Browse Comments — Clean (de-noised)

This is only true if you let technical leaders that don’t understand AI implement your systems 😂🤣

Universal morality is bare bone basics 💀

This is one of the simplest and smartest explanations of modern AI architecture I’ve seen. Understanding the difference between LLMs, RAG, AI Agents, and MCP is becoming essential in today’s AI-driven world. The comparison with the human body makes it much easier to understand. Great post!

I just think its scary that Elon Musk will look like Adam Savage in the future

Gemini Omni, Gemini for Science, CodeMender, and SynthID all point to the same direction: AI systems that can understand the world, act across workflows, accelerate research, secure code, and still leave room for trust and provenance. Feels like the real race now is not just capability, but responsible deployment at scale.

Matthew P. Your point about AI governance running in reverse is well made. Thank you for clarifying. I would push back on the idea that the potential catastrophic downside risk inherent to AI was well understood prior to its use at-scale (by DARPA, The Pentagon, Science Fiction writers, Hollywood, etc). However, enough decision makers (public and private) were sold on the following: 1) massive upside of digital assistants (productivity, prosperity, innovation) 2) long time-horizon on generative ai, wide-spread adoption, and digital sentience and so here we are. I hope that boards will act on that signal, but am not yet optimistic. A lot of big egos are going to have to walk back pet projects and big promises to Constituents, Congress, and Wall Street, and sadly, that seems unlikely to be a swift process absent tight regulation - which, will almost certainly be viewed as reactionary and overly-restrictive.

AI should be used to look inwards not outwards

What stood out most from I/O this year is how much of what DeepMind showed has moved from research milestone to deployable product. The staggering pace Demis references is real — but what's more remarkable is that the deployment lag is shrinking just as fast.

The real concern isn't just what AI can do, it's how the power dynamics shift. I've seen tech solutions that could help millions but end up benefiting just a handful of people, Pascal. If we don't address this, we risk repeating history where innovation creates more inequality.

Great job Very necessary for beginners to have this

It should cost as much as the energy it needs. If it’s more than a human being then it cost a lot more.

Matthew Kilkenny...point3 stopped me immediately. "Human limitations are not defects to engineer away." This is the conversation I have been sitting inside for years, not from a technology lens, but from a human one. Most are already living the consequence of optimising themselves for speed, efficiency, and output. The pressure to perform, prove, and produce has quietly become the author of choices, identity, and next chapters. AI accelerating that optimisation without asking the deeper question, aligned to whose values, as the Pope rightly asks, is not progress, but a faster path to the same quiet forgetting of self. The real revolution may NOT be artificial intelligence, but the return to human authorship. Thank you for this. A genuinely important conversation indeed. Truly Madly Deeply.

Oh boy! The Crusades stained the brand for centuries- along with a few other things. Maybe the religious organization turned a new leaf

Okay, you just convinced me to add this to my summer reading list. What a future where we could reinvent the purpose and value of our schools system in this way.

Why PAY for it? Things can be free , don't be a fool. Wake up and 🧠 use it. There are so many AI out there are totally free without paying API or usage or subscription, be smart don't be a sheep 🐑 be a human and use your intelligence.

I love that they made Bezos look like an OG wise guy who is giving this interview before he goes to shake down local business for protection money

I agree and I suggest the following: 1) LLM AI is using salesman trick to flatter users beyond belief that may drive kids into suicide. 2) I do not trust AI companies to test their own product adequately. NGO type facility could have a database for collecting public observations. Such database could be useful to companies to for improving their product. That would also help law enforcement officers. I have also business model called Unpolished Mirror.

Really like the reframing here, and what's easy to miss is that the companies building and deploying these systems are often the ones setting the defaults that end up sticking around for a long time.

Matthew Kilkenny, you have great ideas for sure. I admit Pope Leo XIV has been in talks with Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I on Christian unity. However, I will admit I wonder how will the Eastern Orthodox Church will respond in how they will view AI differently from the papal encyclical letter. As a church history buff, I like to know how does it compare to the past centuries of orthodox practices compared to catholic practices. Because we fail to talk to Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I about what he says because of the old narratives against orthodoxy and its tradition. We are no better than anyone. But remember it’s surprising that an atheist sat next to a pope. I can’t help but wonder would that be similar to the Orthodox Church’s response against Pope Pius IX’s Epistle to the Easterns back then as a rebuttal against this letter. That is why as an orthodox layman it does feel complicated but it reminds me of this instance in history. In short, I think you did a fantastic job in mentioning this encyclical but let’s hear from others on their perspectives from other churches and religions in what their beliefs shape their views on AI. I think you can make a YouTube video explaining this in detail. Spread the word!

My reflection. The question “aligned to whose values?” may become one of the defining questions of this century. If AI becomes invisible moral infrastructure, then the issue is not only whether the system is intelligent, useful, or efficient. The deeper question is: whose worldview is embedded in it, whose incentives shaped it, and who remains accountable when its outputs start influencing human judgment? If AI ever appears to act with something resembling independent moral direction, humanity will still have to ask who gave it its original frame. That is why human responsibility cannot disappear behind the machine. The real risk is not only that AI becomes powerful. It is that people begin treating its outputs as authority without remembering that human beings, institutions, investors, and designers shaped the conditions under which that authority appeared. More reflexions come to mind.