'After we adapt to AI being ubiquitous, we'll settle into a new normal.'

No, brother.

After this wave where AI agents / genAI worlds become ubiquitous, it's 100 more waves, all faster/more complex.

There is a point on the exponential where only AI can ride the waves, not man.

You say:

'No! I don't want a perfect AI partner! I like imperfection better, it's REAL!'

Because you are too weak to ask:

'What kind of experience would pull ME away from my partner/to AI? Or pull my partner from me?'

The future is coming at you regardless of your denial.

My latest on TechRadar:

'Right now video games / adult content provide a very rough proxy for fulfilling deep human needs...

Soon AI-generated, hyper-customized personal experiences will offer more than a rough proxy, they’ll offer a viable (and often more rich) alternative.'…

Bengio has two main reasons why an authoritarian regime would be the wrong governance structure to handle AGI’s development:

(I know someone’s going to comment “Yo, that’s e/acc af!” - but it’s not. He advocates for collaboration, not total international laissez-faire.)

Once there are planet-sized AGI god-minds, it's pretty silly to think that brain-augmented humans will have any relevance (practically, economically, or otherwise).

But BMI might (a) help to build a better AGI, and/or (b) extend our 'relevance runway' - so I say: Why not try?

New #enemieslist : @therickwilson talks with #AI expert Daniel Faggella about AI's impact on workforce, economy, and society. They discuss AI's current state, future possibilities, societal impacts, and the role it can play in politics. resolutesquare.com/podcasts/0RNYb…

'Dan's 'No, brother' stuff is just to make ppl fear AI!'

No, brother.

I am for AGI, not against.

I want ppl to look squarely at the following: (1) humanity won't be relevant post-AGI, and (2) work/coordination is required to create a 'worthy successor' (not: paperclipper).