Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

David Sacks: Everything Kathy Hochul Said About Datacenters Was a False Accusation David Sacks: “These data centers become the scapegoat for all of the angst that people have about AI. Everything she's saying there is a false accusation on datacenters. So let's just go one by one.” POWER: So...

theallinpod's profile picture

The All-In Podcast

588,207 subscribers

111,447 просмотров • 1 месяц назад •via X (Twitter)

Наука и технологииНовости и политика
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

David Sacks dismantles Hochul’s data center myths: • Power: Build behind the meter. AI companies can become power companies • Land: Extremely efficient with massive ROI; America has plenty of open space • Noise: Overblown, easily fixed with distance • Water: Hoax — closed loop systems use less than In-N-Out or almonds • Jobs & Taxes: Big tax revenue, construction boom + ongoing jobs • Pollution: Powered by clean natural gas David Sacks “When you compare economic impact to all these different things, data centers are one of the best things we could be building as a nation. These data centers have become the scapegoat for all the angst about AI.” @jason “All I have to say is, Welcome to Texas.” Should states be welcoming or blocking data centers?
3:11

David Sacks dismantles Hochul’s data center myths: • Power: Build behind the meter. AI companies can become power companies • Land: Extremely efficient with massive ROI; America has plenty of open space • Noise: Overblown, easily fixed with distance • Water: Hoax — closed loop systems use less than In-N-Out or almonds • Jobs & Taxes: Big tax revenue, construction boom + ongoing jobs • Pollution: Powered by clean natural gas David Sacks “When you compare economic impact to all these different things, data centers are one of the best things we could be building as a nation. These data centers have become the scapegoat for all the angst about AI.” @jason “All I have to say is, Welcome to Texas.” Should states be welcoming or blocking data centers?

jay plemons

36,080 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

David Sacks Responds to Kathy Hochul’s Moratorium on Data Centers “Everything she's saying is a false accusation on the data center … These data centers have become the scapegoat for all of the angst that people have about AI.”
3:21

David Sacks Responds to Kathy Hochul’s Moratorium on Data Centers “Everything she's saying is a false accusation on the data center … These data centers have become the scapegoat for all of the angst that people have about AI.”

Chief Nerd

50,049 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

SITUATION EXPLAINED: The anti-data center movement is trying to solve problems that don't exist. Adrian Dittmann: "There are a lot of misunderstandings around what exactly these things are, their environmental impact, why they even have an impact at all." "There's a neighborhood complaining about generator noise. But they actually requested the data center not connect to the local power infrastructure. So now the company has to run generators. The people complaining about the noise created the noise." "The water problem, people don't understand that these are self-contained systems and that these issues are largely 10 to 20 years old. Many of these issues do not even apply anymore." "You can even look this up yourself. The price for electricity because of data center construction has actually gone down because it has forced the energy companies to actually improve the infrastructure, improve the power grid." "Same thing happened with EVs. They said if there's gonna be a million EVs, there's going to be a collapse of the energy infrastructure. You have millions of EVs now. Nothing collapsed."
3:41

SITUATION EXPLAINED: The anti-data center movement is trying to solve problems that don't exist. Adrian Dittmann: "There are a lot of misunderstandings around what exactly these things are, their environmental impact, why they even have an impact at all." "There's a neighborhood complaining about generator noise. But they actually requested the data center not connect to the local power infrastructure. So now the company has to run generators. The people complaining about the noise created the noise." "The water problem, people don't understand that these are self-contained systems and that these issues are largely 10 to 20 years old. Many of these issues do not even apply anymore." "You can even look this up yourself. The price for electricity because of data center construction has actually gone down because it has forced the energy companies to actually improve the infrastructure, improve the power grid." "Same thing happened with EVs. They said if there's gonna be a million EVs, there's going to be a collapse of the energy infrastructure. You have millions of EVs now. Nothing collapsed."

MTS

13,833 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

David Friedberg: “ What if we could make all residential electricity free in the United States?” “We consume, in this country, about 4 trillion kilowatt hours of electricity.” “1/3 of that, $250B, is residential consumption.” “2/3 of that, $500B, is industrial and commercial consumption.” “Theoretically, you could increase the price on industrial and commercial consumption by ~50% and make all residential electricity in the United States free.” “And then on the commercial and industrial side, the reason you would then have an incentive to build private power systems would be that you can bring your costs down.” “And instead of centralizing all of this with the utilities, what it can do is it can force a market demand for industrial and commercial users to build their own power systems, which would increase overall electricity supply in the United States.” “The data centers are the tip of the iceberg, but if you make this a pan industrial problem, then all of the industrial companies would have to take this path.”
0:59

David Friedberg: “ What if we could make all residential electricity free in the United States?” “We consume, in this country, about 4 trillion kilowatt hours of electricity.” “1/3 of that, $250B, is residential consumption.” “2/3 of that, $500B, is industrial and commercial consumption.” “Theoretically, you could increase the price on industrial and commercial consumption by ~50% and make all residential electricity in the United States free.” “And then on the commercial and industrial side, the reason you would then have an incentive to build private power systems would be that you can bring your costs down.” “And instead of centralizing all of this with the utilities, what it can do is it can force a market demand for industrial and commercial users to build their own power systems, which would increase overall electricity supply in the United States.” “The data centers are the tip of the iceberg, but if you make this a pan industrial problem, then all of the industrial companies would have to take this path.”

The All-In Podcast

219,832 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

Friedberg’s Datacenter Wake-Up Call: If We Don't Build Them Here, Other Countries Will david friedberg explains why a datacenter moratorium would be a disaster for the US: The data coming in and out of datacenters moves at roughly the speed of light, so you could put them anywhere. And I think that our policymakers need to be very cognizant of that fact. You have, and we do, connect to the internet using high speed cable, high speed fiber optic throughout the world, and so theoretically, if we don't embrace and allow the economic development of the datacenter industry, and it will fundamentally be an industry because it is almost like the new oil, if we don't put them here, someone else will put them on their shores. Someone else will put them in their country, someone else will put them in their jurisdiction, and a lot of the economic value that arises from the people that will build those facilities, the energy that will be installed to produce power for those facilities, and then all of the second and third order industries that emerge as a result of those installations, that value will accrue elsewhere. The demand is there. The economy's moving forward, AI's moving forward. Datacenters do not take up a lot of space. They're very small relative to the economic value that they produce. If you zoom out on the map of the world, all the datacenters in the world fit under the tip of a pin, and so this is a very small footprint. If we're going to give up hundreds of thousands of jobs and many billions of dollars of economic value creation, we're being pretty silly and pretty obtuse in our view of the world. Provided datacenters are producing their own electricity, that means that you're taking electricity consumption off the grid because they otherwise are not being used on the grid, and that will reduce the cost of electricity for other residential and industrial users. So it's silly to think that we need to put a moratorium on datacenters. As soon as you do that, the companies that use datacenters are not going to slow down. They're going to go put them somewhere else, and we're going to miss out.
1:47

Friedberg’s Datacenter Wake-Up Call: If We Don't Build Them Here, Other Countries Will david friedberg explains why a datacenter moratorium would be a disaster for the US: The data coming in and out of datacenters moves at roughly the speed of light, so you could put them anywhere. And I think that our policymakers need to be very cognizant of that fact. You have, and we do, connect to the internet using high speed cable, high speed fiber optic throughout the world, and so theoretically, if we don't embrace and allow the economic development of the datacenter industry, and it will fundamentally be an industry because it is almost like the new oil, if we don't put them here, someone else will put them on their shores. Someone else will put them in their country, someone else will put them in their jurisdiction, and a lot of the economic value that arises from the people that will build those facilities, the energy that will be installed to produce power for those facilities, and then all of the second and third order industries that emerge as a result of those installations, that value will accrue elsewhere. The demand is there. The economy's moving forward, AI's moving forward. Datacenters do not take up a lot of space. They're very small relative to the economic value that they produce. If you zoom out on the map of the world, all the datacenters in the world fit under the tip of a pin, and so this is a very small footprint. If we're going to give up hundreds of thousands of jobs and many billions of dollars of economic value creation, we're being pretty silly and pretty obtuse in our view of the world. Provided datacenters are producing their own electricity, that means that you're taking electricity consumption off the grid because they otherwise are not being used on the grid, and that will reduce the cost of electricity for other residential and industrial users. So it's silly to think that we need to put a moratorium on datacenters. As soon as you do that, the companies that use datacenters are not going to slow down. They're going to go put them somewhere else, and we're going to miss out.

The All-In Podcast

89,358 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

🔥 David Sacks Says Trump’s New AI Pledge Could Lower Electric Bills for Americans “The President has said that he's committed to not allowing residential rates to go up as a result of data centers … What you're going to see is that it could actually bring down consumer prices because … when these data centers set up their own power and connect to the grid, they can give back the excess to the grid.”
2:06

🔥 David Sacks Says Trump’s New AI Pledge Could Lower Electric Bills for Americans “The President has said that he's committed to not allowing residential rates to go up as a result of data centers … What you're going to see is that it could actually bring down consumer prices because … when these data centers set up their own power and connect to the grid, they can give back the excess to the grid.”

Chief Nerd

41,519 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

David Sacks: NO Federal Bailout for AI – “Build out, not bailout” “My entire feed was full of comments saying that we can't allow OpenAI to have a federal bailout.” “Look, there's not gonna be a federal bailout for AI, not gonna happen.” “We have five major frontier model companies right now, and there are new companies being formed all the time.” “And if one of them fails, hey, it's gonna go out of business and the other ones are gonna replace it.” “So nobody is talking about a bailout.” “I do think that we want to make it easier to build infrastructure in this country.” “And that means making permitting easier, making power generation easier. That's all about regulatory reform.” “And I think that the goal here is to enable a rapid infrastructure build out without increasing residential rates for electricity, that's the thing we have to combat.” “But the way that you solve that problem is by making it easier for these AI companies to stand up their own power generation behind the meter, and that requires regulatory reform. That's what the president has called for.” “So no one's talking about a bailout. We are talking about making permitting easier, and making it easier to do build outs.” “So ‘Build out, not bailout’ should be our motto here.”
1:07

David Sacks: NO Federal Bailout for AI – “Build out, not bailout” “My entire feed was full of comments saying that we can't allow OpenAI to have a federal bailout.” “Look, there's not gonna be a federal bailout for AI, not gonna happen.” “We have five major frontier model companies right now, and there are new companies being formed all the time.” “And if one of them fails, hey, it's gonna go out of business and the other ones are gonna replace it.” “So nobody is talking about a bailout.” “I do think that we want to make it easier to build infrastructure in this country.” “And that means making permitting easier, making power generation easier. That's all about regulatory reform.” “And I think that the goal here is to enable a rapid infrastructure build out without increasing residential rates for electricity, that's the thing we have to combat.” “But the way that you solve that problem is by making it easier for these AI companies to stand up their own power generation behind the meter, and that requires regulatory reform. That's what the president has called for.” “So no one's talking about a bailout. We are talking about making permitting easier, and making it easier to do build outs.” “So ‘Build out, not bailout’ should be our motto here.”

The All-In Podcast

115,786 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад

The billionaires want to turn us into a subscription economy--where the workers own nothing, and the Greedy Few own everything. That's one of the reasons why they're building so many #DataCenters. I'm not giving up our land, water, air quality, and power just so that they can turn us all into permanent subscribers just to live. Join us to fight back >>
0:35

The billionaires want to turn us into a subscription economy--where the workers own nothing, and the Greedy Few own everything. That's one of the reasons why they're building so many #DataCenters. I'm not giving up our land, water, air quality, and power just so that they can turn us all into permanent subscribers just to live. Join us to fight back >>

Clayton Tucker

23,108 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

Elon Musk explains the Kardashev Scale: "That's the most objective metric that any alien species, say, visiting us would calibrate how much progress we've made as a civilization, and one of the most objective ways to do that is the amount of power that any given civilization has been able to harness, and there was a Russian physicist, actually, who thought about this, and it's, I think, it's a good way to characterize it, which is you can have, you can assess how well a civilization is harnessing the power available on the planet, that's type I. And then type II would be how much of the star's power are you harnessing, and then type III would be how much of the galaxy's power are you harnessing. These are very objective and measurable numbers, so right now we're very low on the Kardashev I scale, like, what proportion of our planet's power are we harnessing, it's a very, very tiny number, and basically we're harnessing almost nothing of our stars' power, so the sun is truly an immense state. We don't even know how to do level III, really. AI will figure it out. One way to appreciate the size of the sun is to think about how heavy is the sun compared to all the rest of the mass in the solar system. So, the sun is about 99.86% of all mass in the solar system. It's everything, and then all the remaining 1.14% most of that is Jupiter, one planet."
2:39

Elon Musk explains the Kardashev Scale: "That's the most objective metric that any alien species, say, visiting us would calibrate how much progress we've made as a civilization, and one of the most objective ways to do that is the amount of power that any given civilization has been able to harness, and there was a Russian physicist, actually, who thought about this, and it's, I think, it's a good way to characterize it, which is you can have, you can assess how well a civilization is harnessing the power available on the planet, that's type I. And then type II would be how much of the star's power are you harnessing, and then type III would be how much of the galaxy's power are you harnessing. These are very objective and measurable numbers, so right now we're very low on the Kardashev I scale, like, what proportion of our planet's power are we harnessing, it's a very, very tiny number, and basically we're harnessing almost nothing of our stars' power, so the sun is truly an immense state. We don't even know how to do level III, really. AI will figure it out. One way to appreciate the size of the sun is to think about how heavy is the sun compared to all the rest of the mass in the solar system. So, the sun is about 99.86% of all mass in the solar system. It's everything, and then all the remaining 1.14% most of that is Jupiter, one planet."

DogeDesigner

53,650 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

AOC: And what are they asking for now? Endless energy. These companies are so desperate to profit from the AI boom that they are racing to construct thousands of giant AI data centers, jacking up utility costs for everyday Americans to pay for them. These data centers power thousands of high-intensity computer chips that are processing constantly and require massive amounts of energy to operate. Just one hyperscale data center consumes the same amount of energy in one second as 100,000 households. Because of this massive energy use, power and water utility companies must build multibillion-dollar infrastructure to keep up with the demand.
1:31

AOC: And what are they asking for now? Endless energy. These companies are so desperate to profit from the AI boom that they are racing to construct thousands of giant AI data centers, jacking up utility costs for everyday Americans to pay for them. These data centers power thousands of high-intensity computer chips that are processing constantly and require massive amounts of energy to operate. Just one hyperscale data center consumes the same amount of energy in one second as 100,000 households. Because of this massive energy use, power and water utility companies must build multibillion-dollar infrastructure to keep up with the demand.

Acyn

35,659 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

I’m the only developer of data centers on earth that graduated from environmental studies. I'm pretty aware of what these concerns are. They are around air, water use, heat, noise pollution. So sustainability is at the heart of what we do in terms of all these proposals. We search for the best technology. There's many air-cooled turbines now, so you're blending in air-cooled versus water. There's so many different ways to generate power. We can also put a percentage of the power generation through solar, wind, and batteries because the battery technology is 10X more efficient than it was just five years ago. So that's very helpful because it makes the cost of energy lower.
1:46

I’m the only developer of data centers on earth that graduated from environmental studies. I'm pretty aware of what these concerns are. They are around air, water use, heat, noise pollution. So sustainability is at the heart of what we do in terms of all these proposals. We search for the best technology. There's many air-cooled turbines now, so you're blending in air-cooled versus water. There's so many different ways to generate power. We can also put a percentage of the power generation through solar, wind, and batteries because the battery technology is 10X more efficient than it was just five years ago. So that's very helpful because it makes the cost of energy lower.

Kevin O'Leary aka Mr. Wonderful

1,387,611 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

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.”
1:52

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 просмотров • 22 дней назад

"If you have ambitions to be a Professor at Yale, Harvard, or one of these big institutions, the way you do that is mostly by getting funding for research. It's by getting a lot of publishing - a lot flying around the world to talk about something. You need all of these things to bolster your reputation as an international expert in this area. Now, the best way to do that, at least in psychiatry but I suspect in other areas of medicine, is actually to collaborate with pharmaceutical companies to run clinical trials. They write the publications for you - most of it, they do a lot of the grunt work, they give you the protocols, and then, essentially, they fund you and fly you around the place. I used to remember, as a junior doctor, looking up to the Professors. And they would say, 'These drugs are safe and effective. There's not a lot of problems there.' ...What I've seen more and more is that they've been compromised, and that they have incentives tied to the money and to career advancement. That means that they can't be as forthright as they ought to be about these things. And it's gotten to a problem where these are the Professors who are training the doctors who are setting the tone for what is acceptable care out there. And I think that's one of the biggest problems out there." - @taperclinic
7:15

"If you have ambitions to be a Professor at Yale, Harvard, or one of these big institutions, the way you do that is mostly by getting funding for research. It's by getting a lot of publishing - a lot flying around the world to talk about something. You need all of these things to bolster your reputation as an international expert in this area. Now, the best way to do that, at least in psychiatry but I suspect in other areas of medicine, is actually to collaborate with pharmaceutical companies to run clinical trials. They write the publications for you - most of it, they do a lot of the grunt work, they give you the protocols, and then, essentially, they fund you and fly you around the place. I used to remember, as a junior doctor, looking up to the Professors. And they would say, 'These drugs are safe and effective. There's not a lot of problems there.' ...What I've seen more and more is that they've been compromised, and that they have incentives tied to the money and to career advancement. That means that they can't be as forthright as they ought to be about these things. And it's gotten to a problem where these are the Professors who are training the doctors who are setting the tone for what is acceptable care out there. And I think that's one of the biggest problems out there." - @taperclinic

Jan Jekielek

43,499 просмотров • 1 год назад

ELON: WE MUST PUT AN END TO THE TYRANNY OF THE BUREAUCRACY “In order for us to be a true democracy, a functioning democracy, the government must be responsive to the people. That's literally what democracy means. However, when you have a vast unelected bureaucracy that is not answerable to the public, and if the elected officials, the President, the people in Congress and the Senate, if they don't have the power to affect the bureaucracy — and it's actually extremely difficult to affect the bureaucracy — then you do not have rule of the people. Then, you do not have democracy, but you have rule of the bureau — bureaucracy. And this is obviously wrong. It is unconstitutional, and it is imperative, therefore, that we return power to the people of the country and not have tyranny of the bureaucracy, which we most definitely have had to a degree that is absurd. It's not just that there's an unconstitutional fourth branch of the government, but it is arguably the most powerful branch of the government.” Source: DOGE update on 𝕏 Spaces, February 2025
0:58

ELON: WE MUST PUT AN END TO THE TYRANNY OF THE BUREAUCRACY “In order for us to be a true democracy, a functioning democracy, the government must be responsive to the people. That's literally what democracy means. However, when you have a vast unelected bureaucracy that is not answerable to the public, and if the elected officials, the President, the people in Congress and the Senate, if they don't have the power to affect the bureaucracy — and it's actually extremely difficult to affect the bureaucracy — then you do not have rule of the people. Then, you do not have democracy, but you have rule of the bureau — bureaucracy. And this is obviously wrong. It is unconstitutional, and it is imperative, therefore, that we return power to the people of the country and not have tyranny of the bureaucracy, which we most definitely have had to a degree that is absurd. It's not just that there's an unconstitutional fourth branch of the government, but it is arguably the most powerful branch of the government.” Source: DOGE update on 𝕏 Spaces, February 2025

Mario Nawfal

1,738,823 просмотров • 1 год назад

I think the fact is there are only going to be four or five of these companies that are able to raise the billions required to build the infrastructure to support these models. It's a global competition, and particularly against the Chinese right now because they're trying to beat us on AI, because the country with the best AI is gonna win all the wars. That's what's gonna happen. I think at the end of the day you want diversification in your portfolio, not just one stack. For me, I'm playing the picks and shovels. I'm building energy because you need energy for this stuff, and I'm building data centers. Now, there are different things, but right now we need more electrical power in this country beyond just data centers. We just need power because we got a booming economy.
2:33

I think the fact is there are only going to be four or five of these companies that are able to raise the billions required to build the infrastructure to support these models. It's a global competition, and particularly against the Chinese right now because they're trying to beat us on AI, because the country with the best AI is gonna win all the wars. That's what's gonna happen. I think at the end of the day you want diversification in your portfolio, not just one stack. For me, I'm playing the picks and shovels. I'm building energy because you need energy for this stuff, and I'm building data centers. Now, there are different things, but right now we need more electrical power in this country beyond just data centers. We just need power because we got a booming economy.

Kevin O'Leary aka Mr. Wonderful

13,143 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

As AI infrastructure scales, how do American's benefit? COATUE 's Thomas Laffont: "The token is the atomic unit of AI. If you produce tokens you can produce AI. We're seeing now these factories from power to chips to data centers get put together so you can produce tokens. How did you think about making sure that the benefits were widely shared?" Director Michael Kratsios : "The greatest and most powerful well-capitalized companies in the world are the ones that are most interested in building these data centers." "The President brought the companies to the White House and got them to agree to build, bring, or buy their own power to build these data centers." "The American people need to have confidence that when these data centers come to town they will not be the ones who are gonna be bearing the cost of that electricity." The Hill & Valley Forum 2026 The Hill & Valley Forum COATUE White House OSTP 47
2:42

As AI infrastructure scales, how do American's benefit? COATUE 's Thomas Laffont: "The token is the atomic unit of AI. If you produce tokens you can produce AI. We're seeing now these factories from power to chips to data centers get put together so you can produce tokens. How did you think about making sure that the benefits were widely shared?" Director Michael Kratsios : "The greatest and most powerful well-capitalized companies in the world are the ones that are most interested in building these data centers." "The President brought the companies to the White House and got them to agree to build, bring, or buy their own power to build these data centers." "The American people need to have confidence that when these data centers come to town they will not be the ones who are gonna be bearing the cost of that electricity." The Hill & Valley Forum 2026 The Hill & Valley Forum COATUE White House OSTP 47

The Hill & Valley Forum

11,241 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

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 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад

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 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Elon Musk: We must end the tyranny of the bureaucracy. “In order for us to be a true democracy, a functioning democracy, the government must be responsive to the people. That's literally what democracy means. However, when you have a vast unelected bureaucracy that is not answerable to the public, and if the elected officials, the President, the people in Congress and the Senate, if they don't have the power to affect the bureaucracy — and it's actually extremely difficult to affect the bureaucracy — then you do not have rule of the people, you do not have democracy, you have rule of the bureau, bureaucracy. And this is obviously wrong. It is unconstitutional, and it is imperative, therefore, that we return power to the people of the country and not have tyranny of the bureaucracy, which we most definitely have had to follow to a degree that is absurd. It's not just that there's an unconstitutional fourth branch of the government, but it is arguably the most powerful branch of the government.” DOGE update on 𝕏 Spaces, February 3, 2025
0:58

Elon Musk: We must end the tyranny of the bureaucracy. “In order for us to be a true democracy, a functioning democracy, the government must be responsive to the people. That's literally what democracy means. However, when you have a vast unelected bureaucracy that is not answerable to the public, and if the elected officials, the President, the people in Congress and the Senate, if they don't have the power to affect the bureaucracy — and it's actually extremely difficult to affect the bureaucracy — then you do not have rule of the people, you do not have democracy, you have rule of the bureau, bureaucracy. And this is obviously wrong. It is unconstitutional, and it is imperative, therefore, that we return power to the people of the country and not have tyranny of the bureaucracy, which we most definitely have had to follow to a degree that is absurd. It's not just that there's an unconstitutional fourth branch of the government, but it is arguably the most powerful branch of the government.” DOGE update on 𝕏 Spaces, February 3, 2025

ELON CLIPS

14,738 просмотров • 1 год назад