正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

David from USD.AI on the institutional shift happening behind CHIP, why every borrower they have is institutional, and why the AI super cycle has had no real on-chain exposure until now: "We have personally beat out other investment banks in running deals that we've signed. They're starting to view...

modernmarket_'s profile picture

The Modern Market Show

10,718 subscribers

10,397 次观看 • 3 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

Box CEO Aaron Levie: Why AI Is Being Adopted By Enterprises Faster Than Cloud "There's a lot of similarities to the early days of cloud and the early days of AI with one big difference: The early days of cloud we were having to go convince people that the cloud was going be a big deal. A lot of people didn't believe us. So that meant we just couldn't win deals in entire segments of customers. Conversely with AI, you're no longer really having to convince people that AI is the future." Box's Aaron Levie talking with Y Combinator's David Lieb
2:31

Box CEO Aaron Levie: Why AI Is Being Adopted By Enterprises Faster Than Cloud "There's a lot of similarities to the early days of cloud and the early days of AI with one big difference: The early days of cloud we were having to go convince people that the cloud was going be a big deal. A lot of people didn't believe us. So that meant we just couldn't win deals in entire segments of customers. Conversely with AI, you're no longer really having to convince people that AI is the future." Box's Aaron Levie talking with Y Combinator's David Lieb

Overlap: Business & Tech

11,400 次观看 • 11 个月前

Sam Altman says AI leaders have done a terrible job at communicating to the public: “The, ‘Dear peasants, we will bequeath upon you these gifts of a cure for cancer and material wealth and great entertainment, and you stop complaining, and we'll make all the decisions about the future and just trust us, we'll be benevolent dictators.’ That’s not good. Not good.” “A lot of the people building AI have been saying, ‘There's a 25% chance we're going to destroy the world, and yet we're going to race ahead to do it because otherwise those bad guys will do it first.’” “Or, ‘Man, this thing is going to be really terrible, and 50% of the jobs are going to go away in the next year, and we hope you all are okay, but it seems really scary.’” “We have not, as a field, done a very good job of explaining to people what the benefits are and how the downsides can be mitigated—and we certainly have not done a good job even if people have had answers like saying, ‘There's going to be UBI, or work will be optional.’” “There's been very little discussion from people about how and why it's important that people have more power and personal freedom in the world, not less. And that matters a lot to most people.” “The ability of people to influence their own future and collectively design where society is going to go, and the autonomy that comes with that, is very important. I don't think a lot of people in the AI field… they feel it for themselves, but they don't spend much time thinking about it, reflecting on or acknowledging how important that is to other people.”
3:19

Sam Altman says AI leaders have done a terrible job at communicating to the public: “The, ‘Dear peasants, we will bequeath upon you these gifts of a cure for cancer and material wealth and great entertainment, and you stop complaining, and we'll make all the decisions about the future and just trust us, we'll be benevolent dictators.’ That’s not good. Not good.” “A lot of the people building AI have been saying, ‘There's a 25% chance we're going to destroy the world, and yet we're going to race ahead to do it because otherwise those bad guys will do it first.’” “Or, ‘Man, this thing is going to be really terrible, and 50% of the jobs are going to go away in the next year, and we hope you all are okay, but it seems really scary.’” “We have not, as a field, done a very good job of explaining to people what the benefits are and how the downsides can be mitigated—and we certainly have not done a good job even if people have had answers like saying, ‘There's going to be UBI, or work will be optional.’” “There's been very little discussion from people about how and why it's important that people have more power and personal freedom in the world, not less. And that matters a lot to most people.” “The ability of people to influence their own future and collectively design where society is going to go, and the autonomy that comes with that, is very important. I don't think a lot of people in the AI field… they feel it for themselves, but they don't spend much time thinking about it, reflecting on or acknowledging how important that is to other people.”

David Senra

32,300 次观看 • 2 天前

DAVID SACKS ON THE AI RACE: "The US is currently in an AI race, and our chief global competition is China, obviously. They're the only other country that has the talent, the resources, and the technology expertise to basically beat us in AI. And I think whoever wins this AI race, that's going to have tremendous ramifications for both our economy and our national security. Clearly, we want the US to be the winner, just like we were with the internet, and every other technology revolution before that […] We know that to win this AI race, we have to be the most innovative. You can't regulate your way just to beating your competitor. You have to out-innovate them. And we know that in the United States, the innovation comes from the private sector, not the government. So we have to do everything we can to help our companies win, to help them be innovative, and that means getting a lot of red tape out of the way… We have to have the most AI infrastructure in the US. It has to be the easiest place to build it. All of the new data centers that are going in, they require tremendous power, so getting ahead of the curve on energy, making sure we stand up all of this new infrastructure we're going to need to basically produce these AI factories… We want the US technology stack to dominate globally. We want to be the partner of choice for the whole world… I think everyone in Silicon Valley understands that the way that you win a technology race is to have the biggest ecosystem […] You just want everybody to be building on top of your technology stack, and that's what we want for the United States." David Sacks w/Marc Benioff Dreamforce
2:15

DAVID SACKS ON THE AI RACE: "The US is currently in an AI race, and our chief global competition is China, obviously. They're the only other country that has the talent, the resources, and the technology expertise to basically beat us in AI. And I think whoever wins this AI race, that's going to have tremendous ramifications for both our economy and our national security. Clearly, we want the US to be the winner, just like we were with the internet, and every other technology revolution before that […] We know that to win this AI race, we have to be the most innovative. You can't regulate your way just to beating your competitor. You have to out-innovate them. And we know that in the United States, the innovation comes from the private sector, not the government. So we have to do everything we can to help our companies win, to help them be innovative, and that means getting a lot of red tape out of the way… We have to have the most AI infrastructure in the US. It has to be the easiest place to build it. All of the new data centers that are going in, they require tremendous power, so getting ahead of the curve on energy, making sure we stand up all of this new infrastructure we're going to need to basically produce these AI factories… We want the US technology stack to dominate globally. We want to be the partner of choice for the whole world… I think everyone in Silicon Valley understands that the way that you win a technology race is to have the biggest ecosystem […] You just want everybody to be building on top of your technology stack, and that's what we want for the United States." David Sacks w/Marc Benioff Dreamforce

Ron Pragides 

231,781 次观看 • 10 个月前

Amp CEO, Quinn Slack on why he thinks Kimi K3 could be a Sputnik moment for America: "With GLM 5.2 we had a mini Sputnik moment. When the Soviet Union launched a satellite into space before the US and we realized we have to catch up." "Kimi K3 I need to go and see, but that could be an even bigger Sputnik moment that wakes us up and will probably create a lot of good effects in terms of catalyzing the understanding of AI as a strategic advantage for the US rather than as something people should be against." "But I think it could also scare a lot of people, and I can understand why they'd be scared." "The worst possible outcome could be that open models are banned or are banned from certain industries or companies in the US. There's a lot of people in lobbying organizations in Washington DC, and a lot of people in various parts of the government that want to do that." "They want to say, we won't let these models trained in China be used in the US. There's a lot of people trying to do that now, and that would make us all worse off. I'm pretty nervous about that." Quinn Slack Amp
1:26

Amp CEO, Quinn Slack on why he thinks Kimi K3 could be a Sputnik moment for America: "With GLM 5.2 we had a mini Sputnik moment. When the Soviet Union launched a satellite into space before the US and we realized we have to catch up." "Kimi K3 I need to go and see, but that could be an even bigger Sputnik moment that wakes us up and will probably create a lot of good effects in terms of catalyzing the understanding of AI as a strategic advantage for the US rather than as something people should be against." "But I think it could also scare a lot of people, and I can understand why they'd be scared." "The worst possible outcome could be that open models are banned or are banned from certain industries or companies in the US. There's a lot of people in lobbying organizations in Washington DC, and a lot of people in various parts of the government that want to do that." "They want to say, we won't let these models trained in China be used in the US. There's a lot of people trying to do that now, and that would make us all worse off. I'm pretty nervous about that." Quinn Slack Amp

MTS

58,660 次观看 • 1 个月前

Elon Musk explains the deeper reason why SpaceX succeeding in AI matters for humanity’s future "It's important that we have an AI that cares about humanity, that fosters humanity and helps take us to other planets and other star systems This is why I think it's essential that SpaceX succeed not just with AI hardware, but also with AI software. I think an AI that is SpaceX's baby will be a very good AI SpaceX is a collection some of the very best humans on Earth, both in capability and in morality and goodness. We want to have an AI that is born of that capability, that morality and that goodness. I think that's very, very important So I'd like to encourage people to help out with the AI hardware on the ground, the AI software, and of course with the AI satellites Solar is going to be a very important part of that. The Terafab will be a very important part of that”
1:28

Elon Musk explains the deeper reason why SpaceX succeeding in AI matters for humanity’s future "It's important that we have an AI that cares about humanity, that fosters humanity and helps take us to other planets and other star systems This is why I think it's essential that SpaceX succeed not just with AI hardware, but also with AI software. I think an AI that is SpaceX's baby will be a very good AI SpaceX is a collection some of the very best humans on Earth, both in capability and in morality and goodness. We want to have an AI that is born of that capability, that morality and that goodness. I think that's very, very important So I'd like to encourage people to help out with the AI hardware on the ground, the AI software, and of course with the AI satellites Solar is going to be a very important part of that. The Terafab will be a very important part of that”

X Freeze

29,610 次观看 • 15 天前

$AMZN CEO Andy Jassy reveals customers want Trainium chips outside AWS and says there's a real chance Amazon sells them that way. "On the question about selling Trainium, we're quite excited about what's happening in our chips business." "As I mentioned earlier, it's over $25 billion in annual revenue at this point. We think we have the leading price performance chip in both the AI space with Trainium and in the CPU space with Graviton." "The fact that we have multi-year, multi-gigawatt commitments from the two largest AI labs, Anthropic and OpenAI, and more and more companies, as I mentioned in my opening comments, using Trainium is exciting and promising." "And we just have an incredible amount of demand for Trainium. So there are a lot of customers who are very excited about using it in the form that we're providing right now." "We do have an increasing number of customers who are interested in us providing the Trainium chips to them separate from our cloud. And we're actively having those conversations and exploring. And I expect there's a real chance we'll do that in the future."
1:04

$AMZN CEO Andy Jassy reveals customers want Trainium chips outside AWS and says there's a real chance Amazon sells them that way. "On the question about selling Trainium, we're quite excited about what's happening in our chips business." "As I mentioned earlier, it's over $25 billion in annual revenue at this point. We think we have the leading price performance chip in both the AI space with Trainium and in the CPU space with Graviton." "The fact that we have multi-year, multi-gigawatt commitments from the two largest AI labs, Anthropic and OpenAI, and more and more companies, as I mentioned in my opening comments, using Trainium is exciting and promising." "And we just have an incredible amount of demand for Trainium. So there are a lot of customers who are very excited about using it in the form that we're providing right now." "We do have an increasing number of customers who are interested in us providing the Trainium chips to them separate from our cloud. And we're actively having those conversations and exploring. And I expect there's a real chance we'll do that in the future."

Fireside Alpha

11,669 次观看 • 24 天前

🚨OpenAI CFO speaks on AI boom and data centers “I think we are sooo in the early innings. I think a lot of prognosticators wanna call it “we’re on the sugar rush”… WE ARE NOT! more like the railroads or the build out of electricity. The internet turns out in hindsight a relatively capex light build out. I think we are just getting started! Now.. we have to do a lot to make data centers more efficient.. we need to think about new ways to power them. BUT in terms of AI, it is voracious right now for GPUs and COMPUTE. the biggest thing we face is WE ARE CONSTANTLY UNDER COMPUTE That’s why we launched Stargate. That’s why we are doing the BIGGER builds with ..Microsoft*, with ORACLE, CoreWeave and so on.. And we are just getting started!”
1:21

🚨OpenAI CFO speaks on AI boom and data centers “I think we are sooo in the early innings. I think a lot of prognosticators wanna call it “we’re on the sugar rush”… WE ARE NOT! more like the railroads or the build out of electricity. The internet turns out in hindsight a relatively capex light build out. I think we are just getting started! Now.. we have to do a lot to make data centers more efficient.. we need to think about new ways to power them. BUT in terms of AI, it is voracious right now for GPUs and COMPUTE. the biggest thing we face is WE ARE CONSTANTLY UNDER COMPUTE That’s why we launched Stargate. That’s why we are doing the BIGGER builds with ..Microsoft*, with ORACLE, CoreWeave and so on.. And we are just getting started!”

NIK

102,475 次观看 • 1 年前

Ben Horowitz on the necessity of American Dynamism at the dawn of the AI revolution: "There's really been no country in the world that comes close to America at giving people a shot." "When people have a chance to contribute, then they can have an impact. Then they can advance the state of things for everybody." "We won the industrial revolution, and we did that because we had superior technology." "And here we are on the dawn of a new technological revolution, the AI revolution." "Are we going to be able to give people a shot, and continue to advance humanity?" "I think that's an open question right now." benahorowitz.eth
2:00

Ben Horowitz on the necessity of American Dynamism at the dawn of the AI revolution: "There's really been no country in the world that comes close to America at giving people a shot." "When people have a chance to contribute, then they can have an impact. Then they can advance the state of things for everybody." "We won the industrial revolution, and we did that because we had superior technology." "And here we are on the dawn of a new technological revolution, the AI revolution." "Are we going to be able to give people a shot, and continue to advance humanity?" "I think that's an open question right now." benahorowitz.eth

David Ulevitch 🇺🇸

25,492 次观看 • 5 个月前

Sam Altman's new interview: AI should not be designed to pursue goals that are disconnected from human needs. People must remain at the center of AI development. “I have no interest in building a super-smart AI that accomplishes some non-human goals. People should react. People should say, ‘Hey, this is what I want, and this is what I do not want.’ I do not think the issue is that we have failed to explain the benefits. We say, ‘AI is going to cure a bunch of diseases,’ and people say, ‘Okay, that is great, but that is not really my question. My question is: What is my role in the future? What is my economic future? What is my agency? How do I know that my kids and my family will still be able to have fulfilling, creative expression, struggle, drive the world forward, grow, and do this thing together in a way that has worked for a long time?’ When people in AI say, ‘Sure, there are going to be no jobs,’ or ‘50% of jobs are going to go away,’ or ‘90% of jobs are going to go away,’ and ‘AI is going to be smarter than you at everything,’ and ‘We will give you some basic income, but you are not really going to have a role,’ that is horrible. And by the way, if an AI company says, ‘Maybe we are going to destroy all the jobs, and we will be the most valuable company in the world,’ people should look at you like, ‘Yeah, that is a terrible message.’ I do not think the problem is that we have not articulated the upsides. I think people actually believe us. They hear, ‘AI may cure your cancer,’ and they think, ‘That sounds great.’ I think we, as an industry, have failed to explain how people stay in control of determining the future at every step, and how people can still have a meaningful life in all the ways we care about.” ---- From "CNBC Television" YouTube channel, (link in comment)
1:28

Sam Altman's new interview: AI should not be designed to pursue goals that are disconnected from human needs. People must remain at the center of AI development. “I have no interest in building a super-smart AI that accomplishes some non-human goals. People should react. People should say, ‘Hey, this is what I want, and this is what I do not want.’ I do not think the issue is that we have failed to explain the benefits. We say, ‘AI is going to cure a bunch of diseases,’ and people say, ‘Okay, that is great, but that is not really my question. My question is: What is my role in the future? What is my economic future? What is my agency? How do I know that my kids and my family will still be able to have fulfilling, creative expression, struggle, drive the world forward, grow, and do this thing together in a way that has worked for a long time?’ When people in AI say, ‘Sure, there are going to be no jobs,’ or ‘50% of jobs are going to go away,’ or ‘90% of jobs are going to go away,’ and ‘AI is going to be smarter than you at everything,’ and ‘We will give you some basic income, but you are not really going to have a role,’ that is horrible. And by the way, if an AI company says, ‘Maybe we are going to destroy all the jobs, and we will be the most valuable company in the world,’ people should look at you like, ‘Yeah, that is a terrible message.’ I do not think the problem is that we have not articulated the upsides. I think people actually believe us. They hear, ‘AI may cure your cancer,’ and they think, ‘That sounds great.’ I think we, as an industry, have failed to explain how people stay in control of determining the future at every step, and how people can still have a meaningful life in all the ways we care about.” ---- From "CNBC Television" YouTube channel, (link in comment)

Rohan Paul

79,111 次观看 • 2 个月前

Marc Andreessen says the US is in a foot race with China in AI, and the next phase will be fought in robotics, not code. "This is a full on race. It's a foot race. It's a game of inches. We're not going to have a five year lead. We're going to have maybe a six month lead. We have to run fast. We have to win. We can't put constraints on our companies that the Chinese government isn't putting on their own companies." "Even if they never quite catch us in software, they might just lap us in hardware and that'll be that. The good news is I think there's a growing awareness... across the political spectrum in the US that de-industrialization went too far. And there's a growing desire to figure out how to reverse that." "I say I'm guardedly optimistic that we'll be making progress on that, but I think there's a lot of work to be done." Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸
2:17

Marc Andreessen says the US is in a foot race with China in AI, and the next phase will be fought in robotics, not code. "This is a full on race. It's a foot race. It's a game of inches. We're not going to have a five year lead. We're going to have maybe a six month lead. We have to run fast. We have to win. We can't put constraints on our companies that the Chinese government isn't putting on their own companies." "Even if they never quite catch us in software, they might just lap us in hardware and that'll be that. The good news is I think there's a growing awareness... across the political spectrum in the US that de-industrialization went too far. And there's a growing desire to figure out how to reverse that." "I say I'm guardedly optimistic that we'll be making progress on that, but I think there's a lot of work to be done." Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸

a16z

69,885 次观看 • 9 个月前

Dario Amodei says AI improving itself is not a moment that is coming, and he put Anthropic's internal number on how fast it is already happening: "I don't think it's a moment in time. I think it's a continuous process. We're already seeing it in some ways, where the AI is able to suggest architectures for the next AI." "I would say a year ago we were seeing 10 to 15% kind of increase in total factor productivity due to AI. Like, that's probably up to 20 or 30% now. It might be doubling. Like, as with all things, we're on the exponential." "There's no moment where AI improves itself or runs out of control or becomes unsafe. What we have is an accelerating exponential. And at each point on the exponential we have to assess, is this a time to slow down? Is this a time to put more controls on this technology? I think more and more of that is going to be required." "But I think the Rosetta Stone to all of this is the smooth exponential." "I think there's an object lesson in the people who were against all AI regulation and then they saw one thing and they wanted to nationalize. I think there's an object lesson in the people who dismissed the power of AI and then said, oh my God, it's improving itself. It's running out of control. We have to shut it all down. Yo-yoing between those extreme reactions is incredibly unhelpful as a response to this technology." "The right response, the wise response, is to say, we're not going to panic. Our countermeasures will smoothly ratchet up with the power of the technology. If you see someone having this kind of crazy yo-yo reaction, that's a sign that they were caught by surprise and that they're not serious." - Dario Amodei (Dario Amodei), CEO of Anthropic, on The Circuit with Emily Chang (Bloomberg Originals).
1:27

Dario Amodei says AI improving itself is not a moment that is coming, and he put Anthropic's internal number on how fast it is already happening: "I don't think it's a moment in time. I think it's a continuous process. We're already seeing it in some ways, where the AI is able to suggest architectures for the next AI." "I would say a year ago we were seeing 10 to 15% kind of increase in total factor productivity due to AI. Like, that's probably up to 20 or 30% now. It might be doubling. Like, as with all things, we're on the exponential." "There's no moment where AI improves itself or runs out of control or becomes unsafe. What we have is an accelerating exponential. And at each point on the exponential we have to assess, is this a time to slow down? Is this a time to put more controls on this technology? I think more and more of that is going to be required." "But I think the Rosetta Stone to all of this is the smooth exponential." "I think there's an object lesson in the people who were against all AI regulation and then they saw one thing and they wanted to nationalize. I think there's an object lesson in the people who dismissed the power of AI and then said, oh my God, it's improving itself. It's running out of control. We have to shut it all down. Yo-yoing between those extreme reactions is incredibly unhelpful as a response to this technology." "The right response, the wise response, is to say, we're not going to panic. Our countermeasures will smoothly ratchet up with the power of the technology. If you see someone having this kind of crazy yo-yo reaction, that's a sign that they were caught by surprise and that they're not serious." - Dario Amodei (Dario Amodei), CEO of Anthropic, on The Circuit with Emily Chang (Bloomberg Originals).

Karl Mehta

50,718 次观看 • 1 个月前

.Scott Wu to Joe Lonsdale on why Cognition uses AI in job interviews: "One or two years ago, people had this mentality of 'How do we make sure people aren't using AI while we're interviewing them?' And I think that has totally flipped. Honestly, I think that was wrong... If you're asking the question of like, how do we evaluate people on exactly the thing that AI can already do, that seems kind of the wrong. Our interview process has always been... you can use as much AI as you want to use. We're going to give you a few hours. Just build your whole own product surface. A lot of these are projects that, frankly, is like, if you were trying to do this by hand, you would not be able to get done in a few hours. So you kind of have to use AI for this. But in reality, what we actually want to test is, in addition to how familiar you are with these tools, what we actually want to test is, what do you think is the right thing to build? Or how do you make these product decisions? How do you make these trade-offs? How do you decide or collect information about what you should be doing?"
0:58

.Scott Wu to Joe Lonsdale on why Cognition uses AI in job interviews: "One or two years ago, people had this mentality of 'How do we make sure people aren't using AI while we're interviewing them?' And I think that has totally flipped. Honestly, I think that was wrong... If you're asking the question of like, how do we evaluate people on exactly the thing that AI can already do, that seems kind of the wrong. Our interview process has always been... you can use as much AI as you want to use. We're going to give you a few hours. Just build your whole own product surface. A lot of these are projects that, frankly, is like, if you were trying to do this by hand, you would not be able to get done in a few hours. So you kind of have to use AI for this. But in reality, what we actually want to test is, in addition to how familiar you are with these tools, what we actually want to test is, what do you think is the right thing to build? Or how do you make these product decisions? How do you make these trade-offs? How do you decide or collect information about what you should be doing?"

American Optimist

13,182 次观看 • 4 个月前

"I think among a lot of Democrats there's this kind of what psychologists would call 'learned helplessness' where you just think, 'Well we can't do anything about it. We have to wait till 2029' ... In New York with some people it's just like, 'Well we just have to do our things in New York and not worry about the rest of the country.' It does not work that way. We are one country. Our democracy can rise or fall on what this man is doing. And, it's not just our democracy. ... It directly affects our lives. The stability of our economy depends on the belief in the rule of law that people think we have a stable legal system, and it's hard to believe that today"
1:26

"I think among a lot of Democrats there's this kind of what psychologists would call 'learned helplessness' where you just think, 'Well we can't do anything about it. We have to wait till 2029' ... In New York with some people it's just like, 'Well we just have to do our things in New York and not worry about the rest of the country.' It does not work that way. We are one country. Our democracy can rise or fall on what this man is doing. And, it's not just our democracy. ... It directly affects our lives. The stability of our economy depends on the belief in the rule of law that people think we have a stable legal system, and it's hard to believe that today"

George Conway ⚖️🇺🇸

80,959 次观看 • 3 个月前

Kamala Harris: We cannot despair. We cannot despair. The nature of a democracy is such that I think there's a duality. On the one hand, there's an incredible strength when our democracy is intact. An incredible strength in what it does to protect the freedoms and rights of its people. Oh, there's great strength in that. And it is very fragile. It is only as strong as our willingness to fight for it. And so that's the moment we're in. And I say do not despair because in a democracy, as long as we can keep it, in our democracy the people, every individual has the power to make a decision about what this will be. And so let's not feel powerless. Because then we have been defeated. And that's not our character as the American people. We are not one to be defeated. We rise to a moment and we stand on broad shoulders of people who have fought this fight before for our country. And in many ways let us look at the challenge then that we are being presented and not be overwhelmed by it. The baton is now in our hands, to fight for, not against, but for this country we love.
2:12

Kamala Harris: We cannot despair. We cannot despair. The nature of a democracy is such that I think there's a duality. On the one hand, there's an incredible strength when our democracy is intact. An incredible strength in what it does to protect the freedoms and rights of its people. Oh, there's great strength in that. And it is very fragile. It is only as strong as our willingness to fight for it. And so that's the moment we're in. And I say do not despair because in a democracy, as long as we can keep it, in our democracy the people, every individual has the power to make a decision about what this will be. And so let's not feel powerless. Because then we have been defeated. And that's not our character as the American people. We are not one to be defeated. We rise to a moment and we stand on broad shoulders of people who have fought this fight before for our country. And in many ways let us look at the challenge then that we are being presented and not be overwhelmed by it. The baton is now in our hands, to fight for, not against, but for this country we love.

Acyn

343,187 次观看 • 1 年前

YOKO ONO: ONOCHORD, VENICE, 2004 Yoko: The world is divided in two industries. One is the War Industry and the other is the Peace Industry. The people in the War Industry are totally together. They don't have to talk to each other, even. They know exactly what they want to do. They want to go out there, kill and make money. But the people in the Peace Industry, which are us - we are so idealistic that each one of us criticises the other Peace Person in the Peace Industry. And we are always just arguing and we are wasting our energies doing that. So let's just forgive each other and see that we are in the Peace Industry and that's all that counts. Even if you are not marching for peace, just be yourself, being a florist, being a merchant, being a talior, anything. That way you're contributing to the Peace Industry. People are just concentrating on fear, confusion and anger. And therefore just for a moment, I'd like us to think about Love. In a very magical, straight way, John and I met in London and from then on we stood for Peace and Love. And when I do this kind of event. Well it is... I was inspired to do it, but I still think that I'm still with John in spirit. John and I created the country called Nutopia. Not Utopia, because there was Utopia as a concept already. And we wanted to create a new concept, so we just added N on it - Nutopia - and as a country. Well, that is the concept of a country. And we all are citizens of that country. And in my apartment in the Dakota Building, we put a little plaque on the back door, the kitchen door. It says 'Nutopian Embassy' and even now we have that. (laughs). Nutopia exists in our minds. And because of that, some people want to rebel against it. The reason some want to rebel against it is a good proof that it exists. I think that it was a terrible thing that happened in Chechnya. But we have to still keep our hopes up. And instead of giving up, we have to keep on sending the message of Love to each other. You say that I am the Ambassador of Peace. We are all Ambassadors of Peace. You are too. Everybody in this room are Ambassadors of Peace. Just the fact that we are not participating in War. The fact that we are here, and we are what we are, means that we are in the Peace Industry. All of us. John and I used to say that our apartment in the Dakota is a conceptual monastry, just for the two of us. And when we go out of the Dakota, we get so many people communicating with us, so it's very important that we had silence and quietness. And my apartment is a very small space compared to the world. And I need that for my peace of mind. You should be kind to each other. You should come together, hug each other, love each other, express our love to each other and we should make it work. We should finally create a world that is a totally an Earth for Us. So let's do it. Yoko Ono, OpenAsia Press Conference, whilst exhibiting Onochord, 2004 by Yoko Ono (Nutopia) at the Venice Biennale: OpenAsia 2004, Lido Di Venezia, Venice, Italy, 9 September 2004.
9:13

YOKO ONO: ONOCHORD, VENICE, 2004 Yoko: The world is divided in two industries. One is the War Industry and the other is the Peace Industry. The people in the War Industry are totally together. They don't have to talk to each other, even. They know exactly what they want to do. They want to go out there, kill and make money. But the people in the Peace Industry, which are us - we are so idealistic that each one of us criticises the other Peace Person in the Peace Industry. And we are always just arguing and we are wasting our energies doing that. So let's just forgive each other and see that we are in the Peace Industry and that's all that counts. Even if you are not marching for peace, just be yourself, being a florist, being a merchant, being a talior, anything. That way you're contributing to the Peace Industry. People are just concentrating on fear, confusion and anger. And therefore just for a moment, I'd like us to think about Love. In a very magical, straight way, John and I met in London and from then on we stood for Peace and Love. And when I do this kind of event. Well it is... I was inspired to do it, but I still think that I'm still with John in spirit. John and I created the country called Nutopia. Not Utopia, because there was Utopia as a concept already. And we wanted to create a new concept, so we just added N on it - Nutopia - and as a country. Well, that is the concept of a country. And we all are citizens of that country. And in my apartment in the Dakota Building, we put a little plaque on the back door, the kitchen door. It says 'Nutopian Embassy' and even now we have that. (laughs). Nutopia exists in our minds. And because of that, some people want to rebel against it. The reason some want to rebel against it is a good proof that it exists. I think that it was a terrible thing that happened in Chechnya. But we have to still keep our hopes up. And instead of giving up, we have to keep on sending the message of Love to each other. You say that I am the Ambassador of Peace. We are all Ambassadors of Peace. You are too. Everybody in this room are Ambassadors of Peace. Just the fact that we are not participating in War. The fact that we are here, and we are what we are, means that we are in the Peace Industry. All of us. John and I used to say that our apartment in the Dakota is a conceptual monastry, just for the two of us. And when we go out of the Dakota, we get so many people communicating with us, so it's very important that we had silence and quietness. And my apartment is a very small space compared to the world. And I need that for my peace of mind. You should be kind to each other. You should come together, hug each other, love each other, express our love to each other and we should make it work. We should finally create a world that is a totally an Earth for Us. So let's do it. Yoko Ono, OpenAsia Press Conference, whilst exhibiting Onochord, 2004 by Yoko Ono (Nutopia) at the Venice Biennale: OpenAsia 2004, Lido Di Venezia, Venice, Italy, 9 September 2004.

Yoko Ono

35,208 次观看 • 2 年前

David Sacks: “FDA for AI” is fake news, but here’s why it’s making headlines @jason: “ Who's leading Trump down the path of regulation and creating this AI FDA?” David Sacks: “I think there's several things going on here. The first one is, there's a lot of fake news. This whole idea of an FDA for AI, I don't think any senior official supports it. Certainly, I don't think that's the way the president thinks about these issues. He's the most pro-innovation president we've ever had. And the White House Chief of Staff, Susie Wiles, just put out a statement last night that I think pretty much shoots this down. Second, there's another thing going on, which is a straw manning of what the Trump administration did on AI in its first year. In the same way that they want to spin this FDA for AI, they're also trying to spin what we did as this completely laissez-faire attitude, where there'd be no regulations whatsoever, nor guardrails. It's a way of criticizing what we did. They're trying to portray it as unsafe. In fact, if you look, on March 20th, the White House released a national AI regulatory framework in which we put out a four-page bulleted list of legislation that we would support. So we have not been against every conceivable regulation or every conceivable law, we just believe that there should be specific solutions to specific problems, as opposed to a giant power grab by Washington that would squash innovation. Point number three is, there is a legitimate thing happening here with, let's call it Mythos or cyber. Within 3-6 months, all the major frontier labs, including Chinese models, will have cyber capabilities. In response to that, we do need there to be a hardening of systems, and we do need there to be a scanning of codebases to find these vulnerabilities and patch them before the hackers do it. Because the hackers will have these capabilities in a matter of months. That's a certainty. So we do need a response to that. Now, my view on what should that response be, first of all, we should want the government and the private sector to work cooperatively, and I think they are. What we should be doing, I think, is getting these tools, Mythos, and then the OpenAI model, and others like it, in the hands of our cybersecurity industry. And by the way, not just the public companies like Palo Alto Networks and CrowdStrike, although certainly they're two of the most noteworthy, but there's also some incredibly strong startups on the way up. We need to get these tools into their hands as quickly as possible because they're a force multiplier for all the companies out there that aren't that good at cybersecurity, they can use these companies as vendors. And just one last point on this whole thing is, both Anthropic and OpenAI acted responsibly here. No one was trying to release these super powerful models. So in a way, all the people who are saying that we need pre-release approvals for models, they're trying to solve a problem that didn't exist. Yes, we do have this cyber issue, but that is a problem that we will solve over the next six months. What they're trying to do is use that issue to try and create a permanent new infrastructure in Washington. The classic 'never let a crisis go to waste' strategy.”
2:47

David Sacks: “FDA for AI” is fake news, but here’s why it’s making headlines @jason: “ Who's leading Trump down the path of regulation and creating this AI FDA?” David Sacks: “I think there's several things going on here. The first one is, there's a lot of fake news. This whole idea of an FDA for AI, I don't think any senior official supports it. Certainly, I don't think that's the way the president thinks about these issues. He's the most pro-innovation president we've ever had. And the White House Chief of Staff, Susie Wiles, just put out a statement last night that I think pretty much shoots this down. Second, there's another thing going on, which is a straw manning of what the Trump administration did on AI in its first year. In the same way that they want to spin this FDA for AI, they're also trying to spin what we did as this completely laissez-faire attitude, where there'd be no regulations whatsoever, nor guardrails. It's a way of criticizing what we did. They're trying to portray it as unsafe. In fact, if you look, on March 20th, the White House released a national AI regulatory framework in which we put out a four-page bulleted list of legislation that we would support. So we have not been against every conceivable regulation or every conceivable law, we just believe that there should be specific solutions to specific problems, as opposed to a giant power grab by Washington that would squash innovation. Point number three is, there is a legitimate thing happening here with, let's call it Mythos or cyber. Within 3-6 months, all the major frontier labs, including Chinese models, will have cyber capabilities. In response to that, we do need there to be a hardening of systems, and we do need there to be a scanning of codebases to find these vulnerabilities and patch them before the hackers do it. Because the hackers will have these capabilities in a matter of months. That's a certainty. So we do need a response to that. Now, my view on what should that response be, first of all, we should want the government and the private sector to work cooperatively, and I think they are. What we should be doing, I think, is getting these tools, Mythos, and then the OpenAI model, and others like it, in the hands of our cybersecurity industry. And by the way, not just the public companies like Palo Alto Networks and CrowdStrike, although certainly they're two of the most noteworthy, but there's also some incredibly strong startups on the way up. We need to get these tools into their hands as quickly as possible because they're a force multiplier for all the companies out there that aren't that good at cybersecurity, they can use these companies as vendors. And just one last point on this whole thing is, both Anthropic and OpenAI acted responsibly here. No one was trying to release these super powerful models. So in a way, all the people who are saying that we need pre-release approvals for models, they're trying to solve a problem that didn't exist. Yes, we do have this cyber issue, but that is a problem that we will solve over the next six months. What they're trying to do is use that issue to try and create a permanent new infrastructure in Washington. The classic 'never let a crisis go to waste' strategy.”

The All-In Podcast

150,106 次观看 • 3 个月前

Sam Altman: “Concentration of power with AI is a terrifying thing.” "A lot of the talk about safety concerns is well-founded, and then a lot of it is about people that just really, even if it's slightly subconscious, wanna concentrate power. I don't think anyone should want to live in a world of AI overlords, where someone is making decisions for all of the future, and in exchange for a cure for cancer, which obviously is a wonderful thing, we collectively cede all agency. I am terrified of a world where the very real fears of AI are used as a way to say, “Only this small group of people can have it because it's too dangerous, and only they understand it. But don't worry, they're gonna make the right decisions for all of us.” I was a child of the internet. There were no rules. It was amazing, and I think it's critical we preserve that spirit with AI."
1:17

Sam Altman: “Concentration of power with AI is a terrifying thing.” "A lot of the talk about safety concerns is well-founded, and then a lot of it is about people that just really, even if it's slightly subconscious, wanna concentrate power. I don't think anyone should want to live in a world of AI overlords, where someone is making decisions for all of the future, and in exchange for a cure for cancer, which obviously is a wonderful thing, we collectively cede all agency. I am terrified of a world where the very real fears of AI are used as a way to say, “Only this small group of people can have it because it's too dangerous, and only they understand it. But don't worry, they're gonna make the right decisions for all of us.” I was a child of the internet. There were no rules. It was amazing, and I think it's critical we preserve that spirit with AI."

Patrick OShaughnessy

67,444 次观看 • 29 天前

.carried_no_interest says the rumors that enterprise customers are no longer signing up for 3-year contracts — combined with "adjacency in the market map" — is way more of a threat to software private equity than vibe coding: "The entire basis of software PE being one of the best private market categories was that you had enterprise customers with 3-year contracts." "If every other enterprise customer says, 'AI is just so amazing now, and we don't know where we're going to be, and what it's going to look like, so we're only doing 1-year deals,' that has much bigger implications than someone vibecoding a Notion clone on a Sunday. That's a big deal." "And I think the reason they're doing that — and this is the bigger threat to a lot of these companies — is the adjacency in the market map." "If you look like Rippling, and you have a very talented group of people like their employees, they can attack so many parts of the HR platform space now that they simply couldn't 3 years ago." "That's a lot scarier than vibe coding, than somebody just whipping up [a clone] and going out with a bunch of cold emails. It's the adjacency threats in the market map. Because now, who's Rippling going to go after?"
1:37

.carried_no_interest says the rumors that enterprise customers are no longer signing up for 3-year contracts — combined with "adjacency in the market map" — is way more of a threat to software private equity than vibe coding: "The entire basis of software PE being one of the best private market categories was that you had enterprise customers with 3-year contracts." "If every other enterprise customer says, 'AI is just so amazing now, and we don't know where we're going to be, and what it's going to look like, so we're only doing 1-year deals,' that has much bigger implications than someone vibecoding a Notion clone on a Sunday. That's a big deal." "And I think the reason they're doing that — and this is the bigger threat to a lot of these companies — is the adjacency in the market map." "If you look like Rippling, and you have a very talented group of people like their employees, they can attack so many parts of the HR platform space now that they simply couldn't 3 years ago." "That's a lot scarier than vibe coding, than somebody just whipping up [a clone] and going out with a bunch of cold emails. It's the adjacency threats in the market map. Because now, who's Rippling going to go after?"

TBPN

18,851 次观看 • 5 个月前

ELON MUSK: We believe the AI5 chip will be roughly comparable performance to an NVIDIA Blackwell, and at much less than 10% of the cost Transcription: I'm super hardcore on chips right now as you may be able to tell. I have chips on the brain. I dream about chips, Literally! Because in order to have a functional robot, you have to have a great AI chip. And it needs to be an inexpensive chip and it needs to be very power efficient So we think we believe the AI5 chip will be probably about a third of the power of say something like a Blackwell, an NVIDIA Blackwell, which is a great chip, for roughly comparable performance. And much less than 10% of the cost. This is a chip that is very much optimized for the Tesla AI software stack. So it's not meant to be a general purpose chip, it's meant to be an amazing chip for the Tesla AI software And I mean a couple of things that I think make... like how is Tesla able to achieve such an improvement? I think it is because we are specialized. We're not trying to... you know, NVIDIA has to serve the superset of all past and future customers. So all of their requirements, all of the software that they've written has to work, which is a very difficult problem. Whereas we just need to make it work for our software. And so we're able to simplify the chip dramatically And then we also, I think we're unique in this, but like we have an integer-based system. And integer operations are fundamentally more efficient than floating point operations. So we can do floating point, but the vast majority of our inference is done in integer. Which is, if you're familiar with sort of logic gates, the simplicity of integer... it's integer is much more power efficient, much more silicon efficient, but you have to, you actually have to train for integer inference, which everyone else is training for floating point. That's kind of like a niche technical detail, but it's actually very important. So, yeah, this is going to be a great chip So this chip will be made in basically in four places: TSMC Taiwan, Samsung Korea, TSMC Arizona, and TSMC Texas. And we already know what improvements to make for AI6. So I'm hopeful that we can within less than a year of AI5 starting production, we can actually transition in the same fab to AI6 and double all of the performance metrics
3:12

ELON MUSK: We believe the AI5 chip will be roughly comparable performance to an NVIDIA Blackwell, and at much less than 10% of the cost Transcription: I'm super hardcore on chips right now as you may be able to tell. I have chips on the brain. I dream about chips, Literally! Because in order to have a functional robot, you have to have a great AI chip. And it needs to be an inexpensive chip and it needs to be very power efficient So we think we believe the AI5 chip will be probably about a third of the power of say something like a Blackwell, an NVIDIA Blackwell, which is a great chip, for roughly comparable performance. And much less than 10% of the cost. This is a chip that is very much optimized for the Tesla AI software stack. So it's not meant to be a general purpose chip, it's meant to be an amazing chip for the Tesla AI software And I mean a couple of things that I think make... like how is Tesla able to achieve such an improvement? I think it is because we are specialized. We're not trying to... you know, NVIDIA has to serve the superset of all past and future customers. So all of their requirements, all of the software that they've written has to work, which is a very difficult problem. Whereas we just need to make it work for our software. And so we're able to simplify the chip dramatically And then we also, I think we're unique in this, but like we have an integer-based system. And integer operations are fundamentally more efficient than floating point operations. So we can do floating point, but the vast majority of our inference is done in integer. Which is, if you're familiar with sort of logic gates, the simplicity of integer... it's integer is much more power efficient, much more silicon efficient, but you have to, you actually have to train for integer inference, which everyone else is training for floating point. That's kind of like a niche technical detail, but it's actually very important. So, yeah, this is going to be a great chip So this chip will be made in basically in four places: TSMC Taiwan, Samsung Korea, TSMC Arizona, and TSMC Texas. And we already know what improvements to make for AI6. So I'm hopeful that we can within less than a year of AI5 starting production, we can actually transition in the same fab to AI6 and double all of the performance metrics

X Freeze

305,109 次观看 • 9 个月前