Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

A crypto project actually trained a 72B parameter AI model from scratch using decentralized GPU compute. Not fine-tuned, not a wrapper: trained from zero. The model benchmarks competitively against Meta's LLaMA 3 on reasoning tasks, and the entire training run cost a fraction of what centralized labs spend. If...

40,543 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Mark Zuckerberg is explaining one of the most misunderstood dynamics in AI and it has direct investment implications (Save this). The concept he's describing is model distillation, and it's one of the most important techniques to emerge in AI over the past year. Here's how it works. You train a massive, enormously expensive model, in Meta's case, Llama 4 Behemoth, a 2 trillion parameter teacher model and then you use that model to teach a much smaller, cheaper model. The smaller model inherits roughly 90 to 95% of the intelligence of the giant while running at 10% of the cost and on a fraction of the compute. Meta already did this with the Llama 4 family and Behemoth serves as the teacher. Llama 4 Scout and Maverick, the publicly released open-source models were distilled from it. Scout runs on a single H100 GPU with a 10 million token context window and outperforms models that cost far more to operate. Maverick, at 17 billion active parameters, rivals DeepSeek V3 in coding at half the parameter count and beats GPT-4o on multimodal benchmarks. Both are completely free for commercial use. What Zuckerberg is pointing at is a structural shift in how AI gets deployed in the real world. Companies aren't taking a frontier model off the shelf and running it as-is but rather taking open-source models, fine-tuning them on their own proprietary data, distilling them into even smaller custom models tailored to their specific use case, and running them on infrastructure they control at a fraction of the cost of a closed frontier API. The investment implication of this is significant and runs in two directions. For Meta specifically, this is a strategic masterstroke. Every company that builds on Llama, fine-tunes it, distills it, or deploys it through their infrastructure is pulling into Meta's orbit while Meta builds the most powerful open teacher model. The ecosystem of companies using it grows and that ecosystem generates commercial activity across Meta's platforms and data services. Meta's AI research benefits from billions of real world deployment signals and it's a flywheel that closed model providers cannot replicate because their strategy requires charging per token, which is now a 65x cost disadvantage against the open-source alternative. For the broader market, distillation changes the economics of inference in a way that has barely been priced in. As intelligence becomes extractable into smaller and cheaper models, the absolute demand for compute doesn't decline but rather it explodes, because now the number of applications that are economically viable expands by orders of magnitude. Every task that was previously too expensive to automate at $3.25 per call becomes viable at $0.05 that means more total token usage, more total GPU utilization, and more demand for the infrastructure companies, the Nebiuses, the GE Vernovas, the Constellation Energies that supply the underlying compute and power.

Milk Road AI

27,869 Aufrufe • vor 20 Tagen

Covenant Labs just did a 90-minute AMA breaking down their 3 Bittensor subnets. templar. basilica. grail. Pre-training, compute, and post-training under one roof. Most people missed it. Here's everything they said. Covenant is building what they call the "end to end intelligence continuum." Three subnets. Three layers of the AI stack. All permissionless. Templar (SN3) handles decentralized pre-training. Basilica (SN39) handles compute. Grail (SN81) handles RL post-training. Sam Dare, the lead, put it bluntly. Decentralized training is "humanity's last dance." Not about beating OpenAI head to head. About creating optionality. About making it cheap enough for anyone to train models. The gap between academia and frontier labs is growing exponentially. Researchers can't afford to experiment. The actual training run costs 5% of the reported budget. The other 95% is experimentation. If Covenant cracks cheap training, that entire surface area opens up. On Templar specifically: • Hit 39% emission on Bittensor. Highest since Apex was the only subnet on the network • Covenant-72B trained permissionlessly with 70+ contributors on commodity internet • 1.1 trillion tokens processed. No centralized data center • Performance competitive with LLaMA-2-70B On Grail, something flew under the radar. They built Pulse. A weight synchronization method that compresses model updates by 100x. • In RL post-training, only ~1% of weights update per step • Pulse exploits that sparsity. Lossless compression • Prime Intellect's comparable system took 14 minutes to sync a 30B model • Pulse makes decentralized RL training actually feasible at scale • Already used by Cursor The lead researcher on Grail said they've trained on math, code, and GPU kernels. Got 40-60% improvement on benchmarks. Working toward agentic training with 100K+ token context and 30B+ parameter models. On Basilica, the compute subnet: The team was blunt. Just reselling GPU hours is a 5-10% margin game. Traditional compute providers already do that. Their play is value-added services. • "GPU as code." No dashboard. No UI. Agents interact via SDK • Custom scheduler that places workloads across heterogeneous hardware • Verification checks for GPU, CPU, bandwidth, memory, storage, and OS security • Partnerships with providers like Mass Compute for 10-20% below market pricing • Miners compete on useful infrastructure, not just GPU hours Sam then went on a rant about the miner burn debate. His take: Bittensor had to grow up. dTAO introduced investors. The old "miners are God" philosophy doesn't hold. • Subnet owners have a duty to protect token value • Miners are a resource optimization exercise, not a cost reduction exercise • 100% miner emissions on compute subnets = immediate sell pressure • The 41% miner allocation is arbitrary. Different business models need different splits • Fish (who started burns) agreed. Burns usually mean the validation isn't mature enough The bigger point. You can't police burns. Subnets just send to their own keys instead of the burn address. Subnet 28 does exactly that. Sam's position: judge subnets on outcomes, not process. Const has changed the protocol 9-10 times in 2 years. That iteration speed is Bittensor's actual moat. The whole Covenant thesis is playing out in real time. TAO is up 100%+ in a month. Jensen Huang name-dropped the network. Grayscale has an ETF filing. But the real story is three subnets quietly building every layer of decentralized AI.

Jesus Martinez

26,642 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Hey everyone, today I want to introduce a project that’s aiming to redefine how we access compute for AI — it’s called GPUAI. 🔶 GPUAI: Unlocking Global GPU Power for the AI Era GPUAI isn’t just another GPU marketplace or leasing service. It’s a fully decentralized protocol that connects idle GPU resources around the world — from gaming PCs to data center clusters — and transforms them into a high-performance compute network for AI workloads. 🧠 Why does it matter? Right now, the biggest bottleneck in AI isn’t algorithms — it’s access to compute. Training and running models requires massive GPU power, but it’s locked up in centralized cloud platforms, expensive and hard to access for smaller teams. With GPUAI, anyone can tap into a global GPU pool that’s: ✅ Fully decentralized ✅ Reputation-based and smart contract coordinated ✅ Encrypted and secure ✅ Token-incentivized — meaning contributors get rewarded in $GPUAI 📈 For developers, it’s a flexible way to access GPU compute for training, inference, and more — without cloud lock-in. 💰 For GPU owners, it’s a chance to monetize idle hardware that would otherwise go unused. The protocol is live, the apps are active, and the ecosystem is growing fast. 🌐 Try it yourself at 📖 Learn more on 🎮 Play our community games at This is real infrastructure for the future of AI, not hype. Follow them and explore their mission of decentralized computing at Tell me what you think - if you have a GPU, you can start profiting now. #GPUAI #Web3Infrastructure #AIComputing #DePIN #Decentralization

The Crypto GEMs

69,984 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

The teams shipping AI agents right now are bleeding money on the dumbest possible expense: teaching a 400B-parameter model to read a file name. Every time an AI agent needs to "see" something today, it routes an image through a frontier model. OCR, object detection, checking if a button exists on screen. You're paying GPT-4o or Claude pricing for tasks that require perception, not reasoning. One agent workflow processing a few thousand screenshots per day can burn through more on vision calls than on the actual thinking. Perceptron's Isaac is 2B parameters. Built by the team that created Meta's Chameleon multimodal models. On perceptive benchmarks, it matches or beats models 50x its size. The VQA, OCR, and object detection scores are competitive with models running on infrastructure that costs orders of magnitude more. The MCP wrapper is the distribution play. One install command and every Claude Code agent can offload vision tasks to a model that runs on a single consumer GPU. The agent keeps its reasoning in the frontier model and routes perception to a specialist. That split is how you get vision-heavy agent workflows from "technically possible but expensive" to "cheap enough to run on everything." This is the same pattern that won in every other compute-intensive stack. General-purpose handles orchestration. Specialists handle the heavy lifting. Graphics went through it. Audio went through it. Video encoding went through it. Vision in AI agents is next. The teams building agents that see 10,000 images a day will care about this before anyone else does.

Aakash Gupta

55,978 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

I'm running Llama 4 Maverick at 620 t/s! I'm living in the future! Honestly, a large language model running this fast is something straight out of a sci-fi movie. Speeds like this will enable a whole new world of applications that aren't possible today. For reference, GPT-4o, which is probably the most popular OpenAI model, runs between 60 and 110 t/s. The secret here: I'm not running AI at Meta's Llama 4 Maverick on a GPU. I'm using the SambaNova Cloud (my sponsor) and their custom SN40L chips. They are optimized from the ground up for running AI workflows. Right now, SambaNova Cloud runs DeepSeek, Qwen, Whisper, and the entire family of Llama models on these chips. You can check the speed of each of these models using SambaNova Cloud's Playground (see the attached video). It's completely free, and that's how I'm measuring their speeds. For example, I also tried DeepSeek R1 (the latest version from May) and, oh boy! DeepSeek R1 is a huge 671B parameter model. It's probably the best open reasoning model in the world, and it runs at 140 tokens per second! !!! Inference time on an SN40L is night and day from what you'll get from a GPU. Here is why this is big: If you are running an agentic workflow that uses multiple models simultaneously on a GPU, it will need to swap models in and out of memory (because not every model fits). A single SNL40 chip can simultaneously hold over 100 models (trillions of parameters) in memory. If you are using open models, try the SambaCloud API to see what lightning speed looks like. Here is how: 1. Create a free account at: 2. Check the QuickStart guide: If you try the playground, check the speed you're getting with Llama 4 and DeepSeek, and post the results below. I've seen much higher numbers than I posted here, so I'm curious to see whether geography affects the speed.

Santiago

34,148 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr