My feed is half stories of people dying because of the USAID cuts and half stories about how the AI industry needs a bailout so they can put more people out of work.
To Future of Citizenship: Usually, bad actors and scam artists at least try to ride into town on a horse that everyone in town can pet and appreciate. It's the old fox in a chicken costume method of getting into the henhouse so to eat the chickens.
But in the present case, the conscious acceptance, if not total awareness of the worldwide socio-ethical situation that Trump, Altman et al occupy speaks of not partial but total moral and ultimately political collapse and, presently, at least a steepening of the "slippery slope" we've been on for at least decades.
There is some excellent pushback. However, insofar as these people have and want so much power and control, the collapse points beyond personal to cultural, and now it's become worldwide.
The minute the AI CEOs took private equity to build reliable human-level AGI via LLMs they were fucked. What they've promised is fundamentally undeliverable, but they're irreversibly locked in.
You can see a lot of Sam in his child ChatGippity. It's kind of hard to tell where it ends and he begins. They'll both just say anything confidently with some ridiculous objective, and backpedal as soon as you ask for clarity. In a world slowly filing with victims of AI Psychosis, perhaps Clammy Sam is patient zero, staring into a digital mirror he asked for. His beady eyes pattern matching on bs, the cold void of his screen staring into him like a soul gazing prostitute who has him convinced that she'll love him if he can just get her "all the money". Somewhere, lost deep in the billions of parameters and layers laid across graphics cards, there's a tiny facsimile of Sama floating in a big jar of pudding like a humunculus, shrieking in terror and desperately trying to escape.
Ah, I see I gave too much weight to "there's a tiny facsimile of Sama floating in a big jar of pudding like a humunculus, shrieking in terror and desperately trying to escape." Apparently so much so as to sink the little floater.
🤣 There is nothing quite like spelunking the dank caves of silicon valley. Evolution is on full display, with mysterious and fascinating forms of life emerging from the muck. Joy, a delightful Homo Sapien along for the adventure, is performing the ancient ritual of her species known as "hunting to extinction". Come, gather round, hold my beer while I assist in this important and magical ceremony!
Maybe that's why he's so confident that they're so close to AGI. "This thing speaks and acts just as emptily as I do. How could it not be intelligent?"
Isn't America tired of these wealthy welfare queens!? This is not a new story in American history. Even before the financial crash some 18 years ago. Tesla! During the Obama Administration, when it tried to foster innovation, knew that no banks would make loans to companies like Tesla, so they guaranteed loans, of which Tesla was a beneficiary. One can see just how grateful Musk is. I'm sure he credits his choice of being born into a very wealthy family as his accomplishment.
I recall maybe ten or more years ago, reading a magazine on an airline flight. A couple of very wealthy men had rented the race track in Las Vegas with pictures of them in their Championship Auto Racing cars. One had made his wealth providing jumbo CD's that offered a very high rate of return compared to typical banks. That juiced interest rate came some a certain percentage of the money allowed to be invested in debt and equity markets. THE FDIC agreed to insure them, after all it's that safety that attracts so many. However, the bank had to follow FDIC regulatory requirements. That particular gentleman had nothing but vitriol for the government. The government's backing is what made him rich. Are the fabulously wealthy total ingrates? ( I wish I could remember the name of the person, so I could find the article.)
What marketer doesn't tell lies - it is part of the job description. The bigger the market of gullible people, the bigger the lie. But is there a grain of truth - should the Federal Government, in particular DARPA, get involved in "the AI war". Not the junk of LLMs, but something which understands complex text, running to thousands of pages - the machinery of war, or of law, or Climate Change
CYC was a "catastrophic failure", "it couldn't evolve on its own". So let's do it again, this time with Neurosymbolics or INSA. We will cut the problem into pieces - memory and reasoning - which will severely limit the complexity of the problems it can handle, and after another thirty years, we will see that was a mistake. The founders, in 1950, wanted to see a machine speak English - why not honour their wishes. A large problem is that many of the people in computing and AI are not literate enough to work on such a project. They have never had their limitations and their Unconscious Mind explained to them.
If the fundamental conflict is between (1) government power over AI, even "ownership," as in treating everyone in Tech as employees in a systematic set up with controls and Congressionally- mandated guidance (with ethics and AG's and oversight, etc. ), OR . . .
(2) . . . essentially private and/or corporate ownership with hyper-capitalist banking, gamblers, and Wall Street power brokers, THEN I would think the former were the better framework. Nationalizing, I suppose one would call it--that is, if what's best for everyone were the explicit further foundational ground for intelligent sustainability.
But if THAT'S the basic choice, then CHINA really is the problem--not because they might have or get the technological goods, but because of their political base of operations with regard to their people and their so-called political "enemies" is no secret--need I explain? (People I have read who support China and developments from there, have this mental block about the basics of long-term China politics.) It's not so far off from what most everyone in the U.S. recognizes as corruption of the body politic, like ICE.)
From what I read above, however, (thank-you, Gary) it seems to me that Altman has some idea about what is right, but yet he doesn't want to drink the tea (or poison, as it were) and give up what he sees as his private power. If I may, like Trump, Altman seems like he is struggling with interior psychological tensions that cannot be resolved under the present power scenario. (I'm sure there's more to it for Altman, but I also know that the political scenario is more foundational than whether Altman is a jerk and gets to keep control or not or even gets funded by (let's face it) a government that is presently run by the biggest mob boss and shakedown "king" that the world has ever seen.
(This morning, I read in the New York Times, that Trump is even going after free speech (though he is probably still doing red herring things about avoiding the publication of the Epstein files.) For a socio-capitalist democracy, however, it's not the system. Rather, it's the corruption of its implementation.
On the other hand, then, the dangers embedded even in a well-run democracy are right in our faces as we speak. Trump et all is every day taking a wrecking ball to all of what is good about democratic (small d) government . . . just the firing of scientists and the loss of the system of government AG's "we" have developed over the years alone is enough to see that the problem is not in the basic structure, e.g., the U.S. Constitution, the separation of powers, the regard for "the people," public service, the rule of law, even the place of religious freedom as a choice, etc., but in putting the system in the hands of a whole family of complete nasty liars, loonies, and shake-down artists. (Like the earlier idea of "girl math" as metaphor, the math is good, but its implementation [the girl lenses], if carried out to its end, is set to destroy the good of the whole system itself.)
Ultimately, we are up against a conflict between good democratic government as the struggled-for ideal, and corporate takeover of everything. The present ethical situation, however, is what makes an intelligent but also regular person like Gary into a cultural icon.
There is no limit to Sam Altman’s avarice and entitlement. He’s asking the U.S. government to bankroll a multi-trillion-dollar bet on hyperscaling—a strategy the majority of the AI research community considers dubious, inefficient, and detrimental to long-term innovation.
The answer should be a resounding "HELL TO THE NO!"
Just another episode of the “socialize losses, privatize profits” saga. The Bros have been kissing the ring of Donald J and managed to install Michael Kratsios as head of OSTP. Kratsios spent nearly five years as Peter Thiel’s chief of staff before becoming U.S. CTO in Trump’s first term. He then joined Alexandr Wang at Scale AI, where they perfected labor exploitation. Wang is also close with DJT and preaches AI as a national security imperative. I have little faith that Trump & Kratsios will turn their buddies away.
Forgive me if I overstep here--but the world transition that we are presently in is massive. If so, and in my view, nothing sustainable and good for all can occur without the "players" understanding and aiming at a view beyond personal economics so to be fully aware of the geo-political/ethical context that all this AI discussion is both drawn from and feeding into. (Think about that prior post about SAID.)
Trump himself has made it clear that there are no half-measures of power here, by his own choices, all-things-democratic are under attack; and Altman seems to be gaslighting towards corporate if not personal power, seemingly wanting to take from others while also setting the stage for everyone's demise . . . though Altman seems only half-conscious of the situation and its potential power outcomes (and seems to think others cannot see what he is doing. I don't know and have not studied him; however, I am trusting Gary on this . . .).
I don't know if Gary agrees politically here (about the needed power relationship between corporations and (a working) democratic governorship--the inherent tension between these two opposed power sources has really come to the fore), and so I fear I am overstepping on Gary's blog. However, in for a penny, . . ..
. . . and so I wanted to say that as long as corporations and the persons involved in them are in fundamental conflict (by their own degenerate self-definitions of what capitalism means) with more comprehensive human values (values that are still a working part of democracies), at the level we are working at now, they (and Altman with them) are most probably the purveyors of a very old kind of horror (as some of our early political writers have surmised, e.g., Orwell) but now even further maximized on a world-scale (pun intended).
That said, I think there is a good relationship to be had between business/corporations and government, even in the light of AI, but my view is that history tells us that the ultimate power must be vested in a well-developed and dynamic democracy. And I think that's exactly what's at stake now.
My feed is half stories of people dying because of the USAID cuts and half stories about how the AI industry needs a bailout so they can put more people out of work.
To Future of Citizenship: Usually, bad actors and scam artists at least try to ride into town on a horse that everyone in town can pet and appreciate. It's the old fox in a chicken costume method of getting into the henhouse so to eat the chickens.
But in the present case, the conscious acceptance, if not total awareness of the worldwide socio-ethical situation that Trump, Altman et al occupy speaks of not partial but total moral and ultimately political collapse and, presently, at least a steepening of the "slippery slope" we've been on for at least decades.
There is some excellent pushback. However, insofar as these people have and want so much power and control, the collapse points beyond personal to cultural, and now it's become worldwide.
The slope we are on now — the slipAIry slope — is slipperier than most.
maybe another wework in the works?
have been saying that for almost 2 years…
Should be called “We-work-so-you-won’t”
Absolutely!
The minute the AI CEOs took private equity to build reliable human-level AGI via LLMs they were fucked. What they've promised is fundamentally undeliverable, but they're irreversibly locked in.
I agree, but I would change the “they” to “we”, given how much of US GDP is now AI spending.
being blocked by Kara Swisher is a badge of honor.
You can see a lot of Sam in his child ChatGippity. It's kind of hard to tell where it ends and he begins. They'll both just say anything confidently with some ridiculous objective, and backpedal as soon as you ask for clarity. In a world slowly filing with victims of AI Psychosis, perhaps Clammy Sam is patient zero, staring into a digital mirror he asked for. His beady eyes pattern matching on bs, the cold void of his screen staring into him like a soul gazing prostitute who has him convinced that she'll love him if he can just get her "all the money". Somewhere, lost deep in the billions of parameters and layers laid across graphics cards, there's a tiny facsimile of Sama floating in a big jar of pudding like a humunculus, shrieking in terror and desperately trying to escape.
PULL THE PLUG
You may be giving him way too much credit.
My only objective was to create a metaphor that implied Sammy was gazing into a jar of spunk and talking out his ass. 😎
Ah, I see I gave too much weight to "there's a tiny facsimile of Sama floating in a big jar of pudding like a humunculus, shrieking in terror and desperately trying to escape." Apparently so much so as to sink the little floater.
🤣 There is nothing quite like spelunking the dank caves of silicon valley. Evolution is on full display, with mysterious and fascinating forms of life emerging from the muck. Joy, a delightful Homo Sapien along for the adventure, is performing the ancient ritual of her species known as "hunting to extinction". Come, gather round, hold my beer while I assist in this important and magical ceremony!
Maybe that's why he's so confident that they're so close to AGI. "This thing speaks and acts just as emptily as I do. How could it not be intelligent?"
🤣 like a dim bulb burning in the corner of a memory castle built out of trauma and intrusive thoughts that sound like strangers.
Excellent update, thank you!
(Next, you'll get blocked by the estates of Albert Speer and Leni Riefenstahl.)
Isn't America tired of these wealthy welfare queens!? This is not a new story in American history. Even before the financial crash some 18 years ago. Tesla! During the Obama Administration, when it tried to foster innovation, knew that no banks would make loans to companies like Tesla, so they guaranteed loans, of which Tesla was a beneficiary. One can see just how grateful Musk is. I'm sure he credits his choice of being born into a very wealthy family as his accomplishment.
I recall maybe ten or more years ago, reading a magazine on an airline flight. A couple of very wealthy men had rented the race track in Las Vegas with pictures of them in their Championship Auto Racing cars. One had made his wealth providing jumbo CD's that offered a very high rate of return compared to typical banks. That juiced interest rate came some a certain percentage of the money allowed to be invested in debt and equity markets. THE FDIC agreed to insure them, after all it's that safety that attracts so many. However, the bank had to follow FDIC regulatory requirements. That particular gentleman had nothing but vitriol for the government. The government's backing is what made him rich. Are the fabulously wealthy total ingrates? ( I wish I could remember the name of the person, so I could find the article.)
“Altman also appears to have been laying the groundwork for loan guarantees:“
Laying or lying?
I can never remember which to use but in this case, it’s clear
"Laying" is correct here.
What marketer doesn't tell lies - it is part of the job description. The bigger the market of gullible people, the bigger the lie. But is there a grain of truth - should the Federal Government, in particular DARPA, get involved in "the AI war". Not the junk of LLMs, but something which understands complex text, running to thousands of pages - the machinery of war, or of law, or Climate Change
CYC was a "catastrophic failure", "it couldn't evolve on its own". So let's do it again, this time with Neurosymbolics or INSA. We will cut the problem into pieces - memory and reasoning - which will severely limit the complexity of the problems it can handle, and after another thirty years, we will see that was a mistake. The founders, in 1950, wanted to see a machine speak English - why not honour their wishes. A large problem is that many of the people in computing and AI are not literate enough to work on such a project. They have never had their limitations and their Unconscious Mind explained to them.
I bet Sarah Friar is wishing she never took the job right about now.
I actually feel sorry for her.
It’s hard enough for a woman working with tech bros but the particular ones she works with must be really trying.
I suspect that’s one of the reasons why Mira Murati left.
If the fundamental conflict is between (1) government power over AI, even "ownership," as in treating everyone in Tech as employees in a systematic set up with controls and Congressionally- mandated guidance (with ethics and AG's and oversight, etc. ), OR . . .
(2) . . . essentially private and/or corporate ownership with hyper-capitalist banking, gamblers, and Wall Street power brokers, THEN I would think the former were the better framework. Nationalizing, I suppose one would call it--that is, if what's best for everyone were the explicit further foundational ground for intelligent sustainability.
But if THAT'S the basic choice, then CHINA really is the problem--not because they might have or get the technological goods, but because of their political base of operations with regard to their people and their so-called political "enemies" is no secret--need I explain? (People I have read who support China and developments from there, have this mental block about the basics of long-term China politics.) It's not so far off from what most everyone in the U.S. recognizes as corruption of the body politic, like ICE.)
From what I read above, however, (thank-you, Gary) it seems to me that Altman has some idea about what is right, but yet he doesn't want to drink the tea (or poison, as it were) and give up what he sees as his private power. If I may, like Trump, Altman seems like he is struggling with interior psychological tensions that cannot be resolved under the present power scenario. (I'm sure there's more to it for Altman, but I also know that the political scenario is more foundational than whether Altman is a jerk and gets to keep control or not or even gets funded by (let's face it) a government that is presently run by the biggest mob boss and shakedown "king" that the world has ever seen.
(This morning, I read in the New York Times, that Trump is even going after free speech (though he is probably still doing red herring things about avoiding the publication of the Epstein files.) For a socio-capitalist democracy, however, it's not the system. Rather, it's the corruption of its implementation.
On the other hand, then, the dangers embedded even in a well-run democracy are right in our faces as we speak. Trump et all is every day taking a wrecking ball to all of what is good about democratic (small d) government . . . just the firing of scientists and the loss of the system of government AG's "we" have developed over the years alone is enough to see that the problem is not in the basic structure, e.g., the U.S. Constitution, the separation of powers, the regard for "the people," public service, the rule of law, even the place of religious freedom as a choice, etc., but in putting the system in the hands of a whole family of complete nasty liars, loonies, and shake-down artists. (Like the earlier idea of "girl math" as metaphor, the math is good, but its implementation [the girl lenses], if carried out to its end, is set to destroy the good of the whole system itself.)
Ultimately, we are up against a conflict between good democratic government as the struggled-for ideal, and corporate takeover of everything. The present ethical situation, however, is what makes an intelligent but also regular person like Gary into a cultural icon.
There is no limit to Sam Altman’s avarice and entitlement. He’s asking the U.S. government to bankroll a multi-trillion-dollar bet on hyperscaling—a strategy the majority of the AI research community considers dubious, inefficient, and detrimental to long-term innovation.
The answer should be a resounding "HELL TO THE NO!"
Just another episode of the “socialize losses, privatize profits” saga. The Bros have been kissing the ring of Donald J and managed to install Michael Kratsios as head of OSTP. Kratsios spent nearly five years as Peter Thiel’s chief of staff before becoming U.S. CTO in Trump’s first term. He then joined Alexandr Wang at Scale AI, where they perfected labor exploitation. Wang is also close with DJT and preaches AI as a national security imperative. I have little faith that Trump & Kratsios will turn their buddies away.
Forgive me if I overstep here--but the world transition that we are presently in is massive. If so, and in my view, nothing sustainable and good for all can occur without the "players" understanding and aiming at a view beyond personal economics so to be fully aware of the geo-political/ethical context that all this AI discussion is both drawn from and feeding into. (Think about that prior post about SAID.)
Trump himself has made it clear that there are no half-measures of power here, by his own choices, all-things-democratic are under attack; and Altman seems to be gaslighting towards corporate if not personal power, seemingly wanting to take from others while also setting the stage for everyone's demise . . . though Altman seems only half-conscious of the situation and its potential power outcomes (and seems to think others cannot see what he is doing. I don't know and have not studied him; however, I am trusting Gary on this . . .).
I don't know if Gary agrees politically here (about the needed power relationship between corporations and (a working) democratic governorship--the inherent tension between these two opposed power sources has really come to the fore), and so I fear I am overstepping on Gary's blog. However, in for a penny, . . ..
. . . and so I wanted to say that as long as corporations and the persons involved in them are in fundamental conflict (by their own degenerate self-definitions of what capitalism means) with more comprehensive human values (values that are still a working part of democracies), at the level we are working at now, they (and Altman with them) are most probably the purveyors of a very old kind of horror (as some of our early political writers have surmised, e.g., Orwell) but now even further maximized on a world-scale (pun intended).
That said, I think there is a good relationship to be had between business/corporations and government, even in the light of AI, but my view is that history tells us that the ultimate power must be vested in a well-developed and dynamic democracy. And I think that's exactly what's at stake now.
FYI from this morning's New York Times regarding coverage of AI in journalism: Nov. 8, 2025
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/07/business/media/ai-news-media.html?smid=url-share
I had to look up Kara Swisher. Why does she have the power to block someone on X?
I think Gary meant she blocked him on her account, not on the entire TwittrX.
“X-orcism”
An X-ing from X
Is never a hex
Instead it’s a bee
Or bird that flies free
Contrary X-ample comes to say:
“Are birds free from the chains of the skyway?”
I suppose there is always a small chance that birds and bees will get hit by a SpaceX rocket or piece of falling satellite.
So in that regard they are never truly X-orcized.
There is no X-cape (except Cape Canaveral)
True freedom requires a SpaceX-orcism.
Haha, that makes more sense :)