Apple’s warehouse tells me they won’t give me a trade-in refund on my Mac Mini M4 because it is the “previous model.” Now they are mailing it back to me …
Even though previously I could trade in an M4 MacBook Pro for an M5.
Speech recognition grammars for a small list of context menu items, compared to System One (Jev / Laya) models for a small list of context menu-like items
Dario’s personality inflation is becoming almost as exponential as the AI curve he keeps describing.
Yesterday: AI could destroy civilization.
Today: Claude is discovering new biology.
Tomorrow: Claude cures most diseases.
Apparently he has found the perfect business model:
sell the apocalypse, then sell the salvation.
Billionaire tech CEOs Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk and Jensen Huang spoke with President Donald Trump last month and convinced him to block efforts to establish an AI industry-funded regulator, according to a report.
Read more: https://t.co/dfHXZYxrLU
📸: Jill Connelly via Getty Images
@bg2clips What they want is to be the gatekeepers and make open weight models illegal.
In 2-5 years everyone will be running AI on their own premises. Their subscription income will drop to $0. They know it and are in a desperate panic.
Then they will ask for a bailout.
😳 Brad Gerstner on the ex-Anthropic researcher who told America AI could end humanity in three years:
"To go on national television in a highly coordinated way and sit in the living room on NBC, on ABC, on CBS, on Fox, and have a single researcher who spent six weeks at Anthropic tell the moms and dads of America that this can kill all of humanity in the next three years without any countervailing conversation is deeply irresponsible.
Jensen Huang yesterday called it deeply untrue. Andrew Feldman, the founder of Cerebras, who spent decades studying this, called it utter horseshit. Elon himself said it was a coordinated psyop."
- @altcap with Scott Wapner @TheJudgeCNBC on CNBC Friday, Sept 11th, 2026
Progress in airplane design have made them safer and safer.
Airplanes would have been safer earlier with *accelerated* progress.
Turbofan engines have become so reliable that long-haul airplanes can now have only two of them.
The same is true for AI: better AI is safer AI.
"Pacing", whatever one means by that, is counterproductive.
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.