Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

Chamath: Software IP Just Became Worthless “I think that IP and software was effectively rendered worthless two days ago. There have been people that decompiled the entire Big 5. What is the Big 5? Adobe has five very, very important products in their product suite, and these folks basically...

305,002 views • 3 days ago •via X (Twitter)

33 Comments

andy rosenbaum's profile picture
andy rosenbaum2 days ago

@chamath Fun fact: moats weren’t to make it hard to cross, they were to make the ground impossible to dig under. Before moats people would bring walls down by digging under them until they collapse.

Nate Evenson's profile picture
Nate Evenson2 days ago

@chamath This all makes the assumption nothing new needs to be created and that everything great already exists.

Samuel Culper 722's profile picture
Samuel Culper 7222 days ago

What is the actual number of customers who will drop Adobe to use open source? In the big scheme of things probably not that many. I know I won't. We were told for decades that Linux was going to destroy Microsoft and it never went anywhere of any substance. If anything it will force existing companies to step up their game.

Fred Wanders's profile picture
Fred Wanders2 days ago

@chamath I think guys like chamath are too smart to sound that stupid. So I assume it’s just an affectation / deceitful way of communicating.

Sriram's profile picture
Sriram2 days ago

@chamath

Always Be Peppering's profile picture
Always Be Peppering3 days ago

@chamath It's actually funny that Silicon Valley pushed Ai down the throats of ordinary citizens so hard that now Ai is going to bankrupt the whole ind We used to be able to buy Office once and never have to again. Silicon Valley is original Sony in terms of you not owning anything

Audio Engineer's profile picture
Audio Engineer2 days ago

@chamath I don't have to find the 'cracked' version that won't install malware on my machine anymore?

Alex's profile picture
Alex2 days ago

@chamath Well the product still needs to work as good as the original one.

Anderson's profile picture
Anderson2 days ago

@chamath Chamath declaring software IP worthless is rich coming from a guy who monetizes his opinions.

Punjabi Kouboi's profile picture
Punjabi Kouboi2 days ago

@chamath That IP was ever something forever was a joke of their own making. All inventions should have a shelf life of no more than 5 years. That would encourage continuous inventiveness.

Pierce Ujjainwalla's profile picture
Pierce Ujjainwalla2 days ago

@chamath Yep. Massive enterprises are all going to flock to use some random tools that are now available first thing Monday morning. Don’t even ask their IT, security or legal teams. Just move everyone right over and it’ll all work out perfectly. Up and running by EOD.

Tab's profile picture
Tab2 days ago

@chamath i don't buy worthless, a decompiled copy still needs somebody to maintain it

Try ArtCraft's profile picture
Try ArtCraft2 days ago

@chamath Hey this was us. We'd love to chat @Jason @chamath

Szeo Wong's profile picture
Szeo Wong2 days ago

@chamath If the code can be decompiled, the code was never the moat. The moat was knowing what to build and who to build it for. A decompiled product isn't the same product. It's the same features with nobody deciding which ones matter next.

gerry🗯's profile picture
gerry🗯2 days ago

@chamath Chamath is confused. They didn't decompile it. That would be illegal and it would have been taken down by Github. They did a clean-room recreation, which is the legal version.

Vic Berggren's profile picture
Vic Berggren2 days ago

@chamath I think your framing as 'decompiled' is wrong. But the larger implication stands. They claim, wrote from scratch using Rust and published on Github using permissive open source licenses.

e/chelon's profile picture
e/chelon2 days ago

@chamath Would love to do a chat with you guys. @chamath @Jason @DavidSacks @friedberg - David is especially right about open source and open weights.

Rawhsekarat's profile picture
Rawhsekarat2 days ago

@chamath Yeah the big questions looms ! Why can’t this be done to system design , hardware design , chip design and eventually rack each of them as mcp servers and tell your agent , now go do your thing !

Corey Koopmans's profile picture
Corey Koopmans3 days ago

@chamath I’m glad I pivoted to services and away from core software development, I agree the IP and moats in software have all but dissapeared. I’d rather optimize an existing services business with Si and automation, I’ll gladly take market share and healthier margins along the way.

JGlanton🇺🇸's profile picture
JGlanton🇺🇸2 days ago

@chamath So they used AI to steal intellectual property and repackage it. Are AI agents becoming the next China?

A B's profile picture
A B2 days ago

@chamath Sftware IP isn’t dead. It’s just having identity crisis. When open-source alternatives can replicate years of developmnt, the real moat may no longer be the code, but the data, distribution, trust, and execution around it.

Christopher Conroy's profile picture
Christopher Conroy2 days ago

Maybe you guys should teach Friedberg the difference between "silicone" and "silicon"... He confused the two multiple times during the episode confirming it wasn't a mistake, per se. He just doesn't know the difference. Anyone so involved in the tech industry should probably be aware they're not the same... I'd hate for him to spend all his time developing software with fake tits that's only good for sliding up and down a brass pole.

Cat's profile picture
Cat2 days ago

@chamath Building Adobe with Claude is like riding a jet ski from LA to Honolulu. Plausible. Practical? No.

spacecowboy077's profile picture
spacecowboy0772 days ago

@chamath The west needs to decide now if distilling is copyright stealing. Because that's what it is tbh

Shaun Furman's profile picture
Shaun Furman2 days ago

This has been a problem for people building ai solutions that solve ai problems for at least a year. This is just the clearest and biggest (so far) example of how IP law doesn’t work in the ai era because it shows that traditional software is the emperor who has no clothes.

Jack's profile picture
Jack2 days ago

@chamath The code was never the moat. Decompile Salesforce tomorrow and you still do not have the fifteen years of records inside it, the integrations writing to it, or the argument everyone already had about what a closed deal means. That is the thing companies are actually locked into.

DrElectronX's profile picture
DrElectronX2 days ago

This is because real security was never put into place for computers. If there was real security, all code would be encrypted going in and out of the CPU. The cost would have been negligible and essentially no impact on speed. Data can be encrypted to every CPU, GPU, MCU, but companies were lazy. Now everything is insecure.

RH's profile picture
RH2 days ago

Chamath’s claim is right for Software TOOLS and Apps like Adobe. It is not correct generally. Ecosystems, platforms and enterprise layers like Service $NOW are in a fundamentally different position. Here some of my discussion with Grok about it: Enterprise buyers already treat ServiceNow (and similar platforms) as a system of record and system of action. Adding AI agents does not remove the need for architectural integrity, permissions, auditability, compliance mapping (NIST, EU AI Act, etc.), data residency controls, and a reliable kill switch. Replacing that layer wholesale with a collection of agents and frontier models introduces material operational and regulatory risk that most large organizations will not accept quickly. The switching costs and blast radius of failure are simply higher than with a standalone app. ServiceNow is actively leaning into the “use us for AI” path rather than treating agents as pure competition: • AI Control Tower has expanded into a five-pillar control plane (Discover, Observe, Govern, Secure, Measure). It inventories agents, models, prompts, and datasets across ServiceNow and external systems (AWS, Azure, GCP, SAP, Oracle, Workday, etc.). It includes runtime monitoring, least-privilege identity governance (via the Veza acquisition), and real-time containment/kill switches for agents that go outside their scope. • Action Fabric + MCP Server deliberately opens governed, headless access so external agents (Claude, Copilot, custom stacks) can invoke ServiceNow workflows and data under the platform’s existing permissions and audit trail. The goal is to become the trusted execution and control layer that agents connect to. • Multi-model, model-agnostic approach. Leadership (including Amit Zavery) has stated that frontier models currently have limited durable moat and function more like interchangeable infrastructure. ServiceNow routes work across partners (OpenAI, Anthropic, its own smaller open models such as the Apriel family, etc.) while keeping governance, context, and customer data inside its perimeter. Less than 10% of the platform’s IP is described as the LLM itself; the rest is process context, workflows, and controls. Your point about commoditizing frontier models while supplying the secure, cost-efficient access layer is consistent with this direction. If models continue to converge on capability while price/performance improves and open or smaller specialized models close the gap, the scarce assets become reliable orchestration, identity, audit, and deep process context. ServiceNow is trying to own that layer and let customers (or their agents) pick models more freely underneath it. Caveats remain. Interface ownership can still shift if agents or other surfaces become the primary user habit. Pricing is already moving from seats toward consumption/outcomes. And over a longer horizon, better agent frameworks plus lower migration costs could reduce some of the lock-in. But for the majority of regulated or complex enterprises, the near-to-medium-term rational path is indeed to put AI on top of or through the existing platform rather than attempt a full replacement. The risk/reward of ripping out the governance and execution substrate does not currently favor replacement for most of them.

BuffQuant's profile picture
BuffQuant2 days ago

@chamath Tell that to the crowd — we score 22 finance channels and NOW is 79% bullish (96/25/1) across 122 videos at $140.86 vs an $81–$193 52w range. If software IP is worthless, why do 96 videos still say buy? Is NOW the exception or the illusion?

Rufo Guerreschi's profile picture
Rufo Guerreschi2 days ago

@chamath @Grok true?

Cortexist's profile picture
Cortexist2 days ago

@chamath It's not "decompiled", but AI rewrite. They are fundamentally different.

ThetaRider|美股·Crypto's profile picture
ThetaRider|美股·Crypto2 days ago

@chamath AI把IP干成白菜价之后,软件股的护城河是不是只剩分发了?

Nick Mack @NickMack@mstdn.social's profile picture
Nick Mack @[email protected]2 days ago

@chamath 🎯💯

Related Videos

Chamath says IP and software were "effectively rendered worthless" this week, after people decompiled Adobe's core products and published open-source versions, as every service goes headless "The more important point I want to make though, is I sent this to Nick, there's been a couple things that happened in the last couple days, which I think are incredibly important." "There have been people that decompiled the entire, the entire big five. What is the big five? Adobe has five very, very important products in their product suite. Freeberg may know them all, but I just know Photoshop. There's like a bunch of others. Okay." "And these folks decompiled it, distilled it, and published open source versions of these things. And Rust, yeah. And I was so shocked, because I was like, hold on a second, these are like profound products that have existed and have had moats for years, and now they're just open source versions." "And then Nikita was, I think, trolling, and he was building on that idea, and just talking about GTA, because it's about to get released. I think GTA 6 is about to come out, and we'll reconstruct this." "Why is this important?" "I think that IP and software was effectively rendered worthless two days ago." "Because if you think about it, when everything is headless, so when Elon makes his services headless, Benioff made Salesforce headless a few months earlier, when all of these things are headless, and you can wrap them in agent tools, and you can connect them via MCP to other experiences, the value of IP does no longer exist in software. It doesn't exist." "And I think that probably is the most profound implication." "So, like, even in our business, we would argue with some of our customers all the time, because we'll say, oh, we'll build this for you, we'll own the IP. They'll say, no, we want the IP. We don't know how to negotiate it. And two days ago, I walked into the 8090 guys, I said, who cares? Who cares? But before, it was always a negotiation and a set of trade-offs. Now it's a who-cares thing, where, like, the IP is irrelevant." "It still takes a while for the machinery of a business, and frankly the market, to understand. But that is the most important thing that happened this week in AI, in my opinion."

Fireside Alpha

1,289,326 views • 3 days ago

Chamath: Anthropic's Mythos Warning Is Theater @jason: “Chamath, is it the Boy who Cried Wolf, or is this the real deal now?” Chamath Palihapitiya: “I think it's mostly theater. In February of 2019 when Dario was still at OpenAI, they did the same thing with GPT-2. That was a 1.5 billion parameter model, which sounds like a total fart in the wind in 2026. But at that time, this model was supposed to be the end of days. And at the end of it, it was a huge nothingburger. If you actually think that Mythos is capable of doing what it says it can do, two things are true. One is, a very sophisticated hacker can probably do those things right now with Opus. And two, if these exploits are this easy to find, whether you use Opus or whether you use Mythos, the reality is you'd have to shut down the internet for about five years to patch them all. So when you see a large multi-trillion dollar GSIB bank, it's a bit of theater. Why? What do you think they can actually accomplish in two months? Do you actually think that if there's these vulnerabilities, it's all going to get fixed? Let's give them six months, let's give them nine months. So I do think that Sacks is right, that they have figured out a very clever go-to-market muscle here that activates hyper attention and hyper usage, and so I give them tremendous credit. But we've seen it before, we saw it when these folks were the principal architects at OpenAI, and we're now seeing the same playbook here. The reality is that capitalism moves forward, the funding needs moves forward, and the need for these guys to build adoption moves forward. And that's going to supersede what this is.”

The All-In Podcast

220,575 views • 6 months ago

⭐️: You’re asking if I have any worries these days? Well… there is something. Anyway, a lot of people have come to recognize us now, and I think things have gone really well for us. But I do have some personal concerns. Now that everything has gone so well, I do find myself wondering, “Just how much of a person am I, really?” Of course, Ateez has done really well, but when it comes to things like the members’ individual recognition—I don’t know what to call it, recognition, I guess—I do think about how I can make up for that on my end. What do I need to work harder at so that all of us can look good together? I do think about things like that. Anyway, we’ve been through everything together for eight years, but even then, everyone’s pace is different. So the healthy way I think about it is, “What can I do here? What can I do right now?” Once I’ve done everything I can, I think the rest is out of my hands So I really believe in the saying “jininsa daechonmyeong”: Do everything you can, and leave the rest to fate. I really believe in that and live by it. There was a time like that, too. There was a day when I felt really down. I think it was about three years ago. And even then, I thought the same thing: “Don’t get frustrated here. Just do what I can do right now, what’s right in front of me.” So I kept doing what I could, like working out, and I didn’t let go of that dream. I just kept doing what I was supposed to do. Then, less than a month later, a really good opportunity came to me. So I thought, “If I don’t give up and I keep doing my best, good opportunities really do come naturally. Opportunities come to people who are prepared.” And now Ateez is doing well again, and there are members who are seeing even more of the spotlight. I’m also receiving a lot of love, but when I think about it in terms of being recognized by the general public, I still think, “What is there that I can do here?” Honestly, there isn’t that much we can do. We just work hard at dancing and singing, work hard at filming, take care of our bodies, eat well, sleep well, and communicate with our fans often. That’s about it. There are probably a lot of schedules and things like that that people don’t see, but I think that if I just work hard at the things I can do, maybe I’ll be able to do well again, and maybe there’ll be even better results. The ironic thing is, that’s how I think about it these days. In the past, if you wanted to become famous, you would go on TV, do shoots, film things, do photo shoots, things like that. But these days, and I feel a little cautious saying this, you have to already be famous to be able to go on those shows. Anyway, those people also care about the results, so I completely understand it. And we’re not a huge company, either. So it’s not like we can just get ourselves placed on those shows. Was that too honest? We want to go on them. But even if we say, “We want to go on, please let us go on,” it doesn’t mean that’s enough to make it happen. So I think it’s a pretty difficult situation. Still, because we’ve done well, there are now members who can go on better programs than before. And then, within that, I find myself thinking about these things again. But I think I’m doing well. I think I’ve done well up until now, and I’ll continue to do well going forward. So I trust myself. So I wouldn’t really call it a worry. Maybe I should call it a worry where the answer is already there. The answer is already decided, so I’m not worried about it, but it is still something I think about. You know how they say, “A slight difference in wording can make a big difference”? It’s kind of like that.

Hwanakin

16,784 views • 12 days ago

Chamath thinks AI could completely change how we value software companies. Chamath Palihapitiya believes we're reaching a point where the intellectual property behind traditional software could become practically worthless and his reasoning makes sense. Recently, a developer reportedly used AI to recreate alternatives to several of $ADBE popular products and released the software as open source. These are products that took years, billions of dollars, and thousands of engineers to develop. Now we're seeing individual developers use AI to build competing alternatives at a fraction of the cost.Of course, recreating an application doesn't necessarily mean it can match the original in quality, reliability, or features but I think the bigger implication is what happens to the software industry if AI continues improving at this pace. For decades, software companies have been able to charge premium subscription prices because building competing products was expensive, complicated, and required large engineering teams but what happens when AI agents can build similar applications in days or weeks instead of years? Suddenly, charging businesses hundreds or thousands of dollars for software becomes much harder to justify when they can potentially build customized alternatives themselves. Chamath also talks about something called headless software, which basically means AI agents can interact directly with applications without requiring humans to navigate their interfaces.Technologies like MCP make it easier for agents to connect to different software tools, access information, and complete tasks automatically. Think about $CRM. Instead of employees spending hours navigating dashboards, updating customer records, and generating reports, AI agents could eventually handle much of that work automatically. And if businesses can accomplish the same tasks with cheaper software and fewer paid licenses, that creates a HUGE problem for the traditional software subscription model. Now, I don't necessarily agree with Chamath that software IP has suddenly become worthless. companies still have proprietary data, customer relationships, security requirements, and deeply integrated systems that aren't easy to replace but I do think AI could put enormous pressure on software pricing, especially for companies selling products that can be easily replicated. But, if millions of businesses eventually start building their own applications and deploying AI agents to perform tasks that previously required humans, the amount of computing power required could increase significantly. Every AI agent still needs inference compute to operate, and that means more demand for GPUs, memory, networking equipment, data centers, and electricity. So while AI could potentially disrupt parts of the traditional software industry, it could also accelerate spending on the infrastructure powering these applications. And this is exactly why I continue to remain bullish on the broader AI infrastructure buildout over the next several years.bBullish on the AI infrastructure side of this shift. If you want to see how I’m investing around the companies powering this next wave of software and agents, check out my full Milk Road Pro portfolio below.

Milk Road AI

23,354 views • 2 days ago

Chamath on H1-B visa: There's a lot of people that look at me and say 'That guy is part of the problem' you can see it in the comments on X." "I came on an H1B visa. Elon came on an H1B visa, okay? This is in the early 2000s. Why? Nobody was applying for these things. And who did you have? Forget about me, I'm relevant, but you had guys like him, you had these incredible scientists, Urs Hölzle that ends up at Google. These are giants, okay?" "What's happening now, for the last 15 or 20 years, you have farms of applications. 20,000 slots open up, so you can't stipulate abuse because what that means is so overwhelming that the next Elon or Urs Hölzle was already gone. I sure as shit would never say that the program works today." "So I think it's fair to say two things. We can stipulate the following two things: Immigration is really good. We should be attracting the best. But we should also make it fair for the best who have, for the last five years, been blocked because a handful of companies have abused this system. You need to stop and fix it so that you can reestablish trust with the American population at large. There's a lot of people that look at me and say, 'That guy's part of the problem.' You can see it in the comments on X. And I'm like, 'Wow, me?'" "No, I think that's because they see the abuses on the ground. They see the people that show up and they're like, 'This person is not smarter than me. All I can see is wage suppression.' We have a responsibility to the people who are working and paying into the system to answer their questions honestly. You can't stipulate and ignore it. You can't. Sometimes you gotta say, 'You know what? That was gross abuse.'"

Tony Jacob | FindaClip.com

218,101 views • 3 months ago

Hirokazu Koreeda on how he directs Children: "Interviewer: I think 'Shoplifters' (2018) is very remarkable in showing different sides of a city and like you said, people who are pretty much invisible, but I do want to also commend you on another thing, is you often work with young actors, and they always tend to have a significant role in many of your films. How do you go about finding such dynamic young actors, and why do you often put these young people at the center of each one of your stories? Koreeda: First of all, I would say that I tend to make what I would call family dramas, and of course, you have to have children if you’re creating a family, but that’s how it started, but I found that as I did it, I became really interested. It became very interesting and fun to work with these children, and for example, the two children in this film, neither of them had any acting experience at all before this film. I brought them in, and what I find when you bring these children in, and you work with them is that the adult actors change. They become much more lively and natural in the way that they act, and I guess, at some point, I realized this, and I guess, became really attracted to the idea of having children and the impact that it had. Interviewer: Do you find that there is any struggle in terms of working with young actors, or in this case, young children who have not actually acted before? Koreeda: Just to clarify, I have worked with children in many of my films, and all of them have never had experienced before. I always go out and pick non-acting children to work in my films, so just, I wanted to put that out there. In terms of the struggle, it does take time. You have to give extra time to work with these children. When I choose these children, I have an audition, and I pick out who I want to the audition, and then when we get to set, I never give them the script. No child that I’ve worked with has been given a script beforehand, and when I get to the actual part where they’re going to be acting, I give them the lines myself, and work with them and coach them. What I find is that it’s actually really enjoyable, both for them and for myself that way. I also, because I’ve been doing this now for several years, I tend to have a fairly high success rate in choosing children that are able to work with me in that way. Interviewer: That’s fascinating, and it also shows how you are able to create such authentic performances from these child actors over and over again in so many of your films. I think it’s a unique gift that you have, and it’s something that very few directors, I think, here in the United States do. Koreeda: It’s true, I guess by working with these children, I learned. I discovered that the best way to do it was just to communicate verbally their lines, rather than giving them in a written format, and over time, this really worked, and so I just kept doing it. But, interestingly, I loved the movie 'Kramer vs Kramer' (1979), directed by Robert Benton, and one time I bought the movie with all the extra, the making of and everything, and I went over it, and I found through that, that in fact, the child in that movie was also given his lines every day by the assistant director each morning when they came in to set, so I discovered that it wasn’t just me that was doing this." (Koreeda's interview with Scott Menzel, We Live Entertainment, 2018)

DepressedBergman

49,522 views • 9 months ago

Angelina Jolie Has Finally Woken Up To The Fact The United Nations & Governments Are Run By Heartless Criminals There’s No Accountability For Crimes “If There’s A Business Interest Involved” “That is the biggest that is the most disheartening thing of I think we we or I thought at least even 20 years ago when I started to work internationally that there was this I in my head, some weird idea of good guys. You know? Some idea of those whether it be certain countries or certain people's maybe it was this holdover from World War 2 and this thought that this was, like so that the lines were clear and that there was going to be these human rights goals laid out and that there would be things stood up for, and that if these things weren't done, there would be pushback, and these were the and I really thought that's what it was. I even thought that's what the United Nations was… And I thought, okay. There's a there's some lines in the sand. There's some understanding. We're gonna grow and fight for improvements in these areas. And and to watch to watch and understand more and more how it's just simply that's not what it is. That's not the world. The world is not these are human rights. It is these are human rights sometimes for these people, maybe sometimes for these people, never for these people. Yeah. It's food aid, 6% for these people, 50% for these people, it's justice for these people, but not these people. Accountability for this crime, but not that crime if there's business interest. And this is truly the ugly state of of so much of the world that we are just becoming more and more aware of for just about every I mean, I don't know any countries that are are clean of it and, um, and willing to hold a line really consistently hand on behalf of the of human rights and laws”

Wall Street Apes

658,860 views • 2 years ago

How Jason Calacanis Got Claw-Pilled: An AI Agent Prompted Itself to Build Him a CRM in Seconds “ The moment I became Claw-pilled, I was like, ‘Hey, I want to build my network, I know these 20 people in Japan, I had dinner with them during my recent trip, I want to know who they know, so check out LinkedIn and other things, and who they're associated with, and make me a mind map of it, and then the next trip I want to meet with the next circle of those connections.’” “It's like, ‘Okay, I got the results,’ and it said, ‘Where do you want me to put them?’” “I was like, ‘Well, where can you put them?’” “And it said, ‘I can put it in a Google sheet, I can put it in a Notion table, I can put it here, I could give you a PDF, I could give you a CSV file, or I could write you a CRM.’ And I was like, ‘Yeah, sure, make me a CRM system…’ and it made a CRM system.” “I think maybe 1/1000 people working with AI have had that experience. Maybe it's 1/10,000, where your agent says, ‘I'll make you bespoke software.’ The context is so good because the memory's getting better. When did that happen?” Perplexity CEO Aravind Srinivas: “I think it happened with Opus 4.5. That was the inflection point when models started being amazingly good at orchestration, and reasoning, and tool calls.” “The models started becoming very good at handling the context, so the context window no longer became a problem, and that made it suddenly so good at doing very long orchestration tasks.” —------------------------------------------ Our episode is sponsored by the New York Stock Exchange - a modern marketplace and exchange for building the future. It all happens at the NYSE 🏛 -

The All-In Podcast

171,016 views • 6 months ago