Steven Bartlett

that argument does appear to be pretty true.

If we scale up, if we just imagine any rate of change with this intelligence, at some point, we're going to come to a weapon that could theoretically disable all of the United States' electricity, their weapons systems.

It would know exactly how to disable the United States from a cyber perspective because it would be that smart.

All you've got to imagine is any rate of improvement over any period, any sort of long period of time.

So this is a theory that might be true.

But, you know, again, going to this point of like, even if it's a small percentage, it's worth paying attention to on the other side of the foot.

This is a theory that people talk about.

It could be the case that the most intelligent civilization is going to be the superior civilization.

Logically, that's a pretty sound thing to say, no?

So far, so true.

It has a narrow intelligence because it's solving a narrow problem, which is like one plus one equals two.

I would argue that most of the top people in AI believe that the intelligence is going to continue to scale for some time.

A lot of them do, like Geoffrey Hinton does.

I think I have jagged intelligence, obviously.

I wasn't going to say it.

I think I know a little, I know a little bit about, no, I know a lot about a little bit.

It's not easy and it takes a lot more time than these models, it seems.

Less compute.

But when one of them learns, they all learn.

Which is a big advantage.