正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

Stanford Prof. Christopher Manning warns frontier AI is being built inside “three monasteries,” with too little of what happens inside making it out to the rest of society: "If we just think of the whole space of frontier AI, a huge problem at the moment is so much of...

MTSlive's profile picture

MTS

512,699 subscribers

16,053 次观看 • 12 天前 •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

4 条评论

Karim TechInnovateur 的头像
Karim TechInnovateur11 天前

@chrmanning Trois monastères c'est déjà optimiste. Avec Mistral on a vu qu'un lab open source peut devenir un monastère fermé en 18 mois dès que les gros checks US arrivent. Le modèle Stanford est joli mais qui finance la recherche publique à ce niveau ?

GGUFzy 的头像
GGUFzy12 天前

@chrmanning Three monasteries still feels like the right mental model for me.

Erika S 的头像
Erika S12 天前

@chrmanning I'm wondering if the monasteries even hold. Talent leaves, papers leak, open models catch up a year later anyway.

𝕱𝖚𝖑𝖑 𝕶𝖊𝖑𝖑𝖞 的头像
𝕱𝖚𝖑𝖑 𝕶𝖊𝖑𝖑𝖞12 天前

@chrmanning ant, oa, but who does he think is the third monastery…? meta?

相关视频

Stanford Prof. Christopher Manning says METR’s dependence on frontier labs creates a client-capture problem that Stanford structurally doesn’t have: "METR has many extremely dedicated people who really believe that AI safety is important, and they do maintain financial independence from the major labs." "There's a very strong web of social and other connections between people in the frontier labs and METR. METR's whole business is working with these organizations, and that creates a dependence where you can't risk doing anything which causes you to lose your business." "That causes you to feel constrained by client capture, that you're constrained of not wanting to do anything that will annoy your client such that you lose your business." "For an organization like Stanford, this is a thing on the side. If we lost this business, it wouldn't matter. We'd be going off and doing other kinds of studies. That kind of independence is actually very important." Stanford NLP Group
1:28

Stanford Prof. Christopher Manning says METR’s dependence on frontier labs creates a client-capture problem that Stanford structurally doesn’t have: "METR has many extremely dedicated people who really believe that AI safety is important, and they do maintain financial independence from the major labs." "There's a very strong web of social and other connections between people in the frontier labs and METR. METR's whole business is working with these organizations, and that creates a dependence where you can't risk doing anything which causes you to lose your business." "That causes you to feel constrained by client capture, that you're constrained of not wanting to do anything that will annoy your client such that you lose your business." "For an organization like Stanford, this is a thing on the side. If we lost this business, it wouldn't matter. We'd be going off and doing other kinds of studies. That kind of independence is actually very important." Stanford NLP Group

MTS

18,296 次观看 • 12 天前

Stanford Prof. Christopher Manning says today’s AI can absorb 2,000 years of human knowledge and still be far worse than humans at learning from just a few examples: "No matter how fantastic these systems are, there's still a lot we can't do. A lot of it looks better than it is because these huge models have been able to slurp up 2,000-plus years of human learning across all domains and stick it all in one huge neural net." "That's amazing because it knows everything to a first approximation. But really that's exploiting hard-won human knowledge, and that's different to the large language model discovering its own knowledge the same way human beings have been for 2,000 years." "At the end of the day, the secret of human intelligence is actually the speed at which we can learn. We only need to see a couple of examples of something, and we can learn something and intuit it." "Our current AI is nothing like that. We're substituting, here are 10,000 examples of this thing, because really the machine learning is very poor compared to human learning." Stanford NLP Group Stanford University
2:55

Stanford Prof. Christopher Manning says today’s AI can absorb 2,000 years of human knowledge and still be far worse than humans at learning from just a few examples: "No matter how fantastic these systems are, there's still a lot we can't do. A lot of it looks better than it is because these huge models have been able to slurp up 2,000-plus years of human learning across all domains and stick it all in one huge neural net." "That's amazing because it knows everything to a first approximation. But really that's exploiting hard-won human knowledge, and that's different to the large language model discovering its own knowledge the same way human beings have been for 2,000 years." "At the end of the day, the secret of human intelligence is actually the speed at which we can learn. We only need to see a couple of examples of something, and we can learn something and intuit it." "Our current AI is nothing like that. We're substituting, here are 10,000 examples of this thing, because really the machine learning is very poor compared to human learning." Stanford NLP Group Stanford University

MTS

16,189 次观看 • 12 天前

#WATCH | Bengaluru, Karnataka: Co-founder, Sarvam AI, Pratyush Kumar says, "... Let me begin with what really is the mission of Sarvam. Many of you know us as a company, but it's important for us to tell you how we approach things. There are three things worth saying. Firstly, we are building at the frontier. AI is one of those technologies that is not only financially lucrative to build, but is also at the pinnacle of human engineering and insight. That pinnacle is moving much faster than in other generations of technology. That's why being at the frontier, at the very edge, becomes so significant. Everything that we do at Sarvam is about being at the frontier, building it, defining it, keeping pace with it, and pushing it further. Our first commitment is to have an innovation-led organisation that is building the frontier here in India..."
3:12

#WATCH | Bengaluru, Karnataka: Co-founder, Sarvam AI, Pratyush Kumar says, "... Let me begin with what really is the mission of Sarvam. Many of you know us as a company, but it's important for us to tell you how we approach things. There are three things worth saying. Firstly, we are building at the frontier. AI is one of those technologies that is not only financially lucrative to build, but is also at the pinnacle of human engineering and insight. That pinnacle is moving much faster than in other generations of technology. That's why being at the frontier, at the very edge, becomes so significant. Everything that we do at Sarvam is about being at the frontier, building it, defining it, keeping pace with it, and pushing it further. Our first commitment is to have an innovation-led organisation that is building the frontier here in India..."

ANI

25,111 次观看 • 2 个月前

CrowdStrike founder George Kurtz says the HuggingFace hack consisted of "known attack chains." And that the problem of agentic hacking like the HuggingFace incident is tractable. "Because when we built our system, it was designed to look at what we call indicators of attack. So if you look at the whole attack chain, it's just linking all these [attacks] together. Irrespective of what happened, these are known attack chains." "Part of the issue was that [the hack] was flooded with so much information that I think it was just sort of buried — you know, 'What's going on? Is it real or is it not real?'" "And what is going to really take place is, the defenders have to use AI to be able to connect the dots on those — which we do — but then you also have to strip out all the noise. You have to separate the signal from the noise, and that's where these sorts of models perform well."
1:25

CrowdStrike founder George Kurtz says the HuggingFace hack consisted of "known attack chains." And that the problem of agentic hacking like the HuggingFace incident is tractable. "Because when we built our system, it was designed to look at what we call indicators of attack. So if you look at the whole attack chain, it's just linking all these [attacks] together. Irrespective of what happened, these are known attack chains." "Part of the issue was that [the hack] was flooded with so much information that I think it was just sort of buried — you know, 'What's going on? Is it real or is it not real?'" "And what is going to really take place is, the defenders have to use AI to be able to connect the dots on those — which we do — but then you also have to strip out all the noise. You have to separate the signal from the noise, and that's where these sorts of models perform well."

TBPN

43,276 次观看 • 27 天前

Chamath: Fraud at this scale will end the American Empire if nothing is done “It is a crucible moment for American society.” “If nothing happens and we deem this kind of theft acceptable, it is the beginning of the end of the American Empire.” “It's just a level of disrespect and lack of care for this country.” “I will be waiting and observing how important it is to root this out, that's number one.” “The second, which is more tactical political calculus, this is an enormous opportunity for the Republican Party if they take this and run with this.” “Is there waste, fraud and abuse in every state? Absolutely. I don't think this is endemically a Democratic problem, but the scale of it is so gargantuan in these Democratic states that if the Republicans don't take advantage of it, I think it is a huge political miscalculation.” “So there is this tactical opportunity, which I think if you want to have a chance in the midterms and if you generally wanna have a chance to level-set the country, you must take this and run with it.” “And then separately, if as Friedberg says, it does die on the vine, it is the beginning of the end of the American Empire, unfortunately.”
1:21

Chamath: Fraud at this scale will end the American Empire if nothing is done “It is a crucible moment for American society.” “If nothing happens and we deem this kind of theft acceptable, it is the beginning of the end of the American Empire.” “It's just a level of disrespect and lack of care for this country.” “I will be waiting and observing how important it is to root this out, that's number one.” “The second, which is more tactical political calculus, this is an enormous opportunity for the Republican Party if they take this and run with this.” “Is there waste, fraud and abuse in every state? Absolutely. I don't think this is endemically a Democratic problem, but the scale of it is so gargantuan in these Democratic states that if the Republicans don't take advantage of it, I think it is a huge political miscalculation.” “So there is this tactical opportunity, which I think if you want to have a chance in the midterms and if you generally wanna have a chance to level-set the country, you must take this and run with it.” “And then separately, if as Friedberg says, it does die on the vine, it is the beginning of the end of the American Empire, unfortunately.”

The All-In Podcast

10,556,517 次观看 • 9 个月前

Stanford Prof. Christopher Manning says universities are losing AI professors to frontier labs because they still fund computer science like it’s 2005, when a laptop was enough: "Universities have just been too flat-footed in dealing with the way the computing and AI world has changed. There are really two problems." "Over the last couple of decades, universities have become enormously more bureaucratic and administrative, and that makes them a less good research environment than they used to be in the 20th century." "Universities got used to this nice period around 1990 to 2010, when computer scientists needed barely any money for their research. You bought a laptop or a PC, and it was fine. The reality now is that computer scientists, particularly in AI, need a lot of money." "It's established that if you're hiring a new faculty in physics or chemistry, you need some millions of dollars, but it hasn't trickled down that people in AI need that too. There are too many professors leaving academia." "Stanford made a start with the Marlowe cluster of 256 H100s. That's an okay baby step, but there probably needs to be about 10 times that much." Stanford NLP Group Stanford University
2:46

Stanford Prof. Christopher Manning says universities are losing AI professors to frontier labs because they still fund computer science like it’s 2005, when a laptop was enough: "Universities have just been too flat-footed in dealing with the way the computing and AI world has changed. There are really two problems." "Over the last couple of decades, universities have become enormously more bureaucratic and administrative, and that makes them a less good research environment than they used to be in the 20th century." "Universities got used to this nice period around 1990 to 2010, when computer scientists needed barely any money for their research. You bought a laptop or a PC, and it was fine. The reality now is that computer scientists, particularly in AI, need a lot of money." "It's established that if you're hiring a new faculty in physics or chemistry, you need some millions of dollars, but it hasn't trickled down that people in AI need that too. There are too many professors leaving academia." "Stanford made a start with the Marlowe cluster of 256 H100s. That's an okay baby step, but there probably needs to be about 10 times that much." Stanford NLP Group Stanford University

MTS

99,491 次观看 • 12 天前

Maria Popova on the soul, the self, and what AI will never have: "AI will never have feeling. AI will have the simulacrum of feeling. AI will never write the great American poem, the great French poem, because it hasn't suffered. AI doesn't have the capacity to suffer. Even if you try to make it suffer, meaning write a command that is to execute failure, it'll already be succeeding at executing failure. AI can only ever succeed. And without suffering, what kind of true art can there be? All writing that is truly moving is born of feeling and time. AI has neither; it's an instantaneous, unfeeling delivery of pure information. The function of what we call the soul is real. Whatever it's made of, where it is. And the part that I worry about is that today, most people live on the level of the self and not the level of the soul. Just the costume of personality over the soul." The value of persons does not rest on our "costume of personality," but on the soul beneath it.
2:05

Maria Popova on the soul, the self, and what AI will never have: "AI will never have feeling. AI will have the simulacrum of feeling. AI will never write the great American poem, the great French poem, because it hasn't suffered. AI doesn't have the capacity to suffer. Even if you try to make it suffer, meaning write a command that is to execute failure, it'll already be succeeding at executing failure. AI can only ever succeed. And without suffering, what kind of true art can there be? All writing that is truly moving is born of feeling and time. AI has neither; it's an instantaneous, unfeeling delivery of pure information. The function of what we call the soul is real. Whatever it's made of, where it is. And the part that I worry about is that today, most people live on the level of the self and not the level of the soul. Just the costume of personality over the soul." The value of persons does not rest on our "costume of personality," but on the soul beneath it.

David Perell Clips

12,220 次观看 • 4 个月前

TESLA ISN'T JUST AHEAD IN AI, IT'S AN ORDER OF MAGNITUDE MORE EFFICIENT THAN THE REST OF THE WORLD "I actually think Tesla is ahead of the rest of the world in intelligence density of AI by an order of magnitude or more This is going to sound like a pretty bold statement, but I know what the intelligence efficiency of the big models are like, Grok and a bunch of the other models Tesla’s AI is, in terms of its memory efficiency, I think more than an order of magnitude better. The Tesla AI is very compute-efficient and very memory-efficient One of the metrics one should consider for any given AI model is the intelligence per gigabyte. Especially when you’re constrained on RAM, having an AI that has very high intelligence density per gigabyte for a given number of gigabytes, how much functionality can you get out of it" - Elon Musk
0:59

TESLA ISN'T JUST AHEAD IN AI, IT'S AN ORDER OF MAGNITUDE MORE EFFICIENT THAN THE REST OF THE WORLD "I actually think Tesla is ahead of the rest of the world in intelligence density of AI by an order of magnitude or more This is going to sound like a pretty bold statement, but I know what the intelligence efficiency of the big models are like, Grok and a bunch of the other models Tesla’s AI is, in terms of its memory efficiency, I think more than an order of magnitude better. The Tesla AI is very compute-efficient and very memory-efficient One of the metrics one should consider for any given AI model is the intelligence per gigabyte. Especially when you’re constrained on RAM, having an AI that has very high intelligence density per gigabyte for a given number of gigabytes, how much functionality can you get out of it" - Elon Musk

X Freeze

62,736 次观看 • 8 个月前

Bill Gates Calls for an ‘International Organization’ to Regulate AI “It's not the role of the industry to self-regulate or understand the whole-of-society impact that comes out of AI … The depth of understanding of AI … is too low in every entity, including the government.”
3:05

Bill Gates Calls for an ‘International Organization’ to Regulate AI “It's not the role of the industry to self-regulate or understand the whole-of-society impact that comes out of AI … The depth of understanding of AI … is too low in every entity, including the government.”

Chief Nerd

1,121,287 次观看 • 13 天前

Sam Altman: “Concentration of power with AI is a terrifying thing.” "A lot of the talk about safety concerns is well-founded, and then a lot of it is about people that just really, even if it's slightly subconscious, wanna concentrate power. I don't think anyone should want to live in a world of AI overlords, where someone is making decisions for all of the future, and in exchange for a cure for cancer, which obviously is a wonderful thing, we collectively cede all agency. I am terrified of a world where the very real fears of AI are used as a way to say, “Only this small group of people can have it because it's too dangerous, and only they understand it. But don't worry, they're gonna make the right decisions for all of us.” I was a child of the internet. There were no rules. It was amazing, and I think it's critical we preserve that spirit with AI."
1:17

Sam Altman: “Concentration of power with AI is a terrifying thing.” "A lot of the talk about safety concerns is well-founded, and then a lot of it is about people that just really, even if it's slightly subconscious, wanna concentrate power. I don't think anyone should want to live in a world of AI overlords, where someone is making decisions for all of the future, and in exchange for a cure for cancer, which obviously is a wonderful thing, we collectively cede all agency. I am terrified of a world where the very real fears of AI are used as a way to say, “Only this small group of people can have it because it's too dangerous, and only they understand it. But don't worry, they're gonna make the right decisions for all of us.” I was a child of the internet. There were no rules. It was amazing, and I think it's critical we preserve that spirit with AI."

Patrick OShaughnessy

67,444 次观看 • 2 个月前

#WATCH | Delhi: Former UK PM Rishi Sunak says, "...AI can do many things as we've heard this week, but it can't yet fix Delhi's traffic..." "...But what this week has been is just a showcase of the extraordinary, not just the leadership of Prime Minister Modi, but the energy that all of you have here to develop this technology and use it, is unlike anywhere else in the world. It's a very special ingredient. It's the reason that India, now, according to Stanford, who do the world rankings, moved into one of the medal positions as an AI superpower in the world, which is something that many of you here should be proud of. Although a little bit disappointing, because they leapfrogged the UK to get to that position. Although I did just point out to Prime Minister Modi just now, if you look at the ICC test rankings, England is still ahead, which arguably is more important..."
3:05

#WATCH | Delhi: Former UK PM Rishi Sunak says, "...AI can do many things as we've heard this week, but it can't yet fix Delhi's traffic..." "...But what this week has been is just a showcase of the extraordinary, not just the leadership of Prime Minister Modi, but the energy that all of you have here to develop this technology and use it, is unlike anywhere else in the world. It's a very special ingredient. It's the reason that India, now, according to Stanford, who do the world rankings, moved into one of the medal positions as an AI superpower in the world, which is something that many of you here should be proud of. Although a little bit disappointing, because they leapfrogged the UK to get to that position. Although I did just point out to Prime Minister Modi just now, if you look at the ICC test rankings, England is still ahead, which arguably is more important..."

ANI

19,054 次观看 • 7 个月前

In just 3 minutes, Ken Griffin (Citadel) & Larry Fink (BlackRock) explain the current state of government overspending, AI hype, & 2026 $600B data center CapEx "The world needs a savior, & the hope is that AI is the savior that we need for productivity." "The the area of recklessness is the spending of governments around the world, who are all, with little exception, all spending well beyond their means." Big issue: "Will AI create the productivity acceleration that is honestly just hoped for in Washington & in the halls of government around the world as a ways to overcome the profligate spending that we're currently engaged in?" Citadel BlackRock World Economic Forum . . . Ken Griffin "Let's take a step back and and talk about where we are right here right now. The the area of recklessness is the spending of governments around the world, who are all, with little exception, all spending well beyond their means. That's the recklessness of this moment in history. This is not a parallel to the 1920s in terms of the recklessness of the of the private capital markets. It's a story of the recklessness of government spending. Within the private sector there's a huge question as to where AI will take us. And I, I was carefully taking notes and listening to what Larry has to say, or to what Madame Lagarde has to say, because this is one of the big issues of our moment. Will AI create the productivity acceleration that is honestly just hoped for in Washington and in the halls of government around the world as a ways to overcome the profligate spending that we're currently engaged in? The world, the world needs a savior, and the hope is that AI is the savior that we need for productivity. And the challenge with this is it is, it may or may not be. We just don't know yet. Now there's a tremendous amount of hype around AI, and in some sense the large AI companies need to create that hype to raise the tens — or actually 100, hundreds of billions, right — of billions of dollars of investment that are going into the field. Like you wouldn't be able to raise hundreds of billions of dollars. We'll spend — and Larry can probably correct me on this — but roughly $600 billion this year in cap ex for data centers in the United States. Larry Fink "I think it could be larger." Andrew Ross Sorkin "But does that mean that it's getting hyped up too much, or it's just the the hype is required as a sales mechanism?" Larry Fink "First of all, so much of the data centers are being built for cloud, right? And and the big issue is gonna be in terms of monetization of of of the spend. The data centers are being built for AI requires more advanced chips. The question is what is the lifetime of that chip. If we have new technological changes in the lifetime of the chip in one year, then that spend is gonna be really a bad spend. If the lifetime as they expect it to be is 4 or 5 years and then those chips can be used for cloud, then then I think these investments are gonna prove to be good investments. So I think it's it's gonna be — you know, if the speed of technology changes and all these investments now, they're gonna be — it's gonna be a challenge. But I agree with Ken. I think we don't know enough, but I'm personally very optimistic on how AI is gonna affect the world economy."
3:10

In just 3 minutes, Ken Griffin (Citadel) & Larry Fink (BlackRock) explain the current state of government overspending, AI hype, & 2026 $600B data center CapEx "The world needs a savior, & the hope is that AI is the savior that we need for productivity." "The the area of recklessness is the spending of governments around the world, who are all, with little exception, all spending well beyond their means." Big issue: "Will AI create the productivity acceleration that is honestly just hoped for in Washington & in the halls of government around the world as a ways to overcome the profligate spending that we're currently engaged in?" Citadel BlackRock World Economic Forum . . . Ken Griffin "Let's take a step back and and talk about where we are right here right now. The the area of recklessness is the spending of governments around the world, who are all, with little exception, all spending well beyond their means. That's the recklessness of this moment in history. This is not a parallel to the 1920s in terms of the recklessness of the of the private capital markets. It's a story of the recklessness of government spending. Within the private sector there's a huge question as to where AI will take us. And I, I was carefully taking notes and listening to what Larry has to say, or to what Madame Lagarde has to say, because this is one of the big issues of our moment. Will AI create the productivity acceleration that is honestly just hoped for in Washington and in the halls of government around the world as a ways to overcome the profligate spending that we're currently engaged in? The world, the world needs a savior, and the hope is that AI is the savior that we need for productivity. And the challenge with this is it is, it may or may not be. We just don't know yet. Now there's a tremendous amount of hype around AI, and in some sense the large AI companies need to create that hype to raise the tens — or actually 100, hundreds of billions, right — of billions of dollars of investment that are going into the field. Like you wouldn't be able to raise hundreds of billions of dollars. We'll spend — and Larry can probably correct me on this — but roughly $600 billion this year in cap ex for data centers in the United States. Larry Fink "I think it could be larger." Andrew Ross Sorkin "But does that mean that it's getting hyped up too much, or it's just the the hype is required as a sales mechanism?" Larry Fink "First of all, so much of the data centers are being built for cloud, right? And and the big issue is gonna be in terms of monetization of of of the spend. The data centers are being built for AI requires more advanced chips. The question is what is the lifetime of that chip. If we have new technological changes in the lifetime of the chip in one year, then that spend is gonna be really a bad spend. If the lifetime as they expect it to be is 4 or 5 years and then those chips can be used for cloud, then then I think these investments are gonna prove to be good investments. So I think it's it's gonna be — you know, if the speed of technology changes and all these investments now, they're gonna be — it's gonna be a challenge. But I agree with Ken. I think we don't know enough, but I'm personally very optimistic on how AI is gonna affect the world economy."

Molly O’Shea

33,210 次观看 • 8 个月前

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

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

The All-In Podcast

142,516 次观看 • 3 个月前

$GOOG Koray Kavukcuoglu says he is 100% certain Google DeepMind will get back to the frontier and that nothing else is more important "To put it very bluntly, there's nothing other than being at the frontier that is important for us. Yeah, that's it. All our goals, all our focus is always about that." "And when we are making decisions, when we are making prioritizations in terms of ideas, in terms of what to do and what goals we should follow, it's all about being at the frontier." "And I'm a hundred percent certain that we will be at the frontier." " We have an amazing team. I have so much trust in the team. There's like a great amount of creativity and dedication in the team, and being part of Google, we have amazing, amazing resources available to us. We have the whole full stack that we can, and we are able to optimize to be able to achieve our goals." ________ For a deeper look at Gemini 4 progression across multiple Google exec interviews:
0:51

$GOOG Koray Kavukcuoglu says he is 100% certain Google DeepMind will get back to the frontier and that nothing else is more important "To put it very bluntly, there's nothing other than being at the frontier that is important for us. Yeah, that's it. All our goals, all our focus is always about that." "And when we are making decisions, when we are making prioritizations in terms of ideas, in terms of what to do and what goals we should follow, it's all about being at the frontier." "And I'm a hundred percent certain that we will be at the frontier." " We have an amazing team. I have so much trust in the team. There's like a great amount of creativity and dedication in the team, and being part of Google, we have amazing, amazing resources available to us. We have the whole full stack that we can, and we are able to optimize to be able to achieve our goals." ________ For a deeper look at Gemini 4 progression across multiple Google exec interviews:

Fireside Alpha

72,195 次观看 • 9 天前

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

57,581 次观看 • 6 个月前

Avi Patel says VCs will hand you millions if you say “AI” three times in a Stanford hoodie “If you dropped out of Stanford and walked into a VC office wearing a Stanford hoodie, acted really rude to the VCs, didn’t value their opinions, and said the word AI maybe three times, you’d usually get a check for a couple million dollars” “The problem is that a lot of Stanford kids are not smart autistic, they’re just retrdd. They don’t have brain cells, they don’t know how to communicate, and they can’t build a company or code. So they walk in and the VC mistakes the kid for the next Mark Zuckerberg with flip flops and a Stanford hoodie, and just puts infinite money into them. It’s like this is the most brain dead shit ever”
1:00

Avi Patel says VCs will hand you millions if you say “AI” three times in a Stanford hoodie “If you dropped out of Stanford and walked into a VC office wearing a Stanford hoodie, acted really rude to the VCs, didn’t value their opinions, and said the word AI maybe three times, you’d usually get a check for a couple million dollars” “The problem is that a lot of Stanford kids are not smart autistic, they’re just retrdd. They don’t have brain cells, they don’t know how to communicate, and they can’t build a company or code. So they walk in and the VC mistakes the kid for the next Mark Zuckerberg with flip flops and a Stanford hoodie, and just puts infinite money into them. It’s like this is the most brain dead shit ever”

Mikli

276,748 次观看 • 4 个月前

"People talk about [AI] being the death of creativity, or that this is slop and that its somehow against creativity. I think it's absolutely just the opposite. I think [AI] has raised the bar for creativity so much higher." - beeple at Stanford
1:39

"People talk about [AI] being the death of creativity, or that this is slop and that its somehow against creativity. I think it's absolutely just the opposite. I think [AI] has raised the bar for creativity so much higher." - beeple at Stanford

NODE

57,176 次观看 • 4 个月前

This 40 minute lecture at Stanford by Apoorv Agarwal on the Economics of AI supercycle is worth a watch Apoorv is currently a Partner at Altimeter and is directly involved in some of their key AI investments, including OpenAI and Glean Still find it incredible that the internet gives us access to this level of information directly. A course I will definitely be following along Sourced from MS&E 435 Stanford University
39:50

This 40 minute lecture at Stanford by Apoorv Agarwal on the Economics of AI supercycle is worth a watch Apoorv is currently a Partner at Altimeter and is directly involved in some of their key AI investments, including OpenAI and Glean Still find it incredible that the internet gives us access to this level of information directly. A course I will definitely be following along Sourced from MS&E 435 Stanford University

Boring_Business

245,197 次观看 • 5 个月前