it looks like a poo.

Or, if you are brave enough...

There's a corresponding siskind post also called something something plan A, I skimmed until the part where the US and China take de facto control of chip infrasrtucture and distribution (saying "nationalise" is haram for free market types), basically imagine having to write a letter to the government to formally justify upgrading your computer, and that's all the AI fanfiction I can tolerate without ruining my breakfast.

Also clanker crankers appropriating the term 'Golden Path' from Dune is just distasteful.

My favorite part was the section where they worked out the logistics of China hiding a data center inside of a mountain.

2040, wasn't that Kurzweils eventual prediction?

Oh damn, they originally said it was gonna be called AI 2030, so they pushed it back a bit

It’s not a rehash of AI 2027 with moved-back timelines like I thought it would be, instead its what they believe should happen in regards to AI development

Plan A is our positive vision for what should happen instead. In this scenario, humanity delays the development of superintelligence until 2040, makes all AI research public, allows dozens of companies globally to catch up to the frontier, and intentionally enters a regime of mutually assured compute destruction.

And in the first footnote:

So far reality is tracking closer to AI 2027 than even we expected. (2027 was our modal year at time of publication, not our median.)

According to them, preliminary analysis of the data as of July 2026 says that rate of progress is 75% of AI 2027. This says Daniel K only believes in a 25% chance of AGI by the end of 2027, their model also hasn’t changed so their medians are still shown as beyond 2027. Footnote 11 also flat-out says they have no idea how much things will keep progressing

I’m not gonna be able to go through the whole thing because busy today, but those are my observations based off a quick glance

The part about tasteless AI enthusiasts needing to be housetrained to not post slop on the forums because that's borderline antisocial was also cool.

Nothing in my interactions with humanities types indicates they would be in a better position to handle either the educational slopnami or a slopped out job market.

As far as educational systems go, "human judgment, logic, and ethical reasoning" were always left to natural selection instead of being actively pursued. Taking a philosophy course on the history of logic and ethics isn't the same as having any.

On one hand, Anthropic sourcing suggests that this is probably at least partially nonsense. On the other hand, though, if there's any accuracy at all I'm going to spend the rest of my life infuriated that I went down the technical degree route and actively avoided a liberal arts education in order to improve my career outlook and then this happened.

Like, I don't think they were trying to mislead but I feel like every guidance counselor for kids ought to have a plaque in their office saying "please note that the world is complicated, ever-changing, and scary and I might actually have no idea what the fuck I'm talking about".

Founder @ Egoist Machines, Inc.

Or is that something more quirky, "Eqoist?" Sorry, if you're making it that easy to misread while I'm having my morning caffeine, I'm not going to do you any favors

I want to piggyback off this to talk about the inevitable Uber comparisons, because not only is the mismatch between investment and returns several orders of magnitude greater, but there's also a difference in kind. Uber's model was to undercut the taxi industry and establish a dependence within their niche before increasing revenues. It's the classic enshitttification cycle. But the AI plan, at least as advertised, isn't to undercut a specific industry as much as it is to undercut literally the entire white-collar labor force. There are several problems with this, starting with the fact that the technology isn't actually able to replace the target in the way it would need to. More significantly, however, is that labor doesn't work like taxis. If labor can't get work it shuts down the entire economy because they lose their income and can't actually consume any of the things the market offers. Also labor tends to get mad and break out the pitchforks and molotovs if things get too bad, and "restructuring the economy to no longer provide you the means to sustain your family" seems like the kind of situation that definitionally makes things too bad. In either event the point is that even if this tech is somehow as revolutionary as advertised then there's not really any winning for the company.

The author characterizes EA as being more "businesslike and professional" than LW, then spends the article talking about how their plans all hinge on getting a rich patron.

The image of the beautiful gardens floored with Astroturf is sad.

cruise ship, duh

brave new frontiers in mass food poisoning to be explored