And now you're writing a letter to the Party Central Committee using Party approved newspeak

"We do not believe the path to superintelligence ..."

and reporting to the Party issues at the factory ... De ja vu from USSR.

https://krebsonsecurity.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/slsh-...

(from https://krebsonsecurity.com/2025/11/meet-rey-the-admin-of-sc... linked in the original post)

i'm not qualified to pass any judgement here, just Wirecard comes to mind. Routing sensitive payments, including to the network of secret informants, through Wirecard while the Wirecard guy (son of a KGB spy) was safari-ing (and posting photos of it) in Syria with the Wagner mercenaries... He lives right now in Russia, and it looks like German intelligence hasn't exacted any revenge.

LLMs seem to be moving toward personhood.

And after all the LLM learns from user posts too, and if everybody starts posting their darkest desires, fantasies, plans it may skew the "alignment" to say the least. Lets hope that the AGI level doesn't necessarily come with cheating, lying, religious fervor, power lust or whatever other sideeffects have been observed in human intelligence.

SpaceX is building spaceport with 10 pads or something like this. At 1 Starship/pad per day that 1000 tons/day to LEO - i.e. 1 year.

The Starship is making great progress. Even if it takes 10 years to once-a-day reusability, the need will be even greater by then.

> compute and AI models move so much faster than that timescale

tech moves faster with each iteration, and datacenters and networks only grow with it. The ground-based datacenters has and will continue to grow in cost. While space-based costs will be cheaper and cheaper. Not the first time we have 2 such curves, and such curves dynamics usually leads to paradigm shift.

if anybody was looking for a good reason for datacenters in space.

That is how the BigAI leads the society to the idea of necessity to relax the anti-monopoly laws when it comes to the Big AI - the main goal of all that "AI will kill you all" hysteria.

4 years ago we had the ChatGPT moment and notice how civilizational change has been accelerating since then. In a few years we're gong to have the seemingly profound Starship moment. Back at the time it was obvious, i may be said it is even here, that Starship low price will cause explosion of amount of launched payloads and a technological revolution as a result, yet it wasn't clear what kind of payloads it would really be. And now we have the AI - Starship and AI are basically ideally dove-tail each other. Two revolutionary technologies accelerating each other - Strarship lowering deployment cost and removing other obstacles for AI while AI providing guaranteed massive scale launch market for Starship - that will be a thing to watch (or participate if you're lucky :)

to generate 1KW you need 5m2 of solar panels. And black body radiation of 1.5m2 at 70 C is 1KW.

A unit with 1 GPU, 2m2 radiator and 5m2 solar panels is say 20kg. At promised Starship price well under $100/kg, that is less than $2000 to put that unit into orbit. That is much cheaper than $15000 per 1KW of a ground-based datacenter, especially when additionally factoring in [expensive and climate change causing] ground-based electricity vs. free electricity in space once you launched the unit with its solar panels.

Add political opposition on Earth, Iranian drones hitting datacenters, various laws (i.e. costs) that your ground-based datacenter is subject too ... the space starts to look like a very cozy place for a datacenter :)

a formation in the shape of the client's logo.

and that changes the whole social/economics/political game. The companies can't rely on the society nor on the government for required services, be it power or even defense (like those attacked AWS datacenters in Middle East). Thus those companies are more and more vertically integrated - for example they all have their own nuclear power startups and at least 2 - AMZN and SPCX - already have their access to space. One can mentally extrapolate things further or just read say Karp's book "The Technological Republic".

that is the way of technology. If i want to be just in the middle of the pack, not even a cutting edge, i have to buy a car, i can't just walk everywhere in reasonable time. I have to use a phone, i go to the doctor for modern medicine, etc. - note that pretty much everything is private companies goods and private services.

>where the frontier is in the hands of a single company.

We did invent anti-monopoly laws though to address such major issues with the private origin of the goods and services, and of course AI companies should be subject to it too (if you noticed, by stocking the scare of AI the BigAI companies are actually trying to get the anti-monopoly laws relaxed for them - and this is where our attention should be, the rest is just red herring)

>It takes what was previously an incredibly open field

It was nice riding a horse among the open rolling hills.

You still can be punished for violating a law even if you hadn't passed the bar exam. So even without bar exam, you're supposed to know that sequence of letters and apply in your life exactly because it is available to anyone (until a law is officially published, it usually has no force)

reminds an old sci-fi story where top engineers were shown a video of a genius inventor who invented anti-gravity and unfortunately died while testing his apparatus which was clearly anti-gravitating in the video. Thus believing that it is a solved problem, just need to rediscover the lost solution, the engineers quickly developed anti-gravity. The original video happened to be a fake specially created for that purpose.

>thus themselves holding a monopoly on certain aspects of mathematics

Monopoly prevents others. In science me knowing something doesn't prevent others from obtaining the same knowledge, especially in math where any knowledge is just a result of thinking.

The math establishment is trying to bring into the math the rules and notions similar to those of the patent and trademark laws. Those attempts should be outright rejected.

no. The math result is a result only when it includes proof. The proof is the value here. The way somebody came to it isn't really important - we don't know how Newton came to his results, whether it was apple or pear, and it isn't really important. Or how Einstein was walking the city streets looking at the tower watches - it is just historic curiosity having no real value for science.

That has been one of the greatest thing about math departments - smooth talkers were always clearly visible as smooth talkers. You're either producing proofs, or you're anything but a mathematician.

I feel for mathematicians. They have similar situation like we have in programming. Well, we all just have to evolve and adjust (in particular reign in our pride as just in a few years - i think once LLMs start hitting 100T+ - we may loose our "top of God's creation" position). Any attempts at gatekeeping, ludditing, organizing in quasi observational/advisory boards really intended to protect their tenures, etc. ... - well, you just can't stop the wave.

It all reminds how Catholic Church insisted on responsible release of the Bible in German. The Church even unleashed the devastating 30 Years War trying to protect its monopoly on religion including the right to sell indulgences, etc.

>AI labs should provide significant support, including funding

And now all those "responsible math" and advisory boards would like to preserve their monopoly on math and would like to sell the indulgences to the AI labs. As usually it is all about money and power, not about science. As a Math PhD dropout myself i feel a bit of a shame and disappointment for that undignified scramble by the mathematics establishment. Being smart they should have led the way and show an example to the rest of humanity ...