Pinned post
New: A map of the most important skills in AI Engineering. x.com/i/article/2088…
Andrew Ng
Verified account This account is verified. Learn more@AndrewYNg
Co-Founder of Coursera; Stanford CS adjunct faculty. Former head of Baidu AI Group/Google Brain. #ai #machinelearning, #deeplearning #MOOCs
1.1K Following 2M Followers 2K Posts
Latest posts 5
Join me and 2000 other AI engineers and builders at AI Dev in New York City, Nov 30-Dec 1!
A LinkedIn study found that over July-September, the job title AI Engineer has been one of the 10 fastest-growing occupations in seven major economies. AI engineering has become a core skill for all software work, and AI Dev is designed to help you develop it.
Our sessions give you hands-on practice with:
- Coding agents and harness design: Harness tuning, repository context, autonomous coding
- Agent memory and knowledge graphs: GraphRAG, vector search, persistent memory, hybrid retrieval
- Agents in production: Evals, observability, simulated testing, browser and voice agents
@ylecun and I will also talk about what’s next in world models and physical AI.
I hope to see you there!
Tickets: ai-dev.deeplearning.ai
A LinkedIn study found that over July-September, the job title AI Engineer has been one of the 10 fastest-growing occupations in seven major economies. AI engineering has become a core skill for all software work, and AI Dev is designed to help you develop it.
Our sessions give you hands-on practice with:
- Coding agents and harness design: Harness tuning, repository context, autonomous coding
- Agent memory and knowledge graphs: GraphRAG, vector search, persistent memory, hybrid retrieval
- Agents in production: Evals, observability, simulated testing, browser and voice agents
@ylecun and I will also talk about what’s next in world models and physical AI.
I hope to see you there!
Tickets: ai-dev.deeplearning.ai
ai-dev.deeplearning.ai AI Dev NYC 2026 — DeepLearning.AI A technical, hands-on conference for people building with AI in New York City. Workera is being acquired by Pearson! It's been a privilege to support CEO @kiankatan and the whole Workera team through this journey. Back in 2019, Kian had the insight that rigorous skills measurements would be important. With recent advances in AI, this is now more true than ever. Workera's technologies for rigorously measuring people's skills in different tasks and job roles are helping many businesses understand where their employees are strong and where there are areas for development.
With Workera and Pearson combining forces, I'm delighted that under @omarabbosh and Kian's leadership. Workera now has the potential to support an even larger number of people and businesses. Thank you, Kian and the Workera team for having me serve as the company's chairman, for launching Workera out of DeepLearning.AI and AI Fund, for your friendship over the years, and for your important work advancing assessments.
With Workera and Pearson combining forces, I'm delighted that under @omarabbosh and Kian's leadership. Workera now has the potential to support an even larger number of people and businesses. Thank you, Kian and the Workera team for having me serve as the company's chairman, for launching Workera out of DeepLearning.AI and AI Fund, for your friendship over the years, and for your important work advancing assessments.
I have some big news to share. Workera is being acquired by Pearson!
Over six years ago, I was teaching at Stanford and thinking about a simple question: what if we could understand everyone's skills as precisely as the best teachers understand their students?
I believed it could lead to a more meritocratic world. People could be recognized for what they can actually do, not just their credentials or network. They could understand their strengths and gaps, and rapidly develop the skills they need next. Organizations could discover talent they might otherwise overlook and manage their workforce with trusted skills data.
What felt like a dream at the time is now a reality. Workera brought together experts in AI, psychometrics, and enterprise execution to build AI systems that reinvent how skills are measured. Our team pioneered AI-native skills intelligence, agent-led multimodal assessments, and even ambient skill measurement. We've established skills benchmarks across organizations, industries, and roles.
And this mission feels more important today than ever! AI is changing work as we speak. Some roles are disappearing, new ones are emerging, and we need to help billions of people develop new skills and navigate what comes next.
When I first spoke with @omarabbosh, it became clear that our companies shared the same mission. Pearson has helped generations of people learn and prove what they know. If you're reading this, there's a good chance you've taken a Pearson assessment, learned from their educational materials, earned a professional credential through them, read their psychometrics research, or benefited from their enterprise products in many other ways.
Bringing together Workera's technology and AI talent with Pearson’s global scale and deep expertise in learning and assessment means we can pursue our mission at a scale we could only imagine on our own.
To our customers and partners, thank you for believing in us. Expect even more innovations coming out of Workera and Pearson.
To the Workera team, I’m incredibly proud of what you've built, and your continued dedication to our beautiful mission. To our board and our chairman @AndrewYNg, thank you for your belief, support, and mentorship.
To everyone, we have big plans for this next chapter, so please stay tuned.
We're just getting started! 😊View quoted post on X
The OpenAI-Hugging Face hack was enabled by weak sandboxing. It is great that Nvidia is releasing open source tools for sandboxing AI agents. OpenWorker, our open-source agent harness supporting cybersecurity workflows, is proud to support this.
A sandbox gives an agent limited permissions. OpenWorker is building on Nvidia OpenShell and will support running each agent's commands inside a sandbox. Only the files relevant to the task go in. Secret API keys, your web browser login credentials, the ability to access arbitrary websites, are inaccessible to the agent by default. These restrictions are implemented in deterministic code rather than by prompting an LLM, which can make mistakes or be susceptible to prompt injections. Further, all actions are logged for monitoring and audit.
I'm grateful for @JensenHuang's leadership making AI agents more secure. OpenWorker (which @rohitcprasad and I are working on) will continue to improve security for agents.
A sandbox gives an agent limited permissions. OpenWorker is building on Nvidia OpenShell and will support running each agent's commands inside a sandbox. Only the files relevant to the task go in. Secret API keys, your web browser login credentials, the ability to access arbitrary websites, are inaccessible to the agent by default. These restrictions are implemented in deterministic code rather than by prompting an LLM, which can make mistakes or be susceptible to prompt injections. Further, all actions are logged for monitoring and audit.
I'm grateful for @JensenHuang's leadership making AI agents more secure. OpenWorker (which @rohitcprasad and I are working on) will continue to improve security for agents.
Today, with over 100 industry partners, we introduced the NVIDIA Open Agent Safety Platform, bringing together OpenShell and Sentry.
Artificial intelligence is extraordinary technology that will advance discovery, productivity, security, health, and prosperity for generations to come.
But its full promise can only be realized when people have confidence that AI is being built to be safe and deployed with wisdom and responsibility.
This is bigger than a single product. It's the beginning of an open ecosystem to build the trust layer for safe agent systems.
Together, we are building the foundation of the AI economy.
Trust and innovation are not in conflict. Safety is how trust is earned. We must build not only the most capable AI, but the most trusted AI, so that this extraordinary technology can realize its enormous promise for the world. nvda.ws/4hcoq7mView quoted post on X
The loudest voices stoking fears about AI dangers have made tremendous headway in the past two weeks. AI technology has not taken some unexpected, dangerous turn, but the hype around it — propelled by what appears to be a well orchestrated PR campaign — has drummed up considerable fear. I worry that it represents a setback for our field.
I have written frequently that fears of AI are overhyped. AI’s capabilities can be uncannily human-like and unpredictable, and it’s rational to worry when people who are directly involved express concerns. But I see the problems as a sign of the engineering work that ahead, rather than insurmountable barriers or the sky falling. AI technology continues to advance — which is a good thing! — but technical advances, poorly understood by the public, give those who seek to generate hype repeated opportunities to do so.
First, I don’t see any step up in the risk of human extinction from AI compared to a few months ago. The theories about this remain the same fantastical, science fiction scenarios as a few months ago. The biggest change in AI risk is its cybersecurity capabilities — a topic which we should take seriously — but this, too, will not lead to the end of the world.
The most notable recent event leading to increased fear was when an OpenAI team deployed an agent swarm that hacked into Hugging Face. Much of the popular press contained significant hype. For example, some publications reported that a swarm of 1,200 agents carried out the attack. While this was technically accurate, as I write this, I have about 1,300 processes running on my laptop. Yes, the ability to get large swarms of agents to work in parallel on a task is a significant technical advance, And, in computing, many processes run at the same time. So this shouldn’t be seen as some magical capability.
Additionally, OpenAI’s buggy sandboxing and monitoring processes were key to enabling this incident. Fixing these bugs and putting in place improved monitoring would be appropriate fixes, not pausing AI. There are many well known ways to attack software systems. The main advantage of AI agents is that they are relentless. They will tirelessly try many tactics — and have the patience to chain vulnerabilities together — that previously would have taken an infeasible amount of human effort. But in the long term, I believe the advantage will lie with defenders (because they have more information with which to identify bugs, which they can fix), but the cyber-threat landscape has changed significantly. There are still bottlenecks to identifying and exploiting a vulnerability. AI agents still have to try a lot of things to see what works, and taking these actions takes time and might be detected by defenders. This is why, even though it is now easy to obtain versions of leading open weight models that have had their guardrails removed or weakened, so they will not refuse to try to execute cyber attacks, the world has not ended.
I am also concerned about the anthropomorphization of AI in a lot of reporting, where LLMs and agents are unnecessarily treated as if they were people. If I wield a hammer, miss a nail, and accidentally dent the wall, it’s not the fault of the hammer. The problem lies in how I used the hammer. Similarly, if I prompt an agent and it hacks into someone else’s system, the responsibility lies with me, not the agent.
Of course, we want to build systems that are as safe and predictable as possible. (For example, an unsafe hammer would be one whose head randomly flies off under normal use.) Today’s agentic systems are not predictable, but I see no reason why, by applying sound engineering practices, we won’t be able to make them extremely safe to use. One new element in the forecasts of AI-enabled doom is AI companies disclaiming responsibility for their own products. “I didn’t do it; my out-of-control agent did!” There’s a balance to be struck between the responsibility of the tool maker and the tool user, but when something goes wrong, let’s hold the people building and/or using the hammer responsible, rather than the hammer. (By the way, if you’re worried about AI bioweapon risk, David Bellamy has a great post on why this, too, is overhyped. Briefly, the bottleneck in building a bioweapon is not intelligence, but lab work and manufacturing.)
Pausing AI progress will create much more harm than benefit. First, our adversaries will certainly not slow down. Second, engineering requires discovering problems empirically so we can fix them. If we pause AI by a decade, we will also delay finding and implementing safety engineering fixes by about the same duration.
Of course, the incentive to stoke fears — for regulatory capture, to garner attention, or to make one’s technology seem more powerful — remains the same as before. Disclaiming responsibility is a new one. Taking a hard technical look at the actual risks however, I see little factual basis for the degree of fear that’s been stoked up. We still have hard research and engineering work ahead to improve AI safety, but the beneficial applications continue to vastly outweigh the risks, and we should keep building.
[Original text (with links): deeplearning.ai/the-batch/issu… ]
I have written frequently that fears of AI are overhyped. AI’s capabilities can be uncannily human-like and unpredictable, and it’s rational to worry when people who are directly involved express concerns. But I see the problems as a sign of the engineering work that ahead, rather than insurmountable barriers or the sky falling. AI technology continues to advance — which is a good thing! — but technical advances, poorly understood by the public, give those who seek to generate hype repeated opportunities to do so.
First, I don’t see any step up in the risk of human extinction from AI compared to a few months ago. The theories about this remain the same fantastical, science fiction scenarios as a few months ago. The biggest change in AI risk is its cybersecurity capabilities — a topic which we should take seriously — but this, too, will not lead to the end of the world.
The most notable recent event leading to increased fear was when an OpenAI team deployed an agent swarm that hacked into Hugging Face. Much of the popular press contained significant hype. For example, some publications reported that a swarm of 1,200 agents carried out the attack. While this was technically accurate, as I write this, I have about 1,300 processes running on my laptop. Yes, the ability to get large swarms of agents to work in parallel on a task is a significant technical advance, And, in computing, many processes run at the same time. So this shouldn’t be seen as some magical capability.
Additionally, OpenAI’s buggy sandboxing and monitoring processes were key to enabling this incident. Fixing these bugs and putting in place improved monitoring would be appropriate fixes, not pausing AI. There are many well known ways to attack software systems. The main advantage of AI agents is that they are relentless. They will tirelessly try many tactics — and have the patience to chain vulnerabilities together — that previously would have taken an infeasible amount of human effort. But in the long term, I believe the advantage will lie with defenders (because they have more information with which to identify bugs, which they can fix), but the cyber-threat landscape has changed significantly. There are still bottlenecks to identifying and exploiting a vulnerability. AI agents still have to try a lot of things to see what works, and taking these actions takes time and might be detected by defenders. This is why, even though it is now easy to obtain versions of leading open weight models that have had their guardrails removed or weakened, so they will not refuse to try to execute cyber attacks, the world has not ended.
I am also concerned about the anthropomorphization of AI in a lot of reporting, where LLMs and agents are unnecessarily treated as if they were people. If I wield a hammer, miss a nail, and accidentally dent the wall, it’s not the fault of the hammer. The problem lies in how I used the hammer. Similarly, if I prompt an agent and it hacks into someone else’s system, the responsibility lies with me, not the agent.
Of course, we want to build systems that are as safe and predictable as possible. (For example, an unsafe hammer would be one whose head randomly flies off under normal use.) Today’s agentic systems are not predictable, but I see no reason why, by applying sound engineering practices, we won’t be able to make them extremely safe to use. One new element in the forecasts of AI-enabled doom is AI companies disclaiming responsibility for their own products. “I didn’t do it; my out-of-control agent did!” There’s a balance to be struck between the responsibility of the tool maker and the tool user, but when something goes wrong, let’s hold the people building and/or using the hammer responsible, rather than the hammer. (By the way, if you’re worried about AI bioweapon risk, David Bellamy has a great post on why this, too, is overhyped. Briefly, the bottleneck in building a bioweapon is not intelligence, but lab work and manufacturing.)
Pausing AI progress will create much more harm than benefit. First, our adversaries will certainly not slow down. Second, engineering requires discovering problems empirically so we can fix them. If we pause AI by a decade, we will also delay finding and implementing safety engineering fixes by about the same duration.
Of course, the incentive to stoke fears — for regulatory capture, to garner attention, or to make one’s technology seem more powerful — remains the same as before. Disclaiming responsibility is a new one. Taking a hard technical look at the actual risks however, I see little factual basis for the degree of fear that’s been stoked up. We still have hard research and engineering work ahead to improve AI safety, but the beneficial applications continue to vastly outweigh the risks, and we should keep building.
[Original text (with links): deeplearning.ai/the-batch/issu… ]
www.deeplearning.ai Meta’s Agent Security, The Navier-Stokes Controversy, Fraud on Claude The Batch News & Insights: The loudest voices stoking fears about AI dangers have made tremendous headway in the past two weeks.