Pinned Tweet
If you're anti-AI and open to discussion, let's talk.
I'm not here to change your mind, convince you to embrace AI, or tell you that your concerns are unfounded.
I'd genuinely like to build bridges between people on both sides of this increasingly polarised conversation. To exchange ideas, challenge assumptions, and perhaps come away understanding each other a little better.
I've noticed a great deal of misinformation surrounding AI, from both its supporters and its critics. There are misconceptions about how these systems work, what they're capable of, what they aren't capable of, and where the technology currently stands.
But that doesn't mean opposition to AI is inherently misguided. There are very real ethical, economic, creative, and philosophical concerns worth discussing, and I don't think those concerns should be dismissed simply because someone happens to be enthusiastic about the technology.
In fact, I'm more than willing to help you strengthen your arguments against AI.
If your criticism rests on a misunderstanding of the technology, I'd rather help you build a better, more accurate argument than try to score points by proving you wrong.
And in exchange, I'd like to understand your perspective. What concerns you? What do you think people working with AI are overlooking? What objections do you have that deserve more attention than they're currently receiving?
I'm perfectly comfortable walking away from a conversation with neither of us having changed our minds.
You don't have to like AI. You don't have to use it. You certainly don't have to agree with me.
I just think there's value in having conversations where the objective isn't to defeat the other person, but to leave both people better informed than when they started.
So, if you're willing to have that conversation, my door is open.
Unsupervised Ape retweeted
This interview with GabeN is quite interesting:
“Perhaps unsurprisingly, Newell believes that LLM tools are the next great technological leap, and are going to prove so transformative that this is where people should focus their learning.“
pcgamer.com/software/ai/gabe…
Unsupervised Ape retweeted
🇲🇾✨ Help me bring Malaysian folklore to life!
I'm conducting a survey for my design assignment on Malaysian folklore & souvenirs! ⋆˚꩜。
📝 10 questions | ⏱️ ~10 seconds
Your response means a lot! 🫶🏻
🔗 Google Form link in replies ⤵
Feel free to ↻ with your friends too!💖
The most dogshit, uninformed, uneducated posts I've ever seen on this app all comes from minors.
Can we please just ban them all.
Another day, another phishing attempt.
My late father lost a lot of money to scammers. I've seen the damage these people can do, and I absolutely despise them.
Today, instead of simply deleting another suspicious SMS, I decided to try a little experiment.
What could ChatGPT find out about these scammers? More importantly, could it actually do something about them?
Within minutes, it investigated the suspicious domains, uncovered evidence suggesting a coordinated phishing operation, and submitted reports to the domain registrar, Maybank, and CyberSecurity Malaysia.
All with very little effort on my part.
Whether the reports lead to any action remains to be seen. But something that once required considerable technical knowledge is now accessible to practically anyone.
So here's my appeal - if you receive a phishing message, don't just delete it. Don't click the links either. Use AI to help gather evidence and report it to the proper authorities.
Imagine if everyone started doing this.
Unsupervised Ape retweeted
Because it's more involved than typing "make game" into a prompt window. You could still do it, but it's easier to just buy the game instead of recreating it.
Kind of like how people can brew beer at home but it's easier and faster to just buy beer.
Honestly, I didn't believe in vibe coding at first.
When it first became a thing, I tried it. Everything was buggy, half the things didn't work, and even as someone without formal programming training, I could see why developers were concerned.
So I wrote it off.
Then came the Astra/Opus 5.5 era. I saw what people were building, tried it again, and to my surprise, things actually worked.
So I changed my mind.
I formed an opinion based on the evidence available at the time. New evidence emerged, I tested it myself, and updated my beliefs.
Isn't that how we're supposed to think?
When did changing your mind in light of new evidence become a bad thing?
"Nobody wants to play games made by AI."
Correct.
If your entire selling point is "this game was made with AI," why should anyone care?
People play games because they're good games. Because of the storytelling, the gameplay, the characters, the world, or simply because they're fun.
AI is a tool used to make the game. It's not the game itself.
Nobody buys a game to admire your production process. They buy it because you've given them a reason to play it.
Whether you used AI, Unreal Engine, Godot, or sacrificed a goat to make it is beside the point.
Is the game any good?
Unsupervised Ape retweeted
Stop whatever you're doing and read this carefully.
OpenAI may have just changed the world forever, again. Their absolutely monstrous internal model produced three new discoveries at once, backed by some of the biggest scientists in their fields:
Math: a proof of the local smoothing conjecture in every dimension, which also resolves the Kakeya and Stein restriction conjectures.
Computer science: a claimed refutation of ETH, one of the core assumptions of complexity theory.
Physics: a rigorous existence proof for 4D quantum field theories including QCD, the theory of the strong force.
Ryan Williams (MIT) and Nobel laureate David Gross are leading independent reviews.
We are announcing three new discoveries in mathematics, computer science, and physics about harmonic analysis, complexity theory, and quantum field theory.
openai.com/index/building-sc…
































