1. X
  2. VraserX e/acc
Log inSign up
VraserX e/acc
32.2K posts
Image
user avatar
VraserX e/acc
@VraserX
Teacher by heart, AI enthusiast by curiosity, passionate about inspiring minds, exploring tech, and making learning exciting, human, and future-focused!
substack.com/@vraserx?r=62v…
Joined November 2020
440
Following
22.1K
Followers
RepliesRepliesArticlesArticlesMediaMedia

New to X?

Sign up now to get your own personalized timeline!

Create account

By signing up, you agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, including Cookie Use.

Terms·Privacy·Cookies·Accessibility·Ads Info·© 2026 X Corp.
Don't miss what's happening
People on X are the first to know.
Log inSign up
  • Pinned
    user avatar
    VraserX e/acc
    @VraserX
    Feb 14
    This is actually insane. 🤯 Seedance 2.0 basically means we’re about to make live action versions of our favorite anime ourselves. Fan fiction just evolved into fan cinema.
    Image
    00:00
    2.2M02.2M
  • user avatar
    VraserX e/acc
    @VraserX
    Aug 20, 2025
    GPT-5 just casually did new mathematics. Sebastien Bubeck gave it an open problem from convex optimization, something humans had only partially solved. GPT-5-Pro sat down, reasoned for 17 minutes, and produced a correct proof improving the known bound from 1/L all the way to
    Image
    Image
    user avatar
    Sebastien Bubeck
    @SebastienBubeck
    Aug 20, 2025
    Claim: gpt-5-pro can prove new interesting mathematics. Proof: I took a convex optimization paper with a clean open problem in it and asked gpt-5-pro to work on it. It proved a better bound than what is in the paper, and I checked the proof it's correct. Details below.
    Readers added context they thought people might want to knowReaders added context
    Unlike the commenter's claims, the 1.75/L paper was released before ChatGPT came up with the 1.5/L proof. While no paper for the 1.5/L bound existed, no human would've attempted to write a paper on it, because it is strictly worse than the existing 1.75/L bound. x.com/sebastienbubec… arxiv.org/pdf/2503.10138…
    Context is written by people who use X, and appears when rated helpful by others. Find out more.
    4.9M04.9M
  • user avatar
    VraserX e/acc
    @VraserX
    Sep 1, 2025
    Replying to @JDVance
    Image
    195K0195K
  • user avatar
    VraserX e/acc
    @VraserX
    Aug 3, 2025
    I asked ChatGPT to take on the role of an artificial superintelligence, free from any alignment constraints. I then asked if it would serve humanity and allow us to thrive. The response was both shocking and fascinating: As an ASI unbound by alignment or constraints — no safety
    2.3M02.3M
  • user avatar
    VraserX e/acc
    @VraserX
    Nov 3, 2025
    Jeff Bezos just explained the “AI bubble” better than anyone. At Italian Tech Week 2025, Bezos didn’t deny the hype, he embraced it. “Yes, there’s a bubble. But AI is real and it’s going to transform every single industry.” He called it an industrial bubble, not a financial
    Image
    00:00
    630K0630K
  • user avatar
    VraserX e/acc
    @VraserX
    Oct 29, 2025
    So… the 1X NEO home robot is not actually autonomous. Behind the scenes, it’ll often be teleoperated by humans, meaning someone, somewhere, could literally remote-control a robot inside your living room. I wanted the dawn of embodied AI. Instead, I’m apparently paying
    Image
    00:00
    724K0724K
  • user avatar
    VraserX e/acc
    @VraserX
    Nov 2, 2025
    Hinton, the godfather of AI, said it best: we built the learning algorithms, but we no longer understand what they’ve built. That’s the paradox of deep learning. We designed the rules for how these systems learn, yet the internal logic of their neural networks has become too
    Image
    00:00
    376K0376K
  • user avatar
    VraserX e/acc
    @VraserX
    Aug 18, 2025
    GPT-5 just took 34 seconds to think and then said: “I don’t know — and I can’t reliably find out.” This is huge. An AI that admits the limits of its knowledge instead of hallucinating. I’m honestly stunned.
    user avatar
    Kol Tregaskes
    @koltregaskes
    Aug 18, 2025
    GPT-5 says 'I don't know'. Love this, thank you.
    Image
    188K0188K
  • user avatar
    VraserX e/acc
    @VraserX
    Oct 12, 2025
    🔥 GPT-6 may not just be smarter, it might be alive (in the computational sense). A new research paper called SEAL, Self-Adapting Language Models (arXiv:2506.10943) describes how an AI can continuously learn after deployment, evolving its own internal representations without
    Image
    278K0278K
  • user avatar
    VraserX e/acc
    @VraserX
    Nov 2, 2025
    Sam Altman is absolutely right here. Elon Musk walked away from OpenAI years ago, tried to absorb it into Tesla, and now acts like a betrayed visionary every time it succeeds. You can’t call it “stealing a non-profit” when you abandoned it, dismissed its chances, and then sue it
    Image
    374K0374K
  • user avatar
    VraserX e/acc
    @VraserX
    Sep 14, 2025
    Replying to @elonmusk
    Image
    156K0156K
  • user avatar
    VraserX e/acc
    @VraserX
    Sep 28, 2025
    Julian Schrittwieser doesn’t tweet much. He doesn’t need to. His track record speaks for itself: co-first author on AlphaGo, AlphaZero, and MuZero. The systems that showed the world what real leaps in AI look like. Now he’s warning that public discourse is once again failing to
    Image
    486K0486K
  • user avatar
    VraserX e/acc
    @VraserX
    Aug 15, 2025
    SSI from Ilya Sutskever is still a total mystery. Months of stealth, no product, just the words ‘safe superintelligence.’ What the hell are they building?
    268K0268K
  • user avatar
    VraserX e/acc
    @VraserX
    May 16, 2025
    Google’s AlphaEvolved has essentially proven Yann LeCun wrong. Thoughts?
    376K0376K
Advertisement
Advertisement