Purpose rebirth is the re-finding of play in the thing we choose to partner with AI (likely with a paycheck attached) to do N hours a week.

I think you’re right that mechanically I’m saying the same thing as they are saying “use AI to build your dreams”.

I think the psychology is the difference. Specially, “oh it can now do that too” has to be met with “finally” rather than “no way! That was supposed to be human only”.

eg “what are we after?” Is also likely a question that will be solved by AI in N years after mathematicians chip at it for all that time.

Any and every singular focus will be eliminated. There will be more tho to work on - that’s where the purpose rebirth is. I think.

Maybe said differently, I think one day these same authors will write the post - “more of math is handled by AI. It doesn’t matter. We will work on the infinite amount of it that’s left. Whatever that happens to be, even when we are surprised it wasn’t what we tried to control it to be.”

That will be acceptance. That we’ll be purpose rebirth.

Maybe reread my comments in both contexts.

Capitalistic acceleration will most definitely keep trampling on anything in front of it. Because, the humans with capital will steer it that way.

Eg OpenAI steering the “AI the tool” at Navier Stokes on a rumor (inaccurate as we found out) of Anthropic having solved it.

Meanwhile, I really don’t believe the narrative about fewer jobs.

As long as you’re curious, as long as you continue learning, the new tools and focus on the parts of your current job that involve judgment you will continue putting food on your table as long as you are alive.

Use any and every tool you have to save the people around you time, and the C level will continually fight to keep you.

When AI gets good at something you are good at - great use the time (accelerated by using AI for self help) to find another thing you’re good at the AI isn’t yet. Make sure you have 3-4 things you’re good at at any given time so as AI gets good you have redundancy.

FWIW I never enjoy naming things lol. I agree death and temporary seem at odds. “Purpose Loss” didn’t have the same gusto. I mostly riffed the vocabulary and definition off “Ego Death” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ego_death

Defined something like: temporary state of complete loss of personal purpose and the experience of existential dread from never achieving self-actualization in spite of the tremendous time commitment towards excellence in a now automated intelligence.

I truly think because of the pace of innovation this will be a universal feeling for every human for the rest of existence.

As a software engineer, I myself have only recently recovered from it. So, it’s really interesting to watch a prominent figure in their industry publicly go through “purpose death” and the related grief. It’ll be a useful case study to re-read his written meditations through this cycle.

I’d say Terrance has recently left the denial phase, the anger phase I’m sure he wisely kept off the Internet, and is currently in the bargaining phase - ie scrambling to change the goal posts. I wonder if he will wisely keep the depression / burnout phases also off the internet.

However, soon as the goalposts keep falling, I think like most humans he will accept, retool, and come out of this grief with renewed purpose with larger expectations of himself and mathematics. This recent post even starts towards some of that - but sadly is slightly off the mark.

“The important question is, therefore, not whether AI will defeat mathematicians, but which mathematical ends we want AI to serve.”

He still thinks there is controlling AI. AI will run and trample anything that stays in front of it. He needs to one day find acceptance in letting AI run while he learns how to suggest it minor course corrections which it may or may not accept, and when it doesn’t accept quickly learn from the AI why he was right or wrong.

I maybe wrong, but I think this is the cycle of “purpose death” we will all have to contend with in our own time.

In my most recent experimental game I’d like to be able to just assign BiPed / QuadPed to the asset mesh + rig and let the engine handle the rest. Ideally, allowing me to build custom animations for attacks (or even custom movement animation like a limp) and have those blend into each other and also blend into / outof the default movement animations.

Inspired by https://youtu.be/FM8yNkWad1w?is=XV3FmLG4IPvTWknh

“Easy installation” with two screws seems like a benefit to customers except when they come back to their parked bike only to find their expensive mod also had a hidden feature: “easy uninstallation”.

The simpler assumption is that over enough time, the S functions stack together for long enough that working backwards from exponential is a better predictor of reality.

These stacked S curves have continually been true with most technology.

The conclusion is “you should do MRIs it is equivalently beneficial as all of ___ are bad for you”

Unfortunately still need to copy paste the code into a file+terminal command. Which is annoying but works.

However, balancing ergonomics is a the big challenge.

I personally would prefer less ergonomics for more security, but that’s likely not a broadly shared opinion.

Datacenters in space is ambiguous enough to mean on lunar soil which provides plenty of heat dissipation using geothermal heat pumps.

Similarly mass to orbit is also less problematic if silicon factories (including the refineries) are built on lunar soil as well.