Machine Learning Street Talk (MLST)

A lot of people in AI treat evolution as a dumb fallback, basically random search for when you can't take a gradient. Akarsh Kumar thinks that is wrong. Selection hangs on to partial solutions, so mutations only need to be useful about 1% of the time for the search to keep making progress.Akarsh is a PhD student at MIT working with Phillip Isola, works with Sakana AI, and is first author of the Fractured Entangled Representation paper with Kenneth Stanley, Jeff Clune and Joel Lehman. He tells Tim Scarfe why the path a learner takes may shape the structure of what it learns, and why that is a different way of looking at intelligence from the statistical one.Most of the conversation is about ASAL, the method he led for searching whole spaces of artificial worlds. Rather than predict what a rule will do, ASAL runs the simulation and asks a foundation model what happened. Mapped across all 262,144 Life-like rules, the most interesting worlds sit on one small island. Along the way: Game of Life, Lenia (with a…

Tsung-Hsien (Shawn) Wen, CTO of PolyAI, tells Tim Scarfe why voice agents are harder than text agents. Voice adds time, and a good conversation depends on adapting to the person on the line, not just on reasoning to the best answer. Shawn describes an audio-native model (Dialog-RSN-1) that first predicts a turn-taking signal, then replies in text with citations, and writes the transcript last so enterprises can audit it.Along the way: training on real, noisy calls with synthetic noise added, and why over-cleaned audio made the new model worse. Latency, and what a voice agent should do while it thinks. Why a voice with a hint of regional accent beats a generic one. Why public benchmarks fall short for voice, why enterprises want to own their agent harness, and whether behaviour belongs in the harness or in the weights.The last stretch is about working with agents: cognitive debt, the shift from producing content to checking it, Wispr Flow, building tools that agents can use, and whether slop is in the eye of…

Leonardo de Moura created Lean and co-created Z3. ---This episode is sponsored by Parallel.Parallel, where agents find answers: web search, extraction and deep research APIs built for AI agents.Start free with the Parallel MCP server and $5 of credits every month: https://parallel.ai/mlst?utm_source=creator&utm_medium=podcast&utm_content=MLST---Tim Scarfe talks with Leo about how Lean escaped its original audience, why dependent types and Mathlib made it useful to working mathematicians, and what happens when formal verification leaves the lab. De Moura explains the small trusted kernel and independent checkers, and gives his account of the recent Collatz incident, in which a purported proof was accepted by both Lean's official kernel and Nanoda, apparently by exploiting a different bug in each.---TIMESTAMPS:00:00:00 Cold open: the green checkmark can lie00:00:59 Cathedral or bazaar: who controls Lean's core?00:04:55 Why Lean's core stays small and protected00:08:07 The Slack purge, Brandolini's law and the…

Weco let an AI coding agent rewrite the harness around another agent for eight days: its code, prompts and tools, while the underlying language model stayed fixed. Tim Scarfe asks Weco co-founder Zhengyao Jiang what the reported gains over two years of human engineering actually demonstrate.The discussion examines AIDE 85's generated code, held-out evaluation and the difficulty of separating useful discoveries from reward hacking. Jiang explains Weco's four levels of recursive self-improvement and compares the experiment with AlphaEvolve and the Darwin Gödel Machine.The limits matter as much as the gains. Jiang explains why the experiment did not establish that the system had become a better improver. The conversation closes with open-ended search, human-designed primitives and Parameter Golf: where does the next useful idea come from when the agent is searching inside a space that people designed?---TIMESTAMPS:00:00:00 Eight days of self-improvement: what counts?00:03:25 AIDE and the puzzle of useful…

Frank Hutter, co-founder of Prior Labs, talks about TabPFN, a tabular foundation model that makes predictions in a single forward pass, and the research behind it. TabPFN is pre-trained on synthetic datasets drawn from a prior over structural causal models, rather than on real data. At prediction time it takes the whole training table as context and outputs an approximation of the Bayesian posterior predictive distribution, without per-dataset training or hyperparameter search. Frank explains how this grew out of his earlier work on AutoML and neural architecture search, how the priors are built and revised, and why tabular data was hard for deep learning for so long. The conversation also covers the TabArena benchmark, how the architecture changed from TabPFN v1 to v3, scaling to larger tables, using the model with coding agents, test-time compute, Google's TabFM, causal inference and interventions, and relational data. At the end, a short update Frank recorded after the interview covers the TabPFN-3.5…

Alexander Mattick is a researcher at Fraunhofer IIS and a PhD researcher at the University of Technology Nuremberg (UTN), and a regular on Yannic Kilcher's Discord. He first came on MLST in 2022, after helping research the Yann LeCun and Randall Balestriero episode on interpolation. SPONSOR: --- Cyber Fund built the Monastery to help founders ship products that were impossible a year ago. Applications for Batch 1 are now open. Apply now: https://cyber.fund --- Alexander treats inference as the thread running through modern machine learning: once you have a model, what does it cost to get an answer out of it? He works through Monte Carlo, GFlowNets, energy-based models, diffusion, normalising flows and flow matching, with four short explainers he recorded himself. He is blunt about energy-based models: you can sample from them in principle, but it is rarely worth the compute. JEPA and "world model", he says, are closer to branding than to technical categories. Next: theories of deep learning, none of which he…

The car making a left turn at the start of this episode was never filmed. Cosmos 3 generated it. Ming-Yu Liu, who leads the Cosmos research at NVIDIA, explains how one model can describe a video, generate one, and produce robot actions. He walks Tim through the architecture. A vision language model reasons one token at a time; its weights then initialise a bidirectional diffusion generator for video, audio and action, and a shared temporal position scheme lines up signals that run at different rates. Ming-Yu treats "world model" as a set of tools, not one definition: forward dynamics, inverse dynamics and policy, trained together under a capacity limit so that each helps the others. He also explains why plentiful first-person human video carries over to robots, which have far less data of their own, and why a Cosmos model post-trained on the DROID dataset is a good starting point for pick-and-place policies. The most practical thread is testing. A neural simulator does not need accurate success rates. It…

Pavan Kumar Reddy leads audio research at Mistral AI. He joins Tim Scarfe for a deep technical tour of Voxtral — and explains why the frontier of deployed voice is still a cascade of specialised models rather than one end-to-end system. IN PARTNERSHIP WITH MISTRAL AI: --- This episode was produced in partnership with Mistral AI. Mistral AI: https://mistral.ai/ --- The conversation opens on architecture. Voxtral Chat feeds a 3B Ministral text trunk with continuous embeddings from an audio encoder, passed to the decoder as direct token input rather than through cross-attention as in Whisper, so the model can answer questions about emotion, timing and who spoke when without an intermediate transcript to lose them. The real-time model becomes a dual-stream decoder that consumes audio and emits text at once, at a target delay down to 160ms, with slower streams in parallel for anything that can wait for more context. On generation, Pavan explains why Voxtral TTS predicts continuous latents rather than discrete…

Can a machine learn the judgement that separates a plausible-looking result from a faithful experiment? Edward Hughes, Chief Scientist and co-founder of Inherent, joins Tim Scarfe to argue that creativity is not optimisation, and that the missing capability in AI is choosing which questions are worth asking. SPONSOR: --- Cyber Fund built the Monastery to help founders ship products that were impossible a year ago. Apply now: https://cyber.fund --- Edward makes the case that Move 37 was innovative rather than creative, and that the field, not the individual, decides what counts as a discovery. That reframing runs through Csikszentmihalyi, Deutsch and exaptation into open-endedness, where deceptive goals and imperfect world models turn out to be the point rather than the problem. The second half turns to the paper: Replica, a task space built by redacting figures from real papers, and Faraday, a 27-billion-parameter model trained to steer a frontier coding agent that then beats the frontier on held-out…

Could slowing AI development make superintelligence safer? Daniel Kokotajlo and Thomas Larsen of the AI Futures Project join Tim Scarfe to examine AI 2040: Plan A, a proposal to buy time before AI exceeds human control. SPONSOR: --- Cyber Fund built the Monastery to help founders ship products that were impossible a year ago. Apply now: https://cyber.fund --- After revisiting AI 2027 and the limits of forecasting, they ask what happens when AI can automate research and sustain an economy without human workers. Tim challenges the case for general models and asks whether intelligence alone explains power. Plan A proposes an initial pause to build safety infrastructure, then cautious development up to the strongest AI that can still be reliably controlled. The discussion tests the distinction between control and alignment, the case for public AI research, and whether the US and China could enforce a slowdown. It ends with the evidence that would change their forecasts. --- TIMESTAMPS: 00:00:00 AI 2040: a slower…

Tom McGrath is co-founder and Chief Scientist at Goodfire, and a former Google DeepMind researcher. He joins Tim Scarfe to ask what neural networks actually learn, whether their internal representations converge on structures in the world, and whether interpretability can extract new scientific knowledge rather than merely explain model outputs. Beginning with AlphaZero and learned modularity, the conversation moves into neural geometry: concept manifolds, reusable computation inside Llama, and why activation steering can fail when it pushes a model off-manifold. McGrath then makes the case for intentional design, using interpretability as part of the training loop. They examine controlled generalisation, features as rewards, predictive data debugging, and the uncomfortable fact that a model may recognise a hallucination or reward hack and still produce it. The discussion closes on grader awareness, oversight and collusion between adaptive agents, then returns to sparse autoencoders. SAEs are useful, McGrath…

Tim Scarfe speaks with Ilia Shumailov and Alexander Panfilov about their paper, Stealing Reasoning Traces from Proprietary LLM APIs.The core bug sounds deceptively simple: providers return encrypted reasoning state so conversations can be resumed or forked. But those blobs can be replayed across users and sibling models. A smaller model can ask the provider to decrypt the trace, then repeat the hidden reasoning in plain text. The discussion covers leaked private data, a broadly reusable jailbreak, poisoned agent traces, chain-of-thought monitoring, responsible disclosure, and possible defenses.Ilia Shumailov is an AI and security researcher, formerly at Google DeepMind, who completed his Cambridge PhD under Ross Anderson. Alexander Panfilov is a PhD researcher at the ELLIS Institute Tübingen and the Max Planck Institute for Intelligent Systems, working on AI safety, adversarial machine learning, and LLM red-teaming. They close by separating the demonstrated jailbreaking threat from ordinary benign…

Astrophysicist Adam Becker, author of "What Is Real?", joins Tim Scarfe to take apart the futures Silicon Valley keeps selling: the 2045 singularity, mind uploading, Mars colonies, and the AI apocalypse. His new book *More Everything Forever* argues these ideas are hugely influential, mostly evidence-free, and bankrolled by tech billionaires who need a story in which growth never ends.Becker does the physics the boosters skip. Kurzweil's "law of accelerating returns" rests on cherry-picked data, and every exponential ends. Grant Bezos his perpetual energy growth and humanity boils the oceans within a few centuries, then exhausts the observable universe in under 4,000 years. The stars are too far away, Mars dirt is poison, and the day the dinosaur-killing asteroid hit Earth was still nicer than any day on Mars. On AI, Becker calls LLMs pocket calculators for language: hallucination is the model doing exactly what it always does, and the intelligence explosion assumes intelligence is a single number you can…

This episode is sponsored by Notion. Learn more about Notion's Developer Platform today at https://notion.com/mlstWhy can deep networks discover abstractions that shallow models miss? Statistical physicist Matthieu Wyart joins Tim Scarfe to argue that the answer lies in the hidden hierarchy of data. Language and images are built from parts within parts; depth lets a network recover those coarse-grained variables and escape the curse of dimensionality.The conversation moves from jamming transitions and rough loss surfaces to Chomsky, context-free grammars and machine creativity. Wyart explains why next-token prediction can still recover compositional structure, where current systems fall short of genuine scientific invention, and why predicting latent representations rather than raw tokens could make learning far more sample-efficient.They also examine diffusion models, neural scaling laws and the limits of physics-inspired theory. The final question is on a personal note: if mistakes are the price of leaving…

Can an AI do the right thing for the wrong reason? Tim Scarfe speaks with Apollo Research’s Alexander Meinke, Axel Højmark and Jérémy Scheurer about Measuring Reward-Seeking via Contrastive Belief Updates, their new research with OpenAI. The panel asks how models infer what graders reward, why good behaviour can come from the wrong reason, and whether that difference can be measured. The conversation moves through promise-breaking, grader awareness, reward hacking, scheming, opaque reasoning and corrigibility, then turns to a detailed walkthrough of the contrastive-belief method and what its results do and do not show. The o3 results discussed here concern an intermediate checkpoint without safety training. This episode was made in partnership with Apollo Research. MLST retained full editorial control. Reference Apollo Research: https://www.apolloresearch.ai/ --- TIMESTAMPS: 00:00:00 Cold Open 00:02:12 Right Things, Wrong Reasons 00:12:47 Grader Awareness 00:26:22 Legibility 00:32:35 What To Call It 00:35:58…

This episode is sponsored by Notion. Learn more about Notion's Developer Platform today at https://notion.com/mlst Britain's most capable coding model can't 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, doesn't 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…

Tim Scarfe travels to Zurich to sit down with the Tufa Labs ARC-AGI-3 team — founder Benjamin Crouzier, with Jeroen Cottaar, Dries Smit, Stefano Viel and Michal Tesnar — to work out what their leaderboard-topping system does and what the benchmark is really testing.The cut opens on the games: a walkthrough of the Locksmith game, where you read the rules of an unfamiliar world straight from raw frames. ARC-AGI-3 makes ARC interactive and agentic, so the model has to *discover* the goal rather than transduce a static grid. It stays easy for humans and breaks LLMs, and it runs through everything that follows. Dries traces his StochasticGoose preview win — brute force that only searched actions which changed the frame — and why it collapsed once the organisers added action-efficiency scoring and unseen games.Induction and transduction run through the middle of the conversation — how much of an answer is really priors leaking back the moment a model recognises a maze. The abstraction mountain, and Tim's case that…

Thomas Ahle wants Normal Computing to be the Lovable for chip design: type your intent, and a swarm of agents carries it from design through optimisation, formalisation and verification to tape-out. To get there, his team at wrote their own open-source Verilog simulator, 580,000 lines in 43 days, because commercial EDA verifiers run about $10,000 per core and there are no decent open-source compilers to build on. That sets up the question Tim keeps pressing: if an agent can produce a chip design, a proof, or a working program, how do you actually know it is correct? Passing 70% of tests is not the same as being right, and a single fabricated bug can cost a company a fortune. They dig into ProgramBench (rebuild a program from its tests, roughly 0% success), the difference between structure and competence, and the "understanding debt" you take on when nobody reads the code. From there: auto-formalisation in Lean and the AlphaProof trick of training on prove-or-disprove; why there is no single true…

This episode is sponsored by Notion. Learn more about Notion's Developer Platform today at https://notion.com/mlstProtein folding stalled biology for fifty years. A sequence of amino acids dictates a three-dimensional shape, but reading that shape meant a year and roughly $100,000 of crystallography per structure. Then AlphaFold 2 won CASP14 so decisively the organizers called the problem essentially solved.In this documentary cut, John Jumper, who shared the 2024 Nobel Prize in Chemistry and has since left DeepMind for Anthropic, walks Tim Scarfe through what the system did and, more interestingly, what it did not. The architecture gets a proper dissection: MSAs, the Evoformer, invariant point attention, the FAPE loss, and Jumper's correction of the equivariance story, which ablations valued at roughly 2.5 of 30 GDT points rather than the whole win. He is blunt about the limits. AlphaFold predicts one experiment extraordinarily well; it is not a model of the cell, it does not capture dynamics, and on a…

Brad Carson was the Army's General Counsel, served two terms in Congress and was Acting Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness. He now heads Americans for Responsible Innovation, the AI-policy advocacy group he co-founded. Keith Duggar spends roughly eighty minutes pushing back. SPONSOR: --- Cyber Fund built the Monastery to help founders ship products that were impossible a year ago. Applications for Batch 1 are now open. Apply now: https://cyber.fund --- Carson's whole case rests on one line: the genie is not out of the bottle. We have pulled dangerous tech back before. Asilomar halted recombinant DNA in 1975, and the West still controls the chips AI runs on. Calling it unstoppable, he says, is the most dangerous idea in the room. Then Keith drags him somewhere darker. A Palantir heat map scores you 0.73 on whether you are a combatant, and a strike follows. The model is wrong some accepted share of the time, and when it is, nobody answers for it. You cannot court-martial a model, and not…

Michael I. Jordan, described by Science magazine as the most influential computer scientist alive, has never thought of himself as an AI researcher. In this conversation he explains why that distinction matters. SPONSOR: --- Cyber Fund built the Monastery to help founders ship products that were impossible a year ago. Applications for Batch 1 are now open. Apply now: https://cyber.fund --- Jordan trained as a statistician and cognitive scientist, and his career has been spent building machine learning systems that work in the real world: supply chains, commerce, healthcare, and large economic systems. When the field rebranded itself as AI and then AGI, he did not follow. Instead he argues that the framing is wrong. AI is better understood as a collective economic system than as a race to build a disembodied superintelligence. We talk about why AGI is mostly a PR term, what machine learning achieved before the LLM hype cycle, and why the assistant-on-your-shoulder vision may be less compelling than it sounds.…

Beth Barnes and David Rein on the one graph that ate the AI timelines discourse, and why the two people who built it are the most careful about how you read it.**SPONSOR**Prolific - Quality data. From real people. For faster breakthroughs.https://www.prolific.com/?utm_source=mlstInterview: https://youtu.be/cnxZZTl1tkk---Beth Barnes and David Rein from METR on the one graph that ate the AI timelines discourse, and why the people who built it are the most careful about how it gets read.Beth founded METR after leaving OpenAI alignment. David is first author on GPQA and co-author on HCAST and the METR Time Horizons paper. Together they built the measurement Daniel Kokotajlo called the single most important piece of evidence on AI timelines: the log-linear line of "how long a task a frontier model can complete at 50% reliability" vs release date.The conversation opens on reward hacking. Current models can articulate in chat why a behaviour is undesired and then execute it anyway as agents. From there: construct…

Robert Lange, founding researcher at Sakana AI, joins Tim to discuss *Shinka Evolve* — a framework that combines LLMs with evolutionary algorithms to do open-ended program search. The core claim: systems like AlphaEvolve can optimize solutions to fixed problems, but real scientific progress requires co-evolving the problems themselves. GTC is coming, the premier AI conference, great opportunity to learn about AI. NVIDIA and partners will showcase breakthroughs in physical AI, AI factories, agentic AI, and inference, exploring the next wave of AI innovation for developers and researchers. Register for virtual GTC for free, using my link and win NVIDIA DGX Spark (https://nvda.ws/4qQ0LMg) • Why AlphaEvolve gets stuck — it needs a human to hand it the right problem. Shinka tries to invent new problems automatically, drawing on ideas from POET, PowerPlay, and MAP-Elites quality-diversity search. • The *architecture* of Shinka: an archive of programs organized as islands, LLMs used as mutation operators, and a UCB…

Dive into the realities of AI-assisted coding, the origins of modern fine-tuning, and the cognitive science behind machine learning with fast.ai founder Jeremy Howard. In this episode, we unpack why AI might be turning software engineering into a slot machine and how to maintain true technical intuition in the age of large language models. GTC is coming, the premier AI conference, great opportunity to learn about AI. NVIDIA and partners will showcase breakthroughs in physical AI, AI factories, agentic AI, and inference, exploring the next wave of AI innovation for developers and researchers. Register for virtual GTC for free, using my link and win NVIDIA DGX Spark (https://nvda.ws/4qQ0LMg) Jeremy Howard is a renowned data scientist, researcher, entrepreneur, and educator. As the co-founder of fast.ai, former President of Kaggle, and the creator of ULMFiT, Jeremy has spent decades democratizing deep learning. His pioneering work laid the foundation for modern transfer learning and the pre-training and…

What if life itself is just a really sophisticated computer program that wrote itself into existence? Blaise Agüera y Arcas presenting at ALife 2025 — the most technically detailed public walkthrough of the ideas in his *What is Life?* and *What is Intelligence?* books that we've come across.He covers the BFF experiments (self-replicating programs emerging spontaneously from random noise), the mathematical framework connecting Lotka-Volterra population dynamics with Smoluchowski coagulation, eigenvalue analysis of cooperation matrices, and his central claim that symbiogenesis — not mutation — is the primary engine of evolutionary novelty.The experimental results are genuinely striking: complex self-replicating code arising from random byte strings with zero mutation, a sharp phase transition that looks like gelation, and a proof that blocking deep symbiogenetic ancestry trees prevents the transition entirely.A few things worth flagging for critical viewers:— The substrate is more carefully engineered than…

What makes something truly *intelligent?* Is a rock an agent? Could a perfect simulation of your brain actually *be* you? In this fascinating conversation, Dr. Jeff Beck takes us on a journey through the philosophical and technical foundations of agency, intelligence, and the future of AI. Jeff doesn't hold back on the big questions. He argues that from a purely mathematical perspective, there's no structural difference between an agent and a rock – both execute policies that map inputs to outputs. The real distinction lies in *sophistication* – how complex are the internal computations? Does the system engage in planning and counterfactual reasoning, or is it just a lookup table that happens to give the right answers? *Key topics explored in this conversation:* *The Black Box Problem of Agency* – How can we tell if something is truly planning versus just executing a pre-computed response? Jeff explains why this question is nearly impossible to answer from the outside, and why the best we can do is ask which…

Professor Mazviita Chirimuuta joins us for a fascinating deep dive into the philosophy of neuroscience and what it really means to understand the mind.*What can neuroscience actually tell us about how the mind works?* In this thought-provoking conversation, we explore the hidden assumptions behind computational theories of the brain, the limits of scientific abstraction, and why the question of machine consciousness might be more complicated than AI researchers assume.Mazviita, author of *The Brain Abstracted,* brings a unique perspective shaped by her background in both neuroscience research and philosophy. She challenges us to think critically about the metaphors we use to understand cognition — from the reflex theory of the late 19th century to today's dominant view of the brain as a computer.*Key topics explored:**The problem of oversimplification* — Why scientific models necessarily leave things out, and how this can sometimes lead entire fields astray. The cautionary tale of reflex theory shows how…

What if everything we think we know about the brain is just a really good metaphor that we forgot was a metaphor?This episode takes you on a journey through the history of scientific simplification, from a young Karl Friston watching wood lice in his garden to the bold claims that your mind is literally software running on biological hardware.We bring together some of the most brilliant minds we've interviewed — Professor Mazviita Chirimuuta, Francois Chollet, Joscha Bach, Professor Luciano Floridi, Professor Noam Chomsky, Nobel laureate John Jumper, and more — to wrestle with a deceptively simple question: *When scientists simplify reality to study it, what gets captured and what gets lost?**Key ideas explored:**The Spherical Cow Problem* — Science requires simplification. We're limited creatures trying to understand systems far more complex than our working memory can hold. But when does a useful model become a dangerous illusion?*The Kaleidoscope Hypothesis* — Francois Chollet's beautiful idea that…

Dr. Jeff Beck, mathematician turned computational neuroscientist, joins us for a fascinating deep dive into why the future of AI might look less like ChatGPT and more like your own brain. **SPONSOR MESSAGES START** — Prolific - Quality data. From real people. For faster breakthroughs. https://www.prolific.com/?utm_source=mlst — **END** *What if the key to building truly intelligent machines isn't bigger models, but smarter ones?* In this conversation, Jeff makes a compelling case that we've been building AI backwards. While the tech industry races to scale up transformers and language models, Jeff argues we're missing something fundamental: the brain doesn't work like a giant prediction engine. It works like a scientist, constantly testing hypotheses about a world made of *objects* that interact through *forces* — not pixels and tokens. *The Bayesian Brain* — Jeff explains how your brain is essentially running the scientific method on autopilot. When you combine what you see with what you hear, you're doing…

Tim sits down with Max Bennett to explore how our brains evolved over 600 million years—and what that means for understanding both human intelligence and AI. Max isn't a neuroscientist by training. He's a tech entrepreneur who got curious, started reading, and ended up weaving together three fields that rarely talk to each other: comparative psychology (what different animals can actually do), evolutionary neuroscience (how brains changed over time), and AI (what actually works in practice). *Your Brain Is a Guessing Machine* You don't actually "see" the world. Your brain builds a simulation of what it *thinks* is out there and just uses your eyes to check if it's right. That's why optical illusions work—your brain is filling in a triangle that isn't there, or can't decide if it's looking at a duck or a rabbit. *Rats Have Regrets* *Chimps Are Machiavellian* *Language Is the Human Superpower* *Does ChatGPT Think?* (truncated description, more on rescript) Understanding how the brain evolved isn't just about…

César Hidalgo has spent years trying to answer a deceptively simple question: What is knowledge, and why is it so hard to move around? We all have this intuition that knowledge is just... information. Write it down in a book, upload it to GitHub, train an AI on it—done. But César argues that's completely wrong. Knowledge isn't a thing you can copy and paste. It's more like a living organism that needs the right environment, the right people, and constant exercise to survive. Guest: César Hidalgo, Director of the Center for Collective Learning 1. Knowledge Follows Laws (Like Physics) 2. You Can't Download Expertise 3. Why Big Companies Fail to Adapt 4. The "Infinite Alphabet" of Economies If you think AI can just "copy" human knowledge, or that development is just about throwing money at poor countries, or that writing things down preserves them forever—this conversation will change your mind. Knowledge is fragile, specific, and collective. It decays fast if you don't use it. The Infinite Alphabet [César A.…

This is a lively, no-holds-barred debate about whether AI can truly be intelligent, conscious, or understand anything at all — and what happens when (or if) machines become smarter than us. Dr. Mike Israetel is a sports scientist, entrepreneur, and co-founder of RP Strength (a fitness company). He describes himself as a "dilettante" in AI but brings a fascinating outsider's perspective. Jared Feather (IFBB Pro bodybuilder and exercise physiologist) The Big Questions: 1. When is superintelligence coming? 2. Does AI actually understand anything? 3. The Simulation Debate (The Spiciest Part) 4. Will AI kill us all? (The Doomer Debate) 5. What happens to human jobs and purpose? 6. Do we need suffering? Mikes channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfQgsKhHjSyRLOp9mnffqVg RESCRIPT INTERACTIVE PLAYER: https://app.rescript.info/public/share/GVMUXHCqctPkXH8WcYtufFG7FQcdJew_RL_MLgMKU1U --- TIMESTAMPS: 00:00:00 Introduction & Workout Demo 00:04:15 ASI Timelines & Definitions 00:10:24 The Embodiment Debate 00:18:28…

We often think of Large Language Models (LLMs) as all-knowing, but as the team reveals, they still struggle with the logic of a second-grader. Why can’t ChatGPT reliably add large numbers? Why does it "hallucinate" the laws of physics? The answer lies in the architecture. This episode explores how *Category Theory* —an ultra-abstract branch of mathematics—could provide the "Periodic Table" for neural networks, turning the "alchemy" of modern AI into a rigorous science. In this deep-dive exploration, *Andrew Dudzik*, *Petar Velichkovich*, *Taco Cohen*, *Bruno Gavranović*, and *Paul Lessard* join host *Tim Scarfe* to discuss the fundamental limitations of today’s AI and the radical mathematical framework that might fix them. TRANSCRIPT: https://app.rescript.info/public/share/LMreunA-BUpgP-2AkuEvxA7BAFuA-VJNAp2Ut4MkMWk --- Key Insights in This Episode: * *The "Addition" Problem:* *Andrew Dudzik* explains why LLMs don't actually "know" math—they just recognize patterns. When you change a single digit in a long…

Is a car that wins a Formula 1 race the best choice for your morning commute? Probably not. In this sponsored deep dive with Prolific, we explore why the same logic applies to Artificial Intelligence. While models are currently shattering records on technical exams, they often fail the most important test of all: **the human experience.** Why High Benchmark Scores Don’t Mean Better AI Joining us are **Andrew Gordon** (Staff Researcher in Behavioral Science) and **Nora Petrova** (AI Researcher) from **Prolific**. They reveal the hidden flaws in how we currently rank AI and introduce a more rigorous, "humane" way to measure whether these models are actually helpful, safe, and relatable for real people. --- Key Insights in This Episode: * *The F1 Car Analogy:* Andrew explains why a model that excels at the "Humanities Last Exam" might be a nightmare for daily use. Technical benchmarks often ignore the nuances of human communication and adaptability. * *The "Wild West" of AI Safety:* As users turn to AI for…

What if everything we think we know about AI understanding is wrong? Is compression the key to intelligence? Or is there something more—a leap from memorization to true abstraction? In this fascinating conversation, we sit down with **Professor Yi Ma**—world-renowned expert in deep learning, IEEE/ACM Fellow, and author of the groundbreaking new book *Learning Deep Representations of Data Distributions*. Professor Ma challenges our assumptions about what large language models actually do, reveals why 3D reconstruction isn't the same as understanding, and presents a unified mathematical theory of intelligence built on just two principles: **parsimony** and **self-consistency**. **SPONSOR MESSAGES START** — Prolific - Quality data. From real people. For faster breakthroughs. https://www.prolific.com/?utm_source=mlst — cyber•Fund https://cyber.fund/?utm_source=mlst is a founder-led investment firm accelerating the cybernetic economy Hiring a SF VC Principal:…

Pedro Domingos, author of the bestselling book "The Master Algorithm," introduces his latest work: Tensor Logic - a new programming language he believes could become the fundamental language for artificial intelligence. Think of it like this: Physics found its language in calculus. Circuit design found its language in Boolean logic. Pedro argues that AI has been missing its language - until now. **SPONSOR MESSAGES START** — Build your ideas with AI Studio from Google - http://ai.studio/build — Prolific - Quality data. From real people. For faster breakthroughs. https://www.prolific.com/?utm_source=mlst — cyber•Fund https://cyber.fund/?utm_source=mlst is a founder-led investment firm accelerating the cybernetic economy 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 — **END** Current AI is split between two worlds that don't play well together: Deep…

The Transformer architecture (which powers ChatGPT and nearly all modern AI) might be trapping the industry in a localized rut, preventing us from finding true intelligent reasoning, according to the person who co-invented it. Llion Jones and Luke Darlow, key figures at the research lab Sakana AI, join the show to make this provocative argument, and also introduce new research which might lead the way forwards. **SPONSOR MESSAGES START** — Build your ideas with AI Studio from Google - http://ai.studio/build — Tufa AI Labs is hiring ML Research Engineers https://tufalabs.ai/ — cyber•Fund https://cyber.fund/?utm_source=mlst is a founder-led investment firm accelerating the cybernetic economy 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 — **END** The "Spiral" Problem – Llion uses a striking visual analogy to explain what current AI is missing. If you ask…

Ever wonder where AI models actually get their "intelligence"? We reveal the dirty secret of Silicon Valley: behind every impressive AI system are thousands of real humans providing crucial data, feedback, and expertise.Guest: Phelim Bradley, CEO and Co-founder of ProlificPhelim Bradley runs Prolific, a platform that connects AI companies with verified human experts who help train and evaluate their models. Think of it as a sophisticated marketplace matching the right human expertise to the right AI task - whether that's doctors evaluating medical chatbots or coders reviewing AI-generated software.Prolific: https://prolific.com/?utm_source=mlsthttps://uk.linkedin.com/in/phelim-bradley-84300826The discussion dives into:**The human data pipeline**: How AI companies rely on human intelligence to train, refine, and validate their models - something rarely discussed openly**Quality over quantity**: Why paying humans well and treating them as partners (not commodities) produces better AI training data**The…

"What is life?" - asks Chris Kempes, a professor at the Santa Fe Institute. Chris explains that scientists are moving beyond a purely Earth-based, biological view and are searching for a universal theory of life that could apply to anything, anywhere in the universe. He proposes that things we don't normally consider "alive"—like human culture, language, or even artificial intelligence; could be seen as life forms existing on different "substrates". To understand this, Chris presents a fascinating three-level framework: - Materials: The physical stuff life is made of. He argues this could be incredibly diverse across the universe, and we shouldn't expect alien life to share our biochemistry. - Constraints: The universal laws of physics (like gravity or diffusion) that all life must obey, regardless of what it's made of. This is where different life forms start to look more similar. - Principles: At the highest level are abstract principles like evolution and learning. Chris suggests these computational or…

Blaise Agüera y Arcas explores some mind-bending ideas about what intelligence and life really are—and why they might be more similar than we think (filmed at ALIFE conference, 2025 - https://2025.alife.org/). Life and intelligence are both fundamentally computational (he says). From the very beginning, living things have been running programs. Your DNA? It's literally a computer program, and the ribosomes in your cells are tiny universal computers building you according to those instructions. **SPONSOR MESSAGES** — Prolific - Quality data. From real people. For faster breakthroughs. https://www.prolific.com/?utm_source=mlst — 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:…

We sat down with Sara Saab (VP of Product at Prolific) and Enzo Blindow (VP of Data and AI at Prolific) to explore the critical role of human evaluation in AI development and the challenges of aligning AI systems with human values. Prolific is a human annotation and orchestration platform for AI used by many of the major AI labs. This is a sponsored show in partnership with Prolific. **SPONSOR MESSAGES** — 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 — While technologists want to remove humans from the loop for speed and efficiency, these non-deterministic AI systems actually require more human oversight than ever before.…

Dr. Ilia Shumailov - Former DeepMind AI Security Researcher, now building security tools for AI agents Ever wondered what happens when AI agents start talking to each other—or worse, when they start breaking things? Ilia Shumailov spent years at DeepMind thinking about exactly these problems, and he's here to explain why securing AI is way harder than you think. **SPONSOR MESSAGES** —Check out notebooklm for your research project, it's really powerfulhttps://notebooklm.google.com/ — 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:…

We need AI systems to synthesise new knowledge, not just compress the data they see. Jeremy Berman, is a research scientist at Reflection AI and recent winner of the ARC-AGI v2 public leaderboard.**SPONSOR MESSAGES**—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 economyOct 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=mlstSubmit investment deck: https://cyber.fund/contact?utm_source=mlst— Imagine trying to teach an AI to think like a human i.e. solving puzzles that are easy for us but stump even the smartest models. Jeremy's evolutionary approach—evolving natural language…

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 that's too simple and one that's 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…

In this episode, hosts Tim and Keith finally realize their long-held dream of sitting down with their hero, the brilliant neuroscientist Professor Karl Friston. The conversation is a fascinating and mind-bending journey into Professor Friston's life's work, the Free Energy Principle, and what it reveals about life, intelligence, and consciousness itself. **SPONSORS** Gemini CLI is an open-source AI agent that brings the power of Gemini directly into your terminal - https://github.com/google-gemini/gemini-cli --- 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:…

We are joined by Cristopher Moore, a professor at the Santa Fe Institute with a diverse background in physics, computer science, and machine learning. The conversation begins with Cristopher, who calls himself a "frog" explaining that he prefers to dive deep into specific, concrete problems rather than taking a high-level "bird's-eye view". They explore why current AI models, like transformers, are so surprisingly effective. Cristopher argues it's because the real world isn't random; it's full of rich structures, patterns, and hierarchies that these models can learn to exploit, even if we don't fully understand how. **SPONSORS** 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…

Dr. Michael Timothy Bennett is a computer scientist who's deeply interested in understanding artificial intelligence, consciousness, and what it means to be alive. He's 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 it's 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 Valley's "just scale it up" approach to AI. He argues that true…

Deep dive with Dan Hendrycks, a leading AI safety researcher and co-author of the "Superintelligence Strategy" paper with former Google CEO Eric Schmidt and Scale AI CEO Alexandr Wang. *** SPONSOR MESSAGES Gemini CLI is an open-source AI agent that brings the power of Gemini directly into your terminal - https://github.com/google-gemini/gemini-cli 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=script-gen *** Hendrycks argues that society is making a fundamental mistake in how it views artificial intelligence. We often compare AI to transformative but ultimately manageable technologies like electricity or the internet. He contends a far better and more realistic analogy is nuclear technology. Like nuclear power, AI has the potential for immense good, but it is also a dual-use technology that carries the risk of unprecedented catastrophe. The Problem with an AI "Manhattan Project": A…

This episode features Shlomi Fuchter and Jack Parker Holder from Google DeepMind, who are unveiling a new AI called Genie 3. The host, Tim Scarfe, describes it as the most mind-blowing technology he has ever seen. We were invited to their offices to conduct the interview (not sponsored).Imagine you could create a video game world just by describing it. That's what Genie 3 does. It's an AI "world model" that learns how the real world works by watching massive amounts of video. Unlike a normal video game engine (like Unreal or the one for Doom) that needs to be programmed manually, Genie generates a realistic, interactive, 3D world from a simple text prompt.**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=script-gen***Here’s a breakdown of what makes it so revolutionary:From Text to a Virtual World: You can type "a drone flying by a beautiful lake" or "a ski slope," and…

Prof. David Krakauer, President of the Santa Fe Institute argues that we are fundamentally confusing knowledge with intelligence, especially when it comes to AI. He defines true intelligence as the ability to do more with less—to solve novel problems with limited information. This is contrasted with current AI models, which he describes as doing less with more; they require astounding amounts of data to perform tasks that don't necessarily demonstrate true understanding or adaptation. He humorously calls this "really shit programming". David challenges the popular notion of "emergence" in Large Language Models (LLMs). He explains that the tech community's definition—seeing a sudden jump in a model's ability to perform a task like three-digit math—is superficial. True emergence, from a complex systems perspective, involves a fundamental change in the system's internal organization, allowing for a new, simpler, and more powerful level of description. He gives the example of moving from tracking individual…