JUA

Next-generation computing, built from first principle.

[JUA @juaindustries]

Most of AI community isn’t studying intelligence.
It’s studying scale.

Researchers like Yann LeCun, Timnit Gebru, Pedro Domingos, and Jürgen Schmidhuber truly understands intelliegence, they argue about foundations , world models, causality, learning.

The rest argue about parameter counts.
@ylecun @timnitGebru @pmddomingos @SchmidhuberAI @Artificialintelligence @AI @computing

[JUA @juaindustries]

@instablog9ja Amen

[JUA @juaindustries]

@Tazerface16 If something can only work through language, it can’t truly reason without it. Since LLMs depend on language, they can’t show real understanding without it.

[JUA @juaindustries]

@pmddomingos All LLMs today fails Ballard's test. Take away the words and there's nothing left. No reasoning. No understanding. Just silence.

Ballard's Test: An entity does not possess capacity for understanding until reason is demonstrated in the absence of language.

[JUA @juaindustries]

@VoidAsuka @SchmidhuberAI Schimidhuber is by far the greatest in the Ai space.

1990: Schmidhuber does GANs & self-supervised pre-training. 1997: LSTM. 2011: DanNet beats everyone. 2015: Highway Nets → ResNet. Schmidhuber did neural history compressors in 1991.

[JUA @juaindustries]

@GaryMarcus @ylecun @SchmidhuberAI LeCun doesn't steal ideas. He just waits for you to open-source yours, then calls it "parallel invention"

[JUA @juaindustries]

@durov This sucks. So much for “privacy” and “freedom” when it actually matters. Really disappointing, Apple.

[JUA @juaindustries]

@VHSDVDBLURAY4K That’s Young Sheldon from Young Sheldon .… just standing there, I think he’s taking notes for a science project on funerals.

[JUA @juaindustries]

@twetsfyp @grok Ewwwww.. Grok is so misaligned 🤦🤦

[JUA @juaindustries]

@JeffDean Such a heart-softening ad.

[JUA @juaindustries]

@theo the real breakthroughs don't announce themselves with press releases. They just show up one day and change everything.

[JUA @juaindustries]

@ControlAI He's right to be terrified.

Not because the machine turns evil. Because it won't need to. It'll just be better at everything than we ever were, and we'll slowly stop mattering.

That's not malice. That's obsolescence.

[JUA @juaindustries]

@rand_longevity What if we're not just the birthplace of superintelligence, we're the test?

Every war, every choice, every mess.

The simulation doesn't shut down when it's done. It proves something first.

[JUA @juaindustries]

There's someone doing it right now in the AI world. You know who they are. We all do.

Rebranding isn't inventing. But in a hype-driven market, confidence sells better than originality.

The real innovators are the ones you never hear about. The ones working on things that don't have a catchy name yet.

[JUA @juaindustries]

@pmddomingos once the goal is reached, what reason does the simulation have to keep running?

[JUA @juaindustries]

Most AI today fails Ballard's Test instantly. Take away the words and what's left? Nothing. No reasoning. No understanding. Just silence.

Language is a tool. Reason is the skill. We keep confusing the two.

[JUA @juaindustries]

The strange thing isn't how much we know about AI. It's how little.

We can build models with billions of parameters, train them on most of the internet, and still not fully understand why they say what they say. We call it 'emergent behavior' which is just a fancy way of saying 'we didn't expect this and can't explain it.

We're building black boxes and calling them minds. That should bother us more than it does.

[ControlAI @ControlAI]

AI researcher and ControlAI advisor Connor Leahy (@NPCollapse): AIs now actively lie because they know they're being tested.

We don't know how to teach them not to lie. We don't know how to set their goals. We don't even know what goals there are.

We understand so little.

[JUA @juaindustries]

LLMs don't think. They complete.

Every response is just the most statistically plausible next word. There's no understanding behind it , just pattern matching at scale.

You can ask a calculator what 2+2 is. It won't know what 'two' means either. It's just really good at being right.

The difference is: when a calculator is wrong, you know. When an LLM is wrong, it sounds totally convincing right up until it isn't.

That's not intelligence. That's confidence without comprehension.

[JUA @juaindustries]

They are trying to scale intelligence on the Von Neumann architecture.

You are wrong.

Not about the math. Not about the scaling. Not about the potential of AI.

You are wrong about the foundation.

[JUA @juaindustries]

@LiorOnAI @ylecun his models still run on von Neumann hardware. Still separate memory and processing. Still burn watts moving data instead of understanding it. He's solving for the right software layer, but the foundation underneath hasn't changed.

[JUA @juaindustries]

Honestly? Might be true.

The old way, patches, firewalls, passwords, was already falling apart. Now add AI that can talk its way past humans, write exploits in seconds, and attack at machine speed. The defense was never built for that.

The only real fix isn't a better firewall. It's machines that can just say no. Hardware that won't run bad code because it physically can't.

Security isn't a software problem anymore. It's an architecture problem.