正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

Jensen says Open Source can be MORE expensive for enterprises, Brad Gerstner explains why: Brad Gerstner: “Over the last two weeks, everybody's been saying that the Chinese have caught up, that open source tokens have caught up in intelligence, that they're much cheaper, etc. And Elon comes out and...

theallinpod's profile picture

The All-In Podcast

592,163 subscribers

61,928 次观看 • 1 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

David Sacks says companies are trapped paying OpenAI & Anthropic because they can't figure out how to use open source models "I think enterprise CTOs would like to shift their token consumption to cheaper models for the obvious reason that it would be more efficient. They are seeing compute costs or token costs skyrocket right now, so everyone's trying to figure this out." "You also have the AI sovereignty issue that Alex Karp talked about. They're worried about giving up the secret sauce or the alpha in their business to a frontier lab that may one day be competing with them. "The problem is, I think in most cases, they don't have the technical ability to do it. Coinbase figured out how to do it. DoorDash figured out how to do it. They built a token routing system that allows them to send frontier tasks to frontier models and non frontier tasks to more mundane models. But I don't think your average enterprise has the technical capability to do that." "This is why the share of wallet of closed models, it actually increased. I think that open source went from 19% last year to 11% this year. So open source as a share of enterprise spending is actually decreasing." "I don't think that means usage is decreasing. I think usage is skyrocketing. It also may be the case that because the whole point of using an open model is you just pay for the compute costs, you don't have to pay a lab, so it may be that it's hard to measure that usage in terms of spend." "But nonetheless, anyone who's saying that these closed models are going to lose or are somehow losing, you're just not seeing it in the data."
2:06

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

dnap

110,354 次观看 • 2 个月前

"Closed models are cheaper. The reason you need open models is that they give you control". - Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang "One of the things that people misunderstand about open models is this: yes, you can host them yourself, and you can build your own computer. But most people use computers in the cloud. Frankly, I think closed models are cheaper. If you do not build everything yourself, you avoid the significant cost and expertise required to train, fine-tune, maintain, guardrail, evaluate, and keep the model safe. You would also need to build or obtain the computers required to host it. So, there is nothing cheap about doing all of that yourself. The reason you need open models is that they give you control. You can adapt them for your own highly specialized use cases. I think there is a lot of misunderstanding about closed models versus open models. We felt it was important for people to understand that there is a place for both." ---- From "Bloomberg Podcasts" YouTube channel, (full video link in comment)
0:38

"Closed models are cheaper. The reason you need open models is that they give you control". - Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang "One of the things that people misunderstand about open models is this: yes, you can host them yourself, and you can build your own computer. But most people use computers in the cloud. Frankly, I think closed models are cheaper. If you do not build everything yourself, you avoid the significant cost and expertise required to train, fine-tune, maintain, guardrail, evaluate, and keep the model safe. You would also need to build or obtain the computers required to host it. So, there is nothing cheap about doing all of that yourself. The reason you need open models is that they give you control. You can adapt them for your own highly specialized use cases. I think there is a lot of misunderstanding about closed models versus open models. We felt it was important for people to understand that there is a place for both." ---- From "Bloomberg Podcasts" YouTube channel, (full video link in comment)

Rohan Paul

32,317 次观看 • 22 天前

Gavin Baker Gavin Baker says open source is "awesome" for AI infrastructure names because it shifts the economic value from the frontier labs to the infrastructure, and it is already 80% plus of all tokens processed. "A misconception that a lot of people have is that open source models are somehow bad for AI. They're awesome for the AI infrastructure providers. They just shift economic value from the margins of the frontier labs to the infrastructure." "But I do think there's still a role for these frontier models. And it may be true, to date, frontier tokens are capturing 90% of the economic value, and open source tokens are probably 80% plus of tokens processed, and those ratios may be here to stay." _______ Follow Fireside Alpha for more highlights of the best business and technology conversations.
0:37

Gavin Baker Gavin Baker says open source is "awesome" for AI infrastructure names because it shifts the economic value from the frontier labs to the infrastructure, and it is already 80% plus of all tokens processed. "A misconception that a lot of people have is that open source models are somehow bad for AI. They're awesome for the AI infrastructure providers. They just shift economic value from the margins of the frontier labs to the infrastructure." "But I do think there's still a role for these frontier models. And it may be true, to date, frontier tokens are capturing 90% of the economic value, and open source tokens are probably 80% plus of tokens processed, and those ratios may be here to stay." _______ Follow Fireside Alpha for more highlights of the best business and technology conversations.

Fireside Alpha

162,832 次观看 • 2 个月前

Jason Calacanis: Anthropic, OpenAI and others are trying to kill OpenClaw Why? Because an open source agent platform is an existential threat to frontier model companies. @jason: “ People are going to say I'm a conspiracy theorist, but the number one goal, I believe, in the large language model, frontier model space, is to kill (OpenClaw). This is a giant movement to stop it, because this is the equivalent of having an open source Android-like player in the market, and that could be incredibly disruptive. Because, I believe, open source is going to win the day on the large language models and take 90% of the token usage, and I think the entire frontier model space could be undercut by open source. And I think they realize that SLMs, the smaller language models that are verticalized now, that will run on desktops and laptops and are even starting to run on the top ones, that is their biggest competitive threat, and I hope it happens.”
0:41

Jason Calacanis: Anthropic, OpenAI and others are trying to kill OpenClaw Why? Because an open source agent platform is an existential threat to frontier model companies. @jason: “ People are going to say I'm a conspiracy theorist, but the number one goal, I believe, in the large language model, frontier model space, is to kill (OpenClaw). This is a giant movement to stop it, because this is the equivalent of having an open source Android-like player in the market, and that could be incredibly disruptive. Because, I believe, open source is going to win the day on the large language models and take 90% of the token usage, and I think the entire frontier model space could be undercut by open source. And I think they realize that SLMs, the smaller language models that are verticalized now, that will run on desktops and laptops and are even starting to run on the top ones, that is their biggest competitive threat, and I hope it happens.”

The All-In Podcast

64,677 次观看 • 5 个月前

Baseten Head of AI Model Training Charlie O'Neill says the future is many specialized LLMs dedicated to specific tasks, with bigger labs deployed on the frontiers of areas like science and math: "People are thinking about intelligence capabilities in the wrong way. People are thinking about intelligence relativistically. They say, 'OK, the open-source gap is like 6 months behind closed-source, and GLM 5.3 is as good as Opus 4.8,' or whatever." "The best way to think about what models can do for you, and for the world, is in an absolute sense." "So for any given task that you want to do with an LLM, there's some intelligence threshold where below that you can't do the task, and above that you have very diminishing returns to more intelligence on the task." "So when you think about it that way, the game of LLMs over the last 5 years has been, 'OK, we have these things we want to do with them. Closed source hits it first... but open-source can eventually do that task. And then for many reasons, once you have the base level of intelligence required to do it, you probably do want to swap to open-source." "It's not really about the [frontier lab] God model being better. Like, if I'm filing a tax return, there is a limit to how much intelligence I need to do that particular thing." "So I think the world is going to look like — frontier closed-source labs are going to continue to push the frontier. You do want to use the most intelligent model. You have very inelastic demand for intelligence when you're doing frontier science or frontier math." "But for a lot of the economically valuable things, it looks a lot like, 'I'm a Cursor, or I'm one of these big companies who are realizing I can't just be a wrapper anymore. I've been through the life cycle of building a product that people love. And I should be using that information to make my model better at the things that I care about, and not at anything else.'"
2:48

Baseten Head of AI Model Training Charlie O'Neill says the future is many specialized LLMs dedicated to specific tasks, with bigger labs deployed on the frontiers of areas like science and math: "People are thinking about intelligence capabilities in the wrong way. People are thinking about intelligence relativistically. They say, 'OK, the open-source gap is like 6 months behind closed-source, and GLM 5.3 is as good as Opus 4.8,' or whatever." "The best way to think about what models can do for you, and for the world, is in an absolute sense." "So for any given task that you want to do with an LLM, there's some intelligence threshold where below that you can't do the task, and above that you have very diminishing returns to more intelligence on the task." "So when you think about it that way, the game of LLMs over the last 5 years has been, 'OK, we have these things we want to do with them. Closed source hits it first... but open-source can eventually do that task. And then for many reasons, once you have the base level of intelligence required to do it, you probably do want to swap to open-source." "It's not really about the [frontier lab] God model being better. Like, if I'm filing a tax return, there is a limit to how much intelligence I need to do that particular thing." "So I think the world is going to look like — frontier closed-source labs are going to continue to push the frontier. You do want to use the most intelligent model. You have very inelastic demand for intelligence when you're doing frontier science or frontier math." "But for a lot of the economically valuable things, it looks a lot like, 'I'm a Cursor, or I'm one of these big companies who are realizing I can't just be a wrapper anymore. I've been through the life cycle of building a product that people love. And I should be using that information to make my model better at the things that I care about, and not at anything else.'"

TBPN

50,531 次观看 • 27 天前

$WDC CEO says storage demand and requirement compound and grow whether AI runs on US frontier models or cheaper open-source ones. "Whether it's the traditional frontier models that you've seen in the U.S. that are premium-based, or some of the new open-source, more economical models, the underlying requirement is still that they're going to require a lot of data to support the training of these models." "These models are going to generate a lot more data that requires storage for us." "So we view it as very positive, because even as compute maybe drives greater efficiency in terms of compute and memory resources, the requirement for storage is just going to compound and grow." "So we view it very positively for demand going forward."
0:35

$WDC CEO says storage demand and requirement compound and grow whether AI runs on US frontier models or cheaper open-source ones. "Whether it's the traditional frontier models that you've seen in the U.S. that are premium-based, or some of the new open-source, more economical models, the underlying requirement is still that they're going to require a lot of data to support the training of these models." "These models are going to generate a lot more data that requires storage for us." "So we view it as very positive, because even as compute maybe drives greater efficiency in terms of compute and memory resources, the requirement for storage is just going to compound and grow." "So we view it very positively for demand going forward."

Fireside Alpha

14,114 次观看 • 1 个月前

Palantir CTO Shyam Sankar says Chinese open source models pose a "threat to American Prosperity": "These Chinese open source models are really the result of distillation attacks." "Most of this is just stolen American IP from frontier labs, and I think the frontier labs should do more to protect that IP, and that's in their own economic interest." "The gravest threat to us is not homicide, it's suicide." "It's an inability to turn these tokens into economic value and generate American prosperity for it." "You see that with the proposed moratorium in New York on data centers. Turning our back on AI would be as consequential a mistake as turning our back on the atom in the '70s." "It's just the beginning, but we're starting to see a burgeoning US open model ecosystem forming." "NVIDIA's Nemotron models are very good." "I think you're going to see in the next month a slate of announcements of other American companies, non-frontier labs, neo labs, who are putting out open weight models that companies are going to be able to cheaply fine-tune and capture their own alpha in weights they control." Via Bloomberg
1:21

Palantir CTO Shyam Sankar says Chinese open source models pose a "threat to American Prosperity": "These Chinese open source models are really the result of distillation attacks." "Most of this is just stolen American IP from frontier labs, and I think the frontier labs should do more to protect that IP, and that's in their own economic interest." "The gravest threat to us is not homicide, it's suicide." "It's an inability to turn these tokens into economic value and generate American prosperity for it." "You see that with the proposed moratorium in New York on data centers. Turning our back on AI would be as consequential a mistake as turning our back on the atom in the '70s." "It's just the beginning, but we're starting to see a burgeoning US open model ecosystem forming." "NVIDIA's Nemotron models are very good." "I think you're going to see in the next month a slate of announcements of other American companies, non-frontier labs, neo labs, who are putting out open weight models that companies are going to be able to cheaply fine-tune and capture their own alpha in weights they control." Via Bloomberg

Jawwwn

181,054 次观看 • 2 个月前

Jason Calacanis @jason on Nvidia: "I believe right now, starting today, Nvidia is the number one competitor for OpenAI and Anthropic, not just for tokens but for enterprise compute and I think now Jensen is the leading open source provider in America. I think he's going to take the world, he's going to catch up and blow past China and the Chinese models I think by the end of 2027. And then that means you're going to have a player...I am more convinced than ever now that we can win the race, because Jensen represents open source globally. He's going to be able to take a rack of compute, bring it into a company that is currently using tokens from OpenAI and Anthropic and say here's your rack, soup to nuts, complete vertical solution and you have total sovereignty and i'm reducing your prices 80 or 90% cause I don't need to make money off the tokens I made money off the hardware." Via The All-In Podcast $NVDA
1:57

Jason Calacanis @jason on Nvidia: "I believe right now, starting today, Nvidia is the number one competitor for OpenAI and Anthropic, not just for tokens but for enterprise compute and I think now Jensen is the leading open source provider in America. I think he's going to take the world, he's going to catch up and blow past China and the Chinese models I think by the end of 2027. And then that means you're going to have a player...I am more convinced than ever now that we can win the race, because Jensen represents open source globally. He's going to be able to take a rack of compute, bring it into a company that is currently using tokens from OpenAI and Anthropic and say here's your rack, soup to nuts, complete vertical solution and you have total sovereignty and i'm reducing your prices 80 or 90% cause I don't need to make money off the tokens I made money off the hardware." Via The All-In Podcast $NVDA

P Equity Research 📰

58,653 次观看 • 25 天前

Gavin Baker says the future for the world's biggest companies is open models and private context: "I think the future is an ensemble of models. There's a Pareto curve. No one model is going to be the best at everything." "For the global 1,000 biggest companies, you're going to take whatever the best open-source model is. I think probably in the very near future, that's going to be an Nvidia model." "Everybody says 'Well, in a world where open-source wins, who funds the training?' Chip companies can fund the training." "It's trivial to do a $50 to $100 billion training run for Jensen, but I do think you're going to see American open-source led by Nvidia get really close to the frontier." "Sharing your own enterprise context, that's truly your IP, that's truly the value of your company, the context embedded in all of your data, sharing that with a frontier lab may be hazardous for your financial health." "I think what you'll see these companies do is they'll have their own model on their data, and it will work with one or two other frontier models, checking each other... I think that feels like a very likely future to me." Gavin Baker David George
1:37

Gavin Baker says the future for the world's biggest companies is open models and private context: "I think the future is an ensemble of models. There's a Pareto curve. No one model is going to be the best at everything." "For the global 1,000 biggest companies, you're going to take whatever the best open-source model is. I think probably in the very near future, that's going to be an Nvidia model." "Everybody says 'Well, in a world where open-source wins, who funds the training?' Chip companies can fund the training." "It's trivial to do a $50 to $100 billion training run for Jensen, but I do think you're going to see American open-source led by Nvidia get really close to the frontier." "Sharing your own enterprise context, that's truly your IP, that's truly the value of your company, the context embedded in all of your data, sharing that with a frontier lab may be hazardous for your financial health." "I think what you'll see these companies do is they'll have their own model on their data, and it will work with one or two other frontier models, checking each other... I think that feels like a very likely future to me." Gavin Baker David George

a16z

39,947 次观看 • 1 个月前

.Decagon co-founder and CEO Jesse Zhang says enterprise open-source adoption is falling right now, and that's a sign of adoption rather than rejection: "Even though there's a lot of hype for open-source, the share of open-source inference is actually going down right now." "People are spinning up all these new use cases, and if you're spinning up new use cases, of course you're gonna use the frontier models until they're working." "Once it's at that point, they're heavily incentivized to use open-source because it's way cheaper and faster." "Enterprises have a lot of desire to move, but they can only do so many use cases at once. There is inertia there, and they have to go through all the model risk governance and all the security things." "I think it'll take time, but it will get there." Jesse Zhang
0:49

.Decagon co-founder and CEO Jesse Zhang says enterprise open-source adoption is falling right now, and that's a sign of adoption rather than rejection: "Even though there's a lot of hype for open-source, the share of open-source inference is actually going down right now." "People are spinning up all these new use cases, and if you're spinning up new use cases, of course you're gonna use the frontier models until they're working." "Once it's at that point, they're heavily incentivized to use open-source because it's way cheaper and faster." "Enterprises have a lot of desire to move, but they can only do so many use cases at once. There is inertia there, and they have to go through all the model risk governance and all the security things." "I think it'll take time, but it will get there." Jesse Zhang

a16z

36,749 次观看 • 2 个月前

Brad Gerstner: Companies Will Pay 5x More for the Best AI, No Evidence of Pricing Pressure from Open Source Brad Gerstner: “Jason, you talked about summarizing a document, it may take 20,000 cheap tokens to do. Of course, shoot that to a lagging model or an open source model. But if you're talking about replacing a software engineer for two hours, that may take two million expensive tokens, and the consequence of using something that's 95% as good is really high. Because you have a long-running task, and if the task breaks early, or it breaks in the middle, or it breaks at the end, there's a huge cost to that.” @jason: “You still burn the tokens, right? And back to this analogy I was using, you're pulling the slot machine, and you lose.” Brad: “And (you lose) the time and the compute. So if an AI agent is replacing a $200 an hour consultant, right? Take that as an example. So three consulting firms, they're competing. They need the smartest consultant. They're charging $200 an hour. The difference between spending $3 on a cheap model or $15 on an expensive model to replace a $200/hour consultant, it's just irrelevant. That inference cost difference is irrelevant if you're getting something that's bulletproof for $15, and so I think that's what we're seeing play out. The best evidence for all of this is just revenue growth. I'm talking about, what is Anthropic's revenue growth compared to OpenAI, compared to the open source models? Millions of independent actors are choosing every single day. The open source companies are growing, right? But they're growing selling something that is really, really cheap. And there's room in every single market for premium products, for mid-tier products, and for commodity products, and I think we see a lot of this token growth, people are speculating that the intelligence gap between that commodity stuff and the frontier stuff is going to collapse to the point that people won't pay for the frontier stuff. There is no evidence of that on the field today.”
1:50

Brad Gerstner: Companies Will Pay 5x More for the Best AI, No Evidence of Pricing Pressure from Open Source Brad Gerstner: “Jason, you talked about summarizing a document, it may take 20,000 cheap tokens to do. Of course, shoot that to a lagging model or an open source model. But if you're talking about replacing a software engineer for two hours, that may take two million expensive tokens, and the consequence of using something that's 95% as good is really high. Because you have a long-running task, and if the task breaks early, or it breaks in the middle, or it breaks at the end, there's a huge cost to that.” @jason: “You still burn the tokens, right? And back to this analogy I was using, you're pulling the slot machine, and you lose.” Brad: “And (you lose) the time and the compute. So if an AI agent is replacing a $200 an hour consultant, right? Take that as an example. So three consulting firms, they're competing. They need the smartest consultant. They're charging $200 an hour. The difference between spending $3 on a cheap model or $15 on an expensive model to replace a $200/hour consultant, it's just irrelevant. That inference cost difference is irrelevant if you're getting something that's bulletproof for $15, and so I think that's what we're seeing play out. The best evidence for all of this is just revenue growth. I'm talking about, what is Anthropic's revenue growth compared to OpenAI, compared to the open source models? Millions of independent actors are choosing every single day. The open source companies are growing, right? But they're growing selling something that is really, really cheap. And there's room in every single market for premium products, for mid-tier products, and for commodity products, and I think we see a lot of this token growth, people are speculating that the intelligence gap between that commodity stuff and the frontier stuff is going to collapse to the point that people won't pay for the frontier stuff. There is no evidence of that on the field today.”

The All-In Podcast

52,580 次观看 • 2 个月前

Jensen Huang was asked whether AI's future is open source or proprietary the question the whole industry keeps fighting over. He didn't pick a side. He said something that quietly ends the fight. "models is a technology, not a product. Model is a technology, not a service" "For the vast majority of consumers, the horizontal layer, the general intelligence, I would really, really love not to go fine-tune my own" "all these industries, their domain expertise, their specialization has to be channeled, has to be captured in a way that they can control, and that it can only come from open models" "the open model industry we're contributing tremendously to it is near the frontier" Everyone else is arguing about which lab wins OpenAI or Anthropic, who has the smartest frontier model this quarter. Jensen is standing on stage saying that's the sideshow. The proprietary model is the convenience layer you rent when you don't care. The open model is the thing you own when the work is yours. Two different products for two different needs not two horses in one race. open models are the second-biggest in the room. Ahead of Anthropic. Behind only OpenAI.
2:51

Jensen Huang was asked whether AI's future is open source or proprietary the question the whole industry keeps fighting over. He didn't pick a side. He said something that quietly ends the fight. "models is a technology, not a product. Model is a technology, not a service" "For the vast majority of consumers, the horizontal layer, the general intelligence, I would really, really love not to go fine-tune my own" "all these industries, their domain expertise, their specialization has to be channeled, has to be captured in a way that they can control, and that it can only come from open models" "the open model industry we're contributing tremendously to it is near the frontier" Everyone else is arguing about which lab wins OpenAI or Anthropic, who has the smartest frontier model this quarter. Jensen is standing on stage saying that's the sideshow. The proprietary model is the convenience layer you rent when you don't care. The open model is the thing you own when the work is yours. Two different products for two different needs not two horses in one race. open models are the second-biggest in the room. Ahead of Anthropic. Behind only OpenAI.

Vikram M

12,078 次观看 • 2 个月前

The open-source & open-weight frontier is 7 months behind the closed-model frontier. Let’s talk about it. Check out last week’s episode for the reasons why you might want to consider open-source & open-weight models. Welcome to the fourth episode of the Open Model Series with merve, Hugging Face AI/ML engineer & open-sourceress! We have been discussing open-source & open-weight AI: what it is, how it works, and how you can run them on your own compute. Please leave all your questions about open-source & open-weight AI in the comments! This is a super important topic that is novel to most people, and it can be challenging to grasp - so rest assured your questions are shared with many others!
1:14

The open-source & open-weight frontier is 7 months behind the closed-model frontier. Let’s talk about it. Check out last week’s episode for the reasons why you might want to consider open-source & open-weight models. Welcome to the fourth episode of the Open Model Series with merve, Hugging Face AI/ML engineer & open-sourceress! We have been discussing open-source & open-weight AI: what it is, how it works, and how you can run them on your own compute. Please leave all your questions about open-source & open-weight AI in the comments! This is a super important topic that is novel to most people, and it can be challenging to grasp - so rest assured your questions are shared with many others!

Harper Carroll

17,279 次观看 • 1 个月前

Gavin Baker says open source AI actually makes closed models more valuable "Open source makes frontier tokens more valuable. If you have a 250 IQ intellect that can orchestrate these open source 150 IQ intellects, that makes the 250 IQ intellect more valuable because it can farm out tasks." "If we're going to use the Manhattan Project analogy, everybody talks about Richard Feynman. But they had Oppenheimer and effectively 30 Nobel laureates. But they needed 2,000 physicists who were top 10,000 in the world." "Having more affordable intelligence actually makes the frontier even more valuable. A very plausible outcome is one in which frontier tokens are 65 to 85% of the economic value. Open source tokens are like 80% of the volume. And that's good for everyone. And everyone wins."
1:29

Gavin Baker says open source AI actually makes closed models more valuable "Open source makes frontier tokens more valuable. If you have a 250 IQ intellect that can orchestrate these open source 150 IQ intellects, that makes the 250 IQ intellect more valuable because it can farm out tasks." "If we're going to use the Manhattan Project analogy, everybody talks about Richard Feynman. But they had Oppenheimer and effectively 30 Nobel laureates. But they needed 2,000 physicists who were top 10,000 in the world." "Having more affordable intelligence actually makes the frontier even more valuable. A very plausible outcome is one in which frontier tokens are 65 to 85% of the economic value. Open source tokens are like 80% of the volume. And that's good for everyone. And everyone wins."

dnap

28,807 次观看 • 1 个月前

Demis says he wants to see a Western open source AI stack and that we’re losing to China. He also says Google doesn’t have enough compute to build two frontier (open and closed) models, which is why Gemma is a smaller family of models. Watch this incredible clip. Shout out Y Combinator and Garry Tan for the fantastic interview.
1:23

Demis says he wants to see a Western open source AI stack and that we’re losing to China. He also says Google doesn’t have enough compute to build two frontier (open and closed) models, which is why Gemma is a smaller family of models. Watch this incredible clip. Shout out Y Combinator and Garry Tan for the fantastic interview.

Matthew Berman

296,751 次观看 • 5 个月前

Chamath: Frontier AI Leaders “Created a Total F*cking Mess” Short-sighted fearmongering and immaturity from frontier AI leaders has created deep mistrust, threatening AI’s potential as an open engine of economic mobility. That mistrust gives hyperscalers the chance to position themselves as trusted gatekeepers, using KYC, audit trails, and compliance infrastructure to turn AI into an oligopoly. Chamath Palihapitiya on the All-In Pod: “I think the leaders of the frontier labs leave a lot to be desired. I think what we're seeing is a consistent pattern of evasiveness and immaturity, and I think that does a huge disservice to the entire movement of AI. The key to a vibrant life is rooted in economic mobility, and I think AI is the grand leveler. It is the thing that can enable everyone to have unique amounts of economic mobility because they are unencumbered to figure out what their upper bound is. And against that backdrop, we have to live in this constant doomerism, hype cycle, naivety, and I think it holds us back. How does it hold us back? Tactically, number one, it creates mistrust. I think that Silicon Valley was already decaying in the prestige that it held in American society. We built important things. Then we veered away from that, and we started building less important things. And now we're at a point where we've potentially started to rebuild important things again, but we have this veneer of negativity and mistrust that are created in large part because we just cannot get our sh*t together. And the leaders of the frontier labs are public enemy number one. Number two, I think what it creates, which I think is bad, but what it creates is an incredible opportunity for the hyperscalers. And the very simple opportunity is to convince governments all around the world, not just America, that they should be the gatekeeper. A: You can't trust these guys. B: These models are all over the place. C: Let us be the ones that provision them to the world. We will wrap it in KYC. I've been now talking about KYC for a while, right? Who are these customers? Do they have identification? Why are they allowed to run these models? What are they prompting? Let's keep them so that there's an audit trail. All of these things are going to become issues. The Frontier Lab folks made it an issue because of how they've handled all of this up until now. And what does that create? Now that creates an oligopoly for AI, the most powerful economically leveling instrument we've ever seen in the hands of maybe a handful of hyperscalers, who by the way, would make an incredibly compelling argument, and they would be right. And the only counterfactual to it would be, ‘Well, trust us, guys, it should actually be much more open and in a far more distributed environment.’ Can you imagine the cost and the complexity if you ask the neoscaler to build the same robust KYC or the same VPC infrastructure that Amazon and Microsoft and Google have spent decades investing trillions of dollars in? It's an impossibility, Jason. So you can take all of those datacenters off the map. You can take all of the neoscaler market off the map. All of this was preventable. So instead of a diverse, robust, open ecosystem giving a tool that is the fundamental unlock for humans, we are now going to debate gatekeeping and duopoly versus oligopoly. They have created a total f*cking mess, and it's a shame.”
3:26

Chamath: Frontier AI Leaders “Created a Total F*cking Mess” Short-sighted fearmongering and immaturity from frontier AI leaders has created deep mistrust, threatening AI’s potential as an open engine of economic mobility. That mistrust gives hyperscalers the chance to position themselves as trusted gatekeepers, using KYC, audit trails, and compliance infrastructure to turn AI into an oligopoly. Chamath Palihapitiya on the All-In Pod: “I think the leaders of the frontier labs leave a lot to be desired. I think what we're seeing is a consistent pattern of evasiveness and immaturity, and I think that does a huge disservice to the entire movement of AI. The key to a vibrant life is rooted in economic mobility, and I think AI is the grand leveler. It is the thing that can enable everyone to have unique amounts of economic mobility because they are unencumbered to figure out what their upper bound is. And against that backdrop, we have to live in this constant doomerism, hype cycle, naivety, and I think it holds us back. How does it hold us back? Tactically, number one, it creates mistrust. I think that Silicon Valley was already decaying in the prestige that it held in American society. We built important things. Then we veered away from that, and we started building less important things. And now we're at a point where we've potentially started to rebuild important things again, but we have this veneer of negativity and mistrust that are created in large part because we just cannot get our sh*t together. And the leaders of the frontier labs are public enemy number one. Number two, I think what it creates, which I think is bad, but what it creates is an incredible opportunity for the hyperscalers. And the very simple opportunity is to convince governments all around the world, not just America, that they should be the gatekeeper. A: You can't trust these guys. B: These models are all over the place. C: Let us be the ones that provision them to the world. We will wrap it in KYC. I've been now talking about KYC for a while, right? Who are these customers? Do they have identification? Why are they allowed to run these models? What are they prompting? Let's keep them so that there's an audit trail. All of these things are going to become issues. The Frontier Lab folks made it an issue because of how they've handled all of this up until now. And what does that create? Now that creates an oligopoly for AI, the most powerful economically leveling instrument we've ever seen in the hands of maybe a handful of hyperscalers, who by the way, would make an incredibly compelling argument, and they would be right. And the only counterfactual to it would be, ‘Well, trust us, guys, it should actually be much more open and in a far more distributed environment.’ Can you imagine the cost and the complexity if you ask the neoscaler to build the same robust KYC or the same VPC infrastructure that Amazon and Microsoft and Google have spent decades investing trillions of dollars in? It's an impossibility, Jason. So you can take all of those datacenters off the map. You can take all of the neoscaler market off the map. All of this was preventable. So instead of a diverse, robust, open ecosystem giving a tool that is the fundamental unlock for humans, we are now going to debate gatekeeping and duopoly versus oligopoly. They have created a total f*cking mess, and it's a shame.”

The All-In Podcast

142,516 次观看 • 3 个月前

Jcal says Sam Altman provoked Jensen into directly competing with OpenAI "I think Jensen is going all in on open source based on these two acquisitions, Hugging Face and Poolside. I think Sam Altman poked the tiger." "If you look at what he did, he had done that huge $100 billion deal with $NVDA back in 2025. Then he announced the $AMD deal. Jensen was clearly not pleased about that." "Right after, Sam said he's going to make his own inference, jalapeño, and that he was going to do the deal with $AMD, then Jensen came out was like, 'Well, by the way, we don't actually have to do these investments in OpenAI.'" "I think he's speed-running open source, and you're going to be able to buy your entire stack from $NVDA next year. He is going to own open source. That is a really interesting moment in time because we were sitting here 6, 12 months ago saying open source would never catch up." "Jensen is doing an open source self-driving project. Now he owns Hugging Face, the leading open source indexer where everybody goes to try the new models.”
1:17

Jcal says Sam Altman provoked Jensen into directly competing with OpenAI "I think Jensen is going all in on open source based on these two acquisitions, Hugging Face and Poolside. I think Sam Altman poked the tiger." "If you look at what he did, he had done that huge $100 billion deal with $NVDA back in 2025. Then he announced the $AMD deal. Jensen was clearly not pleased about that." "Right after, Sam said he's going to make his own inference, jalapeño, and that he was going to do the deal with $AMD, then Jensen came out was like, 'Well, by the way, we don't actually have to do these investments in OpenAI.'" "I think he's speed-running open source, and you're going to be able to buy your entire stack from $NVDA next year. He is going to own open source. That is a really interesting moment in time because we were sitting here 6, 12 months ago saying open source would never catch up." "Jensen is doing an open source self-driving project. Now he owns Hugging Face, the leading open source indexer where everybody goes to try the new models.”

dnap

233,352 次观看 • 1 个月前

David Sacks Predicts the Regulatory Capture Playbook to Ban Open Source AI, Step by Step: David Sacks: “I got bad news for you, Chamath, an open source ban is coming. They're not going to call it that. They're going to say that we simply have to apply the same standards to open models that we apply to closed ones. Here's how they do it step by step, let me explain how regulatory capture actually works. So first of all, you have to get this regulatory apparatus. Dario wants an FDA for AI, but he doesn't have enough political support for that, so instead they do this Trojan horse of a FINRA for AI. They call it self-regulating, it's not really, but anyway, that gets them off the ground. Now they've created the standard-setting organization. Now they've got pre-release model testing. Then the pressure grows to codify that in law, so that happens next. And then what they do is they say, ‘Look, all these standards need to apply equally to all models.’ But here's the problem with that. Open models and closed models are technologically different. Once you release an open model into the world, you can't roll it back and you can't monitor exactly how people are using it because they run it on their own hardware. Dario says this is what makes open models dangerous. So what they're going to do is they're going to have the standard-setting body say, ‘Well, we have to set the standards for AI safety.’ By the way, Dario and OpenAI, they're going to fund the whole thing. They're going to contribute all the compute. They're going to be behind it. They're going to be the ones coordinating with the government officials because frankly, people in government have no idea how to monitor and control and set standards for AI safety. Technologically, this is way beyond them. So they're going to go to these companies and say, ‘Tell us how to do it.’ And so what will happen is the standards will get set, and then it'll be a very simple matter of fairness to say that the standards need to apply to open as well as closed models. The open models cannot comply in the same way, and gradually they will be shut out of the market.”
1:38

David Sacks Predicts the Regulatory Capture Playbook to Ban Open Source AI, Step by Step: David Sacks: “I got bad news for you, Chamath, an open source ban is coming. They're not going to call it that. They're going to say that we simply have to apply the same standards to open models that we apply to closed ones. Here's how they do it step by step, let me explain how regulatory capture actually works. So first of all, you have to get this regulatory apparatus. Dario wants an FDA for AI, but he doesn't have enough political support for that, so instead they do this Trojan horse of a FINRA for AI. They call it self-regulating, it's not really, but anyway, that gets them off the ground. Now they've created the standard-setting organization. Now they've got pre-release model testing. Then the pressure grows to codify that in law, so that happens next. And then what they do is they say, ‘Look, all these standards need to apply equally to all models.’ But here's the problem with that. Open models and closed models are technologically different. Once you release an open model into the world, you can't roll it back and you can't monitor exactly how people are using it because they run it on their own hardware. Dario says this is what makes open models dangerous. So what they're going to do is they're going to have the standard-setting body say, ‘Well, we have to set the standards for AI safety.’ By the way, Dario and OpenAI, they're going to fund the whole thing. They're going to contribute all the compute. They're going to be behind it. They're going to be the ones coordinating with the government officials because frankly, people in government have no idea how to monitor and control and set standards for AI safety. Technologically, this is way beyond them. So they're going to go to these companies and say, ‘Tell us how to do it.’ And so what will happen is the standards will get set, and then it'll be a very simple matter of fairness to say that the standards need to apply to open as well as closed models. The open models cannot comply in the same way, and gradually they will be shut out of the market.”

The All-In Podcast

299,594 次观看 • 1 个月前

Interesting that in three of my recent conversations with Krishna at Anthropic, Dylan Patel, and Gavin Baker, each said that frontier tokens are capturing the majority of the economic value. Gavin: "An overwhelming amount of the economic returns to AI at the model layer have been at the frontier. That's surprising to me, and I think it's been surprising to a lot of people. This is one of the most important questions to be answered, and you need to have a hypothesis on it as an investor." Krishna: "We think the returns to frontier intelligence are extremely high. Customers invest really heavily in more tokens with the newer models. The ones at the frontier clearly are capturing this economic value, driving meaningful ROI for customers. The returns to frontier intelligence are not slowing down." Dylan: "No one gives a crap about GPT-4 class models. They want the frontier because the frontier lets them create the economically valuable things."
2:08

Interesting that in three of my recent conversations with Krishna at Anthropic, Dylan Patel, and Gavin Baker, each said that frontier tokens are capturing the majority of the economic value. Gavin: "An overwhelming amount of the economic returns to AI at the model layer have been at the frontier. That's surprising to me, and I think it's been surprising to a lot of people. This is one of the most important questions to be answered, and you need to have a hypothesis on it as an investor." Krishna: "We think the returns to frontier intelligence are extremely high. Customers invest really heavily in more tokens with the newer models. The ones at the frontier clearly are capturing this economic value, driving meaningful ROI for customers. The returns to frontier intelligence are not slowing down." Dylan: "No one gives a crap about GPT-4 class models. They want the frontier because the frontier lets them create the economically valuable things."

Patrick OShaughnessy

121,392 次观看 • 4 个月前

Baseten's Charlie O'Neill on why the gap to the frontier is just compute and data: "Despite OpenAI and Anthropic and the closed source labs having more compute and more data, the recipe is the same. We're all scaling the same recipe here, and we're at slightly different points of the scaling curve. It's not like OpenAI or Anthropic have any secret sauce that differentiates them scaling up their multi-trillion parameter models from the rest of the open source ecosystem." "It really is just a matter of taking the core underlying architecture and training recipe, and throwing more compute and data at it, which is really promising." "Of course, these closed source labs probably have a long tail of optimizations they've made, which we're gonna continue to try and figure out in the open source community. But the core mechanism is there." "K3 is a great example of, well, if you do scale this recipe up, we're gonna get a pretty good model that's very, very close to the frontier, if not frontier itself." Charlie O'Neill Baseten
1:51

Baseten's Charlie O'Neill on why the gap to the frontier is just compute and data: "Despite OpenAI and Anthropic and the closed source labs having more compute and more data, the recipe is the same. We're all scaling the same recipe here, and we're at slightly different points of the scaling curve. It's not like OpenAI or Anthropic have any secret sauce that differentiates them scaling up their multi-trillion parameter models from the rest of the open source ecosystem." "It really is just a matter of taking the core underlying architecture and training recipe, and throwing more compute and data at it, which is really promising." "Of course, these closed source labs probably have a long tail of optimizations they've made, which we're gonna continue to try and figure out in the open source community. But the core mechanism is there." "K3 is a great example of, well, if you do scale this recipe up, we're gonna get a pretty good model that's very, very close to the frontier, if not frontier itself." Charlie O'Neill Baseten

MTS

17,404 次观看 • 2 个月前