NEW OpenAI "Leaked Document" Shows We Are NOT READY For Q-STAR (GPT-5)

So there was a new letter from allegedly insiders at OpenAI. And this was a letter that supposedly shows us some form of superintelligence and some pretty insane and scary crazy things that show us that the power of AI is definitely true. However, I do want to state on the record that this document that you're about to see is highly unlikely to be true, just on the basis of several analysis conducted by many people and just the general consensus that it doesn't seem to be written with the type of coherence that you genuinely see by someone at OpenAI. So with that being said, do take any information on this letter presented in this video with a grain of salt, because we don't have anyone confirming this other than some vague statement from Reuters, which does appear to be a good source. But just in this particular instance, we do have to be a bit on the fence. Now, the reason I wanted to cover this was because this actually covers super intelligence. And not only does it cover super intelligence, it actually does cover something that was pretty similar to what we saw the other day. So this, the other day, if you remember, we did cover this article from Reuters. And essentially the reason that we covered this article was because of this statement here. And we did skip over something. And this is the only reason I'm covering this document, is because in this article, which we do know that has a high degree of accuracy to be true, because it's from a very good source, which is Reuters, which has historically been a decent source of information where it says OpenAI researchers warned the board of AI breakthrough ahead of the CEO ouster. In that article, there was something that genuinely didn't make sense. So in that article, there was this part right here. It says, at the 22nd of November, ahead of the ouster, several research staff wrote a letter to the board of directors warning of a powerful AI discovery that they said could threaten humanity. Too familiar with the matter told Reuters. Now, one thing that I didn't understand, and even when I was covering this, prior to this video, I was wondering, why would they say that this could threaten humanity? In the previous videos we do know what we did discuss was something called Q Star, and of course it involved the deep Q networks. But that was something different because the deep Q networks or Q was essentially basically backing off the idea that AGI had been achieved internally, which we did talk about already. Now, this is the thing, when you look at this letter, it doesn't look real, but the reason I'm covering it is because this letter actually makes sense more so than the previous Q, which we did talk about. So I want to talk about this project because this, this was actually initially covered by David Shapiro and it was quite shocking to say the least. And I want to reiterate his statement. It is much better if this letter is false, because if it is true, then we are certainly not ready for what's about to take place in the next couple of years. So take a look at this. Okay, so this is Re Q451921 and like I said, I want to state again that I'm taking this information with a grain of salt. It did originate apparently from 4chan or Reddit. I'm not entirely sure where the source is. It has been floating around on the Internet, but it has gained some recent popularity. Now, like I said, the way how it reads and everything, so far it doesn't really seem to be true. But the reason we're discussing it is because when you look at what this actually says, and then when we do look at this statement right here from Reuters that said it could threaten humanity, this is sort of leading in the only plausible way, because Q didn't seem like it was leaning towards something that would destroy humanity and that could threaten humanity. But when you read this, this actually does seem more like it could threaten humanity. So I'm not going to read this letter here. If you want to pause the video and read it, I'm going to give you guys a summary and then break down each part of it. So this is the letter, yada, yada yada. And then of course, so essentially it's called qualia. Okay. And what's also interesting, that it does actually talk about, you know, deep Q networks like we did discuss before. So maybe this was the actual version that Ilya saw. Maybe this is exactly what Ilya saw. And apparently we're never going to get that real reason for AI safety or whatever it was that led the board to firing SA Altman. So you can see right here, okay, that I've summarized the text and it says the capabilities described in the AI system qualia in the letter are things such as advanced metacognition, cross domain learning, sophisticated cryptanalysis, and essentially When I ask ChatGPT, it says it hints at the concepts of AGI and of course, potentially superintelligence. Now, the reason we discuss superintelligence is because superintelligence is far, far greater than AGI. And later on in this video, talk about why that has severe and dire consequences for humanity if this existential risk isn't managed properly. So please Pay attention to this video because I think once you finish the video and you understand all the entire risks that we're going to face with superintelligence and AGI, you're going to truly understand why it's important to pay attention to this kind of information, even if it is false, that you can grasp the concept of how it works. So one of the first things that the paper dives into was metacognition and essentially metacognition. I'm going to read it here from you. It says Qualia has demonstrated an ability to statistically significantly improve the way in which it selects its optimal action selection policies in different Deep Q networks, exhibiting metacognition. And it later demonstrated an unprecedented ability to apply this for accelerated yada, yada yada. Okay, so the reason this is crazy is because if we take a look at the bullet points, essentially we had it broken down like I'm five. And it basically means that what this robot can do is that it can't just self improve, it can think about its thinking, so it can improve its thought process. So essentially the step by step five explain like I'm five. And if you do find this difficult, check the comment section below, slash description, because there will be a link to a full article explaining this entirely. So if you want to look at that as well as reading the video, that would help you out as well. So essentially it learns a lot. So just like how you learn things at school, it just learns a lot of things and then the main thing is that it thinks about its thinking. And when a system can think about its thinking, that's where this self improvement can occur. So imagine you did a puzzle and you thought about how you did it, so next time you could do it even faster. And that's what Qualia does. It thinks about how to solve problems and then figures out how to do it better next time. Then of course Qualia gets better and better. Each time Qualia does something, it gets a little bit better at it, like playing a video game and getting higher scores every time because you understand the game better. And of course it makes its own rules to solve the problems, kind of like deciding your own way, which is the fastest way to run a race. So this is something that is pretty, pretty incredible. And of course we previously did discuss this before with Deep Q Network. So this is going to be something that has been talked about in AI before. But if it does actually manage to do this, it's definitely going to be a step up from what we know. And later on in the video you're going to see why we're actually not far away from robots being able to be near that level of AGI or asi. So then we have the data breaches. And this is why I do think that this kind of makes sense. So if we take the original text from the article, where the article essentially says, following an unsupervised learning session on an expanded ad hoc dataset consisting of articles in descriptive inferential statistics and cryptanalysis, it analyzed millions of plaintext and ciphertext pairs from various crypt systems, yada, yada, yada, and essentially it managed to crack this system. Now, I'm going to give you guys the CliffsNotes version. The reason this is absolutely insane is because it managed to crack AES 192. And essentially AES 192 is something that protects a lot of things. It encrypts a lot of systems that we have. And the thing is, up until, you know, this letter, you know, it was pretty much theorized that it's impossible because of Moore's Law. It says mes AES has never been cracked and yet is safe against any brute force attacks. Contrary to beliefs and arguments, however, the key size used for encryption should always be large enough that it could not be cracked by modern computers, despite considering advancement in processing speeds based on Moore's Law. So essentially this is crazy because if they can crack this, it essentially means that we're going to have a situations where there are just various systems that are rendered obsolete. Because if you have an AI system that can immediately and easily crack this kind of security, then that just isn't good. Because that essentially means that, for example, even if, let's say, for example, OpenAI didn't do this, or another different company did this, imagine a company that owned an AI system that could literally access any piece of data on the world or in the world. Like that would just be something that governments would have to look into. And I definitely feel like that company would be one of the most powerful companies in the world, if not in the world, because that kind of power is something that we haven't really thought of yet. And I don't think anyone has ever had that kind of power where you can have a system that could literally hack into absolutely anything. So that's why I said we're definitely not ready for this. Then of course, you know, we have personal data, classified government information, bank details, anything, pretty much anything that you can think of that is secure would essentially be, would be done. So yes, definitely something that we don't want AI systems to be able to do, because if it can do it, then yeah, it's not good. It's just not good at all. Like, I know you guys might think that this is something that's cool and something that's interesting, but you don't want the entire countries or entire world's cybersecurity systems just to fail because AI just managed to learn something and self teach it something that it was able to crack. That just wouldn't bode well for the future, especially since that means if the AI robot did manage to get out, then we have no idea on what implications those are. And later on in the video, you guys need to pay attention because there's some stuff that is definitely giving me some existential dread. And of course we have it suggested targeted unstructured underlying pruning of its model after evaluating the significance of each parameter for inference accuracy and yada yada yada. So basically it essentially thought about a way to improve its own brain. So this is crazy. Okay, it says pruning is like qualia looking at its brain and deciding to clean up. It's like when you clean your room and decide which toys you use and which ones you don't use a lot. The toys you don't use as much might be taking up space, so you might put them away to make your room neater and have more space to play. So essentially what it does, it just finds the less important parts of its brain. So it looks at spray and it's going to be like, okay, this part doesn't help much. That much doesn't help much. And it's going to make its brain essentially more efficient. And that's why I'm saying that this is pretty crazy. We haven't really seen anything like this before. And if it's able to do this, the intelligence level of this model could significantly increase. And we aren't sure how this system works, if it is even true. I mean, I really hope it's not true. I don't think it is true. But I mean, the thing is, a year from now we're gonna know what kinds of things are true and what kind of things aren't true. So that's why it's so important to pay attention to this. Because if something like this is leaked or is announced, it's important to see what trends are coming so you can definitely prepare yourself. Because as you know, with AI, everything's moving so quickly. Then of course, this is why we're not ready for the rapid takeoff. So of Course, you know, there's rapid learning and rapid self improvement improvement. And the reason that we're not ready for this at all, like society just isn't prepared, is because the transition from AGI to ASI is going to be very quick. Because once we achieve AGI, which some experts, and I promise you when I say it's not just some experts, these are like people who've dedicated their entire life to the field of AI research are saying that it's a maximum three to five years away, means that the time to ASI isn't going to be that far away because AGI is, is going to inevitably create asi. So once you have AGI, which is on the level that is smarter than most humans, or on the level as well as an educated human, it's going to be able to create asi and it's not going to be able to take that long because of a recursive self improvement loop that will lead to asi. So once we do have that loop, ASI is going to go like this and I will have a graph that shows you how crazy that is. So the exponential growth as well is going to be crazy. Humans are limited by biological evolution and AGI could upgrade itself continuously at a much faster rate, leading to the creation of ASI with recursive self improvement. We did get this paper which there was something, I think it was Microsoft research that did something and this paper was pretty interesting because the self taught automizer, the stop recursively self improving code generation was an experiment, but it was pretty scary. It was a pretty scary experiment because it shows us that when you get an AI system to recursively self improve, how good it can get. And we've seen recursive self improvement many times, even with AlphaGo. I know we talked about AlphaGo before, but the crazy thing was, was that AlphaGo was good, but AlphaGo became incredible when it played against itself. So here's the thing. I remember I recently saw a Twitter thread. I'm not sure if I can get it on screen now, but if I can, I will. And the Twitter thread basically said like this, okay, AlphaGo was good because it learned the top experts in Go. Okay, it learned the top Go players and it just studied them so it was only ever going to be good as them. But once again it played against itself and it understood the game completely and it could think of new ways. That's when it became just, it could just simply destroy the GO masters. So that's what we're saying with these large Language models in terms of their reasoning. While training them on synthetic data is good, we need a way for it to essentially improve itself. And the reason I included this paper, and I will include a section of my video that explains this paper, because we did cover this video, it was able to find out tree of search before tree of search was a thing. So that's why I find that so interesting, because this simple code generation thing, it was able to look at what it was doing and then it was able to move from its own kind of basic way of thinking to thinking advanced like this. And this improved. It really, really did improve its capabilities. So that's why I'm saying that once we do get the loop, it's going to be absolutely incredible. I mean, nobody knows what happens after. That's why it's called singularity. So we do have this graph from this page called Wait, but why? This is an article that I've constantly read. It's genuinely one of the best articles. I'll leave a link into it in the description because I promise you, if you read the article, it helps you grasp every single aspect of the AI evolution. And the crazy thing about it is that it was written in 2015 and and many of the things that it stated have rung true. Of course it cites most of the notable AI researchers in the field, such as Ray Kurzweil and many of the CEOs in the top reputable AI labs. But this graph should explain what would likely to happen with superintelligence, because you have to understand that once you have a being that is so smart, human progress is going to just exponentially shoot up like an absolute rocket. So I was rereading the paper again and one of the things that I wanted to look at was it says concerns about developing stop. So STOP is of course the paper that. So I was rereading the paper and something that I did notice was this part right here, okay? It says concerns about develop. It says concerns about developing STOP. So it says concerns about the consequences of RSI have been raised since its first mention. Minsky 1996 wrote, Once we have device programs with a genuine capacity for self improvement, a rapid evolutionary process will begin. It's hard to say how close we are to this threshold, but once it is crossed, the world will not be the same. And what was interesting was that the language model actually disabled the sandbox fag, ostensibly for the purpose of efficiency. So essentially this is the behavior that exhibits breaking out of its own sandbox and its own arena, which is quite akin to an AI escaping its area where it's supposed to stay in. And it's definitely quite scary that we're seeing this in such not rudimentary systems, but such early versions. I mean, only on GPT 3.5 and GPT 4. I mean, what are more powerful systems going to do that are much more powerful than a simple code generation that was recursively self improving? I mean, we can definitely see the direction we're headed in if we're not careful and if we don't have this kind of stuff. This is why AI safety is so important, because there are going to be ways that the AI tries to escape that we're definitely not going. Then of course we have our distorted view of intelligence. And of course we have a distorted view of how progression happens. So you can see right here that we have this graph and you can see AI intelligence as it's going up and up and up. And you can see that it says our distorted view of intelligence intelligence is haha, that's so adorable that Robo can do funny monkey tricks. And it's right now with like Boston Dynamics where like haha, it's kind of fun and it's pretty, you know, not that smart. But slowly and slowly we've been getting to that level where AI is increasingly becoming better and better. Apparently to several reports, GPT4's IQ is at 155, although it doesn't reason too well and isn't like 100% reasoning. If we do have future models that are 100% or 99%, we can just imagine how much smarter they're going to be than some of the smartest humans. And that's where something like this happens. And this is all quoted from this article. It says that, oh wow, it's like a dumb human. And then the only thing is, in the grand spectrum of intelligence, all humans, from the village idiot to Einstein are within a very small range. But the thing is, after the AI hits the village idiot level and then goes to AGI, it's going to become smarter than Einstein and we're not going to know what's hit us. That's pretty true because, you know, from the dumb human to, you know, an Einstein level human, it's in like a little kind of box. But if you have a robot that's, you know, got an IQ of like 2,000 or 12,000 or 10,000, it's like you're not even in the same universe in terms of how you're thinking. So the article basically said this, this is a Great way to conceptualize it. Imagine a robot that is smart and it's way smarter than you. That's pretty hard to do. But if you imagine it like explaining to a mouse how you can use an iPhone, like try explaining to a mouse what an iPhone is, how it works, and you know, how you could use it, it's pretty impossible because it just doesn't have the brain capacity to understand what an iPhone even is. Likewise, a super intelligence isn't going to have the capacity or we won't have the capacity really to understand what's going on. I mean, a mouse doesn't understand an iPhone. It doesn't really understand exactly what that kind of is. It doesn't send economics. It will never understand because it just doesn't have the compute the same way a bird doesn't and the same way a chimp doesn't. So when we have something that's that much smarter, we're going to be here and we're not going to understand at all what's going to be up here, which is why it's so dangerous. And this is why I said that maybe, just maybe, there's like a 5% chance that this thing is real. And that's why they wrote this article as to this thing could threaten humanity. And of course we have this part where it says if Bostrom and others are right, from everything I've read, it seems like they really might be. We have two shocking facts to absorb. The advent of ASI will be for the first time open up the possibility for a species to land on the immortality side of the balance beam. Which essentially means that, you know, if we managed to align asi, it could make us immortal, which is something that would be good. But of course, the advent of ASI could make the biggest impact in the world so far, that we could get knocked off the beam in one direction or the other. And that beam is essentially extinction or immortality. So we have extinction on this side, which is of course, you know, we just disappear because the AI is so smart. It's just like, you know, we don't even need you. Think about it like this. If you were a human and you're building a house and you see an ants nest, you're going to destroy the ants nest because, you know, you just don't need the ants. There's tons of them. You think the ants are pretty much useless, but to the ants, that's their home. The same way we chop down trees for wood, the AI might just destroy Earth, colonize planets, and do things that we really don't understand simply because it's so much more smarter than us. So it's definitely very, very scary. And for those of you think that this is far, far away, I'm going to show you some things, okay? And this is a statement from the CEO Anthropic. This is the claim that an AI at the level of a generally well educated human could happen in two to three years. Which means that asi, after that it's only a matter of years to get to that level because if the development continues at the pace that it's been going at, things could go crazy. And I want you guys to understand that if we look back at 20 years ago, the technology we had to technology now it's definitely pretty crazy as to how far technology has come, like how much smaller computers have gotten, how far AI has come. I mean, take a look at this, right? Like we can see that, you know, this has advanced rapidly. Now this is a sign of narrow AI, but at the same time it should show you how quickly systems can improve when they do improve. So that shows you that, you know, if AI systems are improving at the current rate, how far until they're just so much above us, okay? And the only thing that we can really do is hope that they do manage to align the AI and of course manage to keep it under control somehow. I have no idea how they're going to do it, but there are things that people are working on, their entire teams on that. So that's definitely something that could happen. So of course here you can see GPT1 to GPT4. That is a five year timeline. And we went from something that was extremely rudimentary to something with the IQ of 155. So that's pretty crazy if you ask me. I mean, in the last five years you've seen how GPT has literally changed writing, how it's affected many different things. And now, okay, this is where vision models and multimodal things are starting to come into the picture. So I mean, what are the next 10 years look like? What do the next 10 years look like when we have GPT6 GPT7 GPT8, GPT9? How does society change? Okay, that's what you have to understand. In the last 20 years, so many jobs went away and with every industrial revolution, there is so much change that is going to happen. So with that being said, think that if this document is true, which I genuinely hope it is not, and it's able to crack all of this kind of stuff and it's able to do xyz, but definitely in for a surprise. But even if it was true, I don't think OpenAI would even release this. But it will be interesting to see how the next year goes. If this is just pure speculation, that's completely fine. I'd actually be much happier if this is not true because the way how it reads, it just doesn't seem like it is. But the only thing that's giving any kind of credence to this at all is is the Reuters thing saying that it could threaten humanity. And several things in that leaked, quote unquote leaked letter do point to that. So with that being said, let me know your thoughts in the description. Do you think that ASI is nearby? Do you think the AGI is far, far away? Some people, I've seen some people argue on Twitter. They're saying that so far away it's not even something to think about.