From time to time, the startup from the Silicon Valley begins so “absurd” with a mission that it is difficult to recognize whether the startup is real or just satire.
This is the case with MechanizeThe startup, whose founder-and the Non-Profit AI research organization, which he founded the name Epoch-is warped on X after he announced it.
Complaints include each the mission of the startup and the implication that he is looking for a status of his respected research institute. (Even a director at the Research Institute Published Na X: “That’s how I wanted for my birthday: Comms crisis.”)
The mechanism was released on Thursday through Post on X By its founder, the famous researcher Ai Tamay Besiroglu. The purpose of the startup, as Besiroglu wrote, is “full automation of the whole work” and “full automation of the economy”.
Does this mean that the mechanism is working on replacing every human worker with an AI agent bot? Basically, yes. The startup wants to provide data, grades and digital environments to enable the automation of employees of any work.
Besiroglu has even calculated the total addressed market, aggregating all the remuneration that people are currently paid. “Market potential is absurd here: US employees receive about $ 18 trillion a year in the aggregate. For the whole world, this number is more than three times higher, about $ 60 trillion a year,” he wrote.
Besiroglu, nonetheless, explained TechCrunch that “our direct goal is actually the work of white”, not manual work work that will require robotics.
The answer to the startup was often brutal. As a user x Anthony Aguirre He replied: “A huge respect for the work of founders in Epoch, but it is sad to see it. Automation of most human workforce is actually a gigantic reward for companies, which is why many of the largest companies on Earth are already realizing it. I think it will be a huge loss for most people.”
But the controversial part is not only the mission of this startup. AI research institute, EPoch, analyzes the influence of AI and produces reference points for AI performance. It was believed that this was an impartial way to check claims for the performance of the SATA border model manufacturers and others.
This is not the first time Epoch waded controversy. In December, Epoch revealed that Opennai supported the creation of one of his AI comparative tests, which then issued his latest O3 model. Social media users believed that the era needs to be more in advance about the relationship.
When Besiroglu announced the mechanize, x user Oliver Habryka answered“Unfortunately, this seems to be approximate that EPoch’s research was directly fed in the work related to the border, although I was hoping that it did not literally come from you.”
Besiroglu says that the mechanism is supported by Who’s Who: Nat Friedman and Daniel Gross, Patrick Collison, Dwarkesh Patel, Jeff Dean, Sholto Douglas and Marcus Abramovitch. Friedman, Gross and Dean didn’t ask TechCrunch’s request for comment.
Marcus Abramovitch confirmed that he had invested. Abramovitch is a managing partner at Crypto Hedge Fund Altx i self -styled “Effective altruist”.
Techcrunch said that he invested because “the band is unique in many dimensions and thought deeper on artificial intelligence than anyone I know.”
Good for people?
Despite this, Besiroglu claims that naysayers, that having agents do all their work, will actually enrich people, and not impoverished them, through “explosive economic growth”. Indicates The paper he published on the point.
“Completely automation of working force can generate great abundance, much higher life standards and new goods and services that we can’t even imagine,” said Techcrunch.
This may apply to who owns agents. That is, if employers pay for them as an alternative of developing them internally (presumably by other agents?).
On the other hand, optimistic perspectives ignore the basic fact: if people have no job, they’ll not have income to buy all the things that AI agents produce.
Despite this, Besiroglu claims that human wages in such an auutomatic world should actually increase, because such employees are “more valuable in complementary roles that AI cannot fulfill.”
Remember, nonetheless, that the goal is to perform all work agents. When asked about this, he explained: “Even in scenarios in which wages can decrease, economic well-being is not determined solely by wages. People usually receive income from other sources-as rents, dividends and government well-being.”
Perhaps we all earn on herds or real estate. For this, there is at all times prosperity – if AI agents pay taxes.
Although Besiroglu’s vision and mission are clearly extreme, the technical problem that desires to solve is legal. If every human worker has a personal crew of agents that helps them create more work, economic abundance may occur. And Besiroglu is undoubtedly appropriate for at least one thing: a 12 months to the age of AI agents, they do not work thoroughly.
He notes that they are unbelievable, do not keep information, do not try to do the task independently, as asked: “and they cannot perform long -term plans without leaving the rails.”
However, he is almost not alone in work on corrections. Giant firms, resembling Salesforce and Microsoft, are building agency platforms. Openai too. And a lot of startups of agents: from specialists from tasks (outgoing sales, financial evaluation); for people working on training data. Others are working on the economy of agent prices.
In the meantime, Besiroglu wants you to know: the mechanism employs.