/Tech10h ago

Sriram Krishnan argues that open science is on a collision course with predictions of a rapid AI singularity

Manheim warns open science and rapid progress are incompatible

921.1K83123160.5K
Original post

just to state the obvious: think there's a collison course between those who believe research and science should be open and those who believe we are in an accelerating singularity curve.

I have many smart friends who have believed both for a while but seeing more and more their realization that these beliefs will be in conflict.

I for one believe that America and the west needs open and distributed access to research and computation and sharing of ideas at all times.

2:40 AM · Jun 10, 2026 · 156.6K Views
Sentiment

Many users praised the CEO's warning on open research clashing with AI singularity goals because they see openness as vital for progress, while negative users cited security risks or attacked the speaker personally.

Pos
71.4%
Neg
28.6%
15 comments with sentiment.
Cluster Engagement
Posts from X
Most Activity
Most Activity
VIEWS4.3KBOOKMARKS3LIKES49
Yann LeCun@ylecun

@sriramk We've been colliding head-on repeatedly for several years now.

8hViews 4.3KLikes 49Bookmarks 3
RETWEETS3REPLIES6
Sreeram Kannan@sreeramkannan

@sriramk We did this experiment to get the open community armed with AI agents to invent a Quantum Circuit which is 13x better than the published SOTA and beat Google's unpublished circuit.

3hViews 2.3KLikes 31

@ylecun Yes. And open research and science needs to prevail.

6hViews 1.1KLikes 12

@sriramk I think they could both be true!

5hViews 83Likes 2Bookmarks 1

@kzitouni1 I refuse to believe a small set of people however well meaning are safer than broad academic scrutiny.

8hViews 163Likes 5
engineer guy@dragonmhmh8

@sreeramkannan @sriramk My Code Already Cracks 20-19 Bits Keys : https://github.com/threealgos/Quantum-RegeV-Cracker

2hViews 28Likes 2

@theHazarika I think the answer to that is having more science and research to make it serve everyone, not less.

10hViews 365Likes 2
David Manheim@davidmanheim

@sriramk It sounds like you reject the notion that we are in an accelerating singularity curve? (Or is the argument that even if progress is accelerating, openness is sufficiently safe? Or that open progress justifies some safety tradeoff?)

10hViews 581Likes 2

@sriramk @franciscojarceo Thank you for saying that.

9hViews 485Likes 2

@tunguz @franciscojarceo I grew up on open source, it and open access to computing and research is why my entire career exists.

8hViews 370Likes 6

@davidmanheim the second statement is closest to my world view. I believe in Linus's Law. If we *are* in a singularity, I want as many smart people in the west to be involved in research on this as possible.

10hViews 279Likes 2
Vincent Weisser@vincentweisser

@sriramk 100% agree! thanks for your work pushing for this Srinam!! 🙏

8hViews 276Likes 6

@AWar1586398 They are not obviously

6hViews 208Likes 2
Yesh@YeshodharaB

@sriramk @DanielleFong India has no chance where this is going :(

5hViews 17Bookmarks 1
Malay Hazarika@theHazarika

@sriramk How worried are you about recursive self improvement?

10hViews 441Likes 1
Nathan Lands@NathanLands

@sriramk @MishaLaskin 100% agree

9hViews 418Likes 1

@davidmanheim think the baseline for history is: open science leads to good outcomes. if this is different, there needs to extraordinary empirical evidence to overcome what is a fundamental value of the west.

"this time it is different" is not good enough.

10hViews 93Likes 2
David Manheim@davidmanheim

@sriramk That's defensible as a predictive position, but the details are critical.

And given the uncertainty about risks, def/acc and promoting differential tech development seems more prudent than absolutism about openness, even when prioritizing progress.

10hViews 93Likes 2
A War@AWar1586398

@sriramk Those are mutually exclusive issues.

6hViews 272Likes 1
Load more posts