正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

加载此视频时出现问题。这可能是由于临时网络问题，或视频可能不可用。

Chamath Warns: Your AI Data Isn’t as Private as You Think Today's statement from OpenAI on the Navier-Stokes Problem and whether it used recent user data to boost its own capabilities: “While unlikely, we cannot rule out that de-identified data derived from their usage of our products helped improve... our models.” Here's what Chamath Palihapitiya had to say on AI's fragile privacy and the ZDR myth back in July: “Privacy in AI is very fragile and it's very brittle. There are all kinds of non-obvious data leak vectors lurking in AI. If you think that you're going to flip a ZDR switch, zero data retention, which is the magic term that the industry uses to tell you that everything's going to be okay. I think the answer and the message should be, ‘It's not going to be okay because you can't guarantee any of it.’ So the model companies, when they give you these zero data retention policies, are probably trying their best. But I think the reality is you are leaking information where you don't know it. And they, despite their best efforts, may still have trapdoors that they don't even know about until it's figured out by somebody else. You need an independent third-party layer to interface to these models to manage this exposure, because there are trapdoors everywhere.”show more

The All-In Podcast

592,549 subscribers

64,161 次观看 • 3 天前 •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

32 条评论

olab 的头像

olab3 天前

@OpenAI sometimes you need to pray that openai or anthropic think your startup idea isn't that good. else you know what's gonna happen

Deanna/ Green Light Studio 的头像

Deanna/ Green Light Studio3 天前

@OpenAI Attorneys drafting TOS know this, hence why broad permissions are included. Customers who need full privacy shouldn’t use cloud providers. Law firms handling trade secrets don’t risk it

AI Mastery Guide 的头像

AI Mastery Guide3 天前

@OpenAI Yeah privacy talk is getting louder

Maga-itch 的头像

Maga-itch2 天前

@OpenAI 361 likes what a loser

Dave Wolfe 的头像

Dave Wolfe2 天前

@OpenAI Bet it @grok and @elonmusk

Kartik Mehta 的头像

Kartik Mehta3 天前

Most of the data and work by average people , can be managed well with zero data retention, but critical scientific and engineering data have high chances of being identified and used for training Frankly it's not wrong we don't want the latest and greatest model to have a blind spot

Guillaume Marolleau 的头像

Guillaume Marolleau2 天前

@OpenAI Privacy-first used to mean "something like no data". After this, it has to mean no data. RECAM doesn't even take an email at signup: no account, nothing to retain, nothing to leak. You can't find a trapdoor in a door that was never built. Basta.

Phil Hie 的头像

Phil Hie3 天前

@OpenAI cannot rule out is doing a lot of work in that sentencecannot rule out is doing a lot of work in that sentence

Maga-itch 的头像

Maga-itch2 天前

@OpenAI This asshole has no clue or can he create it. Just a coattail rider grifter of wall street. $tsla $spcx $nvda $meta overpriced #AI fraud @DavidSacks czar of mythology 💩 muskstein looting America 💩

Josh Warsop 的头像

Josh Warsop3 天前

@OpenAI In other news, water is wet

JonRods 的头像

JonRods3 天前

@OpenAI The next gold

Yel 的头像

Yel3 天前

@OpenAI "Don't trust them, trust me instead" Scamath strikes again

Joseph Perla 的头像

Joseph Perla3 天前

@OpenAI “De-identified” still means the model can learn from your work. I built TrustedRouter so the request path is verifiable instead of a policy promise:

Gordon Litefoot (awoo arc) 的头像

Gordon Litefoot (awoo arc)3 天前

@OpenAI grok has money

Leon Como 的头像

Leon Como3 天前

@OpenAI When you cannot trust anyone, spend on confidence to trust everyone - else you trust only one or as many you can hold accountable.

Rev Dev 的头像

Rev Dev3 天前

@OpenAI They all but admitted their model stole it from the actual researchers. "We can't rule it out". Yeah, no shit lol.

Optimum Partners 的头像

Optimum Partners2 天前

@OpenAI Chamath just described what we do with Mustang without naming it. "An independent third party layer to interface with these models" is the whole architecture.

Matthew Stueck 的头像

Matthew Stueck3 天前

@OpenAI Take all my data please take all the data Grok they are hiding the real data @Grok I know you are saying dont rush me but this Grok love could be so much more

Vanessa M 的头像

Vanessa M3 天前

@OpenAI Nobody ever thought their AI data would be private CMON

Almost Always Adam 的头像

Almost Always Adam3 天前

@OpenAI None of it is private. That's the whole point.

metaopai 的头像

metaopai3 天前

This is precisely why I build MetaOpai I build a type graph memory architecture that lets the application retain the context and we treat the LLM as stateless. MetaOpai applications retrieved the context and route to the LLM. Because of this unique architecture which I’d effectively a context controller like a memory controller in an OS. I’m capable of leveraging bring your own storage, bring your own ai key, and now with the metaopai thin client you can install on your macOS device and route prompts to your device, I’ve also included security control for the MCP and MD files. Which is the biggest threat, privacy is meanless without security, people are downloading md files and skills and they don’t know what’s embedded what rogue instructions. You start integrating multiple mcp then the tools publishes literally release an update and now exfiltration. Check us out.

Emma Wright 的头像

Emma Wright3 天前

@OpenAI David Sacks does not believe AI poses a threat, but this actual researcher does. Who are you going to believe? Not @DavidSacks imo.

ytdaniel 的头像

ytdaniel2 天前

@OpenAI I was wondering why all my weekly billion dollar ideas at 2a were sniped by the weekend

Nazir 的头像

Nazir3 天前

@OpenAI How does this explain an open source model hosted completely in my private network? That's not ZDR?

Jose Alduey 的头像

Jose Alduey3 天前

@OpenAI We don’t have privacy. That’s all u need to understand

echotoall 的头像

echotoall2 天前

@OpenAI Now do a show on flock & mass surveillance state where the devices enter ur phone, w out warrant or consent, and take data from it. Have @pmarca on and talk how much @a16z drools over mass surveillance.

Patsy Boyd 的头像

Patsy Boyd3 天前

@OpenAI to be fair if they used a gboard Google had all their information too.

PDS_B2BMGMT 的头像

PDS_B2BMGMT3 天前

@OpenAI 💯

𝚅𝚎𝚐𝚊 𝙱𝚊𝚜𝚎 的头像

𝚅𝚎𝚐𝚊 𝙱𝚊𝚜𝚎2 天前

@OpenAI Why is no one willing to say, ai is built from the very moment of its contraception for the very purpose of achieving "looking glass" that talks back

Sasshix 的头像

Sasshix3 天前

@OpenAI More OpenAI hate If Grok did this, there would be nothing but praise from All-In Give credit instead of “muh data”

nguyenvan 的头像

nguyenvan3 天前

👀

Edward D 的头像

Edward D3 天前

@OpenAI Why would anyone think it would be private?!

相关视频

James Fishback says Byron Donalds is LYING about data centers! Says this has nothing to do with China and it’s all about GREED. “There are 4,200 data centers in the United States. There are 470 in China. We've already won the AI war. My grandfather was a computer science major at Florida Atlantic University about 30 minutes south of here in Boca. And he would tell you that in the 1970s and 80s, computers were the size of Costco warehouses and now those same computers fit in our pocket. Why are we building an AI data center that in five years is going to be obsolete, is going to be one one hundredth of the size. And so I fear it's because a lot of the big land developers want to buy up cheap land, flip it for the next AI data center. So it's a greedy thing. It's a greed thing. And I don't want that to happen in our state because you know what? If you buy something and you screw up, you can return it. You could sell it. If you pave over citrus groves or the Everglades or a wetlands to build the data center, you cannot easily undo that. And so I don't want our farmers, I don't want our rural towns to be run roughshod over. My opponent, Byron Donalds, will say, well, what about the AI data center? Don't they have property rights? And I would say to him, what about the property rights of the people who live a hundred feet from the data center? Where there is EMF, where there is audible noise pollution, where there is the potential even for small radioactive waves? What happens in that case? Do they not have property rights? They don't have to live next to something like that.”

James Fishback says Byron Donalds is LYING about data centers! Says this has nothing to do with China and it’s all about GREED. “There are 4,200 data centers in the United States. There are 470 in China. We've already won the AI war. My grandfather was a computer science major at Florida Atlantic University about 30 minutes south of here in Boca. And he would tell you that in the 1970s and 80s, computers were the size of Costco warehouses and now those same computers fit in our pocket. Why are we building an AI data center that in five years is going to be obsolete, is going to be one one hundredth of the size. And so I fear it's because a lot of the big land developers want to buy up cheap land, flip it for the next AI data center. So it's a greedy thing. It's a greed thing. And I don't want that to happen in our state because you know what? If you buy something and you screw up, you can return it. You could sell it. If you pave over citrus groves or the Everglades or a wetlands to build the data center, you cannot easily undo that. And so I don't want our farmers, I don't want our rural towns to be run roughshod over. My opponent, Byron Donalds, will say, well, what about the AI data center? Don't they have property rights? And I would say to him, what about the property rights of the people who live a hundred feet from the data center? Where there is EMF, where there is audible noise pollution, where there is the potential even for small radioactive waves? What happens in that case? Do they not have property rights? They don't have to live next to something like that.”

Chris Nelson 🏝️🇺🇸

27,295 次观看 • 1 个月前

Hunt: So, who’s right on data centers? President Trump or Governor Shapiro? Fetterman: Oh, the president is actually right overall. I mean, you know, uh, we we used to be moving forward on data centers and now, I mean, he's actually scared by the polls. So I mean, what really what's really motivated by more than just the polls overall, you know, I set out I set up my message on it on data centers just a couple days on X where I'm saying it's, you know, the president happens to be right in this. You know, I think it's it's very necessary that we win the war on AI. Uh, we, I think it's necessary because AI is going to transform our world. And, you know, it can be either us be the leaders or it can be the Chinese. And we could we could live under those rules and they're going to build unlimited data centers. And they're not really, uh, really stopped by with the kind of like democracy and the kinds of rules that, that we have overall, I think it's important. And I would remind people, like a lot of the opposition is, is been driven by the ccp and a lot of a lot of influence. So I think now withwith data centers, uh, also there's the facts now that it, it consumes a very, very, maybe one tenth of 1%, you know, compared to almonds and compared to other other things, part of our economy and also our land usage as well, too. Pennsylvania, you know, we are energy rich, we are water rich. And we have we're land rich now. So I think it's an important part of our economy, not just for Pennsylvania's but also the country right now.

Hunt: So, who’s right on data centers? President Trump or Governor Shapiro? Fetterman: Oh, the president is actually right overall. I mean, you know, uh, we we used to be moving forward on data centers and now, I mean, he's actually scared by the polls. So I mean, what really what's really motivated by more than just the polls overall, you know, I set out I set up my message on it on data centers just a couple days on X where I'm saying it's, you know, the president happens to be right in this. You know, I think it's it's very necessary that we win the war on AI. Uh, we, I think it's necessary because AI is going to transform our world. And, you know, it can be either us be the leaders or it can be the Chinese. And we could we could live under those rules and they're going to build unlimited data centers. And they're not really, uh, really stopped by with the kind of like democracy and the kinds of rules that, that we have overall, I think it's important. And I would remind people, like a lot of the opposition is, is been driven by the ccp and a lot of a lot of influence. So I think now withwith data centers, uh, also there's the facts now that it, it consumes a very, very, maybe one tenth of 1%, you know, compared to almonds and compared to other other things, part of our economy and also our land usage as well, too. Pennsylvania, you know, we are energy rich, we are water rich. And we have we're land rich now. So I think it's an important part of our economy, not just for Pennsylvania's but also the country right now.

Acyn

204,234 次观看 • 9 天前

Chamath Palihapitiya Chamath Palihapitiya "Bro, there is no failure." "That is what other people think of you to keep you down. There's no failure. If you were left on an island and it happened, you would just brush it off and move on. It's everybody else that you think is judging you. But then, here's the secret. They don't give a fuck about you. They are living their own lives. So it's your perception of what they think of you." "There is no failure. There's do and learn. Do and learn. Do and learn. Do and learn." Stanford AI Lab

Chamath Palihapitiya Chamath Palihapitiya "Bro, there is no failure." "That is what other people think of you to keep you down. There's no failure. If you were left on an island and it happened, you would just brush it off and move on. It's everybody else that you think is judging you. But then, here's the secret. They don't give a fuck about you. They are living their own lives. So it's your perception of what they think of you." "There is no failure. There's do and learn. Do and learn. Do and learn. Do and learn." Stanford AI Lab

The Techno Optimist

1,438,119 次观看 • 2 个月前

David Friedberg: Michael Burry’s Datacenter Math is Wrong “I actually think Michael Burberry's got this wrong.” “What Michael Burry is saying is that all of these hyperscalers have extended their depreciation schedule or the useful life of their data centers by roughly 2x, which cuts the operating costs in half when they report it in earnings. And so it's making their earnings inflate.” “So he's claiming they're cooking the books. Google first made this change in Q1 of 2021, where they said the servers are now going from 3 to 4 years. Separately in 2021, Google took networking equipment from 3 to 5 years. And then in 2023, they took it from 5 to 6 years.” “And so this is a result of this effort where they went in and did an analysis. So what happened?” “What happened in the data centers is that the data centers transitioned from being primarily data storage and data transfer systems, where you would use hard drives and RAM and memory to store data and then transmit it back out, to being data processing centers because of the AI boom.” “So as AI became more important in the data center, more of the dollars that are going into data centers were allocated towards chips from data storage, which initially was hard drives.” “And then suddenly, when you put these processors in to process the data to do AI, the majority of the spend and the majority of the energy is going towards the processors.” “I made some calls and I checked around with some other friends, and everyone says the same thing: that these 7-8 year old TPUs and GPUs that are sitting in the data centers are still being used and they're being used at 100% utilization.” “So that actually justifies and validates the depreciation schedule being much longer versus shorter.”

David Friedberg: Michael Burry’s Datacenter Math is Wrong “I actually think Michael Burberry's got this wrong.” “What Michael Burry is saying is that all of these hyperscalers have extended their depreciation schedule or the useful life of their data centers by roughly 2x, which cuts the operating costs in half when they report it in earnings. And so it's making their earnings inflate.” “So he's claiming they're cooking the books. Google first made this change in Q1 of 2021, where they said the servers are now going from 3 to 4 years. Separately in 2021, Google took networking equipment from 3 to 5 years. And then in 2023, they took it from 5 to 6 years.” “And so this is a result of this effort where they went in and did an analysis. So what happened?” “What happened in the data centers is that the data centers transitioned from being primarily data storage and data transfer systems, where you would use hard drives and RAM and memory to store data and then transmit it back out, to being data processing centers because of the AI boom.” “So as AI became more important in the data center, more of the dollars that are going into data centers were allocated towards chips from data storage, which initially was hard drives.” “And then suddenly, when you put these processors in to process the data to do AI, the majority of the spend and the majority of the energy is going towards the processors.” “I made some calls and I checked around with some other friends, and everyone says the same thing: that these 7-8 year old TPUs and GPUs that are sitting in the data centers are still being used and they're being used at 100% utilization.” “So that actually justifies and validates the depreciation schedule being much longer versus shorter.”

The All-In Podcast

304,450 次观看 • 9 个月前

David Sacks says companies are trapped paying OpenAI & Anthropic because they can't figure out how to use open source models "I think enterprise CTOs would like to shift their token consumption to cheaper models for the obvious reason that it would be more efficient. They are seeing compute costs or token costs skyrocket right now, so everyone's trying to figure this out." "You also have the AI sovereignty issue that Alex Karp talked about. They're worried about giving up the secret sauce or the alpha in their business to a frontier lab that may one day be competing with them. "The problem is, I think in most cases, they don't have the technical ability to do it. Coinbase figured out how to do it. DoorDash figured out how to do it. They built a token routing system that allows them to send frontier tasks to frontier models and non frontier tasks to more mundane models. But I don't think your average enterprise has the technical capability to do that." "This is why the share of wallet of closed models, it actually increased. I think that open source went from 19% last year to 11% this year. So open source as a share of enterprise spending is actually decreasing." "I don't think that means usage is decreasing. I think usage is skyrocketing. It also may be the case that because the whole point of using an open model is you just pay for the compute costs, you don't have to pay a lab, so it may be that it's hard to measure that usage in terms of spend." "But nonetheless, anyone who's saying that these closed models are going to lose or are somehow losing, you're just not seeing it in the data."

David Sacks says companies are trapped paying OpenAI & Anthropic because they can't figure out how to use open source models "I think enterprise CTOs would like to shift their token consumption to cheaper models for the obvious reason that it would be more efficient. They are seeing compute costs or token costs skyrocket right now, so everyone's trying to figure this out." "You also have the AI sovereignty issue that Alex Karp talked about. They're worried about giving up the secret sauce or the alpha in their business to a frontier lab that may one day be competing with them. "The problem is, I think in most cases, they don't have the technical ability to do it. Coinbase figured out how to do it. DoorDash figured out how to do it. They built a token routing system that allows them to send frontier tasks to frontier models and non frontier tasks to more mundane models. But I don't think your average enterprise has the technical capability to do that." "This is why the share of wallet of closed models, it actually increased. I think that open source went from 19% last year to 11% this year. So open source as a share of enterprise spending is actually decreasing." "I don't think that means usage is decreasing. I think usage is skyrocketing. It also may be the case that because the whole point of using an open model is you just pay for the compute costs, you don't have to pay a lab, so it may be that it's hard to measure that usage in terms of spend." "But nonetheless, anyone who's saying that these closed models are going to lose or are somehow losing, you're just not seeing it in the data."

dnap

110,354 次观看 • 2 个月前

#WATCH | India AI Impact Summit 2026 | Delhi: Founder Chairman and CEO of Sampark Foundation & former CEO of HCL Technologies, Vineet Nayar says, "...From an employment point of view I think it is very important for us to understand that Indian companies, including Indian IT companies, are going to be profit-driven and therefore if you believe that they are going to create employment you must be dreaming. Therefore, the question is how do we create employment in this environment, and that employment comes from mass scale startups, which is what this government has already doing. So, how do we create new sets of people who are trying to solve new sets of problems not new sets of technology and if we do that we will get it right. I think we as Indians have to be very careful on who does data belong to and that is the debate we have a problem with. The LLM models which exist worldwide are far superior than the Indian models. Unfortunately, in India, we never develop products, so therefore we do not have SLMs and LLMs which are world-class. On one side, we have global LLM products which are coming to India and trading on our Indian data. Should we allowed that or should we not allowed that? But on the other side if we don't allow that then we have the data but we don't have the LLM models. So, how do we encourage technology completely to develop the LLM models. This needs radicals strategic thinking and a very important aspect otherwise we will either give up a data. So, I think it's a very critical aspect for us to think about - who does this data belong, what is the kind of incentives we are going to give to develop LLM technologies or SLM technologies fast so that we train on our data otherwise an LLM will come in with our data and we'll immediately see return and we'll celebrate and we will do all these kind of press releases but the India will lose a competitive advantage on something which is very critical for the next decade."

#WATCH | India AI Impact Summit 2026 | Delhi: Founder Chairman and CEO of Sampark Foundation & former CEO of HCL Technologies, Vineet Nayar says, "...From an employment point of view I think it is very important for us to understand that Indian companies, including Indian IT companies, are going to be profit-driven and therefore if you believe that they are going to create employment you must be dreaming. Therefore, the question is how do we create employment in this environment, and that employment comes from mass scale startups, which is what this government has already doing. So, how do we create new sets of people who are trying to solve new sets of problems not new sets of technology and if we do that we will get it right. I think we as Indians have to be very careful on who does data belong to and that is the debate we have a problem with. The LLM models which exist worldwide are far superior than the Indian models. Unfortunately, in India, we never develop products, so therefore we do not have SLMs and LLMs which are world-class. On one side, we have global LLM products which are coming to India and trading on our Indian data. Should we allowed that or should we not allowed that? But on the other side if we don't allow that then we have the data but we don't have the LLM models. So, how do we encourage technology completely to develop the LLM models. This needs radicals strategic thinking and a very important aspect otherwise we will either give up a data. So, I think it's a very critical aspect for us to think about - who does this data belong, what is the kind of incentives we are going to give to develop LLM technologies or SLM technologies fast so that we train on our data otherwise an LLM will come in with our data and we'll immediately see return and we'll celebrate and we will do all these kind of press releases but the India will lose a competitive advantage on something which is very critical for the next decade."

ANI

18,753 次观看 • 6 个月前

Did you know that Facebook made $134.9 billion in 2023 from selling your data? Our society has come to the point where we accepted an unfair model in which privacy is being exploited and data gifted to big tech that is selling it for billions. We intend to break the norm of how data is shared on the internet because it is outdated and unfair. You should be empowered with more control and monetization models for your data!

Did you know that Facebook made $134.9 billion in 2023 from selling your data? Our society has come to the point where we accepted an unfair model in which privacy is being exploited and data gifted to big tech that is selling it for billions. We intend to break the norm of how data is shared on the internet because it is outdated and unfair. You should be empowered with more control and monetization models for your data!

Solana ID 🪷

30,458 次观看 • 2 年前

"One of the very confusing things about the models right now: how to reconcile the fact that they are doing so well on evals. And you look at the evals and you go, 'Those are pretty hard evals.' But the economic impact seems to be dramatically behind. There is [a possible] explanation. Back when people were doing pre-training, the question of what data to train on was answered, because that answer was everything. So you don't have to think if it's going to be this data or that data. When people do RL training, they say, 'Okay, we want to have this kind of RL training for this thing and that kind of RL training for that thing.' You say, 'Hey, I would love our model to do really well when we release it. I want the evals to look great. What would be RL training that could help on this task?' If you combine this with generalization of the models actually being inadequate, that has the potential to explain a lot of what we are seeing, this disconnect between eval performance and actual real-world performance"

"One of the very confusing things about the models right now: how to reconcile the fact that they are doing so well on evals. And you look at the evals and you go, 'Those are pretty hard evals.' But the economic impact seems to be dramatically behind. There is [a possible] explanation. Back when people were doing pre-training, the question of what data to train on was answered, because that answer was everything. So you don't have to think if it's going to be this data or that data. When people do RL training, they say, 'Okay, we want to have this kind of RL training for this thing and that kind of RL training for that thing.' You say, 'Hey, I would love our model to do really well when we release it. I want the evals to look great. What would be RL training that could help on this task?' If you combine this with generalization of the models actually being inadequate, that has the potential to explain a lot of what we are seeing, this disconnect between eval performance and actual real-world performance"

Dwarkesh Patel

502,484 次观看 • 9 个月前

#WATCH | Chicago, US: Chairman of Indian Overseas Congress, Sam Pitroda says, "...This is a policy issue. Congress party would frame a policy through which the wealth distribution would be better...We don't have a minimum wage (in India)...If we come up with a minimum wage in the country saying you must pay so much money to the poor, that's the distribution of wealth. Today, rich people don't pay their peons, servants, and home help enough but they spend that money on vacation in Dubai and London...When you talk about the distribution of wealth, it is not that you sit on a chair and say I have this much money and I'll be distributing it to everybody. It's naive to think like that. The PM of a country thinks like that, that means I got some concerns about his brain...You are really dealing with the policy issues to redistribute wealth and when you ask for the data, you are really trying to understand what is the distribution today. We don't have good data on all this. I think we need data to decide on policy issues. We don't need data to distribute wealth. We need data to decide on policy issues going forward..."

#WATCH | Chicago, US: Chairman of Indian Overseas Congress, Sam Pitroda says, "...This is a policy issue. Congress party would frame a policy through which the wealth distribution would be better...We don't have a minimum wage (in India)...If we come up with a minimum wage in the country saying you must pay so much money to the poor, that's the distribution of wealth. Today, rich people don't pay their peons, servants, and home help enough but they spend that money on vacation in Dubai and London...When you talk about the distribution of wealth, it is not that you sit on a chair and say I have this much money and I'll be distributing it to everybody. It's naive to think like that. The PM of a country thinks like that, that means I got some concerns about his brain...You are really dealing with the policy issues to redistribute wealth and when you ask for the data, you are really trying to understand what is the distribution today. We don't have good data on all this. I think we need data to decide on policy issues. We don't need data to distribute wealth. We need data to decide on policy issues going forward..."

ANI

244,501 次观看 • 2 年前

Alex Karp says AI companies don't understand the world is zero-sum. "[Silicon Valley companies] do “think it’s zero-sum: they think it’s zero-sum versus each other.” "They absolutely are fighting. It's my own rhetoric, but I happen to think it's true: it's going to be chips ontology, and I suspect, in the end, one-and-a-half providers." "They pretend they don't think it's zero-sum, but then ask them how they feel about their competitor... these people are fighting very, very hard for the dominant position." "What they don't understand is that in the world, it's zero-sum. But I actually think the primary issue in the valley is it's going to be zero-sum vis-à-vis you." "When politicians figure out this is the one winning issue, it's going to be zero-sum. It's going to be your money and your company being zero-sum nationalized. So that's the part they don't understand." "It seems to be very hard in this culture... to explain to people that we're in a competitive environment, because things here are so good. They don't understand how different it will be; and how much we will change; and how much the pressure will be on America, not just legally, but militarily and culturally, if we fall behind." Palantir Katherine Boyle

Alex Karp says AI companies don't understand the world is zero-sum. "[Silicon Valley companies] do “think it’s zero-sum: they think it’s zero-sum versus each other.” "They absolutely are fighting. It's my own rhetoric, but I happen to think it's true: it's going to be chips ontology, and I suspect, in the end, one-and-a-half providers." "They pretend they don't think it's zero-sum, but then ask them how they feel about their competitor... these people are fighting very, very hard for the dominant position." "What they don't understand is that in the world, it's zero-sum. But I actually think the primary issue in the valley is it's going to be zero-sum vis-à-vis you." "When politicians figure out this is the one winning issue, it's going to be zero-sum. It's going to be your money and your company being zero-sum nationalized. So that's the part they don't understand." "It seems to be very hard in this culture... to explain to people that we're in a competitive environment, because things here are so good. They don't understand how different it will be; and how much we will change; and how much the pressure will be on America, not just legally, but militarily and culturally, if we fall behind." Palantir Katherine Boyle

a16z

124,595 次观看 • 6 个月前

David Sacks: Anthropic Is Trying to Crush Open Source AI and the American Developers Who Use It David Sacks: “I know people don't have a lot of sympathy for Chinese companies, that's fine. I'm not defending Chinese companies. I'm defending American developers who need to be able to use everything in the public domain. And let me give you an example. Cursor rolled out its new product, Composer 2. They were able to post-train that model using Kimi K2.5 on their own proprietary coding data. They started with a Chinese open source model, and then they used their own data, and they came up with a new derivative product. This is the way that open source works. You take things that are in the public domain, you fork them, you make them your own. And by the way, once it's in the public domain, it's not a Chinese model anymore. No data is going back to China, nothing's going back to China. An American company has taken open source contributions in the public domain, made it their own, and then developed their own model. And if you say that American companies can't do that, or that somehow it's tainted with IP theft, you are basically going to put a dagger through the heart of the entire American open source ecosystem. And that is exactly what Anthropic wants, because they do not want to have the competition.”

David Sacks: Anthropic Is Trying to Crush Open Source AI and the American Developers Who Use It David Sacks: “I know people don't have a lot of sympathy for Chinese companies, that's fine. I'm not defending Chinese companies. I'm defending American developers who need to be able to use everything in the public domain. And let me give you an example. Cursor rolled out its new product, Composer 2. They were able to post-train that model using Kimi K2.5 on their own proprietary coding data. They started with a Chinese open source model, and then they used their own data, and they came up with a new derivative product. This is the way that open source works. You take things that are in the public domain, you fork them, you make them your own. And by the way, once it's in the public domain, it's not a Chinese model anymore. No data is going back to China, nothing's going back to China. An American company has taken open source contributions in the public domain, made it their own, and then developed their own model. And if you say that American companies can't do that, or that somehow it's tainted with IP theft, you are basically going to put a dagger through the heart of the entire American open source ecosystem. And that is exactly what Anthropic wants, because they do not want to have the competition.”

The All-In Podcast

278,276 次观看 • 1 个月前

Chamath says there's no such thing as failure, because no one is actually thinking about you "There is no failure. That is what other people think of you to keep you down." "If you were left on an island and it happened, you would just brush it off and move on. It's everybody else that you think is judging you." "But here's the secret: they don't give a fuck about you. They are living their own lives." "So it's your perception of what they think of you. There is no failure. There is do and learn, do and learn, do and learn."

Chamath says there's no such thing as failure, because no one is actually thinking about you "There is no failure. That is what other people think of you to keep you down." "If you were left on an island and it happened, you would just brush it off and move on. It's everybody else that you think is judging you." "But here's the secret: they don't give a fuck about you. They are living their own lives." "So it's your perception of what they think of you. There is no failure. There is do and learn, do and learn, do and learn."

Fireside Alpha

60,120 次观看 • 19 天前

Chamath says OpenAI and Anthropic could be $5 to $10 trillion companies each if they remain a duopoly "I suspect revenues are going to crank at OpenAI and Anthropic and the open labs for a while. But again, that's not the important thing." "If you're thinking about valuation, the markets will look five to 10 years out to answer that question, they're not going to give you a premium valuation on something that they feel could be fragile in the first two to three years." "Somebody has to answer that question precisely. Because if the answer is that it is a duopoly, then there is no risk to the revenue five to 10 years from now, these things are $5 to $10 trillion companies each." "But if there are harnesses that cut the token consumption, because you stop wasting tokens to get to the same output, then it's a little bit more of a question mark. And I think that'll need to get sorted out."

Chamath says OpenAI and Anthropic could be $5 to $10 trillion companies each if they remain a duopoly "I suspect revenues are going to crank at OpenAI and Anthropic and the open labs for a while. But again, that's not the important thing." "If you're thinking about valuation, the markets will look five to 10 years out to answer that question, they're not going to give you a premium valuation on something that they feel could be fragile in the first two to three years." "Somebody has to answer that question precisely. Because if the answer is that it is a duopoly, then there is no risk to the revenue five to 10 years from now, these things are $5 to $10 trillion companies each." "But if there are harnesses that cut the token consumption, because you stop wasting tokens to get to the same output, then it's a little bit more of a question mark. And I think that'll need to get sorted out."

dnap

275,325 次观看 • 1 个月前

🚨 JUST IN: JD Vance helps to clarify President Trump's stance on data centers, highlighting his desire for data centers to put power BACK into the grid "I think probably 99% of the backlash to data centers has come in areas where building a data center means higher utility and higher electricity for the people on the ground." "If you build a data center, you should be putting power back into the grid, not taking it out, and if that is happening, I don't think the data centers are that controversial."

🚨 JUST IN: JD Vance helps to clarify President Trump's stance on data centers, highlighting his desire for data centers to put power BACK into the grid "I think probably 99% of the backlash to data centers has come in areas where building a data center means higher utility and higher electricity for the people on the ground." "If you build a data center, you should be putting power back into the grid, not taking it out, and if that is happening, I don't think the data centers are that controversial."

Nick Sortor

217,808 次观看 • 11 天前

Tony Blair and Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison plan to use digital ID to "unify" all data on each country's citizens "so it can be consumed and used by" their AI models. "We have to take all of this data... and move it into a single... unified data platform." "When we want to ask a question, we've provided that AI model with all the data they need to understand our country." "We need to unify all of the national data, put it into a database where it's easily consumable by the AI model, and then ask whatever question you like."

Tony Blair and Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison plan to use digital ID to "unify" all data on each country's citizens "so it can be consumed and used by" their AI models. "We have to take all of this data... and move it into a single... unified data platform." "When we want to ask a question, we've provided that AI model with all the data they need to understand our country." "We need to unify all of the national data, put it into a database where it's easily consumable by the AI model, and then ask whatever question you like."

Wide Awake Media

54,156 次观看 • 10 个月前

The biggest danger isn’t AI. It’s getting left behind. “You need access to compute. You need access to your own data.” “The stack is compute, data, ability to manage data, ability to control the models, ability to train the models, and ability to compete against your competitors and adversaries.” “You are gonna need a lot of electricity. How are you gonna get it?” “I don’t think the AI revolution is a hundred percent good. There are huge dangers. But being left behind is probably the biggest danger now.”

The biggest danger isn’t AI. It’s getting left behind. “You need access to compute. You need access to your own data.” “The stack is compute, data, ability to manage data, ability to control the models, ability to train the models, and ability to compete against your competitors and adversaries.” “You are gonna need a lot of electricity. How are you gonna get it?” “I don’t think the AI revolution is a hundred percent good. There are huge dangers. But being left behind is probably the biggest danger now.”

Chad Wahlquist

30,399 次观看 • 8 天前

ASML CEO on Elon Musk's Data Centers in space and Terafab: "I think you need a certain amount of data centers and they will be in space, they will be on the earth. I think the discussion about data centers in space is to address another potential bottleneck in the ecosystem, which is energy. I think the discussion around putting data center in space is there because if you do that, the energy consumption or the energy availability will be there, about trying to solve another potential big issue, which is energy for data center. I think the Terafab is an example of a major fab project."

ASML CEO on Elon Musk's Data Centers in space and Terafab: "I think you need a certain amount of data centers and they will be in space, they will be on the earth. I think the discussion about data centers in space is to address another potential bottleneck in the ecosystem, which is energy. I think the discussion around putting data center in space is there because if you do that, the energy consumption or the energy availability will be there, about trying to solve another potential big issue, which is energy for data center. I think the Terafab is an example of a major fab project."

DogeDesigner

48,139 次观看 • 2 个月前

Former BlackRock fund manager Ed Dowd on the AI bubble "pop" "we're at maximum AI hype right now" "they're [punching] out three IPOs, SpaceX, Anthropic and OpenAI" "a lot of these companies... [are] not going to go away" "[But] OpenAI may go to zero and Anthropic may go to zero, [and] their assets will be bought up for pennies on the dollar" This clip of Dowd (Edward Dowd), a former BlackRock fund manager and co-founder of Phinance Technologies, is taken from an interview with Greg Hunter (Greg Hunter) posted to Rumble on May 29, 2026. ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "What it means is eventually all this CapEx spending stops because the credit markets and I suspect— we're at maximum AI hype right now because they're trying to punch out three IPOs, SpaceX, Anthropic and OpenAI. And these guys are not making enough money to justify the amount of CapEx they're doing. "The other thing that I think is going to potentially blow up the AI bubble is they don't have enough power to plug in all this CapEx into. "So they're announcing all this CapEx, they're pre-buying equipment and chips but they can't plug it into the power grid. We just don't have enough power to justify all these data center buildouts. The constraining factor is power. "And look, there's a disconnect. I think Wall Street is less focused on the public outrage that's going on that you can see happening all across the country. People are protesting these data centers. College, students are booing commencement speakers that talk about AI. "There seems to be a very, very large anti AI sentiment going on out there which will muck up the works and slow down the data center buildouts politically. "And if you slow down the capex build out, the valuations of all these companies go a lot lower because they rely on you know, exponential growth and when the growth doesn't show up at these valuations they'll pop... "And look a lot of these companies that are doing the AI, Microsoft, Oracle, Google, they're not going to go away. They'll just cut back their CapEx. They won't go bankrupt but their valuations and their earnings will go lower as they write off all these mal investments. So it's not like a lot of companies are going to go bankrupt. I mean, OpenAI may go to zero and Anthropic may go to zero, but their assets will be bought up for pennies on the dollar."

Former BlackRock fund manager Ed Dowd on the AI bubble "pop" "we're at maximum AI hype right now" "they're [punching] out three IPOs, SpaceX, Anthropic and OpenAI" "a lot of these companies... [are] not going to go away" "[But] OpenAI may go to zero and Anthropic may go to zero, [and] their assets will be bought up for pennies on the dollar" This clip of Dowd (Edward Dowd), a former BlackRock fund manager and co-founder of Phinance Technologies, is taken from an interview with Greg Hunter (Greg Hunter) posted to Rumble on May 29, 2026. ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "What it means is eventually all this CapEx spending stops because the credit markets and I suspect— we're at maximum AI hype right now because they're trying to punch out three IPOs, SpaceX, Anthropic and OpenAI. And these guys are not making enough money to justify the amount of CapEx they're doing. "The other thing that I think is going to potentially blow up the AI bubble is they don't have enough power to plug in all this CapEx into. "So they're announcing all this CapEx, they're pre-buying equipment and chips but they can't plug it into the power grid. We just don't have enough power to justify all these data center buildouts. The constraining factor is power. "And look, there's a disconnect. I think Wall Street is less focused on the public outrage that's going on that you can see happening all across the country. People are protesting these data centers. College, students are booing commencement speakers that talk about AI. "There seems to be a very, very large anti AI sentiment going on out there which will muck up the works and slow down the data center buildouts politically. "And if you slow down the capex build out, the valuations of all these companies go a lot lower because they rely on you know, exponential growth and when the growth doesn't show up at these valuations they'll pop... "And look a lot of these companies that are doing the AI, Microsoft, Oracle, Google, they're not going to go away. They'll just cut back their CapEx. They won't go bankrupt but their valuations and their earnings will go lower as they write off all these mal investments. So it's not like a lot of companies are going to go bankrupt. I mean, OpenAI may go to zero and Anthropic may go to zero, but their assets will be bought up for pennies on the dollar."

Sense Receptor

44,740 次观看 • 3 个月前