Andy Turner retweeted
Many of you don't understand how serious this is, so let me break it down.
In computer science there is a famous kind of puzzle called 3-SAT. You are given a long list of yes-or-no switches and a set of rules about how they must be arranged, and you have to find a combination that satisfies every rule. The obvious way to solve it is to try every combination, but each new switch doubles the number of possibilities, so a puzzle with a few hundred switches would take longer than the age of the universe to brute force.
For decades, the smartest people in the field found clever tricks that made this a little faster, but every trick still hit the same wall: the time required kept exploding as the puzzle grew.
About 25 years ago, two computer scientists, Russell Impagliazzo and Ramamohan Paturi, working with Francis Zane, turned that wall into a formal idea.
They proposed the Exponential Time Hypothesis, which says this explosion is not a failure of human cleverness but a law of nature. No algorithm, however brilliant, will ever solve 3-SAT without the time blowing up exponentially. Nobody could prove it, but almost everyone believed it, and it became one of the foundations of modern computer science.
Researchers used it as a measuring stick. If you could show that solving some other problem quickly would also crack 3-SAT quickly, you had shown that problem was hopelessly hard too. Hundreds of papers, across scheduling, graphs, logic and much more, rest on this one assumption.
Now an internal AI model at OpenAI claims to have broken it. It says it found an algorithm that solves these puzzles meaningfully faster than the hypothesis allows, and it has checked the proof in a computer verification system called Lean.
And here is the remarkable part: the very people who proposed the hypothesis, Impagliazzo and Paturi, along with MIT's Ryan Williams, are now leading the public review of whether a machine has disproved their own idea.
So what happens next? If the disproof holds, a large part of theoretical computer science has to be revisited.
Every result that said "this problem cannot be solved faster, assuming ETH" loses its foundation, and researchers will have to work out which of those walls were real and which were simply where we stopped looking. It does not mean everything becomes easy. The new algorithm is still slow in absolute terms and this is not the famous P versus NP problem being solved.
But it means our map of what is possible was wrong in a place we were very confident about, and it was an AI that redrew it. If the disproof fails, the hypothesis survives and the field breathes out, but we will still have watched an AI produce serious, checkable work on one of the deepest questions in the discipline, closely enough that the founders of the idea had to take it seriously. Either way, something has shifted.
Andy Turner retweeted
Hello @elonmusk, Hitler historian here, having researched & written about Hitler for 22 yrs & being a fellow of the Hoover Institution - not exactly a hotbed of far left ideas. This doesn’t add up. It is predicated on the false assumption that collectivism only exists on the Left
Andy Turner retweeted
Replying to @WhiteHouse
Cat check: This is not a bird's eye view, unless the bird is dead
Andy Turner retweeted
UK crime was four times higher when Oasis first played Knebworth than at last year’s reunion gigs.
The collapse of crime and safer streets is one of the biggest stories of our time.
But one almost never told - or believed.
My take on today’s figures: comment.press/lawless
Andy Turner retweeted
Tech blogger 神奇阿宇 from Hubei, China, built a working hoverboard.
Electric, with 10 brushless motors pushing over 30kg of thrust each—enough to lift 4 people—and peak current hitting 2,000 amps.
2 STEPX Neo phones as the board's brain. One inside the board reads posture data in real time; the other on his wrist feeds AI voice prompts through his earbuds—"Weight's shifting left!" "Bend your right knee!"
After 10+ days of brutal training and AI-assisted correction, he achieved man-machine sync.
Andy Turner retweeted
i want new ways to look at lots of trajectories, currently exploring:
- treemap laid out by groupings (metadata or computed)
- colored by classification of success (or grouping)
- sized by length
- zoom in smoothly to see turns as beads on a string
- extremely fast transcript viewer (instant for many thousands of msgs)
- switch to 3d to see the forrest for the trees
- transition to semantic (UMAP) layout
- color by semantic clustering
Andy Turner retweeted
If we want to continue progress in science, we must be prepared to acknowledge that the correct description of nature will eventually simply be too complicated for humans to understand. I do not think it is wise to make human understanding a requirement. AI is the way forward.
Andy Turner retweeted
Brandon and I pledged 50% of our equity. This was the principal reason that I left Google for Anthropic. The existence of this kind of program was a costly signal that Anthropic wasn’t just talk, at a time when Anthropic didn’t even have a released model. Fund a bright future!
We’re committing a portion of Anthropic’s shares to the Anthropic Public Benefit Fund, a new wholly owned entity dedicated entirely to the public benefit.
It will start off with 5% of our shares. For every 50% increase in the company’s value over a set baseline, we can contribute up to an extra 2%, subject to our board’s discretion.
In total, this means that roughly 20% of Anthropic’s shares are committed to the public good. Our co-founders have already pledged to donate 80% of their equity, and around half our employees are donating a portion of their equity as part of a donation matching program we’ve run since our founding.
In the post below, we share more details about our new fund.
anthropic.com/news/public-be…
Andy Turner retweeted
Tim Sweeney
-> Self-taught programmer
-> Designed three programming languages
-> Wrote UnrealScript’s compiler and VM himself
-> Building his latest, Verse, with the creator of Haskell and the co-creator of Scheme
@TimSweeneyEpic is a pretty cracked programmer if you ask me.
Andy Turner retweeted
2/ TL/DR: We found neural activity across both inferotemporal and prefrontal cortex alternates between a conscious mode and an unconscious mode ~ 15 times every second.
Andy Turner retweeted
When my girlfriend and her friends go to the bathroom and I get stuck talking to the other boyfriend
Andy Turner retweeted
Some magical progress towards "magic state" in quantum!
Our @GoogleQuantumAI team has demonstrated "magic state cultivation" on physical hardware for the first time. The result is a 40x error reduction on our Willow processor vs. previous methods, achieving a state-of-the-art 99.99% logical fidelity.
It's another step towards useful, error-corrected quantum computers to help solve the hardest problems. The result is published in Science today, watch the video below to see how it works
Andy Turner retweeted
interpretability might be the most important scientific problem in the world right now, as I don't think we can solve alignment if we don't know what we're building. I think I have good news about it. I co-authored early work in mechanistic interpretability at OpenAI and came away pessimistic, because neural networks appeared to fold into arbitrary tangled knots. years later, I started openai's first large-scale automated interpretability project, finding about 2% of neurons legible with the primitive tools we had
with modern agentic tools and a much closer look, the picture looks totally different. the vast majority in models up to trillions of parameters are legible, and their circuits beautiful. many famous examples of tangled neurons turned out to be misunderstood. The roadblocks I expected mostly aren't there. I now think ambitious interpretability will be solved by the time we need it most, and possibly quite soon, as automated scientists keep improving. it may be a bitter lesson for interpretability: the simple thing, at absurd scale, works
already-clean.goodfire.com/
Andy Turner retweeted
demis hassabis mass-won the nobel prize in chemistry in 2024 for alphaFold. what nobody reported is what he said at a private dinner in london three weeks later.
"we are mass-building the most inefficient thinking machines in the history of engineering. and we are calling it progress."
a neuroscientist at UCL who was at that dinner spent the next 18 months turning that sentence into a 37-page quantitative proof. the paper was submitted to nature in august 2026. it was rejected. not because the science was wrong. because the implications were "too commercially sensitive to publish without further review."
the paper leaked on a closed neuroscience slack on october 1st.
Working Note: The Efficiency Gap
Biological vs Silicon Intelligence - A Thermodynamic Analysis
August 2026
here's what the paper proves -
the human brain runs at 20 watts. the same power as a dim lightbulb. it processes approximately 10^16 operations per second.
GPT-4 inference on an NVIDIA H100 cluster: 3,200,000 watts. it processes approximately 10^15 operations per second.
the brain is 10x faster on 160,000x less energy.
the efficiency ratio: brain = 5 × 10^14 ops/watt. H100 cluster = 3 × 10^8 ops/watt.
the brain is 1,600,000x more energy-efficient than the best AI hardware on earth.
now watch the historical curve [Fig. 1] -
2012 (AlexNet era): AI was 100,000,000x less efficient than the brain.
2017 (transformer era): 10,000,000x less efficient.
2023 (GPT-4 era): 1,600,000x less efficient.
2026 (current): 1,200,000x less efficient.
at the current rate of improvement - 22% efficiency gain per year - AI hardware will match the brain's efficiency in 2089. sixty-three years from now.
jensen huang's entire NVIDIA roadmap assumes exponential improvement. the paper proves the improvement is logarithmic. it's slowing down, not speeding up.
the reason is thermodynamic. the landauer limit.
rolf landauer proved in 1961 that erasing one bit of information requires a minimum energy of kT ln(2). at room temperature: 2.85 × 10^-21 joules.
silicon transistors currently operate at approximately 1,000x above the landauer limit. every hardware generation closes that gap by roughly 15%. but the closer you get to the limit, the harder each improvement becomes. this is why moore's law died.
the brain operates at 10x above the landauer limit.
not 1,000x. ten.
3.8 billion years of evolution optimized the brain to within one order of magnitude of the physical limit of computation. NVIDIA has had 31 years and is still three orders of magnitude away.
the paper asks one question in the conclusion:
"what architectural principle allows biological neural networks to operate within 10x of the thermodynamic floor while artificial networks remain at 1,000x?"
the answer: the brain doesn't separate memory and processing. every neuron is both storage and computation simultaneously. every synapse is both a wire and a processor.
every computer built since von neumann's 1945 architecture separates memory from compute. data moves back and forth on a bus. the bus is the bottleneck. the bus is where the energy goes.
NVIDIA's entire product line - every GPU, every tensor core, every NVLink - is an increasingly elaborate attempt to make the bus faster. not to eliminate it. faster.
the brain has no bus. it never needed one.
the paper's final line:
"the companies that build the first commercially viable non-von-neumann inference chip will make the GPU obsolete within 5 years. the physics demands it."
intel abandoned their neuromorphic chip program (loihi) in 2023. IBM shelved TrueNorth. the two companies closest to solving the problem quit.
the $3.4 trillion NVIDIA valuation is a bet that the bus can be made fast enough forever.
landauer proved it can't. 65 years ago.
save this


































