Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

One week ago, we launched Typeahead. The product is already meaningfully better. We’ve shipped new features, Typeahead 2.0 is almost ready, and we’re already planning 3.0. 3.0 is going to be big. That pace is part of the point. Sam Asante and I started a new company together because...

hnshah's profile picture

Hiten Shah

320,748 subscribers

18,481 Aufrufe • vor 27 Tagen •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Jensen Huang just said this is the greatest era in history to build software. AI agents will not kill software. They will do the exact opposite: create a massive new wave of software demand. at NVIDIA GTC Taipei 2026 "Click and type. We now replace that with explaining to the AI what we want, our intent, and the AI generates the code or uses tools to produce the necessary output. This is how computers are going to work in the future. This is Agentic AI. For two years, we've been building toward this, and now it has arrived. One of the big breakthroughs, of course, is tool use. A lot of people have said, “Jensen, AI is coming. Agentic AI is coming. Therefore, all the software companies are going to go out of business.” This is exactly the opposite. Because there are going to be so many agents, the world is no longer limited by the number of people. Therefore, those agents are going to use more tools than ever. This is actually an incredible time to be a software company. But the software has to be presented to the agent in a way that the agent can use it. This is a big breakthrough. And in fact, what we have done, as you know, what Nvidia’s treasure..." ---- From 'NVIDIA' YT channel (link in comment)
0:59

Jensen Huang just said this is the greatest era in history to build software. AI agents will not kill software. They will do the exact opposite: create a massive new wave of software demand. at NVIDIA GTC Taipei 2026 "Click and type. We now replace that with explaining to the AI what we want, our intent, and the AI generates the code or uses tools to produce the necessary output. This is how computers are going to work in the future. This is Agentic AI. For two years, we've been building toward this, and now it has arrived. One of the big breakthroughs, of course, is tool use. A lot of people have said, “Jensen, AI is coming. Agentic AI is coming. Therefore, all the software companies are going to go out of business.” This is exactly the opposite. Because there are going to be so many agents, the world is no longer limited by the number of people. Therefore, those agents are going to use more tools than ever. This is actually an incredible time to be a software company. But the software has to be presented to the agent in a way that the agent can use it. This is a big breakthrough. And in fact, what we have done, as you know, what Nvidia’s treasure..." ---- From 'NVIDIA' YT channel (link in comment)

Rohan Paul

16,584 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis says the AI bottleneck is already moving from model ideas to physical supply chains. "How much of the restriction at this point is physical? I am talking memory shortage, GPU shortage, and electricity." Demis: "That is constraining a lot of the deployment for sure. We see so much more demand for our models - Gemini and the other models that we have - than we can possibly serve." Then the less obvious part: "It does constrain a little bit the research, because you need a lot of chips to be able to experiment on new ideas at big enough scale that you can actually see if they are going to work." And on memory: "The whole supply chain is kind of strained... It still in the end actually comes down to a few suppliers of a few of the key components. Anywhere where there is some kind of constraint on the capacity, there is a sort of choke point." Important framing: The next AI race is not just who has the best model architecture. It is who can secure memory, chips, power, suppliers, and enough experimental capacity to find the next breakthrough before everyone else.
1:09

DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis says the AI bottleneck is already moving from model ideas to physical supply chains. "How much of the restriction at this point is physical? I am talking memory shortage, GPU shortage, and electricity." Demis: "That is constraining a lot of the deployment for sure. We see so much more demand for our models - Gemini and the other models that we have - than we can possibly serve." Then the less obvious part: "It does constrain a little bit the research, because you need a lot of chips to be able to experiment on new ideas at big enough scale that you can actually see if they are going to work." And on memory: "The whole supply chain is kind of strained... It still in the end actually comes down to a few suppliers of a few of the key components. Anywhere where there is some kind of constraint on the capacity, there is a sort of choke point." Important framing: The next AI race is not just who has the best model architecture. It is who can secure memory, chips, power, suppliers, and enough experimental capacity to find the next breakthrough before everyone else.

Karl Mehta

25,716 Aufrufe • vor 8 Tagen

David Friedberg: The AI Jobs Panic Is a Crock of Sh*t Why? The revenue potential outweighs the cost savings by 100x. “There is no job loss with AI. I've said it a thousand times, and I will say it again, and again, and again. What I see on the ground, and what I've seen at dozens of companies, including my company that I run, there are two sides to a business. There is revenue and there’s costs. On the cost side of the equation, AI can be used to reduce humans doing things that cost money, to some extent. The effect there, I would argue, is nominal. The real opportunity with AI is on the revenue side, where suddenly one engineer can do 100x or 1000x what they used to be able to do, meaning you can make more products at your company, whether those are agricultural seed products, or boats and ships, or software for companies, or clothing, or what have you. Because of AI, everyone has the ability to expand their revenue base to create more products, and that is the foundation of good economic prosperity. It is called productivity. We can grow productivity in this country with AI. So where I see AI being used is on the revenue side 100x more than the cost side. And in that equation, people are hiring like crazy. We cannot hire enough people. I just had a review meeting with my product and engineering team two days ago, and they're like, ‘We want to add an extra 15 headcount to our engineering squads because we have all this opportunity to do stuff that we couldn't otherwise do.’ So we are going to hire more people. And to Sacks' point, we are seeing that show up in the jobs numbers. The idea that AI is going to destroy jobs is a Luddite idea that is being disproven every single day, and I see it on the ground. It is only a matter of time before people wake up to this and they realize that this narrative that they've all been sold is a crock of sh*t.”
1:42

David Friedberg: The AI Jobs Panic Is a Crock of Sh*t Why? The revenue potential outweighs the cost savings by 100x. “There is no job loss with AI. I've said it a thousand times, and I will say it again, and again, and again. What I see on the ground, and what I've seen at dozens of companies, including my company that I run, there are two sides to a business. There is revenue and there’s costs. On the cost side of the equation, AI can be used to reduce humans doing things that cost money, to some extent. The effect there, I would argue, is nominal. The real opportunity with AI is on the revenue side, where suddenly one engineer can do 100x or 1000x what they used to be able to do, meaning you can make more products at your company, whether those are agricultural seed products, or boats and ships, or software for companies, or clothing, or what have you. Because of AI, everyone has the ability to expand their revenue base to create more products, and that is the foundation of good economic prosperity. It is called productivity. We can grow productivity in this country with AI. So where I see AI being used is on the revenue side 100x more than the cost side. And in that equation, people are hiring like crazy. We cannot hire enough people. I just had a review meeting with my product and engineering team two days ago, and they're like, ‘We want to add an extra 15 headcount to our engineering squads because we have all this opportunity to do stuff that we couldn't otherwise do.’ So we are going to hire more people. And to Sacks' point, we are seeing that show up in the jobs numbers. The idea that AI is going to destroy jobs is a Luddite idea that is being disproven every single day, and I see it on the ground. It is only a matter of time before people wake up to this and they realize that this narrative that they've all been sold is a crock of sh*t.”

The All-In Podcast

151,462 Aufrufe • vor 21 Tagen

I miss building simple, working software. At some point, we decided to complicate everything for no reason. Today, people can't build anything without using three frameworks, 17 libraries, and a swarm of microservices. And here is a funny paradox: To understand how these complex systems work, we've had to build systems and tools that generate data we can later analyze. But the more data we produce, the harder it is to process and make sense of it. We are in the middle of an observability crisis. The tools we have are inefficient, and we don't have enough people to keep systems running. A few weeks ago, I met the team Resolve AI, and they have built a fundamentally new approach to observability and incident management: Instead of depending on humans to run a system, Resolve built a Production Software Engineer who runs the system using AI while letting people supervise. And it's not only crazy, but I think this will fundamentally change how we monitor and maintain systems in production for years to come. I recorded a quick video to showcase a simple example of how Resolve works behind the scenes. There are two main things I'd like you to notice: 1. The tool can correlate data across logs, metrics, and traces coming from different systems. You don't have to do any work to get the information that matters right in front of you. 2. (This is the big one!) The tool can diagnose what's happening and give you instructions on how to solve it. It can produce causal relationships across the entire system stack. Resolve is backed by investors like Replit's founder Amjad Masad, Reid Hoffman, Jeff Dean, Fei Fei Li, Andy Price, among others. They are currently working with a select number of companies and want to onboard a few more. If you are interested in trying them out, go to this link: Honestly, this is one of the most impressive uses of AI I've seen.
5:18

I miss building simple, working software. At some point, we decided to complicate everything for no reason. Today, people can't build anything without using three frameworks, 17 libraries, and a swarm of microservices. And here is a funny paradox: To understand how these complex systems work, we've had to build systems and tools that generate data we can later analyze. But the more data we produce, the harder it is to process and make sense of it. We are in the middle of an observability crisis. The tools we have are inefficient, and we don't have enough people to keep systems running. A few weeks ago, I met the team Resolve AI, and they have built a fundamentally new approach to observability and incident management: Instead of depending on humans to run a system, Resolve built a Production Software Engineer who runs the system using AI while letting people supervise. And it's not only crazy, but I think this will fundamentally change how we monitor and maintain systems in production for years to come. I recorded a quick video to showcase a simple example of how Resolve works behind the scenes. There are two main things I'd like you to notice: 1. The tool can correlate data across logs, metrics, and traces coming from different systems. You don't have to do any work to get the information that matters right in front of you. 2. (This is the big one!) The tool can diagnose what's happening and give you instructions on how to solve it. It can produce causal relationships across the entire system stack. Resolve is backed by investors like Replit's founder Amjad Masad, Reid Hoffman, Jeff Dean, Fei Fei Li, Andy Price, among others. They are currently working with a select number of companies and want to onboard a few more. If you are interested in trying them out, go to this link: Honestly, this is one of the most impressive uses of AI I've seen.

Santiago

82,074 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Evan Spiegel on the lesson that killed his first startup and led to Snapchat: "We focused on building the perfect product for way too long before we got feedback. We worked for like eighteen months to build this perfect full-featured product, which was in direct contravention to how I was always taught to build things. Build a prototype, build an MVP, get it in front of people, learn as quickly as possible. But we had spent all this time building this perfect piece of software and we hadn't thought enough about distribution. While we built this great piece of software, our competitor at the time, Naviance, had secured distribution through all the different college counselors. What piece of software are you going to choose to help your kid get into college? The one recommended by the college counselors or the one from two kids at Stanford? I think it's a pretty easy choice. So we saw very early that we had no distribution advantage. Even if we loved our software, people weren't going to use it because we didn't have a scalable way to get it in people's hands. Around that time when we saw the emergence of the App Store on iPhone, it was very clear that was a distribution channel we could really use and benefit from. But we also needed to build things we could build quickly, things we really were going to use together with our friends so we could be the first early customers. Ultimately Peekaboo and Snapchat represented that." This is exactly the asymmetry Peter Thiel describes in Zero to One: superior distribution by itself can create a monopoly, even with no product differentiation. The converse is not true. Thiel puts an even finer point on it: most businesses get zero distribution channels to work. Poor sales rather than bad product is the most common cause of failure. If you can get just one distribution channel to work, you have a great business. Estée Lauder said: it's not enough to have the most wonderful product in the world. You must be able to sell it. Many founders over-index on product perfection and under-invest in distribution. The world is full of great products nobody knows about, and mediocre products with massive distribution that dominate markets. Evan Spiegel lived it. He built the better product, watched it lose, and then built something he could actually distribute.
1:27

Evan Spiegel on the lesson that killed his first startup and led to Snapchat: "We focused on building the perfect product for way too long before we got feedback. We worked for like eighteen months to build this perfect full-featured product, which was in direct contravention to how I was always taught to build things. Build a prototype, build an MVP, get it in front of people, learn as quickly as possible. But we had spent all this time building this perfect piece of software and we hadn't thought enough about distribution. While we built this great piece of software, our competitor at the time, Naviance, had secured distribution through all the different college counselors. What piece of software are you going to choose to help your kid get into college? The one recommended by the college counselors or the one from two kids at Stanford? I think it's a pretty easy choice. So we saw very early that we had no distribution advantage. Even if we loved our software, people weren't going to use it because we didn't have a scalable way to get it in people's hands. Around that time when we saw the emergence of the App Store on iPhone, it was very clear that was a distribution channel we could really use and benefit from. But we also needed to build things we could build quickly, things we really were going to use together with our friends so we could be the first early customers. Ultimately Peekaboo and Snapchat represented that." This is exactly the asymmetry Peter Thiel describes in Zero to One: superior distribution by itself can create a monopoly, even with no product differentiation. The converse is not true. Thiel puts an even finer point on it: most businesses get zero distribution channels to work. Poor sales rather than bad product is the most common cause of failure. If you can get just one distribution channel to work, you have a great business. Estée Lauder said: it's not enough to have the most wonderful product in the world. You must be able to sell it. Many founders over-index on product perfection and under-invest in distribution. The world is full of great products nobody knows about, and mediocre products with massive distribution that dominate markets. Evan Spiegel lived it. He built the better product, watched it lose, and then built something he could actually distribute.

David Senra

27,043 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Larry Ellison just told every software engineer on Earth their job description is dead. Not evolving. Dead. Ellison: “The code that Oracle is writing, Oracle isn’t writing. Our AI models are writing.” This is not a startup demo. This is one of the largest infrastructure monopolies on the planet telling you it already replaced the people who built it. For fifty years, building software meant translating human intent into machine instructions. Line by line. Bug by bug. Sprint by sprint. That entire layer is gone. Ellison: “We don’t write the procedure. We declare our intent.” That sentence just made the entire engineering labor market flinch. The procedure was the job. The procedure was the paycheck. The procedure was what made a developer valuable. And now the machine does it without being asked twice. Ellison: “We just tell the model what we want the program to do, and then the AI comes up with a step-by-step process to actually do it.” You are no longer paid to build. You are paid to think. And most organizations have no idea how to evaluate that. The companies still hiring armies of developers to grind through codebases are paying salaries the machine already made worthless. Not in years. In seconds. When a company worth hundreds of billions hands the keyboard to the machine and tells you the output is better, the debate is not winding down. The debate is over. The enterprise that wins this decade does not write the best code. It removes the human from the process entirely and runs on intent alone. The programmers who survive are the ones who realize the craft is no longer typing. It is architecture. It is judgment. It is knowing what to build and why. Everything else now belongs to the machine. And the machine does not negotiate severance.
0:31

Larry Ellison just told every software engineer on Earth their job description is dead. Not evolving. Dead. Ellison: “The code that Oracle is writing, Oracle isn’t writing. Our AI models are writing.” This is not a startup demo. This is one of the largest infrastructure monopolies on the planet telling you it already replaced the people who built it. For fifty years, building software meant translating human intent into machine instructions. Line by line. Bug by bug. Sprint by sprint. That entire layer is gone. Ellison: “We don’t write the procedure. We declare our intent.” That sentence just made the entire engineering labor market flinch. The procedure was the job. The procedure was the paycheck. The procedure was what made a developer valuable. And now the machine does it without being asked twice. Ellison: “We just tell the model what we want the program to do, and then the AI comes up with a step-by-step process to actually do it.” You are no longer paid to build. You are paid to think. And most organizations have no idea how to evaluate that. The companies still hiring armies of developers to grind through codebases are paying salaries the machine already made worthless. Not in years. In seconds. When a company worth hundreds of billions hands the keyboard to the machine and tells you the output is better, the debate is not winding down. The debate is over. The enterprise that wins this decade does not write the best code. It removes the human from the process entirely and runs on intent alone. The programmers who survive are the ones who realize the craft is no longer typing. It is architecture. It is judgment. It is knowing what to build and why. Everything else now belongs to the machine. And the machine does not negotiate severance.

Dustin

534,277 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Keir Starmer: We need to deal with AI bots. This is something relatively new, and we saw with Grok—did you see the thing with Grok just the other week? An AI bot that allowed you to instruct it to undress people—and it did. It was disgusting, absolutely disgusting. We went into battle on that because I thought this is not good enough. We went into battle, we made the necessary steps, we threatened action, and we won that battle in relation to Grok. But we've got to do it with all AI bots, and we will do it. We can do that by amending some of the legislation that we've already got in place.
0:40

Keir Starmer: We need to deal with AI bots. This is something relatively new, and we saw with Grok—did you see the thing with Grok just the other week? An AI bot that allowed you to instruct it to undress people—and it did. It was disgusting, absolutely disgusting. We went into battle on that because I thought this is not good enough. We went into battle, we made the necessary steps, we threatened action, and we won that battle in relation to Grok. But we've got to do it with all AI bots, and we will do it. We can do that by amending some of the legislation that we've already got in place.

Clash Report

63,266 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Our mainstream culture is conflict-avoidant. There is the assumption that the less conflict there is in a relationship, the better it is. I disagree. If there is real intimacy, conflict is actually unavoidable. Because we are all different. The real indicator of health in a relationship isn’t the lack of conflict, it is the quality of our repair. It is the level of authenticity we can bring. That requires knowing how to be with conflict and disagreement, how to hold nuance. And it also requires practicing the art of repairing. Are we willing to show up and repair what we broke? Do we have the skills and capacity required for that? Avoiding conflict means avoiding truth and therefore avoiding real intimacy. This work is essential and transcends the personal. If we aren't capable of dealing with conflict in our own personal lives, it is no wonder that the world is in the state it is, where the most prevalent conflict management strategy is escalation.
0:59

Our mainstream culture is conflict-avoidant. There is the assumption that the less conflict there is in a relationship, the better it is. I disagree. If there is real intimacy, conflict is actually unavoidable. Because we are all different. The real indicator of health in a relationship isn’t the lack of conflict, it is the quality of our repair. It is the level of authenticity we can bring. That requires knowing how to be with conflict and disagreement, how to hold nuance. And it also requires practicing the art of repairing. Are we willing to show up and repair what we broke? Do we have the skills and capacity required for that? Avoiding conflict means avoiding truth and therefore avoiding real intimacy. This work is essential and transcends the personal. If we aren't capable of dealing with conflict in our own personal lives, it is no wonder that the world is in the state it is, where the most prevalent conflict management strategy is escalation.

Laura Cincera

10,933 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Jensen to AI Leaders: “We have to be far more thoughtful” when communicating to the public Jensen Huang: “(AI) is not a biological being. It is not alien. It is not conscious. It is computer software.” “We say things like, ‘We don't understand it at all.’ It is not true. We understand a lot of things about this technology.” Chamath: “If you were in the seat in the boardroom of Anthropic over that whole scuttlebutt with the Department of War, what do you think you would've told Dario and that team to do, maybe, differently to try to change some of this outcome and some of this perception?” Jensen: “The first thing that I would say about Anthropic is, first of all, the technology is incredible. We are a large consumer of Anthropic technology.” “The desire to warn people about the capability of the technology is also really terrific.” “We just have to make sure that we understand that the world has a spectrum, and that warning is good, scaring is less good because this technology is too important to us.” “I think that it is fine to predict the future, but we need to be a little bit more circumspect. We need to have a little bit more humility, that, in fact, we can't completely predict the future.” “And to say things that are quite extreme, quite catastrophic, that there's no evidence of it happening, could be more damaging than people think.” “And of course we are technology leaders.” “There was a time when nobody listened to us, but now because technology is so important in the social fabric, such an important industry, so important to national security, our words do matter.” “And I think we have to be much more circumspect, we have to be more moderate, we have to be more balanced, we have to be far more thoughtful.”
1:27

Jensen to AI Leaders: “We have to be far more thoughtful” when communicating to the public Jensen Huang: “(AI) is not a biological being. It is not alien. It is not conscious. It is computer software.” “We say things like, ‘We don't understand it at all.’ It is not true. We understand a lot of things about this technology.” Chamath: “If you were in the seat in the boardroom of Anthropic over that whole scuttlebutt with the Department of War, what do you think you would've told Dario and that team to do, maybe, differently to try to change some of this outcome and some of this perception?” Jensen: “The first thing that I would say about Anthropic is, first of all, the technology is incredible. We are a large consumer of Anthropic technology.” “The desire to warn people about the capability of the technology is also really terrific.” “We just have to make sure that we understand that the world has a spectrum, and that warning is good, scaring is less good because this technology is too important to us.” “I think that it is fine to predict the future, but we need to be a little bit more circumspect. We need to have a little bit more humility, that, in fact, we can't completely predict the future.” “And to say things that are quite extreme, quite catastrophic, that there's no evidence of it happening, could be more damaging than people think.” “And of course we are technology leaders.” “There was a time when nobody listened to us, but now because technology is so important in the social fabric, such an important industry, so important to national security, our words do matter.” “And I think we have to be much more circumspect, we have to be more moderate, we have to be more balanced, we have to be far more thoughtful.”

The All-In Podcast

56,915 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

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

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

Rohan Paul

78,920 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Sam Altman says the AI infrastructure race is not about bigger chatbots. It is about shifting the planet's intellectual output from human brains to AI brains. "If people knew what we could do with compute, they would want way, way more." "The thing I am personally most excited about is to use AI and lots of compute to discover new science." "A recent cool example here is we built the Sora Android app using Codex... in less than a month." "You can imagine that way much further, where entire companies can build their products using lots of compute." Then he gives the scale: "Let's say that an AI company today might be generating something on the order of 10 trillion tokens a day out of frontier models." "We're going to have these models at a company be outputting more tokens per day than all of humanity put together, and then 10 times that, and then 100 times that." The bottleneck is moving from software talent to compute supply, inference speed, product integration, and where all that machine intelligence gets pointed.
3:31

Sam Altman says the AI infrastructure race is not about bigger chatbots. It is about shifting the planet's intellectual output from human brains to AI brains. "If people knew what we could do with compute, they would want way, way more." "The thing I am personally most excited about is to use AI and lots of compute to discover new science." "A recent cool example here is we built the Sora Android app using Codex... in less than a month." "You can imagine that way much further, where entire companies can build their products using lots of compute." Then he gives the scale: "Let's say that an AI company today might be generating something on the order of 10 trillion tokens a day out of frontier models." "We're going to have these models at a company be outputting more tokens per day than all of humanity put together, and then 10 times that, and then 100 times that." The bottleneck is moving from software talent to compute supply, inference speed, product integration, and where all that machine intelligence gets pointed.

Karl Mehta

16,536 Aufrufe • vor 7 Tagen

Elon Musk: Let's not forget we're here to make useful products that people love. “We should remember that our goal as a company is to make amazing products that people love. A company is a group of people collected together to produce a compelling product or service that others find useful, and where the value of the product and service is greater than the cost of what it took to make that product or service. Sometimes, weirdly, profit is viewed negatively. But profit is just the difference in value between the output and the input. What did it cost you to make it, and what are people prepared to pay for it? That's the value that you created. It's tough actually, even to maintain a 10% profitability, which is to make the output 10% more valuable than the input. We should not lose sight of why we are here. We're here to make useful products that people love and take care of them over time.” Tesla All-Hands, March 20, 2025
1:03

Elon Musk: Let's not forget we're here to make useful products that people love. “We should remember that our goal as a company is to make amazing products that people love. A company is a group of people collected together to produce a compelling product or service that others find useful, and where the value of the product and service is greater than the cost of what it took to make that product or service. Sometimes, weirdly, profit is viewed negatively. But profit is just the difference in value between the output and the input. What did it cost you to make it, and what are people prepared to pay for it? That's the value that you created. It's tough actually, even to maintain a 10% profitability, which is to make the output 10% more valuable than the input. We should not lose sight of why we are here. We're here to make useful products that people love and take care of them over time.” Tesla All-Hands, March 20, 2025

ELON CLIPS

16,905 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Last week we launched our Superagents. This is the fastest I’ve seen a product grow from 0. A lot of excitement from users, and more importantly – people actually started using it in real workflows almost immediately. We started getting a lot of feedback from how people were actually using it. We shipped 8 things to Base44 Superagent this week. The one I can't stop demoing: Mini Apps is wild. Your agent can now build and show a small working app right inside the conversation. Not text, actual interactive UI with your real data.
0:25

Last week we launched our Superagents. This is the fastest I’ve seen a product grow from 0. A lot of excitement from users, and more importantly – people actually started using it in real workflows almost immediately. We started getting a lot of feedback from how people were actually using it. We shipped 8 things to Base44 Superagent this week. The one I can't stop demoing: Mini Apps is wild. Your agent can now build and show a small working app right inside the conversation. Not text, actual interactive UI with your real data.

Maor Shlomo

14,175 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

In education, are we more focused on what school will look like 10 years from now, or asking the question, what are we doing with students today, and how will that affect them in 10 years? I also wonder how many students truly care about our “10 Year” plans in education. What matters most to them is what we are doing today. I was having a conversation with my daughter Kallea this past week and sharing about an opportunity that I wanted and how it didn’t work out. That was a teachable moment and I asked her, “What do you think your dad is going to do now?” Without hesitating she said, “Work harder.” This is something that I have talked about with her a lot, but hopefully, it is also something that I model. Sometimes things don’t work out because life isn’t fair. And sometimes, things don’t work out because we are not ready and haven’t done the work to get the accomplishment. It is easy to make the fault of others, and sometimes, that is even true. But I know that I always can control my own actions and if you complain about a problem, once you are finished complaining, it is still a problem. Only action creates future opportunities. My actions are the only things I can control. I hope this sticks with her and my kids because I know it is something my parents instilled in me. Of course, we need to focus on what school and learning can look like in the future, but we also have to understand that the future is also very dependent on what we install in our children today.
1:24

In education, are we more focused on what school will look like 10 years from now, or asking the question, what are we doing with students today, and how will that affect them in 10 years? I also wonder how many students truly care about our “10 Year” plans in education. What matters most to them is what we are doing today. I was having a conversation with my daughter Kallea this past week and sharing about an opportunity that I wanted and how it didn’t work out. That was a teachable moment and I asked her, “What do you think your dad is going to do now?” Without hesitating she said, “Work harder.” This is something that I have talked about with her a lot, but hopefully, it is also something that I model. Sometimes things don’t work out because life isn’t fair. And sometimes, things don’t work out because we are not ready and haven’t done the work to get the accomplishment. It is easy to make the fault of others, and sometimes, that is even true. But I know that I always can control my own actions and if you complain about a problem, once you are finished complaining, it is still a problem. Only action creates future opportunities. My actions are the only things I can control. I hope this sticks with her and my kids because I know it is something my parents instilled in me. Of course, we need to focus on what school and learning can look like in the future, but we also have to understand that the future is also very dependent on what we install in our children today.

George Couros

16,598 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

We all know AI is the future of technology. But almost nobody will OWN the technology shaping that future. The AI race is already underway. Billions are being invested. Companies are moving fast. AI is already reshaping entire industries. But when all this value gets created…Who actually benefits? Right now, mostly a handful of billionaires and Big Tech companies. We don’t think that’s fair. If AI is being built on the data, behavior, and contributions of ordinary people… Then ordinary people should share in the value it creates. That’s exactly what we’re building at Action Model: A future where AI is owned by the people, not just the few at the top.
0:25

We all know AI is the future of technology. But almost nobody will OWN the technology shaping that future. The AI race is already underway. Billions are being invested. Companies are moving fast. AI is already reshaping entire industries. But when all this value gets created…Who actually benefits? Right now, mostly a handful of billionaires and Big Tech companies. We don’t think that’s fair. If AI is being built on the data, behavior, and contributions of ordinary people… Then ordinary people should share in the value it creates. That’s exactly what we’re building at Action Model: A future where AI is owned by the people, not just the few at the top.

Action Model

20,863 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

🚨IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT FROM $ARMY 🚨 Let me tell you something. Yes, it's true. We reached 100M market cap a month ago, and now we're trying to make an important floor from which to bounce. Two months ago, we were barely at 1M market cap. The important thing about an asset is not how it behaves in the upswings, but its strength in the downswings. Our story is the story of $XRP. It's a story of redemption, of struggle, of feeling, of hard work. We've come a long way because of who we are, because of what we like to do, because of the toughness of the XRP $ARMY We will continue to work hard, day after day, just like Ripple has fought against the SEC for 7 years. We are XRP holders with diamond hands, accustomed to rowing when there's a storm. We are the XRP $ARMY, the token that represents the movement of XRP holders. Do you like XRP? This is your home. This is your place. We work to achieve greatness. A wise man once said that an asset shows its strength after recovering from several -80%. Every recovery that is made is another sign of strength. We have a listing on a Top 10 CEX on the way. It is almost time to launch it, right now during these holidays it is difficult to speed it up but everything is agreed: $ARMY will be listed on a top 10 exchange. And not only that, but we have many things prepared. If you like XRP, I highly recommend that you watch the attached video with sound. This is us. This is our fight. This is, definitely, your fight. We are not going to give up. We are not going to fall. The community is EVERYTHING, and there is nothing stronger than the XRP ARMY The golden age of XRP begins. We shall prevail. And by the way, we are delighted that there are token brothers who are bringing attention to XRP. Together we are stronger.
0:57

🚨IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT FROM $ARMY 🚨 Let me tell you something. Yes, it's true. We reached 100M market cap a month ago, and now we're trying to make an important floor from which to bounce. Two months ago, we were barely at 1M market cap. The important thing about an asset is not how it behaves in the upswings, but its strength in the downswings. Our story is the story of $XRP. It's a story of redemption, of struggle, of feeling, of hard work. We've come a long way because of who we are, because of what we like to do, because of the toughness of the XRP $ARMY We will continue to work hard, day after day, just like Ripple has fought against the SEC for 7 years. We are XRP holders with diamond hands, accustomed to rowing when there's a storm. We are the XRP $ARMY, the token that represents the movement of XRP holders. Do you like XRP? This is your home. This is your place. We work to achieve greatness. A wise man once said that an asset shows its strength after recovering from several -80%. Every recovery that is made is another sign of strength. We have a listing on a Top 10 CEX on the way. It is almost time to launch it, right now during these holidays it is difficult to speed it up but everything is agreed: $ARMY will be listed on a top 10 exchange. And not only that, but we have many things prepared. If you like XRP, I highly recommend that you watch the attached video with sound. This is us. This is our fight. This is, definitely, your fight. We are not going to give up. We are not going to fall. The community is EVERYTHING, and there is nothing stronger than the XRP ARMY The golden age of XRP begins. We shall prevail. And by the way, we are delighted that there are token brothers who are bringing attention to XRP. Together we are stronger.

$ARMY

20,940 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Jensen Huang explains how he designed NVIDIA from first principles “With respect to building a company, the first thing you have to do—as with all problems—is start from first principles. What is this machine that we’re trying to create? What is its input? What is its output? What are the conditions that it’s in? What is the industry like? Is it a fast moving industry? Is it a bureaucratic industry? Is it a highly regulated industry? And what are you trying to build?” Thinking about it from this perspective, there were several things Jensen wanted to do with the company: “I wanted to create a company that naturally attracts amazing people, and the reason for that is our company’s mission is to solve computing problems that are barely possible.” He also wanted a company that was “as small as possible” and “empowered people.” “If you want an organization that obeys command and control, then you make it a pyramid just like the military—all the way back to the Roman Empire. But If you want to empower people, you want to make it as flat as possible so that information travels quickly.” He continues: “We also don’t have business units. We don’t have divisions. Everybody works as one, and the company is shaped in a way that allows us to build accelerated computing best.” Video source: Sana (2023)
1:56

Jensen Huang explains how he designed NVIDIA from first principles “With respect to building a company, the first thing you have to do—as with all problems—is start from first principles. What is this machine that we’re trying to create? What is its input? What is its output? What are the conditions that it’s in? What is the industry like? Is it a fast moving industry? Is it a bureaucratic industry? Is it a highly regulated industry? And what are you trying to build?” Thinking about it from this perspective, there were several things Jensen wanted to do with the company: “I wanted to create a company that naturally attracts amazing people, and the reason for that is our company’s mission is to solve computing problems that are barely possible.” He also wanted a company that was “as small as possible” and “empowered people.” “If you want an organization that obeys command and control, then you make it a pyramid just like the military—all the way back to the Roman Empire. But If you want to empower people, you want to make it as flat as possible so that information travels quickly.” He continues: “We also don’t have business units. We don’t have divisions. Everybody works as one, and the company is shaped in a way that allows us to build accelerated computing best.” Video source: Sana (2023)

Startup Archive

63,899 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

.Charlie Kirk “COURAGE IS DOING THE RIGHT THING WHEN YOU DON’T KNOW HOW IT IS GOING TO WORK OUT. COURAGE IS COMMITTING YOURSELF TO THE CORRECT COURSE OF ACTION REGARDLESS OF THE COST ASSOCIATED TO IT. EVERY HUMAN BEING I BELIEVE IS MADE IN THE IMAGE OF THE DIVINE, SCARED AND UNIQUE. AND IF WE GET AWAY FROM THIS PRINCIPLE, AS WE HAVE, WE NOT ONLY HAVE MORAL DEGRADATION, WE NOT ONLY HAVE THE COLLAPSING SOCIETY AROUND US, BUT IT’S BAD FOR THAT BEING ITSELF. THAT BEING ITSELF IS UNIQUE. THAT BEING HAS RIGHTS AND WHO ARE WE TO SAY JUST BECAUSE WE’RE OLDER THAT WE GET TO MURDER IT.”
1:29

.Charlie Kirk “COURAGE IS DOING THE RIGHT THING WHEN YOU DON’T KNOW HOW IT IS GOING TO WORK OUT. COURAGE IS COMMITTING YOURSELF TO THE CORRECT COURSE OF ACTION REGARDLESS OF THE COST ASSOCIATED TO IT. EVERY HUMAN BEING I BELIEVE IS MADE IN THE IMAGE OF THE DIVINE, SCARED AND UNIQUE. AND IF WE GET AWAY FROM THIS PRINCIPLE, AS WE HAVE, WE NOT ONLY HAVE MORAL DEGRADATION, WE NOT ONLY HAVE THE COLLAPSING SOCIETY AROUND US, BUT IT’S BAD FOR THAT BEING ITSELF. THAT BEING ITSELF IS UNIQUE. THAT BEING HAS RIGHTS AND WHO ARE WE TO SAY JUST BECAUSE WE’RE OLDER THAT WE GET TO MURDER IT.”

🦅 Eagle Wings 🦅

32,111 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

ELON: ONE OF THE HARDEST THINGS IS TO BE USEFUL “One of the hardest things to do is to be useful. To have high utility under the curve. How much help did you provide to each person on average? Then, how many people did you help? The total utility. Trying to actually ship useful products that people like to a large number of people is so insanely hard. It boggles the mind. This why I say there's a hell of a difference between a company that has shipped product and one that has not shipped product. This is night and day. Then, even once you ship product, can you make the value of the output worth more than the cost of the input, which is, again, insanely difficult, especially with hardware.” Source: Tesla AI Day, September 2022
0:38

ELON: ONE OF THE HARDEST THINGS IS TO BE USEFUL “One of the hardest things to do is to be useful. To have high utility under the curve. How much help did you provide to each person on average? Then, how many people did you help? The total utility. Trying to actually ship useful products that people like to a large number of people is so insanely hard. It boggles the mind. This why I say there's a hell of a difference between a company that has shipped product and one that has not shipped product. This is night and day. Then, even once you ship product, can you make the value of the output worth more than the cost of the input, which is, again, insanely difficult, especially with hardware.” Source: Tesla AI Day, September 2022

Mario Nawfal

4,865,977 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

In light of the names Anneke Lucas mentioned, like the former Canadian prime minister who is dead now, but is the father of the current one. It is being shared all over the internet now. Canadian accounts are posting this, and it is getting lots of attention. This is also a wake-up call for Canada. A lot of people in Canada are commenting on social media that they are shocked by this guy being named. But actually he was already mentioned by Cathy O'Brien in 1995, as being involved in these networks! See the video below. So there is corroboration between these witnesses. A lot of these former and now deceased prime ministers she mentions were, at that time that she was in it in the 70s, involved in this. Also the Belgian one that Anneke names, and was also named by other witnesses. Which tells us, like these witnesses say, this was a global network. So the truth was already out there a bit, but it is coming out more for a bigger public. We will have more revelations coming out in 2025 about these dark dealing that have been going on at the highest levels, I'm sure. This is going to be a shock for a lot of people that are new to this information, because it is reaching a bigger public. Some will choose not to believe it, do no research, and look no further. But a lot more people will wake up to this, it is unstoppable. Of course, we have to check in with our own vibration. If it gets too heavy, take some time out and go for a walk in nature. Whilst revelations are important for the truth to come out, and confronting hard information is part of that, we have to check with our selves how this information is affecting us, and sometimes we need a time off. It is always most important to maintain a healthy balance between checking in with this information and our own peace of mind. #Epstein #PBDpodcast
1:42

In light of the names Anneke Lucas mentioned, like the former Canadian prime minister who is dead now, but is the father of the current one. It is being shared all over the internet now. Canadian accounts are posting this, and it is getting lots of attention. This is also a wake-up call for Canada. A lot of people in Canada are commenting on social media that they are shocked by this guy being named. But actually he was already mentioned by Cathy O'Brien in 1995, as being involved in these networks! See the video below. So there is corroboration between these witnesses. A lot of these former and now deceased prime ministers she mentions were, at that time that she was in it in the 70s, involved in this. Also the Belgian one that Anneke names, and was also named by other witnesses. Which tells us, like these witnesses say, this was a global network. So the truth was already out there a bit, but it is coming out more for a bigger public. We will have more revelations coming out in 2025 about these dark dealing that have been going on at the highest levels, I'm sure. This is going to be a shock for a lot of people that are new to this information, because it is reaching a bigger public. Some will choose not to believe it, do no research, and look no further. But a lot more people will wake up to this, it is unstoppable. Of course, we have to check in with our own vibration. If it gets too heavy, take some time out and go for a walk in nature. Whilst revelations are important for the truth to come out, and confronting hard information is part of that, we have to check with our selves how this information is affecting us, and sometimes we need a time off. It is always most important to maintain a healthy balance between checking in with this information and our own peace of mind. #Epstein #PBDpodcast

Jens Patteeuw

20,426 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr