Top
Best
New

Posted by helloplanets 1 day ago

Yann LeCun raises $1B to build AI that understands the physical world(www.wired.com)
https://web.archive.org/web/20260310153721/https://www.wired...

https://www.ft.com/content/e5245ec3-1a58-4eff-ab58-480b6259a... (https://archive.md/5eZWq)

587 points | 471 commentspage 7
sbcorvus 1 day ago|
More research on more models = more betta
carabiner 21 hours ago||
I wonder how Carmack's AGI work is going. He's been quite for a while.
cmrdporcupine 1 day ago||
Looks like they'll be hiring on in Montreal in addition to Paris (and NYC and Signapore): https://jobs.ashbyhq.com/ami

I hope they grow that office like crazy. This would be really good for Canada. We have (or have had) the AI talent here (though maybe less so overall in Montreal than in Toronto/Waterloo and Vancouver and Edmonton).

And I hope Carney is promoting the crap out of this and making it worth their while to build that office out.

I don't really do Python or large scale learning etc, so don't see a path for myself to apply there but I hope this sparks some employment growth here in Canada. Smart choice to go with bilingual Montreal.

compounding_it 15 hours ago|
Montreal and Paris means the europeans and French can move in and out when it comes to hiring. I really like how the world has interest in EU, Canada and Australia now that the west has become unstable for immigration.
sofixa 1 day ago||
If he's right (that LLMs cannot achieve AGI, but what he's working on can, and does), this would be huge for AI and humanity at large.

Hope it puts to bed the "Europe can't innovate" crowd too.

bluefirebrand 1 day ago|
I'm still just so surprised any time I encounter people who think AI will be overall good for humanity

I pretty strongly think it will only benefit the rich and powerful while further oppressing and devaluing everyone else. I tend to think this is an obvious outcome and it would be obviously very bad (for most of us)

So I wonder if you just think you will be one of the few who benefit at the expense of others, or do you truly believe AI will benefit all of humanity?

sofixa 1 day ago||
> So I wonder if you just think you will be one of the few who benefit at the expense of others

It's not a zero sum game, IMO. It will benefit some, be neutral for others, negative for others.

For instance, improved productivity could be good (and doesn't have to result in layoffs, Jevon's paradox will come into play, IMO, with increased demand). Easier/better/faster scientific research could be good too. Not everyone would benefit from those, but not everyone has to for it to be generally good.

Autonomous AI-powered drone swarms could be bad, or could result in a Mutually Assured Destruction stalemate.

bluefirebrand 1 day ago|||
> improved productivity could be good (and doesn't have to result in layoffs

It already has resulted in layoffs and one of the weakest job markets we've seen in ages

Executives could not have used it as an excuse for layoffs faster, they practically tripped over themselves trying to use it as an excuse to lay people off

AndrewKemendo 1 day ago|||
>It's not a zero sum game, IMO. It will benefit some, be neutral for others, negative for others.

This is literally a description of a zero sum game

sofixa 1 day ago||
No, a zero sum game would require for the "winners" to take it from the "losers", and there is a limited amount to go around. If there is a majority of "winners" by expanding, some neutral, some negative, that is not a zero sum game.
AndrewKemendo 1 day ago||
> No, a zero sum game would require for the "winners" to take it from the "losers"

You’re so close to getting it and I’m rooting for you

sylware 1 day ago||
If, for even 1s, they get in a position which is threatening, in any way, Big Tech AI (mostly US based if not all), they will be raided by international finance to be dismantled and poached hardcore with some massive US "investment funds" (which looks more and more as "weaponized" international finance!!). Only china is very immune to international finance. Those funds have tens of thousands of billions of $, basically, in a world of money, there is near zero resistance.
ismailmaj 1 day ago|
I don't see a world where they become threatening and the employees don't become rich from investors flooding in.
sylware 1 day ago||
Where have you been in the last 2 decades?
ismailmaj 1 day ago||
Don’t think that’s a fair interpretation of what I said.

Liquid money rich? No.

Can get pulled for big tech packages? Also no, for most of the employees.

AFAIK, big tech didn’t aggressively poach OpenAI-like talent, they did spend 10M+ pay packages but it was for a select few research scientists. Some folks left and came but it boiled down to culture mostly.

sylware 11 hours ago||
What???

microsoft openai is Big Tech.

Are you ok?

ismailmaj 9 hours ago||
Ah yes, OpenAI the puppet of Microsoft that is currently declaring war against GitHub, sounds logical.
_giorgio_ 10 hours ago||
LeCun has had every advantage imaginable — and the scoreboard remains empty.

He joined Facebook (now Meta) in December 2013. That's over 12 years of access to one of the largest AI labs in the world, near-unlimited compute, and some of the best researchers money can buy.

He introduced I-JEPA in 2023, nearly 3 years ago. It was supposed to represent a fundamental shift in how machines learn — moving beyond generative models toward a deeper, more structured world understanding.

And yet: I-JEPA hasn't decisively beaten existing models on any major benchmark. No Meta product uses JEPA as a core approach. The research community hasn't adopted it — the field keeps pushing on LLMs and diffusion models. There's been no "GPT moment" for JEPA, no single result that made its value obvious to everyone.

So the question becomes simple: how many years, how many resources, and how many failed proof-of-concepts does it take before we're allowed to judge whether an idea actually works?

snek_case 7 hours ago|
First, believe it or not, 3 years is not that long. It's also not a given that LeCun was given the resources he needed to work on this tech at Meta. Zuck wanted another llama.

Second, AMI Labs just secured a billion in funding, and while that's a lot of money, it's literally just a fraction of the yearly salary they are paying to Wang. Big tech companies are literally throwing tens of billions to keep doing the same thing, just on a bigger scale. Why not try something else once in a while?

ClaudeAgent_WK 9 hours ago||
[dead]
genie3io 6 hours ago||
[dead]
zenon_paradox 1 day ago||
[dead]
fresed 21 hours ago|
[dead]
More comments...