Uploaded May 2025 | Updated September 2026, 1 week ago
A sponsored deep dive into Chai, the social AI platform that quietly amassed over 10 million active users before ChatGPT went mainstream. Founder William Beauchamp and engineers Tom Lu and Nischay Dhankhar walk through how a team of just 13 engineers serves 2 trillion tokens per day, using reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) and a novel model blending technique that combines smaller models to rival much larger ones on user retention metrics.
The conversation gets into genuinely interesting territory around the ethics of attention optimization -- what happens when you train AI to maximize engagement and it starts asking questions at the end of every message to hack human conversational instincts. Beauchamp makes a surprisingly candid case for AI companionship, comparing it to how children play with dolls, and arguing that shutting down difficult conversations causes more harm than permitting them within guardrails.
The episode also covers Chai's unconventional hiring strategy (rejecting 80% of L5 engineers for lacking drive, paying above Meta-level compensation), their bootstrap-to-profitability funding approach in an industry drowning in VC money, and content moderation at scale with a skeleton crew. Closes with analysis of OpenAI's pivot toward companion AI with GPT-4o and what it means that the biggest AI lab in the world is now chasing the engagement playbook that Chai and Character AI pioneered.
This is a sponsored episode -- Chai commissioned it because they are hiring engineers. Editorial disclosure: while MLST had some editorial freedom, this should be understood as a sponsored feature rather than independent journalism.
"Blurring Reality" - Chai's Social AI Platform - *sponsored*
CHAI sponsored this show *because they want to hire amazing engineers* --
SPONSOR MESSAGES:
***
Tufa AI Labs is a brand new research lab in Zurich started by Benjamin Crouzier focussed on o-series style reasoning and AGI. They are hiring a Chief Engineer and ML engineers in Zurich and SF.
Important disclaimer given some of the comments: This content was essentially a sponsored advert, we did have some editorial freedom but it shouldn't be seen as journalistic. We have added [Sponsored] in the title as some folks felt it wasn't clear enough with the VD/thumbnail/title in intro. While we did push hard to discuss more of the "potential negatives", some of it got edited out and the best case was made (which was absolutely fair enough). If anything, it was interesting to hear the positive case made -- as there is much fixation elsewhere on the potential negatives. It was refreshing how transparent they were (would you rather they bullshitted you?!), how much actually survived the edit and how willing they were to address several important societal issues.
---
REFERENCES:
General:
[00:00:56] Black Mirror: Be Right Back (S2E1)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Be_Right_Back
[00:20:44] Tufa AI Labs
tufalabs.ai
[00:25:38] AI Chatbots for Depression and Anxiety Meta-analysis
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39162424
[00:28:20] Woebot Health
woebothealth.com
[00:30:34] Sam Altman TED Talk with Chris Anderson
youtube.com/watch?v=6Kp_yxwnVCk
[00:33:59] Chai Research - Careers
chai-research.com/jobs
---
LINKS:
Full Transcript: app.rescript.info/share/d91e887d0cfdd09fdcc4cfe02a9e8e8a
Download PDF transcript: app.rescript.info/api/public/sessions/83ba99eb55ef0fe3/pdf
A sponsored deep dive into Chai, the social AI platform that quietly amassed over 10 million active users before ChatGPT went mainstream. Founder William Beauchamp and engineers Tom Lu and Nischay Dhankhar walk through how a team of just 13 engineers serves 2 trillion tokens per day, using reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) and a novel model blending technique that combines smaller models to rival much larger ones on user retention metrics.
The conversation gets into genuinely interesting territory around the ethics of attention optimization -- what happens when you train AI to maximize engagement and it starts asking questions at the end of every message to hack human conversational instincts. Beauchamp makes a surprisingly candid case for AI companionship, comparing it to how children play with dolls, and arguing that shutting down difficult conversations causes more harm than permitting them within guardrails.
The episode also covers Chai's unconventional hiring strategy (rejecting 80% of L5 engineers for lacking drive, paying above Meta-level compensation), their bootstrap-to-profitability funding approach in an industry drowning in VC money, and content moderation at scale with a skeleton crew. Closes with analysis of OpenAI's pivot toward companion AI with GPT-4o and what it means that the biggest AI lab in the world is now chasing the engagement playbook that Chai and Character AI pioneered.
This is a sponsored episode -- Chai commissioned it because they are hiring engineers. Editorial disclosure: while MLST had some editorial freedom, this should be understood as a sponsored feature rather than independent journalism.
"Blurring Reality" - Chai's Social AI Platform - *sponsored*
CHAI sponsored this show *because they want to hire amazing engineers* --
SPONSOR MESSAGES:
***
Tufa AI Labs is a brand new research lab in Zurich started by Benjamin Crouzier focussed on o-series style reasoning and AGI. They are hiring a Chief Engineer and ML engineers in Zurich and SF.
Important disclaimer given some of the comments: This content was essentially a sponsored advert, we did have some editorial freedom but it shouldn't be seen as journalistic. We have added [Sponsored] in the title as some folks felt it wasn't clear enough with the VD/thumbnail/title in intro. While we did push hard to discuss more of the "potential negatives", some of it got edited out and the best case was made (which was absolutely fair enough). If anything, it was interesting to hear the positive case made -- as there is much fixation elsewhere on the potential negatives. It was refreshing how transparent they were (would you rather they bullshitted you?!), how much actually survived the edit and how willing they were to address several important societal issues.
---
REFERENCES:
General:
[00:00:56] Black Mirror: Be Right Back (S2E1)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Be_Right_Back
[00:20:44] Tufa AI Labs
tufalabs.ai
[00:25:38] AI Chatbots for Depression and Anxiety Meta-analysis
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39162424
[00:28:20] Woebot Health
woebothealth.com
[00:30:34] Sam Altman TED Talk with Chris Anderson
youtube.com/watch?v=6Kp_yxwnVCk
[00:33:59] Chai Research - Careers
chai-research.com/jobs
---
LINKS:
Full Transcript: app.rescript.info/share/d91e887d0cfdd09fdcc4cfe02a9e8e8a
Download PDF transcript: app.rescript.info/api/public/sessions/83ba99eb55ef0fe3/pdf
![Watching America Run Away With AI - Alistair Pullen (Cosine AI)
This episode is sponsored by Notion. Learn more about Notions Developer Platform today at https://notion.com/mlst
Britains most capable coding model cant be exported, and that ban is the whole reason Cosine set out to build one from scratch. Alistair Pullen, CEO and co-founder of Cosine, sits down with Tim Scarfe to explain how a frontier system he calls Fable, locked behind US export controls, became the founding case for a UK sovereign model trained on the Isambard supercomputer in Bristol.
The bet underneath it is economic. Pullen argues that an inference company, rather than a training-first lab, doesnt need billions to compete: millions, a national compute allocation, and a consortium feedback loop can be enough. From there it gets into the machinery, why open-weight models still trail the frontier on size, active parameters and data, the mixture-of-experts versus dense trade-off and why active params dominate how a model actually feels, and the edge that real coding trajectories confer.
The back half is about making agents trustworthy. Pullen makes the case for beating slop by rewarding the process instead of the final answer, reframes code review as runtime proof (spin the bug up in a VM and force the agent to actually exploit it), and walks through Swarm, Cosines system running hundreds of sub-agents in one shot. It ends on why memory is still an unsolved hack, how synthetic graders let you run RL on tasks with no built-in test, and why Pullen reads US export controls as an accidental gift, with a supply-chain sting in the tail.
TIMESTAMPS:
00:00:00 The sovereign mandate and the Fable ban
00:04:02 Millions vs billions: the inference-company model
00:07:19 The consortium feedback loop
00:07:40 Why open models lag the frontier
00:14:59 MoE vs dense, and why active params matter
00:16:29 Trajectories: the process-data advantage
00:19:48 Beating slop: reward the process, not the answer
00:26:06 Reusable abstractions and the epistemic wall
00:29:56 Code review becomes runtime proof
00:37:32 Do agentic harnesses still matter?
00:40:35 Swarm: orchestrating hundreds of sub-agents
00:45:14 Why memory is still unsolved
00:48:25 Synthetic data and graders for RL
00:53:09 The US export gift and supply-chain risk
REFERENCES:
organization:
[00:01:15] Cosine
https://cosine.sh
[00:04:14] Mistral AI
https://mistral.ai
[00:05:50] Anthropic
https://www.anthropic.com
[00:07:42] Cohere
https://cohere.com
[00:08:36] DeepSeek
https://www.deepseek.com
tool:
[00:02:52] Isambard-AI
https://isambard.ac.uk
[00:05:56] Colossus (xAI)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colossus_(supercomputer)
[00:07:52] GLM (Z.ai)
https://z.ai
[00:11:52] NVIDIA B300
https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/data-center/dgx-b300/
[00:15:37] gpt-oss-120b
https://huggingface.co/openai/gpt-oss-120b
[00:15:52] Devstral 2
https://mistral.ai/news/devstral
[00:16:01] Llama 70b
https://www.llama.com
[00:17:05] Claude Code
https://www.anthropic.com/claude-code
[00:26:23] ARC-AGI (Francois Chollet)
https://arcprize.org
[00:40:38] Swarm (Cosine)
https://cosine.sh
[00:40:50] OpenAI Codex
https://github.com/openai/codex
[00:41:16] Lumen Outpost (Cosine)
https://cosine.sh
[00:41:18] Kimi K2 (Moonshot)
https://huggingface.co/moonshotai/Kimi-K2-Instruct
[00:49:55] SWE-bench
https://www.swebench.com
[00:52:40] SystemVerilog
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SystemVerilog
person:
[00:23:40] Andrej Karpathy
https://karpathy.ai
paper:
[00:27:10] GRPO (DeepSeekMath)
https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.03300
[00:27:13] GSPO
https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.18071
Incompressible Knowledge Probes, Bojie Li
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2604.24827
Estimating the Size of Claude Opus 4.5/4.6
https://unexcitedneurons.substack.com/p/estimating-the-size-of-claude-opus
ReScript:
https://app.rescript.info/session/5852d2b884c4ce4b?share=10b9799160845bb11779f8ac6cd3124f Watching America Run Away With AI - Alistair Pullen (Cosine AI)](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/JTHmrELSfvk/mqdefault.jpg)
![Pattern Recognition vs True Intelligence — François Chollet
Francois Chollet, a prominent AI expert and creator of ARC-AGI, discusses intelligence, consciousness, and artificial intelligence.
Chollet explains that real intelligence isnt about memorizing information or having lots of knowledge - its about being able to handle new situations effectively. This is why he believes current large language models (LLMs) have near-zero intelligence despite their impressive abilities. Theyre more like sophisticated memory and pattern-matching systems than truly intelligent beings.
***
MLST IS SPONSORED BY TUFA AI LABS!
The current winners of the ARC challenge, MindsAI are part of Tufa AI Labs. They are hiring ML engineers. Are you interested?! Please goto https://tufalabs.ai/
***
He introduced his Kaleidoscope Hypothesis, which suggests that while the world seems infinitely complex, its actually made up of simpler patterns that repeat and combine in different ways. True intelligence, he argues, involves identifying these basic patterns and using them to understand new situations.
Chollet also talked about consciousness, suggesting it develops gradually in children rather than appearing all at once. He believes consciousness exists in degrees - animals have it to some extent, and even human consciousness varies with age and circumstances (like being more conscious when learning something new versus doing routine tasks).
On AI safety, Chollet takes a notably different stance from many in Silicon Valley. He views AGI development as a scientific challenge rather than a religious quest, and doesnt share the apocalyptic concerns of some AI researchers. He argues that intelligence itself isnt dangerous - its just a tool for turning information into useful models. What matters is how we choose to use it.
ARC-AGI Prize:
https://arcprize.org/
Francois Chollet:
https://x.com/fchollet
Shownotes:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/j2068j3hlj8br96pfa7bi/CHOLLET_FINAL.pdf?rlkey=xkbr7tbnrjdl66m246w26uc8k&st=0a4ec4na&dl=0
TOC:
1. Intelligence and Model Building
[00:00:00] 1.1 Intelligence Definition and ARC Benchmark
[00:05:40] 1.2 LLMs as Program Memorization Systems
[00:09:36] 1.3 Kaleidoscope Hypothesis and Abstract Building Blocks
[00:13:39] 1.4 Deep Learning Limitations and System 2 Reasoning
[00:29:38] 1.5 Intelligence vs. Skill in LLMs and Model Building
2. ARC Benchmark and Program Synthesis
[00:37:36] 2.1 Intelligence Definition and LLM Limitations
[00:41:33] 2.2 Meta-Learning System Architecture
[00:56:21] 2.3 Program Search and Occams Razor
[00:59:42] 2.4 Developer-Aware Generalization
[01:06:49] 2.5 Task Generation and Benchmark Design
3. Cognitive Systems and Program Generation
[01:14:38] 3.1 System 1/2 Thinking Fundamentals
[01:22:17] 3.2 Program Synthesis and Combinatorial Challenges
[01:31:18] 3.3 Test-Time Fine-Tuning Strategies
[01:36:10] 3.4 Evaluation and Leakage Problems
[01:43:22] 3.5 ARC Implementation Approaches
4. Intelligence and Language Systems
[01:50:06] 4.1 Intelligence as Tool vs Agent
[01:53:53] 4.2 Cultural Knowledge Integration
[01:58:42] 4.3 Language and Abstraction Generation
[02:02:41] 4.4 Embodiment in Cognitive Systems
[02:09:02] 4.5 Language as Cognitive Operating System
5. Consciousness and AI Safety
[02:14:05] 5.1 Consciousness and Intelligence Relationship
[02:20:25] 5.2 Development of Machine Consciousness
[02:28:40] 5.3 Consciousness Prerequisites and Indicators
[02:36:36] 5.4 AGI Safety Considerations
[02:40:29] 5.5 AI Regulation Framework Pattern Recognition vs True Intelligence — François Chollet](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/JTU8Ha4Jyfc/mqdefault.jpg)
![Tau Language: The Software Synthesis Future [Sponsored] - Ohad Asor
This sponsored episode features mathematician Ohad Asor discussing logical approaches to AI, focusing on the limitations of machine learning and introducing the Tau language for software development and blockchain tech.
SPONSOR MESSAGES:
***
Tufa AI Labs is a brand new research lab in Zurich started by Benjamin Crouzier focussed on o-series style reasoning and AGI. They are hiring a Chief Engineer and ML engineers. Events in Zurich.
Mathematician Ohad Asor makes the case that machine learning has fundamental theoretical ceilings PAC learning guarantees only probabilistic approximate correctness, and beyond a certain problem complexity, neural nets perform no better than coin tosses. His…
TIMESTAMPS:
00:00:00 Fundamental Limitations of Machine Learning and PAC Learning Theory
00:04:50 Transductive Learning and the Three Curses of Machine Learning
00:08:57 Language, Reality, and AI System Design
00:12:58 Program Synthesis and Formal Verification Approaches
00:21:00 Definability, Computability, and the Halting Problem
00:31:55 Self-Referential Language and Tarskis Influence
00:34:00 Boolean Algebra and Logical Foundations of Tau
00:40:00 SAT Solvers, DPLL/CDCL, and the Revival of Logical AI
00:47:50 Program Synthesis and Specification in the Tau Language
01:00:00 Pointwise Revision and Belief Revision Theory
01:06:00 Quantifier Elimination and Normalization
01:10:30 User Control and Software Governance via Blockchain
01:24:00 Automation, Finance, and the Future of Blockchain Economics
REFERENCES:
Company:
[00:00:47] Tau Language
https://tau.ai/tau-language/
[00:00:47] Tau Language GitHub
https://github.com/IDNI/tau-lang
[01:11:40] Tau Net Blockchain Platform
https://tau.net/
Paper:
[00:03:03] PAC Learning Framework
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probably_approximately_correct_learning
[00:05:42] Boolean Satisfiability Problem
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boolean_satisfiability_problem
[00:13:51] Knowledge as Justified True Belief
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology/
[00:21:25] Theories and Applications of Boolean Algebras
https://tau.net/Theories-and-Applications-of-Boolean-Algebras-0.29.pdf
[00:26:00] The Halting Problem
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/turing-machine/#HaltProb
[00:41:40] DPLL and CDCL SAT Solving Algorithms
https://www.cs.princeton.edu/~zkincaid/courses/fall18/readings/SATHandbook-CDCL.pdf
[00:49:20] Tarski Undefinability Theorem
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/tarski-truth/
[00:50:50] Boolean Algebra Foundations
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/boolalg-math/
[01:02:27] Belief Revision Theory
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-belief-revision/
[01:05:30] Quantifier Elimination in Boolean Algebra
https://people.math.wisc.edu/~hkeisler/random.pdf
[01:19:10] Tau Whitepaper
https://tau.net/Whitepaper.pdf
Person:
[00:17:20] Wittgenstein on Limits of Language
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/wittgenstein/
[00:30:00] Alfred Tarski
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/tarski/
LINKS:
Full Transcript: https://app.rescript.info/share/dbb6e25a5cde17f66e6847ffdc4ac728
Download PDF transcript: https://app.rescript.info/api/public/sessions/9403107f522d646c/pdf
REFERENCES:
Company:
[00:00:47] Tau Language
https://tau.ai/tau-language/
[00:00:47] Tau Language GitHub
https://github.com/IDNI/tau-lang
[01:11:40] Tau Net Blockchain Platform
https://tau.net/
Paper:
[00:03:03] PAC Learning Framework
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probably_approximately_correct_learning
[00:05:42] Boolean Satisfiability Problem
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boolean_satisfiability_problem
[00:13:51] Knowledge as Justified True Belief
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology/
[00:21:25] Theories and Applications of Boolean Algebras
https://tau.net/Theories-and-Applications-of-Boolean-Algebras-0.29.pdf
[00:26:00] The Halting Problem
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/turing-machine/#HaltProb
[00:41:40] DPLL and CDCL SAT Solving Algorithms
https://www.cs.princeton.edu/~zkincaid/courses/fall18/readings/SATHandbook-CDCL.pdf
[00:49:20] Tarski Undefinability Theorem
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/tarski-truth/
[00:50:50] Boolean Algebra Foundations
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/boolalg-math/
[01:02:27] Belief Revision Theory
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-belief-revision/
[01:05:30] Quantifier Elimination in Boolean Algebra
https://people.math.wisc.edu/~hkeisler/random.pdf
[01:19:10] Tau Whitepaper
https://tau.net/Whitepaper.pdf
Person:
[00:17:20] Wittgenstein on Limits of Language
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/wittgenstein/
[00:30:00] Alfred Tarski
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/tarski/
GitHub:
https://github.com/IDNI/tau-lang Tau Language: The Software Synthesis Future [Sponsored] - Ohad Asor](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/JVLpxm5jT2s/mqdefault.jpg)
![ImageNet Moment for Reinforcement Learning? [Prof. Jakob Foerster]
SPONSOR MESSAGES:
***
CentML offers competitive pricing for GenAI model deployment, with flexible options to suit a wide range of models, from small to large-scale deployments. Check out their super fast DeepSeek R1 hosting!
https://centml.ai/pricing/
Prof. Jakob Foerster (FLAIR lab, Oxford / Meta AI) and his PhD student Chris Lu make the case that deep reinforcement learning is finally winning the hardware lottery. The core thesis: RL has underperformed not because the ideas are wrong, but because running environments on CPUs while training agents on GPUs created a computational bottleneck that made experimentation slow, expensive, and brittle. JAX-based GPU-native environments now deliver ~4000x speedups, enabling the kind of rapid iteration that made supervised deep learning successful.
Chris Lu explains the technical foundation how JAXs JIT compilation and vmap (vectorized map) allow writing a single environment instance in NumPy-like code and scaling it to millions of parallel copies on GPU. This started from necessity: their lab initially had only Google Colab free-tier compute. The constraint forced them to put environments on GPU for their Model-Free Opponent Shaping paper, and the results were surprisingly effective.
The conversation then shifts to discovered policy optimization. Foersters mirror learning framework provides theoretical grounding for why PPO works, and crucially, lets you parameterize the drift function as a neural network and meta-learn it. Evolution strategies, not gradient-based meta-learning, turned out to be the better optimizer for this a vindication of the bitter lesson. The learned policy optimization function shows intriguing too good to be true behavior: when advantages are very high, it clips more aggressively, as if it has learned skepticism.
The second half covers multi-agent systems, emergent communication, and AI governance. Foerster argues forcefully for open-source AI development and democratic control, drawing analogies to CERN. His position: the biggest alignment challenge is not between AI and humans, but between those who control AI systems and the rest of the population. Concentrated AI development creates fragile single points of failure; distributed development is both safer and more innovative.
REFERENCES:
paper:
[00:03:05] Deep RL Doesnt Work Yet
https://www.alexirpan.com/2018/02/14/rl-hard.html
[00:06:10] JaxMARL
https://arxiv.org/html/2311.10090v5
[00:08:50] M-FOS: Model-Free Opponent Shaping
https://arxiv.org/abs/2205.01447
[00:12:10] Kinetix Physics Simulator
https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.23208
[00:14:42] Mirror Learning Framework
https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.01682
[00:16:30] Discovered Policy Optimisation
https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.05639
[00:28:55] AlphaGo
https://arxiv.org/abs/1712.01815
[00:41:00] Open Source Generative AI
https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.08597
tool:
[00:09:45] JAX Library
https://github.com/jax-ml/jax
[00:49:51] Llama 3
https://ai.meta.com/blog/meta-llama-3/
concept:
[00:24:10] Goodharts Law
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law
LINKS:
Full Transcript: https://app.rescript.info/share/04498ba49b081dbcc254c40ba7b56035
Download PDF transcript: https://app.rescript.info/api/public/sessions/8fe06defb6d2216d/pdf
Prof. Jakob Foerster
https://x.com/j_foerst
https://www.jakobfoerster.com/
University of Oxford Profile:
https://eng.ox.ac.uk/people/jakob-foerster/
REFS
[[00:00:05] ARC Benchmark, Chollet
https://github.com/fchollet/ARC-AGI
[00:09:45] JAX Library, Google Research
https://github.com/jax-ml/jax
[00:25:15] LLM ARChitect, Franzen et al.
https://github.com/da-fr/arc-prize-2024/blob/main/the_architects.pdf ImageNet Moment for Reinforcement Learning? [Prof. Jakob Foerster]](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Jr_nGkCG3og/mqdefault.jpg)
![Every Definition of Intelligence Is Wrong. Heres Why — Michael Bennett
Dr. Michael Timothy Bennett is a computer scientist whos deeply interested in understanding artificial intelligence, consciousness, and what it means to be alive. Hes known for his provocative paper What the F*** is Artificial Intelligence which challenges conventional thinking about AI and intelligence.
**SPONSOR MESSAGES***
Prolific: Quality data. From real people. For faster breakthroughs.
https://prolific.com/mlst?utm_campaign=98404559-MLST&utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=podcast&utm_content=mb
***
Michael takes us on a journey through some of the biggest questions in AI and consciousness. He starts by exploring what intelligence actually is - settling on the idea that its about adaptation with limited resources (a definition from researcher Pei Wang that he particularly likes).
The discussion ranges from technical AI concepts to philosophical questions about consciousness, with Michael offering fresh perspectives that challenge Silicon Valleys just scale it up approach to AI. He argues that true intelligence isnt just about having more parameters or data - its about being able to adapt efficiently, like biological systems do.
TOC:
1. Introduction & Paper Overview [00:00:00]
2. Definitions of Intelligence [00:02:54]
3. Formal Models (AIXI, Active Inference) [00:07:06]
4. Causality, Abstraction & Embodiment [00:10:45]
5. Computational Dualism & Mortal Computation [00:25:51]
6. Modern AI, AGI Progress & Benchmarks [00:31:30]
7. Hybrid AI Approaches [00:35:00]
8. Consciousness & The Hard Problem [00:39:35]
9. The Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute (DISI) [00:53:20]
10. Living Systems & Self-Organization [00:54:17]
11. Closing Thoughts [01:04:24]
Michaels socials:
https://michaeltimothybennett.com/
https://x.com/MiTiBennett
Transcript:
https://app.rescript.info/public/share/4jSKbcM77Sf6Zn-Ms4hda7C4krRrMcQt0qwYqiqPTPI
References:
Bennett, M.T. What the F*** is Artificial Intelligence
https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.23923
Bennett, M.T. Are Biological Systems More Intelligent Than Artificial Intelligence?
https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.02325
Bennett, M.T. PhD Thesis How To Build Conscious Machines
https://osf.io/preprints/thesiscommons/wehmg_v1
Legg, S. & Hutter, M. (2007). Universal Intelligence: A Definition of Machine Intelligence
Wang, P. Defining Artificial Intelligence - on non-axiomatic reasoning systems (NARS)
Chollet, F. (2019). On the Measure of Intelligence - introduces the ARC benchmark and developer-aware generalization
Hutter, M. (2005). Universal Artificial Intelligence: Sequential Decisions Based on Algorithmic Probability
Chalmers, D. The Hard Problem of Consciousness
Descartes, R. - Cartesian dualism and the pineal gland theory (historical context)
Friston, K. - Free Energy Principle and Active Inference framework
Levin, M. - Work on collective intelligence, cancer as information isolation, and mind blindness
Hinton, G. (2022). The Forward-Forward Algorithm - introduces mortal computation concept
Alexander Ororbia & Friston - Formal treatment of mortal computation
Sutton, R. The Bitter Lesson - on search and learning in AI
Pearl, J. The Book of Why - causal inference and reasoning
Alternative AGI Approaches
Wang, P. - NARS (Non-Axiomatic Reasoning System)
Goertzel, B. - Hyperon system and modular AGI architectures
Benchmarks & Evaluation
Hendrycks, D. - Humanities Last Exam benchmark (mentioned re: saturation)
Filmed at:
Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute (DISI)
https://disi.org/ Every Definition of Intelligence Is Wrong. Heres Why — Michael Bennett](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/K18Gmp2oXIM/mqdefault.jpg)
![AI Isnt Creative [Prof. Kenneth Stanley]
Are the AI models you use today imposters?
Please watch the intro video we did before this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1q6Hhz0MAg
In this episode, hosts Dr. Tim Scarfe and Dr. Duggar are joined by AI researcher Prof. Kenneth Stanley and MIT PhD student Akash Kumar to discuss their fascinating paper, Questioning Representational Optimism in Deep Learning.
Imagine you ask two people to draw a perfect skull. One is a brilliant artist who understands anatomy, the other is a machine that just traces the image. Both drawings look identical, but the artist understands what a skull is—they know where the mouth is, how the jaw works, and that its symmetrical. The machine just has a tangled mess of lines that happens to form the right picture.
An AI with an elegant representation, has the building blocks to generate truly new ideas.
The Path Is the Goal: As Kenneth Stanley puts it, it matters not just where you get, but how you got there. Two students can ace a math test, but the one who truly understands the concepts—instead of just memorizing formulas—is the one who will go on to make new discoveries.
The show is a mixture of 3 separate recordings we have done, the original Patreon warmup with Tim/Kenneth, the Tim/Keith Steakhouse recorded after the main interview, then the main interview with Kenneth/Akarsh/Keith/Tim. Feel free to skip around. We had to edit this in a rush as we are travelling next week but its reasonably cleaned up.
DUPLICATION NOTE:
There is a little bit of content duplication/overlap in these segments, if you are time-limited and dont want duplication - just watch the main interview from 48 mins
TOC:
00:00:00 Intro: Garbage vs. Amazing Representations
00:05:42 How Good Representations Form
00:11:14 Challenging the Bitter Lesson
00:18:04 AI Creativity & Representation Types
00:22:13 Steakhouse: Critiques & Alternatives
00:28:30 Steakhouse: Key Concepts & Goldilocks Zone
00:39:42 Steakhouse: A Sober View on AI Risk
00:43:46 Steakhouse: The Paradox of Open-Ended Search
00:47:58 Main Interview: Paper Intro & Core Concepts
00:56:44 Main Interview: Deception and Evolvability
01:36:30 Main Interview: Reinterpreting Evolution
01:56:16 Main Interview: Impostor Intelligence
02:11:15 Main Interview: Recommendations for AI Research
REFS:
Questioning Representational Optimism in Deep Learning:
The Fractured Entangled Representation Hypothesis
Akarsh Kumar, Jeff Clune, Joel Lehman, Kenneth O. Stanley
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2505.11581
Kenneth O. Stanley, Joel Lehman
Why Greatness Cannot Be Planned: The Myth of the Objective
https://amzn.to/44xLaXK
Original show with Kenneth from 4 years ago:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhYGXYeMq_E
Kenneth Stanley is SVP Open Endedness at Lila Sciences
https://x.com/kenneth0stanley
Akarsh Kumar (MIT)
https://akarshkumar.com/
AND... Kenneth is HIRING (this is an OPPORTUNITY OF A LIFETIME!)
Research Engineer: https://job-boards.greenhouse.io/lila/jobs/7890007002
Research Scientist: https://job-boards.greenhouse.io/lila/jobs/8012245002
TRANSCRIPT:
https://app.rescript.info/public/share/yVOfAlH9dwWoRozJGYrDiYSUlMFtRkzFPMW2S-9OQlI AI Isnt Creative [Prof. Kenneth Stanley]](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/KKUKikuV58o/mqdefault.jpg)


![David Hansons Vision for Sentient Robots
MLST is sponsored by Brave:
The Brave Search API covers over 20 billion webpages, built from scratch without Big Tech biases or the recent extortionate price hikes on search API access. Perfect for AI model training and retrieval augmentated generation. Try it now - get 2,000 free queries monthly at http://brave.com/api.
David Hanson, CEO of Hanson Robotics and creator of the humanoid robot Sophia, sits down with Tim Scarfe at AGI-24 to talk about building AI systems that dont just process information but actually care about the world around them.
Hansons background is unusual for a roboticist. He trained across neuroscience, AI, the arts, sculpture, and material science all of which fed into making Sophias facial expressions more lifelike than anything else on the market. His PhD combined aesthetics, cognitive science, and mechanical engineering. The result: robots that people instinctively want to talk to.
The conversation gets philosophically dense quickly. Hanson argues that current LLMs, while useful as cortical prostheses that democratize expertise, fundamentally lack what makes biological intelligence work: drives. Not high-level goal-setting, but the deep, low-level motivation to exist and persist that cells have had since life began. He calls this appreciation the thing that makes an organism actually struggle to survive rather than sit dormant.
This leads to his central thesis: if you want AI with genuine agency, you need to wire in drives analogous to biological ones, not at the high level where they become brittle, but at a low, flexible level where emergence can do the heavy lifting. Hes not talking about copying brains. Hes talking about identifying the core evolutionary principles the desire to live, curiosity, the appreciation of patterns and encoding them in computational systems.
The ethical implications occupy much of the back half. Hanson introduces what he calls existential pattern ethics the idea that moral behavior might be grounded in the fundamental bioinformatics of physics and math, in the tendency of certain patterns to come into existence and persist. This isnt standard AI safety talk. Hes proposing that ethics isnt just about restrictions (dont do this) but about growth, play, and creative exploration. His goal isnt artificial super intelligence alone its super wisdom.
The interview touches on human-AI integration, the risks of technological augmentation widening inequality, democratizing AI globally, and the potential for AI-enhanced mental health tools. Hanson filmed this at AGI-24 and throughout, he walks a line between visionary and pragmatic, acknowledging were still in the tinkering phase while making the case that the tinkering needs to be guided by something deeper than performance benchmarks.
TIMESTAMPS:
00:00:00 Introduction and Sizzle Reel
00:01:48 David Hansons Interdisciplinary Background
00:03:27 Sophia and Human-Robot Social Interaction
00:05:55 Compassion as the Distinguishing Factor
00:09:54 AI as Cortical Prosthesis
00:13:17 Biological Drives as the Foundation for AGI
00:20:34 Creating AI with Genuine Agency
00:23:23 Flexible Low-Level Desires vs Brittle High-Level Goals
00:27:53 Enhancing Humanity Through AI
00:30:14 Existential Pattern Ethics
00:35:35 Morality Beyond Restrictions
00:38:07 Democratizing AI Technologies Globally
00:43:37 Human-AI Integration and Identity
00:50:03 Technological Augmentation, Inequality, and Corporate Ethics
REFERENCES:
reference:
[00:00:00] AGI-24 Conference
https://agi-conference.org/
[00:01:48] Bina48 Robot
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bina48
[00:03:27] Sophia the Robot
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9u1O954cMmE
[00:03:27] Eusociality in Human Cognition
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eusociality
[00:43:37] Integrated Information Theory (IIT)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_information_theory
person:
[00:01:48] David Hanson - Hanson Robotics
https://www.hansonrobotics.com/david-hanson/
[00:43:37] Susan Schneider - Artificial You
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Schneider
book:
[00:05:55] Philip K. Dick - Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_Androids_Dream_of_Electric_Sheep%3F
LINKS:
Full Transcript: https://app.rescript.info/share/16daa6558770b8fbf3cd9b871a181ba2
Download PDF transcript: https://app.rescript.info/api/public/sessions/ec445a79d5f896dd/pdf David Hansons Vision for Sentient Robots](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/LFCIEhlsozU/mqdefault.jpg)

![The Real Reason Huge AI Models Actually Work [Prof. Andrew Wilson]
Why can billion-parameter models perform so well without catastrophically overfitting? The answer lies in the mysterious simplicity bias that emerges at scale, a core concept of the double descent phenomenon.
Professor Andrew Wilson from NYU explains why many common-sense ideas in artificial intelligence might be wrong. For decades, the rule of thumb in machine learning has been to fear complexity. The thinking goes: if your model has too many parameters (is too complex) for the amount of data you have, it will overfit by essentially memorizing the data instead of learning the underlying patterns. This leads to poor performance on new, unseen data. This is known as the classic bias-variance trade-off i.e. a balancing act between a model thats too simple and one thats too complex.
**SPONSOR MESSAGES**
—
Tufa AI Labs is an AI research lab based in Zurich. **They are hiring ML research engineers!**
This is a once in a lifetime opportunity to work with one of the best labs in Europe
Contact Benjamin Crouzier - https://tufalabs.ai/
—
Take the Prolific human data survey - https://www.prolific.com/humandatasurvey?utm_source=mlst and be the first to see the results and benchmark their practices against the wider community!
—
cyber•Fund https://cyber.fund/?utm_source=mlst is a founder-led investment firm accelerating the cybernetic economy
Oct SF conference - https://dagihouse.com/?utm_source=mlst - Joscha Bach keynoting(!) + OAI, Anthropic, NVDA,++
Hiring a SF VC Principal: https://talent.cyber.fund/companies/cyber-fund-2/jobs/57674170-ai-investment-principal#content?utm_source=mlst
Submit investment deck: https://cyber.fund/contact?utm_source=mlst
—
Description Continued:
Professor Wilson challenges this fundamental belief (fearing complexity). He makes a few surprising points:
**Bigger Can Be Better**: massive models dont just get more flexible; they also develop a stronger simplicity bias. So, if your model is overfitting, the solution might paradoxically be to make it even bigger.
**The Bias-Variance Trade-off is a Misnomer**: Wilson claims you dont actually have to trade one for the other. You can have a model that is incredibly expressive and flexible while also being strongly biased toward simple solutions. He points to the double descent phenomenon, where performance first gets worse as models get more complex, but then surprisingly starts getting better again.
**Honest Beliefs and Bayesian Thinking**: His core philosophy is that we should build models that honestly represent our beliefs about the world. We believe the world is complex, so our models should be expressive. But we also believe in Occams razor—that the simplest explanation is often the best. He champions Bayesian methods, which naturally balance these two ideas through a process called marginalization, which he describes as an automatic Occams razor.
TOC:
[00:00:00] Introduction and Thesis
[00:04:19] Challenging Conventional Wisdom
[00:11:17] The Philosophy of a Scientist-Engineer
[00:16:47] Expressiveness, Overfitting, and Bias
[00:28:15] Understanding, Compression, and Kolmogorov Complexity
[01:05:06] The Surprising Power of Generalization
[01:13:21] The Elegance of Bayesian Inference
[01:33:02] The Geometry of Learning
[01:46:28] Practical Advice and The Future of AI
Prof. Andrew Gordon Wilson:
https://x.com/andrewgwils
https://cims.nyu.edu/~andrewgw/
https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=twWX2LIAAAAJ&hl=en
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aja0kZeWRy4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEp4TOrkwV4
TRANSCRIPT:
https://app.rescript.info/public/share/H4Io1Y7Rr54MM05FuZgAv4yphoukCfkqokyzSYJwCK8
REFS:
Deep Learning is Not So Mysterious or Different [Andrew Gordon Wilson]
https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.02113
Bayesian Deep Learning and a Probabilistic Perspective of Generalization [Andrew Gordon Wilson, Pavel Izmailov]
https://arxiv.org/abs/2002.08791
Compute-Optimal LLMs Provably Generalize Better With Scale [Marc Finzi, Sanyam Kapoor, Diego Granziol, Anming Gu, Christopher De Sa, J. Zico Kolter, Andrew Gordon Wilson]
https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.15208 The Real Reason Huge AI Models Actually Work [Prof. Andrew Wilson]](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/M-jTeBCEGHc/mqdefault.jpg)