Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

Open-source AI is catching up to proprietary frontier models, but the hardware needed to run them are gatekept. B3 is launching B3IQ so anyone can own their own intelligence. daryl and Viktoriya (B3) and Yorke Ξ Rhodes III 🟧 🇺🇦 (Microsoft/NYU) join Stateful, hosted by Franklin Bi In this...

PanteraCapital's profile picture

Pantera Capital

224,744 subscribers

22,485 просмотров • 21 дней назад •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

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

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

MTS

17,404 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

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

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

dnap

110,354 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Jensen says Open Source can be MORE expensive for enterprises, Brad Gerstner explains why: Brad Gerstner: “Over the last two weeks, everybody's been saying that the Chinese have caught up, that open source tokens have caught up in intelligence, that they're much cheaper, etc. And Elon comes out and says, ‘Not so fast. We're entering the singularity, and the frontier models are way further ahead than people think.’ I believe that to be true. And then Jensen came out this week and said, ‘Closed models are actually cheaper if you don't have to build it for yourself, the training costs, and a lot of expertise to fine-tune, and maintain, and guardrail, and keep it safe. So he's basically making the argument that not only are the frontier models further ahead, but that the cost differential between the two is not what everybody's making it out to be, which I think explains why (closed models) continue to run away with it on the revenue side of the equation. For the vast majority of use cases, I think token consumption is going up for the open source guys, while share of economics is going up for the frontier labs. I think that's what we want to see.” $NVDA
0:57

Jensen says Open Source can be MORE expensive for enterprises, Brad Gerstner explains why: Brad Gerstner: “Over the last two weeks, everybody's been saying that the Chinese have caught up, that open source tokens have caught up in intelligence, that they're much cheaper, etc. And Elon comes out and says, ‘Not so fast. We're entering the singularity, and the frontier models are way further ahead than people think.’ I believe that to be true. And then Jensen came out this week and said, ‘Closed models are actually cheaper if you don't have to build it for yourself, the training costs, and a lot of expertise to fine-tune, and maintain, and guardrail, and keep it safe. So he's basically making the argument that not only are the frontier models further ahead, but that the cost differential between the two is not what everybody's making it out to be, which I think explains why (closed models) continue to run away with it on the revenue side of the equation. For the vast majority of use cases, I think token consumption is going up for the open source guys, while share of economics is going up for the frontier labs. I think that's what we want to see.” $NVDA

The All-In Podcast

61,649 просмотров • 23 дней назад

What does it mean when an AI model is “open weights” and how is it different than “open source”? Welcome to the next episode of the Open Model Series with merve, Hugging Face AI/ML engineer & open-sourceress! Every week we will discuss open-source & open-weight AI: what it is, how it works, and how you can run them on your own compute. Episode 3 out next week; episode 1 linked below. Please leave all your questions about open-source & open-weight AI in the comments. This is a super important topic that is novel to most people, and it can be challenging to grasp - so your questions are shared with many others.
1:02

What does it mean when an AI model is “open weights” and how is it different than “open source”? Welcome to the next episode of the Open Model Series with merve, Hugging Face AI/ML engineer & open-sourceress! Every week we will discuss open-source & open-weight AI: what it is, how it works, and how you can run them on your own compute. Episode 3 out next week; episode 1 linked below. Please leave all your questions about open-source & open-weight AI in the comments. This is a super important topic that is novel to most people, and it can be challenging to grasp - so your questions are shared with many others.

Harper Carroll

32,624 просмотров • 15 дней назад

"You should really treat having your own agent as having your own child. It's not one-click automation, you're raising it." Demi Guo (Demi Guo ), CEO of Pika on why agents need taste, not just prompts. Lin Qiao (Lin Qiao), CEO of Fireworks AI on why 95% of the world's data is still locked inside enterprises and why open-source models are converging with frontier. They join @jason on This Week in AI Episode 9: 00:00 Intro to Lin Qiao and Demi Guo 08:43 95% of private data locked in enterprises 16:03 The interface for creation is a human-like agent 22:07 The death of middle management 28:03 Taste, judgment, and why "slop" is the real risk 33:40 Agents aren't tools, they're children you raise 39:36 How close is open-source to frontier? 53:04 Agents as self-expression 63:17 Meta's Muse model goes closed-source
1:14:18

"You should really treat having your own agent as having your own child. It's not one-click automation, you're raising it." Demi Guo (Demi Guo ), CEO of Pika on why agents need taste, not just prompts. Lin Qiao (Lin Qiao), CEO of Fireworks AI on why 95% of the world's data is still locked inside enterprises and why open-source models are converging with frontier. They join @jason on This Week in AI Episode 9: 00:00 Intro to Lin Qiao and Demi Guo 08:43 95% of private data locked in enterprises 16:03 The interface for creation is a human-like agent 22:07 The death of middle management 28:03 Taste, judgment, and why "slop" is the real risk 33:40 Agents aren't tools, they're children you raise 39:36 How close is open-source to frontier? 53:04 Agents as self-expression 63:17 Meta's Muse model goes closed-source

This Week in AI

48,202 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

Palantir CEO Alex Karp on what customers actually want, the real business of frontier labs, and the importance of open source models: “What the technical customers want is control over their compute, their models, their data stack, and their alpha. They want to know they own the means of production, and it's not being transferred to someone else.” "Who owns the data? Are the prompts secure? Is this being transferred to you?" "If it was so valuable, and I can make you a billion dollars, wouldn't I say I'll make you a billion dollars and I want 30%? Why are they charging for tokens if it's so valuable?"
2:49

Palantir CEO Alex Karp on what customers actually want, the real business of frontier labs, and the importance of open source models: “What the technical customers want is control over their compute, their models, their data stack, and their alpha. They want to know they own the means of production, and it's not being transferred to someone else.” "Who owns the data? Are the prompts secure? Is this being transferred to you?" "If it was so valuable, and I can make you a billion dollars, wouldn't I say I'll make you a billion dollars and I want 30%? Why are they charging for tokens if it's so valuable?"

Palantir

4,519,745 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Announcing the Open Model Series: a new series on open source AI models, with merve of Hugging Face. Hugging Face is the open model hub: it hosts model weights, datasets, evals, & demo apps, and maintains the open-source libraries (like transformers) used to run and train them. I think of it like GitHub, but for AI models. You can download open models and run them on your own machines. In this series we'll cover what open source and open weight models are, how they work, how to run them yourself, and why they're important. By the way - this video is edited entirely with Claude! I can make a tutorial on how I did it. If there's a question you want answered about open models, leave it in the comments. We will read them all. Episode 1 is out soon.
0:26

Announcing the Open Model Series: a new series on open source AI models, with merve of Hugging Face. Hugging Face is the open model hub: it hosts model weights, datasets, evals, & demo apps, and maintains the open-source libraries (like transformers) used to run and train them. I think of it like GitHub, but for AI models. You can download open models and run them on your own machines. In this series we'll cover what open source and open weight models are, how they work, how to run them yourself, and why they're important. By the way - this video is edited entirely with Claude! I can make a tutorial on how I did it. If there's a question you want answered about open models, leave it in the comments. We will read them all. Episode 1 is out soon.

Harper Carroll

30,392 просмотров • 29 дней назад

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

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

Jawwwn

180,421 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

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

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

Vikram M

12,078 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

America is about to lose the AI race, and it will not happen at the frontier. It will happen at the floor. Everyone is watching who ships the smartest model. The actual war is over the 80% of tokens nobody posts about: the routine inference that quietly runs the world. On current trajectory, that fight is already lost. Watch what people do, not what they say. Coinbase just defaulted its own engineers off frontier models onto open weights and cut AI spend nearly in half while usage kept climbing. Even NVIDIA runs a closed frontier model as an orchestrator and pushes the volume to its own open weights. The frontier is becoming a router. The volume goes open. That part is settled. Here is the part that should terrify Washington: the only credible open tier today is Chinese. GLM. Kimi. And the US answer is to tighten export controls and freeze its own labs in place, as if you can embargo a file that is already downloaded, or price-match free. So China hands the Global South Huawei hardware and free open models, and a generation in Africa and Southeast Asia learns to reason through a model that will not tell them what happened at Tiananmen Square. That is not a cost story. That is influence through inference. You do not have to win hearts and minds when you supply the mind. Open source is not a nice-to-have for America. It is the whole ballgame for the 80%, and right now the US is barely on the field. We need American open weights. Not eventually. Now.
0:47

America is about to lose the AI race, and it will not happen at the frontier. It will happen at the floor. Everyone is watching who ships the smartest model. The actual war is over the 80% of tokens nobody posts about: the routine inference that quietly runs the world. On current trajectory, that fight is already lost. Watch what people do, not what they say. Coinbase just defaulted its own engineers off frontier models onto open weights and cut AI spend nearly in half while usage kept climbing. Even NVIDIA runs a closed frontier model as an orchestrator and pushes the volume to its own open weights. The frontier is becoming a router. The volume goes open. That part is settled. Here is the part that should terrify Washington: the only credible open tier today is Chinese. GLM. Kimi. And the US answer is to tighten export controls and freeze its own labs in place, as if you can embargo a file that is already downloaded, or price-match free. So China hands the Global South Huawei hardware and free open models, and a generation in Africa and Southeast Asia learns to reason through a model that will not tell them what happened at Tiananmen Square. That is not a cost story. That is influence through inference. You do not have to win hearts and minds when you supply the mind. Open source is not a nice-to-have for America. It is the whole ballgame for the 80%, and right now the US is barely on the field. We need American open weights. Not eventually. Now.

Ben Pouladian

71,722 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Dust ( helps companies build AI teammates that work across their organization. Founded by former OpenAI researcher Stanislas Polu (Stanislas Polu) and his team, the company has spent the last three years building AI for work while the capabilities of frontier models have advanced at breakneck speed. At Startup School Paris, YC's Mathilde Collin sat down with Stanislas to talk about what it takes to build alongside frontier AI labs, why staying model agnostic is a competitive advantage, how AI is changing the way we work, and why the best startups are built around a problem founders can't stop thinking about. 01:09 — From Stripe to OpenAI to Founder 01:40 — Why Stan Left OpenAI 02:49 — What Dust Actually Does 03:46 — What Work Looks Like in 3 Years 04:53 — Where the Thesis Was Right (and Wrong) 07:05 — Building Alongside Frontier Labs 09:15 — Model Agnostic as a Moat 10:49 — How Frontier Labs Changed Fundraising 12:19 — Raising Small on Purpose 14:39 — What Mistral Got Right 15:11 — Building in France 16:37 — What Happens When Frontier Labs Enter Your Market? 18:27 — The Margin Problem
22:52

Dust ( helps companies build AI teammates that work across their organization. Founded by former OpenAI researcher Stanislas Polu (Stanislas Polu) and his team, the company has spent the last three years building AI for work while the capabilities of frontier models have advanced at breakneck speed. At Startup School Paris, YC's Mathilde Collin sat down with Stanislas to talk about what it takes to build alongside frontier AI labs, why staying model agnostic is a competitive advantage, how AI is changing the way we work, and why the best startups are built around a problem founders can't stop thinking about. 01:09 — From Stripe to OpenAI to Founder 01:40 — Why Stan Left OpenAI 02:49 — What Dust Actually Does 03:46 — What Work Looks Like in 3 Years 04:53 — Where the Thesis Was Right (and Wrong) 07:05 — Building Alongside Frontier Labs 09:15 — Model Agnostic as a Moat 10:49 — How Frontier Labs Changed Fundraising 12:19 — Raising Small on Purpose 14:39 — What Mistral Got Right 15:11 — Building in France 16:37 — What Happens When Frontier Labs Enter Your Market? 18:27 — The Margin Problem

Y Combinator

54,342 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

China just released an open source AI model that matches the best closed models from OpenAI and Anthropic. Gavin Baker explained exactly how they did it and the answer should concern every American AI lab. The model is called GLM 5.2. It was built by Z. AI. You get 744 billion parameters, 1 million token context window and its MIT license, meaning anyone can download it, fork it, build a company on it, with no restrictions and no Dario. It scored 51 points on the artificial analysis intelligence index. The highest score any open weight model has ever achieved. It beat GPT 5.5 on the frontier software engineering benchmark. It trails Claude Opus 4.8 by less than one percentage point. And it costs 85% less to run than GPT 5.5 for comparable performance. Gavin Baker said on the All-In podcast that this model has challenged some of his beliefs. Then he explained how China built it. The method is called distillation. Just think of tens of thousands of phones and computers running simultaneously, all hitting the frontier model APIs through masked accounts, asking specific questions, and harvesting what happens inside the model when it answers. Every reasoning step, every token. The entire thinking process gets recorded and fed back into the Chinese model during training. It is a cheat sheet. It is the answer key to the exam. And here is the part that should worry everyone. Sacks said it plainly. China was already nine months behind American models. But now that GLM 5.2 is good enough to run its own reinforcement learning, it can improve itself without needing to distill from American models anymore. The cheat sheet let them get close enough to start writing their own answers. Sacks said we are six months behind on the model and 24 months behind on silicon and they are only a few months behind in total. The Z. AI founder told Elon Musk directly that open weight fable-level capability will be here before Q1 2027. Every restriction Anthropic lobbied for, every self-imposed safety guardrail, every month of delay in releasing American frontier models accelerated this. The Chinese labs were not under those restrictions. They were not going to wait. The composable model future Gavin described, where every enterprise runs a frontier model alongside their own fine-tuned open weight model, is coming regardless of what American labs do next. The question is just whether the open weight half of that stack is American or Chinese. Right now it is Chinese. WATCH THE FULL PODCAST ON The All-In Podcast
3:21

China just released an open source AI model that matches the best closed models from OpenAI and Anthropic. Gavin Baker explained exactly how they did it and the answer should concern every American AI lab. The model is called GLM 5.2. It was built by Z. AI. You get 744 billion parameters, 1 million token context window and its MIT license, meaning anyone can download it, fork it, build a company on it, with no restrictions and no Dario. It scored 51 points on the artificial analysis intelligence index. The highest score any open weight model has ever achieved. It beat GPT 5.5 on the frontier software engineering benchmark. It trails Claude Opus 4.8 by less than one percentage point. And it costs 85% less to run than GPT 5.5 for comparable performance. Gavin Baker said on the All-In podcast that this model has challenged some of his beliefs. Then he explained how China built it. The method is called distillation. Just think of tens of thousands of phones and computers running simultaneously, all hitting the frontier model APIs through masked accounts, asking specific questions, and harvesting what happens inside the model when it answers. Every reasoning step, every token. The entire thinking process gets recorded and fed back into the Chinese model during training. It is a cheat sheet. It is the answer key to the exam. And here is the part that should worry everyone. Sacks said it plainly. China was already nine months behind American models. But now that GLM 5.2 is good enough to run its own reinforcement learning, it can improve itself without needing to distill from American models anymore. The cheat sheet let them get close enough to start writing their own answers. Sacks said we are six months behind on the model and 24 months behind on silicon and they are only a few months behind in total. The Z. AI founder told Elon Musk directly that open weight fable-level capability will be here before Q1 2027. Every restriction Anthropic lobbied for, every self-imposed safety guardrail, every month of delay in releasing American frontier models accelerated this. The Chinese labs were not under those restrictions. They were not going to wait. The composable model future Gavin described, where every enterprise runs a frontier model alongside their own fine-tuned open weight model, is coming regardless of what American labs do next. The question is just whether the open weight half of that stack is American or Chinese. Right now it is Chinese. WATCH THE FULL PODCAST ON The All-In Podcast

Ihtesham Ali

86,452 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

🚨David Ondrej exposes the truth about the frontier labs. “The progress isn’t slowing down for them, it’s slowing down for us the slaves” “If you think Mythos or Fable 5 is the best model Anthropic has you’re delusional” this is the first time ever that the best AI models are not publicly accessible Anthropic has fear mongered every single human and is now playing the victim with OpenAI after getting “banned” by the U.S government. THIS NEEDS TO WAKE YOU UP frontier models moving forward will become more restricted, less accessible, and more expensive and the only way to combat that is with open-source models. Investing into a DGX spark or 5090 Linux for localized intelligence and building your own AI lab is where the future is heading. every single person needs to start contributing to open-source together for the betterment of society.
0:55

🚨David Ondrej exposes the truth about the frontier labs. “The progress isn’t slowing down for them, it’s slowing down for us the slaves” “If you think Mythos or Fable 5 is the best model Anthropic has you’re delusional” this is the first time ever that the best AI models are not publicly accessible Anthropic has fear mongered every single human and is now playing the victim with OpenAI after getting “banned” by the U.S government. THIS NEEDS TO WAKE YOU UP frontier models moving forward will become more restricted, less accessible, and more expensive and the only way to combat that is with open-source models. Investing into a DGX spark or 5090 Linux for localized intelligence and building your own AI lab is where the future is heading. every single person needs to start contributing to open-source together for the betterment of society.

Vadim

83,314 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Chamath is making one of the most important business arguments of 2026. Half of large US companies right now cannot generate returns that exceed their cost of capital, which has normalized back to its long run average of 8 to 11%. Another one in seven companies globally is stuck generating persistent returns between 1 and 5% and most businesses don't have room for error and in this environment walks every frontier AI lab saying the same thing, give us your data, your workflows, your processes and our model will make everything better. And companies by the millions said yes. What they didn't fully account for is what happens on the other side of that door. Every time an employee runs a query through a frontier model API, the prompt goes through external servers, workflows, customer data, pricing logic, internal processes, all of it transmitted through a third party. As Alex Karp said companies are spending on tokens while handing over the exact proprietary advantages that make their business worth owning. Microsoft blocked internal use of Anthropic's Claude Fable 5 but over its 30-day data retention policy and the largest software company in the world decided a frontier model's data handling was too risky for its own employees. A US government action revoked access to another frontier model for foreign nationals overnight. Now here's where the cost math becomes impossible to ignore. Deutsche Bank calculated a roughly 65x cost gap between frontier models like Claude Fable 5 at ~$3.25 per task and open-source alternatives at ~$0.05. For 90% of everyday enterprise tasks, performance is comparable. Open-weight models now match closed frontier systems on core agent tasks at roughly one-tenth the cost, a high-volume deployment that costs $250/day on Claude runs at $12/day on an open-source equivalent. Chamath Palihapitiya tested this directly by running a standard enterprise code migration task through an orchestration layer wrapping an open-source model came in 16.4x cheaper than using a frontier model directly.
5:24

Chamath is making one of the most important business arguments of 2026. Half of large US companies right now cannot generate returns that exceed their cost of capital, which has normalized back to its long run average of 8 to 11%. Another one in seven companies globally is stuck generating persistent returns between 1 and 5% and most businesses don't have room for error and in this environment walks every frontier AI lab saying the same thing, give us your data, your workflows, your processes and our model will make everything better. And companies by the millions said yes. What they didn't fully account for is what happens on the other side of that door. Every time an employee runs a query through a frontier model API, the prompt goes through external servers, workflows, customer data, pricing logic, internal processes, all of it transmitted through a third party. As Alex Karp said companies are spending on tokens while handing over the exact proprietary advantages that make their business worth owning. Microsoft blocked internal use of Anthropic's Claude Fable 5 but over its 30-day data retention policy and the largest software company in the world decided a frontier model's data handling was too risky for its own employees. A US government action revoked access to another frontier model for foreign nationals overnight. Now here's where the cost math becomes impossible to ignore. Deutsche Bank calculated a roughly 65x cost gap between frontier models like Claude Fable 5 at ~$3.25 per task and open-source alternatives at ~$0.05. For 90% of everyday enterprise tasks, performance is comparable. Open-weight models now match closed frontier systems on core agent tasks at roughly one-tenth the cost, a high-volume deployment that costs $250/day on Claude runs at $12/day on an open-source equivalent. Chamath Palihapitiya tested this directly by running a standard enterprise code migration task through an orchestration layer wrapping an open-source model came in 16.4x cheaper than using a frontier model directly.

Milk Road AI

281,695 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Inside Nemotron and NVIDIA's AI lab: my conversation with Bryan Catanzaro (Bryan Catanzaro). NVIDIA is a chip company. So why does it put hundreds of researchers on building AI models - and then give them away for free? We go deep into the Nemotron models, what it takes to build a top AI lab, and the future of frontier AI. 01:33 - Is open source AI catching the frontier? 05:29 - Do closed labs blocking distillation slow open source down? 07:42 - Is the US falling behind China? 10:30 - Why companies actually choose open models 12:39 - A "crazy" 2008 bet: machine learning on GPUs 15:33 - Working with Andrew Ng and Dario Amodei at Baidu 17:41 - Coming back to NVIDIA: DLSS and the birth of Megatron 21:55 - The real reason NVIDIA builds its own models 24:28 - Is Moore's Law really dead? 33:37 - The Nemotron family: Nano, Super, Ultra 35:09 - Built for agents: why NVIDIA bets on speed 36:02 - How you train a 550B model in 4 bits 39:25 - Hybrid Mamba-Transformer, explained simply 42:31 - Mixture of experts, and why NVIDIA built NVL72 around it 47:26 - Why a 1-million-token context window matters 49:26 - Multi-token prediction: how the model predicts 5 tokens at once 52:47 - Multi-teacher distillation: teaching one model from many 58:01 - Where reinforcement learning goes next 01:00:16 - Inside NVIDIA's research org: "the mission is the boss" 01:04:03 - How NVIDIA decides who gets the GPUs 01:10:53 - Why NVIDIA still feels entrepreneurial after 33 years 01:12:58 - Why Bryan doesn't believe in the singularity 01:17:50 - The AI backlash 01:19:18 - The controversial case: open AI is safer than closed
1:22:57

Inside Nemotron and NVIDIA's AI lab: my conversation with Bryan Catanzaro (Bryan Catanzaro). NVIDIA is a chip company. So why does it put hundreds of researchers on building AI models - and then give them away for free? We go deep into the Nemotron models, what it takes to build a top AI lab, and the future of frontier AI. 01:33 - Is open source AI catching the frontier? 05:29 - Do closed labs blocking distillation slow open source down? 07:42 - Is the US falling behind China? 10:30 - Why companies actually choose open models 12:39 - A "crazy" 2008 bet: machine learning on GPUs 15:33 - Working with Andrew Ng and Dario Amodei at Baidu 17:41 - Coming back to NVIDIA: DLSS and the birth of Megatron 21:55 - The real reason NVIDIA builds its own models 24:28 - Is Moore's Law really dead? 33:37 - The Nemotron family: Nano, Super, Ultra 35:09 - Built for agents: why NVIDIA bets on speed 36:02 - How you train a 550B model in 4 bits 39:25 - Hybrid Mamba-Transformer, explained simply 42:31 - Mixture of experts, and why NVIDIA built NVL72 around it 47:26 - Why a 1-million-token context window matters 49:26 - Multi-token prediction: how the model predicts 5 tokens at once 52:47 - Multi-teacher distillation: teaching one model from many 58:01 - Where reinforcement learning goes next 01:00:16 - Inside NVIDIA's research org: "the mission is the boss" 01:04:03 - How NVIDIA decides who gets the GPUs 01:10:53 - Why NVIDIA still feels entrepreneurial after 33 years 01:12:58 - Why Bryan doesn't believe in the singularity 01:17:50 - The AI backlash 01:19:18 - The controversial case: open AI is safer than closed

Matt Turck

56,903 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Alibaba says their latest model, Qwen3.8-Max, trails only Anthropic’s best, at just a fraction of the cost. With the White House likely backing off threats to block foreign open weight models entirely, is there any way for the American frontier to keep pace? And will US open weight models ever catch up to their Chinese counterparts? We asked Poolside’s CTO Eiso Kant, EXO Labs co-founder Alex Cheema, and Qloo founder Alex Elias to break down where the AI race currently stands. Plus Hank Green thinks AI is addictive… Would you allow AI to monitor your baby overnight if it helped them sleep?… And Jason’s pitch for licensing companies to test out their autonomous driving systems. 0:00 Guest intros and open 7:36 Small vs. frontier models: a false choice? 10:03 Why Poolside thinks coding is the path to AGI 12:55 A first look at EXO's 16:24 The White House's open source pivot 20:21 Margins, compute, and "dirt to intelligence" 36:02 Jason's self-driving auction pitch 37:58 Hank Green's AI apology 38:45 Is AI addictive? 1:08:31 What does it mean for AI to be "privacy first"? 1:10:29 Enterprise AI sovereignty and "colonization" This Week in AI Ep 25 is streaming now! 🎥 Watch the full episode here 👇
1:20:00

Alibaba says their latest model, Qwen3.8-Max, trails only Anthropic’s best, at just a fraction of the cost. With the White House likely backing off threats to block foreign open weight models entirely, is there any way for the American frontier to keep pace? And will US open weight models ever catch up to their Chinese counterparts? We asked Poolside’s CTO Eiso Kant, EXO Labs co-founder Alex Cheema, and Qloo founder Alex Elias to break down where the AI race currently stands. Plus Hank Green thinks AI is addictive… Would you allow AI to monitor your baby overnight if it helped them sleep?… And Jason’s pitch for licensing companies to test out their autonomous driving systems. 0:00 Guest intros and open 7:36 Small vs. frontier models: a false choice? 10:03 Why Poolside thinks coding is the path to AGI 12:55 A first look at EXO's 16:24 The White House's open source pivot 20:21 Margins, compute, and "dirt to intelligence" 36:02 Jason's self-driving auction pitch 37:58 Hank Green's AI apology 38:45 Is AI addictive? 1:08:31 What does it mean for AI to be "privacy first"? 1:10:29 Enterprise AI sovereignty and "colonization" This Week in AI Ep 25 is streaming now! 🎥 Watch the full episode here 👇

This Week in AI

77,661 просмотров • 25 дней назад

Microsoft AI CEO Mustafa Suleyman explains the exit plan behind the biggest partnership in AI. It began with a Satya Nadella message surfaced in the trial: "I don't want to be Intel and have OpenAI be Microsoft." The escape hardware is already shipping. "Partnerships like that don't last forever. OpenAI wants to be a trillion-dollar public company... They want to have the freedom to operate and be able to buy compute from all sorts of other places, build their own compute, partner with whoever they want." "We've made the decision the early part of last year, which obviously informed all the contract negotiations, which then all got resolved and signed in October." "We now are able to manufacture and ship a chip that is 30% cheaper than a GB200 inside of our own clusters." "The MAI-Thinking-1 model that we've just released actually delivers 1.4x performance per watt improvement on top of the 30% improvement that you get from running on a Maia 200, once we co-optimize the models for our tasks." Microsoft watched Windows commoditize Intel and is refusing the Intel seat this time: own silicon, own frontier model, co-designed end to end. The open question is which gap closes first: OpenAI building Microsoft's enterprise distribution, or Microsoft catching OpenAI's frontier models. - Mustafa Suleyman (Mustafa Suleyman), CEO of Microsoft AI, on Decoder with Nilay Patel (nilay patel)
4:18

Microsoft AI CEO Mustafa Suleyman explains the exit plan behind the biggest partnership in AI. It began with a Satya Nadella message surfaced in the trial: "I don't want to be Intel and have OpenAI be Microsoft." The escape hardware is already shipping. "Partnerships like that don't last forever. OpenAI wants to be a trillion-dollar public company... They want to have the freedom to operate and be able to buy compute from all sorts of other places, build their own compute, partner with whoever they want." "We've made the decision the early part of last year, which obviously informed all the contract negotiations, which then all got resolved and signed in October." "We now are able to manufacture and ship a chip that is 30% cheaper than a GB200 inside of our own clusters." "The MAI-Thinking-1 model that we've just released actually delivers 1.4x performance per watt improvement on top of the 30% improvement that you get from running on a Maia 200, once we co-optimize the models for our tasks." Microsoft watched Windows commoditize Intel and is refusing the Intel seat this time: own silicon, own frontier model, co-designed end to end. The open question is which gap closes first: OpenAI building Microsoft's enterprise distribution, or Microsoft catching OpenAI's frontier models. - Mustafa Suleyman (Mustafa Suleyman), CEO of Microsoft AI, on Decoder with Nilay Patel (nilay patel)

Karl Mehta

56,899 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

🚨 CHINA'S AI PLAYBOOK ISN'T TO BEAT OPENAI AND ANTHROPIC. IT'S TO MAKE THEM IRRELEVANT BY MAKING INTELLIGENCE FREE. Chinese labs are giving away frontier-level models for free. Zhipu's GLM-5 already beats Claude Opus 4.5 and Gemini 3.0 Pro on key benchmarks. DeepSeek, Qwen, and Kimi round out 4 of the top 5 open-weight models globally, all released under open licenses anyone can use commercially. The real weapon isn't the models, it's the cost to run them. Chinese provinces like Gansu, Guizhou, and Inner Mongolia are cutting data center power bills by up to 50%. DeepSeek trained its R1 model for around $6 million, compared to roughly $100 million for GPT-4. The remaining blocker is chips. US export controls still cut China off from Nvidia's best hardware. But Zhipu already trained a full frontier model entirely on Huawei's Ascend chips, no Nvidia involved. Huawei's next-gen Atlas 950 cluster, launching late 2026, claims 6.7 times the compute of Nvidia's planned NVL144 systems. If Huawei closes the chip gap while China keeps giving away free, near frontier models running on subsidized power. The entire business model OpenAI and Anthropic are built on, charging hundreds of billions in aggregate revenue for access to intelligence, stops making sense. Why pay premium prices for marginal capability gains when a free alternative running on cheap compute gets you 90% of the way there.
0:28

🚨 CHINA'S AI PLAYBOOK ISN'T TO BEAT OPENAI AND ANTHROPIC. IT'S TO MAKE THEM IRRELEVANT BY MAKING INTELLIGENCE FREE. Chinese labs are giving away frontier-level models for free. Zhipu's GLM-5 already beats Claude Opus 4.5 and Gemini 3.0 Pro on key benchmarks. DeepSeek, Qwen, and Kimi round out 4 of the top 5 open-weight models globally, all released under open licenses anyone can use commercially. The real weapon isn't the models, it's the cost to run them. Chinese provinces like Gansu, Guizhou, and Inner Mongolia are cutting data center power bills by up to 50%. DeepSeek trained its R1 model for around $6 million, compared to roughly $100 million for GPT-4. The remaining blocker is chips. US export controls still cut China off from Nvidia's best hardware. But Zhipu already trained a full frontier model entirely on Huawei's Ascend chips, no Nvidia involved. Huawei's next-gen Atlas 950 cluster, launching late 2026, claims 6.7 times the compute of Nvidia's planned NVL144 systems. If Huawei closes the chip gap while China keeps giving away free, near frontier models running on subsidized power. The entire business model OpenAI and Anthropic are built on, charging hundreds of billions in aggregate revenue for access to intelligence, stops making sense. Why pay premium prices for marginal capability gains when a free alternative running on cheap compute gets you 90% of the way there.

The Macro Paper

71,921 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Palantir's CEO just exposed Sam Altman and Dario Amodei for robbing every Fortune 500 company. Within two minutes, Alex Karp took the entire frontier AI industry apart on national television. His exact words: "Every single enterprise in this country, these people are LIVID. They are paying for tokens that create no value. These people are stealing the weights and alpha of my business." He literally said the entire frontier AI business model is intellectual property extraction dressed up as a subscription. Then he also destroyed the pricing model with a single question that Silicon Valley still refuses to answer: "If it was so valuable, let's say I can make you $1 billion tomorrow. Wouldn't I say I'll make you $1 billion and I want 30 percent? Why are they charging for tokens if it's so valuable?" That question breaks the industry. If OpenAI and Anthropic's models truly delivered the productivity gains the labs claim, they would take equity or a share of the profit they generate. They would not sell access by the million tokens. Token pricing is itself the CONFESSION that the product cannot produce reliable value at scale. If it did, they would price for the value. But they price for the compute because that is what they are actually selling. Karp went even further... He called the entire arrangement "a wealth tax that does not help the poor. It just punishes." American businesses are transferring the alpha of their operations, meaning the workflows, the customer data, the strategy memos, the internal models that make them competitive, directly into the training pipelines of a handful of Silicon Valley labs. Once those labs retrain, the customer's own edge becomes the next enterprise product sold back to their competitors. And the part the AI industry does not want anyone thinking about: Every enterprise running its confidential documents, its customer conversations, and its financial models through a frontier model is potentially teaching that model HOW to replace them. The vendor collects the token fee AND the compounding intelligence about that customer's business. That is the mechanism. And that is why Karp used the word "stealing." He claims this is why every executive he meets is furious in private and silent in public. Nobody wants to be the CEO who called out the labs and then discovered their next competitor was built on their own leaked workflows. The entire AI industry has been priced for perfection on one assumption: That frontier labs produce durable, defensible value that justifies infinite compute spend. But Karp just told us that the customers do not believe that assumption anymore. They believe they are being taxed without benefit, watched without consent, and copied without recourse. The moment enterprises stop believing, the whole valuation stack shakes.
2:45

Palantir's CEO just exposed Sam Altman and Dario Amodei for robbing every Fortune 500 company. Within two minutes, Alex Karp took the entire frontier AI industry apart on national television. His exact words: "Every single enterprise in this country, these people are LIVID. They are paying for tokens that create no value. These people are stealing the weights and alpha of my business." He literally said the entire frontier AI business model is intellectual property extraction dressed up as a subscription. Then he also destroyed the pricing model with a single question that Silicon Valley still refuses to answer: "If it was so valuable, let's say I can make you $1 billion tomorrow. Wouldn't I say I'll make you $1 billion and I want 30 percent? Why are they charging for tokens if it's so valuable?" That question breaks the industry. If OpenAI and Anthropic's models truly delivered the productivity gains the labs claim, they would take equity or a share of the profit they generate. They would not sell access by the million tokens. Token pricing is itself the CONFESSION that the product cannot produce reliable value at scale. If it did, they would price for the value. But they price for the compute because that is what they are actually selling. Karp went even further... He called the entire arrangement "a wealth tax that does not help the poor. It just punishes." American businesses are transferring the alpha of their operations, meaning the workflows, the customer data, the strategy memos, the internal models that make them competitive, directly into the training pipelines of a handful of Silicon Valley labs. Once those labs retrain, the customer's own edge becomes the next enterprise product sold back to their competitors. And the part the AI industry does not want anyone thinking about: Every enterprise running its confidential documents, its customer conversations, and its financial models through a frontier model is potentially teaching that model HOW to replace them. The vendor collects the token fee AND the compounding intelligence about that customer's business. That is the mechanism. And that is why Karp used the word "stealing." He claims this is why every executive he meets is furious in private and silent in public. Nobody wants to be the CEO who called out the labs and then discovered their next competitor was built on their own leaked workflows. The entire AI industry has been priced for perfection on one assumption: That frontier labs produce durable, defensible value that justifies infinite compute spend. But Karp just told us that the customers do not believe that assumption anymore. They believe they are being taxed without benefit, watched without consent, and copied without recourse. The moment enterprises stop believing, the whole valuation stack shakes.

Ricardo

2,915,134 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

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

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

The All-In Podcast

289,509 просмотров • 8 дней назад