Singularity University and XPRIZE founder Peter Diamandis stated: Many are asking what AI will do for us, rather than asking what we should do with it. This reflects his consistent framing of tool selection as a life fork.

In recent years, he has reiterated this stance in communications: The cost of GPT-3.5 level queries has dropped from about $20 per million tokens in November 2022 to about $0.07 in October 2024, approximately 280 times cheaper; a Pew survey shows that about 65% of American workers rarely or never use AI in their work. He advocates for "picking up tools to build, write, and teach" and, along with Alexander Wissner-Gross, promotes a "Solve Everything" abundance timeline, identifying food, energy, education, and health as four pillars that autonomous systems can reduce costs for by 2035. He cites DeepMind's Demis Hassabis and Anthropic's Dario Amodei as supporting evidence for overcoming chronic diseases and extending lifespan within the next decade.

Institutional experience supports this optimistic engineering: XPRIZE buys results with prizes, Singularity University teaches exponential technologies as courses, and Zero-G and A360 sell experiences and communities. In his communications, he cites the annual growth of semiconductors (Micron, Intel, AMD, etc.) as evidence of "inner circle" investments and views the valuation leaps of OpenAI, Anthropic, and xAI as proof of computational power turning into equity. Concurrent programs continue to interview Robinhood, United Therapeutics, etc., incorporating tokenization, organ regeneration, and agent settlement into the same abundance narrative.

Who is buying, who is selling: Buyers are purchasing the agency of "the subject is still human," while sellers are trading attention stuck in victim narratives. The event is driven by a stance, with funding flowing towards the entrepreneurial circle willing to subscribe to a ten-year timeline, rather than new model training budgets. Beneficiaries are those selling courses, competitions, and communities, while those under pressure are regulatory discourses treating safety discussions as the only legitimate issue. Asking "What will it do for you" positions people as objects; asking "What will you do with it" positions people as principals.

The public post lacks new experimental data and does not disclose his personal model usage.

Source: Public information