Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

Every AI PM course right now is teaching the wrong skill. They're all focused on prompt engineering, LLM integration, building with ChatGPT. Meanwhile, the AI PMs earning $900K at Netflix, Amazon, and Meta are being paid for a completely different competency: knowing which AI technique to use and, more...

31,184 views • 3 months ago •via X (Twitter)

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Chamath: "Nvidia is not doing what's in the best interest of the United States." 🇺🇸🇨🇳 "I think we can all do the math. About 47% of all of NVIDIA's revenue goes to China and Chinese-related countries." "And I think when you peel back this onion, what you will find is a whole raft of companies that were stood up to buy these Nvidia GPUs to essentially act as a waystation for China." "And I think that is the big problem." "Let's have a thought starter: if 47% of all of the AI capability and horsepower is being shipped to three Asian countries, where do you think the apps that require that amount of horsepower live?" "Is there a Cursor of Bhutan that we did not know? Is there a great shopping app in Cambodia that's come out of nowhere, that's AI powered?" "I think the answer is no." "Every single time we have an advance in the United States, how is it that Alibaba shows up with something incredible? DeepSeek shows up with something better?" "At every turn and at every step of AI, they are at the same rate or one step ahead." "To be honest with you, I think the real problem that we have is that Nvidia is not doing what is in the best interest of the United States." "You have a American company that has been working around the guidelines at every turn to try to land silicon into the hands of China." "Late last year, they introduced this thing called the H20 that was explicitly designed for China and to be compliant with US rules at the time." "Which again, gives these guys substantial performance." "This is a case where (Nvidia) has plausible deniability. I sell something to a Singaporean registered company? Plausible deniability." "What am I supposed to do? You can't expect me to audit it. I think that's what NVIDIA's answer will be to this question." "But what is the real expectation? At a minimum, the United States should have a mechanism to understand it." "It is implausible that if you did one or two layers of work, you would not find that most of this traffic is being used by Chinese organizations."

The All-In Podcast

910,352 views • 1 year ago

Jensen Huang just explained why every company cutting engineers over AI is asking the entirely wrong question. Huang: “People say, I don’t need software engineers because apparently coding is going to be automated.” That was the narrative. Here is what Huang actually did. Huang: “I’ve given AIs to every one of my software engineers and hardware engineers and engineers period. 100% of NVIDIA has AI assistants, AI coders, and they’re busier than ever.” Not fewer engineers. Not smaller teams. Busier than ever. That is the line most companies are getting completely wrong right now. They hear “AI can write code” and immediately start cutting headcount. Huang did the opposite. He armed everyone. Huang: “And so the question is, what is the task versus what is the job? No different than a financial analyst; the task is mess around with spreadsheets, but the job is to make financial advice. The job is to help a customer.” Writing code was always the task. It was never the job. The job is architecture. Knowing what to build. Why it matters. How it fits into a system that actually creates value. Code is the execution layer between the idea and the outcome. Nothing more. When you automate that layer, you don’t eliminate the engineer. You eliminate the bottleneck between what they can envision and what they can ship. The companies using AI to cut headcount are optimizing for cost. The companies using AI to multiply output are optimizing for territory. Nvidia chose territory. Every engineer at the most valuable semiconductor company on Earth now operates with an AI assistant. Not a pilot program. Not an experiment. Company-wide. Every function. Every team. And the result is not less work. It is more work. Faster. At a scale that was physically impossible twelve months ago. The companies that understand the difference between eliminating engineers and unleashing them will build what comes next. The ones that don’t will watch their best talent walk out the door to the ones that did.

Dustin

82,737 views • 3 months ago

From Eric Vishria on how the top AI founders are building products completely opposite of the SaaS era: "One of the things that is really different in the AI world versus the SaaS world, is that in the SaaS world, over and over again, you had people who really understood the customer. And the problem. And then they understood a domain. They understood what the technology was more or less capable of. But it wasn't a real question of if you could build something or not. For example, take Salesforce, Workday, and ServiceNow. CRM existed before Salesforce. HR management existed before Workday. Same thing with ServiceNow. So in every case, Salesforce followed Siebel. Workday followed Peoplesoft. ServiceNow followed Peregrine and Remedy, and others. So they were just kind of, cloud SaaS versions of the prior generation product. They just understood the customers. They understood the problem. And they were just like, here's a better version. And that evolved a little bit over time in SaaS land. But that's what it is. And so product development in that way was done by people who really understood the customer and the problems. And then just took advantage of the next wave. And this is almost diametrically opposite of product development in the AI era. When I look at the teams that are having the most success today, they have intimate knowledge of the models. They are right on the frontier of understanding which models are better at what, and why, and when. And what they're going to be good at and what they're not going to be good at. And what they're spending their time on, is figuring out how do I apply this capability of this model to this domain or to this user. So they're actually working inside out or technology out, versus customer problem in. And of course, they understand the customer problem. And a lot of times they have firsthand knowledge of it. But they're really close to the metal and capability, and they're applying it. And I think this is a really different way to develop products than in SaaS. I started my career as a product manager a long time ago, and it's almost the complete opposite of everything you learned. "Listen to the customer, understand it, then bring it back to the engineering and product teams." If you did that right now, ask a bunch of customers what they want out of AI, and you brought it back, for the most part, it may not be possible today with today's technology. Whereas the teams that are winning right now really understand the technology and are applying it out. And so I think this reversal matters. I think it's a big difference in terms of how companies are getting built. And maybe even the types of entrepreneurs that will be successful. I'm not sure. You're seeing some real change there. Look at the Bret Taylor's at Sierra. That's a super, super technical founder who really gets it. Brett and Clay really get it. You look at Michael and his co-founders at Cursor. They're super technical founders and they get it. They all really understand what these things can and can't do. And that's a pretty different dynamic relative to the way the best SaaS companies got built." Link in bio for the full conversation going deep on the current class of startups going from zero to $100m+ in ARR within 12 months.

The Peel

209,752 views • 1 year ago

STANFORD JUST PUT ITS ENTIRE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE CURRICULUM ON YOUTUBE FOR FREE. CS221. The same course that produced engineers now running AI labs, building frontier models, and getting paid $500,000 a year at the companies everyone is trying to work for. Most people have never heard of it. The ones who have are not telling you about it. Here is what the course actually covers: Search algorithms. The mathematical foundation behind every AI that finds optimal solutions in complex environments. Constraint satisfaction. How AI reasons through problems with thousands of interdependent variables simultaneously. Markov decision processes. The probabilistic framework behind every AI agent that makes sequential decisions under uncertainty. Machine learning from first principles. Not how to use sklearn. How the math actually works underneath it. Neural networks. Built from the ground up before jumping to applications. Logic and knowledge representation. How AI systems reason about the world formally. Natural language processing. The foundation of everything happening in LLMs right now. Robotics and computer vision. How AI perceives and acts in physical environments. Every concept that powers every AI product you use daily is in this curriculum. Not a surface level overview. The actual mathematics. The actual algorithms. The actual reasoning. This is what separates engineers who build AI from operators who use it. Stanford charged $60,000 a year for students to sit in this classroom. They put the whole thing on YouTube. Bookmark this before you open any other AI resource today. Follow CyrilXBT for more elite resources that build real depth the moment they drop.

CyrilXBT

54,956 views • 2 months ago

The AI business model is undergoing a transformation. For the last few years, the playbook was simple: put an AI wrapper on a SaaS product and sell it by the seat. That era is ending. The new wave of AI companies are moving beyond simple subscriptions and embracing a more sophisticated approach tied directly to value creation. Here’s what’s changing: 💰 From Seats to Spend: The most forward-thinking companies are shifting to usage-based and outcome-driven pricing. Think less about how many people use the AI and more about what the AI does. This includes new revenue streams like "agentic checkout" on ChatGPT, where AI agents complete purchases and transactions directly within a chat interface. The closer the AI is to the dollar, the more value it captures. 🎙️ From Text to Voice & Video: The interface for AI is becoming more human. Voice is mainstream (Sierra for support, Listen Labs for market research). The next frontier is video, where AI will see, understand, and interact with the world in real-time. The keyboard is no longer the only way to talk to a machine. 🤖 From Advisors to Actors: Early AI copilots gave advice. The next generation takes action. These agents aren't just suggesting what to do; they are executing complex workflows that directly impact the metrics that matter: boosting conversion, reducing average handle time (AHT), improving NPS, and cutting churn. This is about moving from passive assistance to active problem-solving. The common thread? A relentless focus on tangible ROI. We’re incredibly bullish on founders who understand this shift and are building companies that align their success with the success of their customers. The future of AI isn't just about intelligence; it's about impact.

Konstantine Buhler

24,868 views • 9 months ago

David Sacks: The AI Regulatory Frenzy at the State Level is “Very Concerning” “Let me give you some stats on this.” “All 50 states have introduced AI bills in 2025.” “There's been over 1,000 bills in state legislatures.” “118 AI laws have already been passed across the 50 states.” “Everyone just seems to be motivated by the imperative to ‘do something’ on AI, even though no one's really sure what that something should be.” “And there's no real agreement on what all these AI regulations are supposed to do, or what the risks are, so they're just making things up.” “So you've got 50 different states each with their own reporting regime, which is going to be a trap for startups because they've all gotta figure this out about what they're supposed to report on, what the deadlines are, who to report to.” “And if you wanna see where this is going, look at Colorado.” “This has already been passed into law, SB 24-205, Consumer Protections for Artificial Intelligence. It bans something they call ‘algorithmic discrimination.’” “Algorithmic discrimination is defined as unlawful differential treatment or disparate impact based on protected characteristics. So things like age, race, sex, disability.” “If any of those factors drive an AI decision and it results in a disparate impact, then both the developer of the AI model and the deployer, which means the business that's using it, can be in violation of this law and they can be prosecuted by the Colorado Attorney General.” “The only way that I see for model developers to comply with this law, is to build in a new DEI layer into the models, to basically somehow prevent models from giving outputs that might have a disparate impact on protected groups.” “So we're back to Woke AI again, and I think that's the whole point.”

The All-In Podcast

186,860 views • 9 months ago