I just don't think there will be just one

[shapanwwuom]

Mark Zuckerberg: Or it's widely used. I mean, I kind of like this theory that a company is “God” only if it or a government controls it. Right? Like if you’re the only person with access to a computer and the internet, you have inhuman powers that no one else has because you have access to Google and you have access to all this stuff. But when everyone has it, it makes us all better, and it also levels the playing field.

So that's kind of what we're trying to achieve with open source. AI. I certainly don't think there should be one company controlling AI. I think you want all sorts of different things to exist, and all sorts of different people to create all sorts of applications with it. I mean, some of them are serious and help you think about things.

I think, like anything on the internet, a lot of it is going to student data be hilarious and entertaining. People will create some interesting AI agents and they will spread like content. It's similar to when you share a short video or a clip and say "this thing is hilarious." In the future, a lot of entertainment will be interactive in nature, where someone will build an experience or an AI and then show it to someone else, who will find it entertaining.

But for example, I don’t necessarily interact with that AI every day. It’s more like, “Okay, this thing is interesting for five minutes,” and then you pass it on to your friends. So, I don't know. I think you want all these different things to exist in the world. In my opinion, the best way to make sure it doesn't get out of hand is to make sure it's distributed fairly evenly.

Host: I think the concern people have is not even whether it will be distributed evenly. Rather, if it becomes sentient and starts operating autonomously, the common concern is that we will become obsolete, that humans are essentially creating a more advanced version of our higher intelligence that will be powered by quantum computing and connected to nuclear reactors.