summary：
Alright, so Ilya Sutskever is saying AI is going back to "research-driven innovation" inst...
Alright, so Ilya Sutskever is saying AI is going back to "research-driven innovation" instead of just scaling up models. Give me a break. Haven't we heard this song and dance before?
Scaling's Dead, Long Live... More Funding?
The "Age of Scaling" Was a Joke Anyway
From 2020 to 2025, supposedly we were in the "age of scaling." Just throw more compute power at the problem, right? As if that's all it takes. Like building a bigger hammer will automatically make you a better carpenter. Newsflash: it doesn't. It just makes you the guy with the really big, probably unwieldy, hammer.
And now Sutskever, fresh off his little drama at OpenAI and his new venture, Safe Superintelligence (SSI), wants us to believe that *now* it's all about the research again? After raking in a cool billion from venture capitalists like Andreessen Horowitz and Sequoia Capital?
I'm calling BS.
Didn't Meta try to buy SSI, too? Valuing it at $32 billion? Thirty-two *billion* for…what, exactly? More promises? More "trust me, we know what we're doing" from the same guys who brought us the last AI winter?
Look, I'm not saying research isn't important. Of course it is. But let's be real: this whole thing smacks of a pivot designed to keep the money flowing. The "scaling" thing probably hit a wall. Maybe the returns weren't as impressive as promised. So, naturally, it's time for a new narrative. A new shiny object to distract us from the fact that nobody *really* knows what they're doing.
Sutskever's "Safe AI": Safe for Whom, Exactly?
Same Players, Different Game?
Sutskever was a key player in OpenAI's leadership shakeup last year. Remember that? The whole Sam Altman ousting and then immediate re-hiring? What was *that* all about, really? We got a lot of corporate-speak, but not a lot of actual answers. And now he's off starting his own thing, promising "safe superintelligence." Safe for whom, exactly? The investors? Because I ain't feeling too secure about it.
He says AI is "returning to a research-focused era, but with access to vast computing power." Okay, so what’s changed, exactly? We had research before, we have computing power now. Is he just saying we have *more* computing power? That's not exactly a revolution, is it? It's like saying we're going back to driving cars, but now we have bigger engines. So what?
And what does "safe superintelligence" even *mean*? Is it like, AI with a built-in kill switch? Or is it just another buzzword designed to calm the easily spooked? I suspect it's the later.
Maybe I'm being too cynical. Maybe Sutskever really *does* have some groundbreaking new ideas. Maybe SSI really *will* deliver on its promises. But forgive me if I remain skeptical. I've seen this movie before, and it usually ends with someone getting burned. Badly.
AI's "Progress": Just a Shiny New Coat of Bullshit?
The Illusion of Progress
From 2012 to 2020, we had the "age of research." New algorithms, new model designs. Then, suddenly, it was all about scaling. And now we're back to research again? It's like the tech industry is just spinning a giant roulette wheel, betting on whatever sounds good at the moment.
And we, the public, are supposed to just sit here and believe it? Believe that each new phase is a genuine step forward? That each new buzzword represents a real breakthrough?
I'm not buying it. It's all smoke and mirrors. A carefully crafted illusion designed to keep the money flowing and the hype train rolling. And honestly...I'm starting to feel a little nauseous.
It's the Same Old Grift, Just Rebranded
