to be the Aesthetics In Architecture person and posting raw, uncut slop like this.