@AnonVoiceX

[Charles Curran @charliebcurran]

I used AI to explain the AI pacing drama, with fruit.

[@AnonVoiceX @anonvoicex]

@nic_carter P(oppression) is way higher than P(doom) and needs to be taken more seriously. AI safety, whatever that is, might not actually decrease p(doom) at all, but exponentially increases p(oppression) and lowers p(abundance).

[David Sacks @DavidSacks]

Dario has written that we need to “pace the frontier,” and Sam has agreed. People may be surprised by my response: go ahead.

You guys are the frontier. By any reasonable metric — market share, revenue growth, model capability — the two of you have a duopoly on frontier intelligence. You’ve also claimed the lead is widening because of recursive self-improvement.

I don’t see what you see in the lab. If the unreleased models are scary enough that you think you should slow down, I support your decision to be responsible.

But stop pretending you need anyone else’s permission. Stop pretending antitrust law has to be suspended so you can form a cartel. Stop pretending you need a regulatory approval process that supersedes product liability. Stop pretending METR is independent when it is intertwined with Anthropic’s investors and staff. Stop pretending you need those same evaluators to police competitors who aren’t even at the frontier.

Most of all, stop pretending the motivation to slow down is purely altruistic. You face massive product-liability exposure if your products enable a truly damaging cyberattack. The market already punishes models that behave in unpredictable or unauthorized ways. After the Hugging Face episode, it is simply good business for OpenAI and Anthropic to trade some raw power for reliability and predictability. Call it alignment if you want. It is also just giving customers what they want.

Pacing the frontier would also create breathing room for a more intelligent conversation about regulation than Bernie Sanders’ “shut it all down.” China is very unlikely to join a global agreement, as you know, and that has to be taken into account as well.

So go ahead and pace the frontier. You are the ones setting it. The easiest way not to build superintelligence is for you to agree not to build it. Demanding your preferred regulatory framework as the price of that will look like blackmail of the public and the political system. So just do it.

If you do, you’ll buy goodwill for the next conversation. If you don’t, we’ll know this was just another bid for regulatory capture — or an election-season psyop.

[@AnonVoiceX @anonvoicex]

@jasonryanmd In the future everyone or their personal ai will know these anomalies and can navigate a diagnosis around them. They will have a lot more data about themselves, obviously and this will not be a problem, but a good thing, obviously. Even if the marginal steps might make you uneasy

[@AnonVoiceX @anonvoicex]

@rand_longevity first they will let you use it as a US citizen, but in the next round that won't be enough. The filter might only get stronger, until the people who want you dumb take control. Hope not though

[@AnonVoiceX @anonvoicex]

@adam3us @countbtc @BitcoinPierre Commercial/academic community is often eclipsed by start up outsiders. You still have military spending >10x since then and if they aren't spending it on secret quantum computers than what are they even doing? Why would they not be keeping secrets and how could anyone be certain?

[@AnonVoiceX @anonvoicex]

@countbtc @adam3us @BitcoinPierre There are few technologies the intel and military community would want to hide and control more than quantum computing. Even diffie hellman was actually discovered in intell community first. People thinking they are going to get good info about this are insane. We need solutions.

[@AnonVoiceX @anonvoicex]

@nic_carter @Pladizow @biancoresearch THANK YOU. People using the it's not an issue because if quantum is broken planes fall out of the sky and everything catches fire narrative is so dumb as shit

[@AnonVoiceX @anonvoicex]

@DPGSpurs @cptgrumpus @Galois_Capital and given tech advancement, a chain celebrating being rigid and ideological compared to one that successfully navigates an encryption upgrade is a bigger difference than all the other attributes that they mostly share anyway. Not to mention again figuring out who the hacker is.

[@AnonVoiceX @anonvoicex]

@DPGSpurs @cptgrumpus @Galois_Capital if they shared bitcoins other attributes, which are substantial and unique to bitcoin, but would be shared by any fork maybe. Its not a great example. I hope quantum is a distant or non existent threat, but how can you look at trends in tech innovation and write anything out?

[@AnonVoiceX @anonvoicex]

@DPGSpurs @cptgrumpus @Galois_Capital I don't really disagree with anything either of you have said, but I do think there will be a fork and if there is one that's even just 15% scarcer and maybe uses some of that to address other weaknesses that might outcompete a chain figuring out who is stealing 15% of its supply

[@AnonVoiceX @anonvoicex]

@Galois_Capital give time to migrate, burn the coins, use the balance to increase security budget. you can keep the fork that is a third owned by maybe a single quantum hacker and you can learn the hard way why not only is that worth a lot less its also completely dysfunctional

[@AnonVoiceX @anonvoicex]

@cptgrumpus @DPGSpurs @Galois_Capital it will fork and the value of the chain that is a third owned by maybe a single quantum hacker will be worth a lot less and this will force all non ideological players to use the chain with the burned coins.

[@AnonVoiceX @anonvoicex]

@nic_carter @based16z Appreciate your work here. You’re right. People are insane to think they have confidence about this, if they had anything close to specialized knowledge about this they almost certainly wouldn’t be able to share it freely.

[@AnonVoiceX @anonvoicex]

@will_bits @MrEwanMorrison he said as he used a data center to communicate with the world

[TFTC @TFTC21]

This is where your healthcare dollars went.

[Isabel Foxen Duke⚡️ @isabelfoxenduke]

BITCOIN RAILS EPISODE #18: MAKE BITCOIN QUANTUM RESISTANT | with BIP360 author Hunter Beast @cryptoquick

Quantum computing is a complicated topic—one that incites equal amounts of fear and skepticism depending on who you talk to… especially in Bitcoin.

In this episode, BIP360 author Hunter Beast wisely shares why the “truth is likely somewhere in the middle,” citing incremental advancements in quantum computing that may eventually pose a legitimate threat to some Bitcoin addresses—as well as steps we can take to protect ourselves in the short, medium and long term.

The correct posture is to “be prepared, not scared,” says @cryptoquick

Ultimately, the introduction of quantum resistant cryptography—via proposals like BIP360—will be needed for higher degrees of security. That said, individuals can mitigate personal risk substantially through proper address-use hygiene.

This episode breaks down the specific challenges Bitcoin will face in the event of a quantum attack, the likelihood of an attack over time, and the steps we’ll need to take at the individual and communal level to ensure Bitcoin’s safety.

This episode includes detailed discussion of:

1) How quantum computing could potentially affect Bitcoin public/private key cryptography—and technologies built on vulnerable addresses (e.g. Taproot)
2) Best practices for protecting yourself against quantum in the short and long term
3) Implications of vulnerable address types—e.g. what about Satoshi’s coins?
4) Deep Dive into BIP360 + proposed long-term solutions
5) Industry roadmaps for quantum computing + how banks and governments are preparing for “Q Day”

As always, this episode can be viewed on Spotify or YouTuve—full episode in the comments or linktree in my bio.

This episode is powered by Best In Slot—the leading API for Ordinals and BRC20 data aggregation and indexing.

TIMESTAMPS:
00:00 Intro 02:05 What is quantum computing?
04:30 How could quantum threaten your Bitcoin wallet?
06:50 Addresses that are safe from quantum
09:13 Satoshi’s coins are in danger!
11:25 What happens if Satoshi’s coins are touched?
14:45 Do we softfork to shield Satoshi’s coins?
16:38 “Transitory inflation” for bitcoin after quantum
21:05 Why Taproot addresses are vulnerable
23:50 Do NOT reuse your Bitcoin addresses!
26:03 When will Quantum become a threat?
28:34 The long/short exposure attack; explained
31:45 Protection using private mempools
33:20 Why all the new Bitcoin L2s are in danger
37:45 Quantum is 5 to 10 years away, governments fear
40:34 Non-Bitcoin systems threatened by quantum
42:26 Centralized systems can adapt to quantum
43:50 Hunter’s BIP: Post quantum cryptography in Bitcoin
47:40 Hunter’s three new signature algorithms
53:48 Is new cryptography on Bitcoin risky?
56:33 Why not just stick to hash-based cryptography?
58:49 A 16X discount for quantum resistant addresses?
01:02:30 Creating quantum resistant multisig addresses
01:04:00 What is Frost?
01:06:50 The long process of approving a BIP
01:08:30 What developers think of Hunter’s BIP
01:10:00 Matt Corallo’s concerns with Hunter’s approach
01:11:00 Steps to implementing the BIP 360
01:17:00 Where to learn more about BIP 360
01:17:50 Who can push the button to change Bitcoin?

[Rothmus 🏴 @Rothmus]

🎯🎯

[Erik Voorhees @ErikVoorhees]

People killed by AI: 0
People killed by the State: hundreds of millions

AI safetyists: Let's put AI under the control of the State