usually, we overestimate the severity and likelihood of the negative outcome.
and we underestimate the severity and likelihood of the positive outcome.
the biggest risk is not taking any risks. shoot your shot.
probably the hardest question is always "push or pivot?"
take the internet/digital world: on the one hand, we did grow up with it, so it would be nice to keep it. but ai makes it kinda ever more unusable.
ai slop on social platforms; security issues, bc attackers will always find ways to disrupt; less time spent overall in digital settings beyond your agentic interface, bc assistants take care of everything.
nobody said that the internet would exist or be used forever, not to mention be secure. so is this problematic? idk, maybe it isn't.
the best advice is usually that which has been said so frequently by ordinary matrix people that it became cliché already.
note it's being said. not acted on. that's your edge.
you can make pretty much anything work. seriously.
the hard part of making something work is not picking, but sticking to the one thing until it works.
seeing ever more people wondering about how the internet will look like with all the ai slop that's coming.
i won't look at all. that's the point. we will go back to analog and physical.
i talked about it:
daniel retweeted
Perhaps one of the greatest modern miracles of society is how safe flying has become.
there is a real chance that superintelligence will cause a dissolution of democracy. current political regimes in the west are post-WWII structures whose mission it is to prevent things like fascism from happening again.
now, because of ai (soon superintelligence) and its abundance, individuals are being incredibly empowered. it's like little rockets taking off everywhere. it will be ever harder to enforce bureaucracy and control everywhere.
another thing is that (1) the gap between rich and poor gets bigger but (2) also the gap between smart and dumb, it feels like.
most people are opposed to data centers, whether they are in their backyard or not. this doesn't seem very reasonable, is true though for about 75% of americans. don't even bother asking a european.
most people clearly lack the ability to grasp the immense potential for improvement for literally everyone that lies in new technologies like this. and yet, their standpoints, ultimately expressed through them voting, are what causes deceleration and halting of those endeavours.
to me, it is obvious that something will change sooner or later. abundant superintelligence is just too liberating to individuals. there is no way democratic systems of such sizes are able to widthstand that.
i'll want to live to at least 120, and i'm sure i will experience this. unless hipsters burn down all data centers and prevent superintelligence from building my fountain of youth.
i love how people are just not able to think of second- and third-order consequences.
yes, ai makes it ever easier to start a business. yes, you can have a 1-person billion-dollar company.
but the easier ai makes it for YOU, the easier it makes it for EVERYONE. not only is there be more competition, but potential customers will try to do it themselves.
figure out what you want to stand for, let ai help you with the execution, but prioritize human interaction. that is the moat of today. real-world, human interaction.
focus on the good, and you will find evidence. focus on the bad, and you will too. your perception, amplified by social media algorithms, will prove the point.
everyone is talking about humanoid robotics companies, all well and good.
humanoid production sky-rockets initially. makes sense because there is no supply at all at the moment.
but what happens then? will it be a commodity like phones where you'd buy a new one every year? idk.
i could perfectly imagine that once a certain demand it saturated and everyone has their humanoid companion, demand shrinks as quickly as it came.
what would be incentives to buy a newer generation of a humanoid on a frequent basis?
tears in my eyes. the future will be so great.
This is freaking huge: For the first time, a AI-assisted personalized mRNA cancer treatment has succeeded in a Phase 3 trial.
Moderna and Merck sequence each patient’s tumor and compare it with their healthy DNA. AI then helps identify which of the tumor’s mutations are most likely to trigger an immune response.
From those targets, Moderna produces an individual mRNA treatment encoding up to 34 neoantigens, The earlier Phase 2 trial followed patients with surgically removed high-risk melanoma for five years:
- 68.8% remained cancer-free, compared with 49.1% on Keytruda alone
- 49% lower risk of recurrence or death
- 59% lower risk of distant metastasis or death
Now the much larger Phase 3 trial involving 1,137 patients has also succeeded.
Absolutely incredible. Dario was right: cancer will be cured in just a few years!
if you think about it, phones are what allows technology to communicate with humans through their senses.
sight: covered✅ (screen)
hearing: covered✅ (speakers)
touch: covered✅ (vibration)
the only senses untouched (pun intended) are smell and taste.
most people lack taste anyway, so that's that.
business idea right there: developing ways to let technology leverage those other two senses too. imagine like a tiny fragrance spray chamber or so.
since odors are molecules flying around, it should be possible. think about that the next time you smell shit. it's literally shit particles in your nose.
if you think about the future of the internet and ai, think about actions for the experience vs. for performance.
UIs are dead. the idea of interacting with an application manually is deprecated. but interestingly: does that mean social media will be dead? probably not.
pleasantly, ai will relieve us from the annoying interactions with the internet or digital space in general. this will be mainly in regard to work-related tasks like research. not long, and humans won't be able to compete with ai at all in providing economic value digitally, inevitably leading us to a great age of abundance where no human work is demanded, thus required anymore.
while deliberate interactions, primarily with other humans on social platforms, will persist. because those are about experience and not performance. you wouldn't go to a restaurant just to eat as quickly as possible, would you? this is also why you're better off using ai for your content only punctually, because people will completely reject intransparently labeled ai content on their last bastions of human interaction.
ultimately, there is, of course, a scenario in which there is literally no way to distinguish between human and ai content. at that point, not even social media will survive, because you can't trust anything you see on a digital device.
then we will probably gather again in marketplaces and battle arenas to marvel at street jugglers and gladiators.
there are exceptions for every rule. sure.
but isn't it fascinating that overall, humanity has the permanent, inherent urge to improve?
it's as if some switch in the brains of humans is constantly flipped to "keep going" instead of "pause".
imagine your robot saying "yeah, wait, let me just train a little ai model on that real quick. just takes a minute". tremendous.
ai, like any technology, enables the smart & adaptive and disables the dumb & unadaptive.
everyone has the choice.
hot take: the people who can't grasp the idea of abundance, and thus fear it, will die out someday.
young folks will grow up with the notion, so it will be just natural for them.
be an early adopter and mentally invested in the future.
anything you see on the internet, you have to approach with scepticism. text, images, videos, all might look human-made, though you'd have to assume they're AI.
achieve real-world results, meet real-world people, complete real-world projects.
the future is physical.