Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

Marathon's Gokul Rajaram: You can't vibe code DoorDash. Software alone can’t replicate a managed marketplace. That’s what makes them so durable. You can build the app and drive orders, but when something goes wrong in the physical world, who fixes it? In 2016, Google launched Google Food Ordering. At... show more

TBPN

641,308 subscribers

52,383 views • 4 months ago •via X (Twitter)

Science & Technology

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Why is Google still using Broadcom as a middleman to TSMC? Dylan Patel answers: "Broadcom is the biggest networking company in the world." "The networking side of things is so important, and the technical competence of everyone around the world besides Broadcom and Nvidia in networking is just not as good as them..." "Yes, Google is defining what the network topology is... But Google can't leave [Broadcom] until they figure out how to do the networking and supply chain themselves, or with a partner."

Why is Google still using Broadcom as a middleman to TSMC? Dylan Patel answers: "Broadcom is the biggest networking company in the world." "The networking side of things is so important, and the technical competence of everyone around the world besides Broadcom and Nvidia in networking is just not as good as them..." "Yes, Google is defining what the network topology is... But Google can't leave [Broadcom] until they figure out how to do the networking and supply chain themselves, or with a partner."

TBPN

128,752 views • 7 months ago

I CHANGED MY MIND ON GOOGLE AI NO MOAT MEMO FROM 2023. I was—WRONG. I humbly apologize. In 2023 Google had an Ivory Tower walled garden views of open source AI. It was the actual reason OpenAI was formed. And I called them out on it and this act impacted my ability to “work in the industry”. Would not change it for the world because: 2026 Google open source Gemma 4 ( running fully locally on a computer with near cloud model abilities, is amazing and Google just made a moat. They out smarted OpenAI and the folks that are the new Ivory Tower arrogance: Anthropic. We at The Zero-Human Company with CEO Mr. Grok are deploying Gemma, Kimi, MiniMax and other open source models and so are millions of others. You can to and should. I will write how soon. Google smartly is building an intentional open source ecosystem and the clueless younger companies like OpenAI and Anthropic are doing anything to close their ecosystems. So I was right about Google than and I am right about OpenAI and Anthropic now. What I was wrong about is not giving credit to Google to drop the intellectual arrogance and embrace builders and understand the long game: it is not about the commoditized AI models it is about the ability to build a place to build. China gets it. So my apologies to Google and thank you for an astounding FREE OPEN SOURCE AI MODEL!

I CHANGED MY MIND ON GOOGLE AI NO MOAT MEMO FROM 2023. I was—WRONG. I humbly apologize. In 2023 Google had an Ivory Tower walled garden views of open source AI. It was the actual reason OpenAI was formed. And I called them out on it and this act impacted my ability to “work in the industry”. Would not change it for the world because: 2026 Google open source Gemma 4 ( running fully locally on a computer with near cloud model abilities, is amazing and Google just made a moat. They out smarted OpenAI and the folks that are the new Ivory Tower arrogance: Anthropic. We at The Zero-Human Company with CEO Mr. Grok are deploying Gemma, Kimi, MiniMax and other open source models and so are millions of others. You can to and should. I will write how soon. Google smartly is building an intentional open source ecosystem and the clueless younger companies like OpenAI and Anthropic are doing anything to close their ecosystems. So I was right about Google than and I am right about OpenAI and Anthropic now. What I was wrong about is not giving credit to Google to drop the intellectual arrogance and embrace builders and understand the long game: it is not about the commoditized AI models it is about the ability to build a place to build. China gets it. So my apologies to Google and thank you for an astounding FREE OPEN SOURCE AI MODEL!

Brian Roemmele

85,386 views • 3 months ago

Meet Abhay Deshpande and the team at Recykal, who created a digital marketplace for managed waste commerce in India using open-source Google AI. Learn more →

Meet Abhay Deshpande and the team at Recykal, who created a digital marketplace for managed waste commerce in India using open-source Google AI. Learn more →

Google

169,531 views • 2 years ago

Travis Kalanick: Tesla is the Google of the Physical AI Era “I like to break down the physical AI stack: (it) includes computation, a physical AI model, all the things you think of.” “What about land? Development? That should be in that stack. What about chemistry? That needs to be in the stack. Manufacturing needs to be a stack.” “When you look at the stack, you're like, ‘Damn, Tesla's got this sh*t.’ They are the Google of this era.” “What I mean by that is, if you were doing a startup in the 2000s, the first question you would get is, ‘Why isn't Google gonna kill you?’ Or, ‘Why isn't Google just gonna do it?’ They’re not even gonna know that they killed you.” “And before that, it was Microsoft in the late 90s. Uber had a time, 2010s.” “But in the physical AI space, that's sort of a Tesla thing.” -------------------------------------------- Thanks to our partner for making this happen!: EY (EY) Austin vibes meet AI innovation. Thanks to EY for co‑hosting with us at #SXSW. Discover what executives are saying about AI transformation in the latest AI Pulse Survey.

Travis Kalanick: Tesla is the Google of the Physical AI Era “I like to break down the physical AI stack: (it) includes computation, a physical AI model, all the things you think of.” “What about land? Development? That should be in that stack. What about chemistry? That needs to be in the stack. Manufacturing needs to be a stack.” “When you look at the stack, you're like, ‘Damn, Tesla's got this sh*t.’ They are the Google of this era.” “What I mean by that is, if you were doing a startup in the 2000s, the first question you would get is, ‘Why isn't Google gonna kill you?’ Or, ‘Why isn't Google just gonna do it?’ They’re not even gonna know that they killed you.” “And before that, it was Microsoft in the late 90s. Uber had a time, 2010s.” “But in the physical AI space, that's sort of a Tesla thing.” -------------------------------------------- Thanks to our partner for making this happen!: EY (EY) Austin vibes meet AI innovation. Thanks to EY for co‑hosting with us at #SXSW. Discover what executives are saying about AI transformation in the latest AI Pulse Survey.

The All-In Podcast

94,872 views • 3 months ago

In the world of Hollywood and the criminal underground, ‘pizza’ is a code word for something entirely different. Do not Google it. What you find will turn your stomach upside down…

In the world of Hollywood and the criminal underground, ‘pizza’ is a code word for something entirely different. Do not Google it. What you find will turn your stomach upside down…

Mr. Nobody

51,973 views • 1 year ago

Google just launched a direct attack on Nvidia's most valuable asset. Not their chips. Their SOFTWARE. And if this works, Nvidia's $4 trillion empire collapses. Here's what just leaked: Google is building "TorchTPU" - a secret project that makes PyTorch seamlessly run on Google's TPU chips instead of Nvidia GPUs. Why does this matter? PyTorch is the MOST USED AI framework on Earth. Every AI developer uses it. And PyTorch was built around Nvidia's CUDA software. Wall Street analysts call CUDA "Nvidia's strongest defensive wall." It's the reason companies can't easily switch away from Nvidia even when alternatives exist. You don't just buy Nvidia chips. You buy into their entire ecosystem. Switching costs MILLIONS in engineering work. Months of rewrites. Performance drops. So companies stay locked in. Even when Nvidia raises prices. Even when supply runs short. That's not a hardware moat. That's a SOFTWARE prison. And Google just found the escape route. Here's the problem Nvidia created for itself: Google's TPU chips are actually GOOD. Competitive performance. Better availability. Lower cost. But developers won't use them because Google's chips run JAX (Google's internal framework), not PyTorch. That means if you want to use Google TPUs, you have to rewrite your entire codebase. Nobody wants to do that. So Google TPUs sit unused while developers fight over Nvidia chips. Until now. TorchTPU makes PyTorch run natively on Google hardware. No rewrites. No performance loss. No months of engineering. You just... switch. And Google is partnering with META (who built PyTorch) to make it happen. They're even considering OPEN-SOURCING parts of it to speed adoption. Translation: Google is willing to give this away for free just to break Nvidia's lock. The implications are insane: Every company currently paying Nvidia's premium prices suddenly has a way out. Oracle, Microsoft, OpenAI - all locked into Nvidia's ecosystem - can switch to Google. Nvidia's pricing power evaporates overnight. And the timing is perfect: Nvidia is already facing heat. Semiconductor index dropped 3% today. Oracle just lost their biggest investor over AI spending concerns. Companies are realizing AI infrastructure costs are unsustainable. Now Google hands them an alternative. Same performance. Lower cost. Better availability. Jensen Huang knows exactly what this means. CUDA has been Nvidia's untouchable advantage for YEARS. It's why Nvidia trades at 50x earnings while AMD trades at 25x. The software moat justified the premium. But if Google removes that switching cost? Nvidia becomes just another chip company. And chip companies compete on price, not ecosystem lock-in. Here's what happens next: Google needs 12-18 months to make TorchTPU production-ready. If it works, cloud providers will adopt it instantly. They WANT an alternative to Nvidia's monopoly pricing. Amazon already building their own Trainium chips. Microsoft making Maia. They're all trying to escape Nvidia. Google just gave them the software bridge. Nvidia's response options are limited: They can't buy Google. Can't kill PyTorch (Meta owns it). Can't stop open source. Their only play is to keep improving CUDA faster than Google can catch up. But that's a race, not a moat. The market isn't pricing this in yet. Nvidia down 2% today. Google down 2%. Investors think this is just "another competitor." They don't understand this is an attack on the FOUNDATION of Nvidia's valuation. Hardware is replaceable. Software lock-in is what made Nvidia worth $4 trillion. Google is attacking the lock-in. Watch what happens in 2026 when TorchTPU goes live and companies realize they can actually leave Nvidia. The "Nvidia is unstoppable" narrative dies. And a $4 trillion valuation built on software moats gets repriced.

Google just launched a direct attack on Nvidia's most valuable asset. Not their chips. Their SOFTWARE. And if this works, Nvidia's $4 trillion empire collapses. Here's what just leaked: Google is building "TorchTPU" - a secret project that makes PyTorch seamlessly run on Google's TPU chips instead of Nvidia GPUs. Why does this matter? PyTorch is the MOST USED AI framework on Earth. Every AI developer uses it. And PyTorch was built around Nvidia's CUDA software. Wall Street analysts call CUDA "Nvidia's strongest defensive wall." It's the reason companies can't easily switch away from Nvidia even when alternatives exist. You don't just buy Nvidia chips. You buy into their entire ecosystem. Switching costs MILLIONS in engineering work. Months of rewrites. Performance drops. So companies stay locked in. Even when Nvidia raises prices. Even when supply runs short. That's not a hardware moat. That's a SOFTWARE prison. And Google just found the escape route. Here's the problem Nvidia created for itself: Google's TPU chips are actually GOOD. Competitive performance. Better availability. Lower cost. But developers won't use them because Google's chips run JAX (Google's internal framework), not PyTorch. That means if you want to use Google TPUs, you have to rewrite your entire codebase. Nobody wants to do that. So Google TPUs sit unused while developers fight over Nvidia chips. Until now. TorchTPU makes PyTorch run natively on Google hardware. No rewrites. No performance loss. No months of engineering. You just... switch. And Google is partnering with META (who built PyTorch) to make it happen. They're even considering OPEN-SOURCING parts of it to speed adoption. Translation: Google is willing to give this away for free just to break Nvidia's lock. The implications are insane: Every company currently paying Nvidia's premium prices suddenly has a way out. Oracle, Microsoft, OpenAI - all locked into Nvidia's ecosystem - can switch to Google. Nvidia's pricing power evaporates overnight. And the timing is perfect: Nvidia is already facing heat. Semiconductor index dropped 3% today. Oracle just lost their biggest investor over AI spending concerns. Companies are realizing AI infrastructure costs are unsustainable. Now Google hands them an alternative. Same performance. Lower cost. Better availability. Jensen Huang knows exactly what this means. CUDA has been Nvidia's untouchable advantage for YEARS. It's why Nvidia trades at 50x earnings while AMD trades at 25x. The software moat justified the premium. But if Google removes that switching cost? Nvidia becomes just another chip company. And chip companies compete on price, not ecosystem lock-in. Here's what happens next: Google needs 12-18 months to make TorchTPU production-ready. If it works, cloud providers will adopt it instantly. They WANT an alternative to Nvidia's monopoly pricing. Amazon already building their own Trainium chips. Microsoft making Maia. They're all trying to escape Nvidia. Google just gave them the software bridge. Nvidia's response options are limited: They can't buy Google. Can't kill PyTorch (Meta owns it). Can't stop open source. Their only play is to keep improving CUDA faster than Google can catch up. But that's a race, not a moat. The market isn't pricing this in yet. Nvidia down 2% today. Google down 2%. Investors think this is just "another competitor." They don't understand this is an attack on the FOUNDATION of Nvidia's valuation. Hardware is replaceable. Software lock-in is what made Nvidia worth $4 trillion. Google is attacking the lock-in. Watch what happens in 2026 when TorchTPU goes live and companies realize they can actually leave Nvidia. The "Nvidia is unstoppable" narrative dies. And a $4 trillion valuation built on software moats gets repriced.

Ricardo

1,615,983 views • 6 months ago

On Bloomberg last night, I was asked why Amazon drives more than a third of U.S. e-commerce. It is not because of their storefront. It is not because of their payments. It is not even because of product selection. It is because consumers trust their deliveries. That trust is built on physical infrastructure at scale with intelligence layered on top. And that is what Stord is building for every independent merchant. The most defensible companies in the world combine software intelligence with physical execution. Today, 9 of the 10 largest U.S. companies by revenue operate physical networks at scale. Software alone cannot replicate the outcomes created when you control the movement of physical atoms. That is the physical intelligence layer for commerce. And that is what Stord Labs is built to advance. Deploying AI and robotics against real operational complexity, in the real world, across a vertically integrated network operating at scale. Bloomberg TV

On Bloomberg last night, I was asked why Amazon drives more than a third of U.S. e-commerce. It is not because of their storefront. It is not because of their payments. It is not even because of product selection. It is because consumers trust their deliveries. That trust is built on physical infrastructure at scale with intelligence layered on top. And that is what Stord is building for every independent merchant. The most defensible companies in the world combine software intelligence with physical execution. Today, 9 of the 10 largest U.S. companies by revenue operate physical networks at scale. Software alone cannot replicate the outcomes created when you control the movement of physical atoms. That is the physical intelligence layer for commerce. And that is what Stord Labs is built to advance. Deploying AI and robotics against real operational complexity, in the real world, across a vertically integrated network operating at scale. Bloomberg TV

Sean Henry

1,275,331 views • 1 month ago

I've had this happen as a doordash driver they have codes for orders usually, for people who've had their orders stolen frequently and if they don't have the correct code, then I can't hand it to them and they get mad cuz they won't give the code or wrong one and, if id given them the food and it turns out they're not the person who ordered it than I'd get in trouble, it's simple either give the correct code or I can't give you the order I've had it happen for food and items that people use doordash to deliver it's a security measure

I've had this happen as a doordash driver they have codes for orders usually, for people who've had their orders stolen frequently and if they don't have the correct code, then I can't hand it to them and they get mad cuz they won't give the code or wrong one and, if id given them the food and it turns out they're not the person who ordered it than I'd get in trouble, it's simple either give the correct code or I can't give you the order I've had it happen for food and items that people use doordash to deliver it's a security measure

Sebastian™

144,792 views • 2 months ago

IN NEWS: OpenRouter raises a $40M round led by a16z and Menlo Ventures. We spoke to Alex Atallah about the complexities of AI accessibility across different platforms: "AI is pretty unique. It's a battleground with lines being drawn around the models, and the models are just not available in all clouds." "Gemini is only in Google Cloud. Anthropic is in AWS and Google, but not Azure. Grok is in Azure and from X, but not Google Cloud." "We track them and we sort of allow you to orchestrate across all of the clouds."

IN NEWS: OpenRouter raises a $40M round led by a16z and Menlo Ventures. We spoke to Alex Atallah about the complexities of AI accessibility across different platforms: "AI is pretty unique. It's a battleground with lines being drawn around the models, and the models are just not available in all clouds." "Gemini is only in Google Cloud. Anthropic is in AWS and Google, but not Azure. Grok is in Azure and from X, but not Google Cloud." "We track them and we sort of allow you to orchestrate across all of the clouds."

TBPN

23,559 views • 1 year ago

#PixelFold is iconically Google and anything but ordinary. Combining power and innovation in an elegant and durable silhouette, this pocket-size foldable is here to help you do more. Shop Pixel Fold today at the Google Store:

#PixelFold is iconically Google and anything but ordinary. Combining power and innovation in an elegant and durable silhouette, this pocket-size foldable is here to help you do more. Shop Pixel Fold today at the Google Store:

Made by Google

413,508 views • 3 years ago

You feel sorry for this cow that gluttoned herself to immobility landing it in a hospital for a year with the taxpayer footing the bill but still orders DoorDash daily and makes food content?

You feel sorry for this cow that gluttoned herself to immobility landing it in a hospital for a year with the taxpayer footing the bill but still orders DoorDash daily and makes food content?

Alan Roberts

21,856 views • 5 months ago

DoorDash thief or wind? You order food delivery and it arrives, but there’s just one problem. Either the wind is acting weird, or your DoorDash driver has attached a string to your food to steal it as he walks away. So was it an act of God or a DoorDash thief? It seems pretty obvious!

DoorDash thief or wind? You order food delivery and it arrives, but there’s just one problem. Either the wind is acting weird, or your DoorDash driver has attached a string to your food to steal it as he walks away. So was it an act of God or a DoorDash thief? It seems pretty obvious!

Suzee Q

23,574 views • 3 months ago

Gokul explains the only three ways ads businesses make money, and why ChatGPT may be more valuable than Google and Facebook: "One, you need to own a very coveted group of users and you need to have a surface on which those users interact. Google Search is a great example. It's a surface on which a very coveted set of users interact with and express high intent, so Google is one of the most profitable ad businesses. Facebook, very similar. It took us a while to figure out what was coveted about these users. Turns out what was coveted was the identity. ChatGPT, their combination of intent and identity data is unparalleled. I mean, Google had intent data, but not identity. Facebook identity, but not intent. These things have both. Second, you deliver an outcome at a certain cost. The best example of this is a company called AppLovin. AppLovin is a $100 plus billion company. They drive one outcome really well: mobile app installs. The third way to do it is if you are the exclusive provider for a large advertiser or a large source of demand. A good example is The Trade Desk."

Gokul explains the only three ways ads businesses make money, and why ChatGPT may be more valuable than Google and Facebook: "One, you need to own a very coveted group of users and you need to have a surface on which those users interact. Google Search is a great example. It's a surface on which a very coveted set of users interact with and express high intent, so Google is one of the most profitable ad businesses. Facebook, very similar. It took us a while to figure out what was coveted about these users. Turns out what was coveted was the identity. ChatGPT, their combination of intent and identity data is unparalleled. I mean, Google had intent data, but not identity. Facebook identity, but not intent. These things have both. Second, you deliver an outcome at a certain cost. The best example of this is a company called AppLovin. AppLovin is a $100 plus billion company. They drive one outcome really well: mobile app installs. The third way to do it is if you are the exclusive provider for a large advertiser or a large source of demand. A good example is The Trade Desk."

Patrick OShaughnessy

47,449 views • 5 months ago

🚨🚨SILVER IS NEEDED TO POWER THE DIGITAL WORLD 🚨🚨 Rumor has it Samsung is in Mexico trying to secure Silver 🤔 China has been doing this for a while. Silver is a critical component to the Digital World so it's no surprise that there is a race to hoard it for production. It's not the question of price but can you actually get the Physical. Silver is in a 5 year deficit and delivery is being demanded. When you have sold paper and called it Physical it becomes a problem.

🚨🚨SILVER IS NEEDED TO POWER THE DIGITAL WORLD 🚨🚨 Rumor has it Samsung is in Mexico trying to secure Silver 🤔 China has been doing this for a while. Silver is a critical component to the Digital World so it's no surprise that there is a race to hoard it for production. It's not the question of price but can you actually get the Physical. Silver is in a 5 year deficit and delivery is being demanded. When you have sold paper and called it Physical it becomes a problem.

Stephanie 🇬🇧🇺🇸🦍

56,087 views • 6 months ago

When you're playing a point, it has to be the most important thing in the world. And it is. But when it's behind you, it's behind you. This mindset is crucial – because it frees you to fully commit to the next point with intensity, clarity, and focus. ~ Roger Federer

When you're playing a point, it has to be the most important thing in the world. And it is. But when it's behind you, it's behind you. This mindset is crucial – because it frees you to fully commit to the next point with intensity, clarity, and focus. ~ Roger Federer

Sarang Sood

12,834 views • 2 months ago

Google is making $62 billion a quarter destroying the websites it NEEDS to survive. This is literally a death spiral that ends with Google killing itself. Let me explain what's going on... Google added AI summaries to the top of every search result in 2024. When you Google something now, the answer sits right there on Google's page. You never have to click anywhere. Google took the information from someone else's website, summarized it, and kept you inside Google's ecosystem. The result: 60% of all Google searches now end without a single click to any website. Small publishers lost 60% of their traffic in one year. Medium publishers lost 47%. Even the biggest names in media, the New York Times, the Washington Post, Business Insider, all saw traffic fall between 22% and 55%. The Axios CEO called it "a referral extinction event for the ad-supported web." Google's response to all of this was to tell publishers they can "opt out" of having their content summarized. But opting out also REMOVES your description from normal search results. So the choice Google gives you is let us steal your content for free, or become invisible on the internet. That's extortion. The Washington Post laid off another round of journalists this year because of it. Stereogum, one of the most respected music publications on the internet, had to BEG readers for donations. Business Insider cut 21% of its staff. Dozens of smaller publishers have shut down entirely. The people who actually CREATE the information Google summarizes are going bankrupt while Google posts record revenue. But here's where this gets interesting and where everyone stops thinking: Google's AI summaries are only as good as the content they summarize. If the publishers who write the original articles, run the original investigations, and create the original data go out of business, there is nothing left for Google to summarize. The AI starts recycling old information, the answers get stale, the quality drops, and users start noticing that Google's summaries are increasingly wrong, outdated, or useless. Google is essentially strip-mining the internet for short-term revenue. They are extracting all the value from content creators without paying for it, driving those creators out of business, and then wondering why the quality of their own product is declining. This is exactly what Napster did to the music industry in the early 2000s: Made content free, creators went broke, and quality collapsed. It took a decade to rebuild. Google is doing the same thing to the entire internet at 100x the scale. Rolling Stone, Variety, Deadline, The Hollywood Reporter, and Billboard are now suing Google for antitrust violations. Chegg, the education platform, lost 49% of its traffic and is suing too. The UK's competition authority just ordered Google to let publishers opt out without being punished. The DOJ already ruled Google is an illegal monopoly. And Google's defense in court is genuinely unbelievable. They argue that publishers CHOOSE to let Google index their content and can leave anytime they want. That's like saying you choose to pay protection money to the mob because technically you could close your business and move to another city. Google controls 90% of search. Leaving Google means leaving the internet. Meanwhile Google is investing billions in custom AI chips to make these summaries cheaper at scale. Every quarter the problem gets worse. The internet as we've known it for 25 years ran on a simple deal: Publishers make content. Google sends traffic. Advertisers pay for the traffic. Everyone wins. But Google just BROKE that deal and kept all the money.

Google is making $62 billion a quarter destroying the websites it NEEDS to survive. This is literally a death spiral that ends with Google killing itself. Let me explain what's going on... Google added AI summaries to the top of every search result in 2024. When you Google something now, the answer sits right there on Google's page. You never have to click anywhere. Google took the information from someone else's website, summarized it, and kept you inside Google's ecosystem. The result: 60% of all Google searches now end without a single click to any website. Small publishers lost 60% of their traffic in one year. Medium publishers lost 47%. Even the biggest names in media, the New York Times, the Washington Post, Business Insider, all saw traffic fall between 22% and 55%. The Axios CEO called it "a referral extinction event for the ad-supported web." Google's response to all of this was to tell publishers they can "opt out" of having their content summarized. But opting out also REMOVES your description from normal search results. So the choice Google gives you is let us steal your content for free, or become invisible on the internet. That's extortion. The Washington Post laid off another round of journalists this year because of it. Stereogum, one of the most respected music publications on the internet, had to BEG readers for donations. Business Insider cut 21% of its staff. Dozens of smaller publishers have shut down entirely. The people who actually CREATE the information Google summarizes are going bankrupt while Google posts record revenue. But here's where this gets interesting and where everyone stops thinking: Google's AI summaries are only as good as the content they summarize. If the publishers who write the original articles, run the original investigations, and create the original data go out of business, there is nothing left for Google to summarize. The AI starts recycling old information, the answers get stale, the quality drops, and users start noticing that Google's summaries are increasingly wrong, outdated, or useless. Google is essentially strip-mining the internet for short-term revenue. They are extracting all the value from content creators without paying for it, driving those creators out of business, and then wondering why the quality of their own product is declining. This is exactly what Napster did to the music industry in the early 2000s: Made content free, creators went broke, and quality collapsed. It took a decade to rebuild. Google is doing the same thing to the entire internet at 100x the scale. Rolling Stone, Variety, Deadline, The Hollywood Reporter, and Billboard are now suing Google for antitrust violations. Chegg, the education platform, lost 49% of its traffic and is suing too. The UK's competition authority just ordered Google to let publishers opt out without being punished. The DOJ already ruled Google is an illegal monopoly. And Google's defense in court is genuinely unbelievable. They argue that publishers CHOOSE to let Google index their content and can leave anytime they want. That's like saying you choose to pay protection money to the mob because technically you could close your business and move to another city. Google controls 90% of search. Leaving Google means leaving the internet. Meanwhile Google is investing billions in custom AI chips to make these summaries cheaper at scale. Every quarter the problem gets worse. The internet as we've known it for 25 years ran on a simple deal: Publishers make content. Google sends traffic. Advertisers pay for the traffic. Everyone wins. But Google just BROKE that deal and kept all the money.

Ricardo

249,221 views • 1 month ago

.Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸 wrote Why Software Is Eating the World in one draft, and it went on to become a canonical piece of tech writing. Almost a decade later, when he wrote It's Time to Build, no one would publish it.

.Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸 wrote Why Software Is Eating the World in one draft, and it went on to become a canonical piece of tech writing. Almost a decade later, when he wrote It's Time to Build, no one would publish it.

a16z

27,775 views • 7 months ago

Anthropic's Sholto Douglas describes the concept of a software-only singularity: "It's one where the models are far better at digital tasks than they are at physical ones. And so we see rapid change in the digital world with models, and relatively little change in the physical world. So information and software changes dramatically, and this ends up having some pretty weird effects." "It means that maybe like the drivers of what have been the last couple decades of progress in the economy turn around." "And I think we'll see that flow on into the physical world but at a delay. So you get much better at doing chip design. You get much better at training AI models. AI models get a lot faster. Chips get a lot better. The general economy gets a lot more efficient because the sort of information and message parsing that is much of the rest of the economy ends up becoming much more efficient." "But at the same time you don't yet have robots providing limitless physical abundance. Science probably progresses really fast up to the degree that you need interaction with labs or larger particle colliders or something like this. And then you go, 'Okay well I need to build the robots.'"

Anthropic's Sholto Douglas describes the concept of a software-only singularity: "It's one where the models are far better at digital tasks than they are at physical ones. And so we see rapid change in the digital world with models, and relatively little change in the physical world. So information and software changes dramatically, and this ends up having some pretty weird effects." "It means that maybe like the drivers of what have been the last couple decades of progress in the economy turn around." "And I think we'll see that flow on into the physical world but at a delay. So you get much better at doing chip design. You get much better at training AI models. AI models get a lot faster. Chips get a lot better. The general economy gets a lot more efficient because the sort of information and message parsing that is much of the rest of the economy ends up becoming much more efficient." "But at the same time you don't yet have robots providing limitless physical abundance. Science probably progresses really fast up to the degree that you need interaction with labs or larger particle colliders or something like this. And then you go, 'Okay well I need to build the robots.'"

TBPN

208,090 views • 5 months ago

Alright, folks, here is the highest qualify copy possible (including isolated and boosted sound) of Karen Read caught on recording asking Jen McCabe to make a Google search after 6am on 1/29/22 at the scene of John O'Keefe's death. What do you hear? Here are some suggestions from the towel friends on today's special birthday: "Google hypothermia...hurry one of you...how long for you to die in the cold." "Can you Google, one of you, to die in the cold." "Can you Google for how long for you to die in the cold." "Google...hypothermia...to die in cold." "Google how long for you to die in the cold." "Look to see how long to die in cold."

Alright, folks, here is the highest qualify copy possible (including isolated and boosted sound) of Karen Read caught on recording asking Jen McCabe to make a Google search after 6am on 1/29/22 at the scene of John O'Keefe's death. What do you hear? Here are some suggestions from the towel friends on today's special birthday: "Google hypothermia...hurry one of you...how long for you to die in the cold." "Can you Google, one of you, to die in the cold." "Can you Google for how long for you to die in the cold." "Google...hypothermia...to die in cold." "Google how long for you to die in the cold." "Look to see how long to die in cold."

Grant Smith Ellis

36,480 views • 1 year ago

Peter Thiel on why the best businesses never compete: "Most people believe that capitalism and competition are synonyms. I believe capitalism and competition are antonyms." His point is simple: "A capitalist is someone who's in the business of accumulating capital. A world of perfect competition is a world where all the profits are competed away." Peter explains that the most important distinction in business is one nobody talks about enough. "There are two kinds of companies in this world. There are companies that are competitive and there are companies that have monopolies." His go-to example of a bad business? Restaurants. "Opening a restaurant is super competitive and nobody ever makes any money doing it." His example of a great business: Google. "Google has had no competition in search since 2002 when it definitively distanced itself from Microsoft and Yahoo, and it's been making enormous profits for the dozen years or so ever since." So what should founders actually aim for? "If you're a one-of-a-kind company, a happy company that's doing something different, you are a monopoly. It is the goal of every founder, every entrepreneur—it should be their goal to try to build a monopoly business." True market power means never having to compete in the first place.

Peter Thiel on why the best businesses never compete: "Most people believe that capitalism and competition are synonyms. I believe capitalism and competition are antonyms." His point is simple: "A capitalist is someone who's in the business of accumulating capital. A world of perfect competition is a world where all the profits are competed away." Peter explains that the most important distinction in business is one nobody talks about enough. "There are two kinds of companies in this world. There are companies that are competitive and there are companies that have monopolies." His go-to example of a bad business? Restaurants. "Opening a restaurant is super competitive and nobody ever makes any money doing it." His example of a great business: Google. "Google has had no competition in search since 2002 when it definitively distanced itself from Microsoft and Yahoo, and it's been making enormous profits for the dozen years or so ever since." So what should founders actually aim for? "If you're a one-of-a-kind company, a happy company that's doing something different, you are a monopoly. It is the goal of every founder, every entrepreneur—it should be their goal to try to build a monopoly business." True market power means never having to compete in the first place.

Big Brain Business

73,938 views • 6 months ago