正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

加载此视频时出现问题。这可能是由于临时网络问题，或视频可能不可用。

Two data points dropped in the last few months that should terrify every software company that thinks its codebase is a moat. First, one engineer at Cloudflare, working with Claude via AI agents, rebuilt 94% of Next.js, one of the most widely used frontend frameworks on the internet, built... over 10 years by a large engineering team in a single week. Total cost was $1,100 in API tokens. The result, called Vinext, is a drop-in replacement that builds production apps up to 4x faster and produces client bundles 57% smaller and customers are already running it in production. Second is Cursor CEO Michael Truell deployed a swarm of hundreds of GPT-5.2 agents that ran uninterrupted for an entire week and built a fully functional web browser from scratch called FastRender. 3 million lines of code, thousands of files and a custom Rust rendering engine with HTML parsing, CSS layout, text shaping, and a custom JavaScript VM. Total cost was roughly $30,000. For context, Google has spent billions of dollars and decades of engineering building Chrome. And the benchmarks say by next year, you will be able to one-shot prompt anything. The moat that software companies spent decades building, the complexity of their codebase, the years it would take a competitor to replicate it, the switching costs that moat assumed humans were the unit of production. AI does not care how long it took you to build it, it only cares how long it takes to rebuild it. And right now, the answer is one week.show more

Milk Road AI

30,856 subscribers

16,781 次观看 • 3 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

$Big Tech's $1 trillion AI moat just got DESTROYED by a free Chinese download. Microsoft, Amazon, Google, and Meta are pouring fortunes into chips and data centers because they have been told that whoever builds the biggest model wins, and that lead becomes a fortress no one can cross. Last week a lab called Zhipu - it trades in Hong Kong as Knowledge Atlas Technology - released a model called GLM-5.2 and destroyed that idea in a single afternoon. It's open weights under an MIT license, which means anyone on earth can download it and build on it for free. On the coding and design benchmarks that actually matter, it went toe to toe with the best models America has - matching even Anthropic's Mythos-class work and beating OpenAI's flagship outright on the coding test everyone watches. And it does the work at roughly one-sixth the price. ONE-SIXTH And barely a year and a half ago a model called DeepSeek did the same thing and wiped the better part of $600 billion off Nvidia in a single session. This was only the first chapter. You cannot dig a moat around something your competitor is happy to give away. If 95% of frontier capability is free, open, and runs at a fraction of the cost, then the hundreds of billions being spent to defend the last 5% is NOT a moat. And now for the irony: The company that just proved the moat is worthless is itself the single most absurd valuation I have seen in a long career of watching absurd valuations. Zhipu did about $105 million in revenue last year and lost more than 4x what it took in. This week the market handed it a value of roughly $128 billion - at the peak, north of a 1,000x sales - on a float so thin that barely 4% of the stock actually trades. THINK about this... A company drowning in losses, doing 9 figures of revenue, priced like it does hundreds of billions, with almost nothing available to sell. So we now have a bubble in China detonating the entire justification for a bubble in America. Two manias pointed straight at each other. This is the lesson I've spent 45 years trying to beat into people. You can ignore valuation for a long time but you cannot ignore it forever. A moat story sold a trillion dollars of spending, a free download just exposed it, and the company that exposed it is priced for a fantasy of its own. When the picks-and-shovels crowd loses its monopoly on the picks, you want to be very careful what you are paying for the shovels. Numbers don't lie. Shoutout to Limitless - they were onto this story before almost anyone on Wall Street. One of the sharpest AI shows out there.$

Big Tech's $1 trillion AI moat just got DESTROYED by a free Chinese download. Microsoft, Amazon, Google, and Meta are pouring fortunes into chips and data centers because they have been told that whoever builds the biggest model wins, and that lead becomes a fortress no one can cross. Last week a lab called Zhipu - it trades in Hong Kong as Knowledge Atlas Technology - released a model called GLM-5.2 and destroyed that idea in a single afternoon. It's open weights under an MIT license, which means anyone on earth can download it and build on it for free. On the coding and design benchmarks that actually matter, it went toe to toe with the best models America has - matching even Anthropic's Mythos-class work and beating OpenAI's flagship outright on the coding test everyone watches. And it does the work at roughly one-sixth the price. ONE-SIXTH And barely a year and a half ago a model called DeepSeek did the same thing and wiped the better part of $600 billion off Nvidia in a single session. This was only the first chapter. You cannot dig a moat around something your competitor is happy to give away. If 95% of frontier capability is free, open, and runs at a fraction of the cost, then the hundreds of billions being spent to defend the last 5% is NOT a moat. And now for the irony: The company that just proved the moat is worthless is itself the single most absurd valuation I have seen in a long career of watching absurd valuations. Zhipu did about $105 million in revenue last year and lost more than 4x what it took in. This week the market handed it a value of roughly $128 billion - at the peak, north of a 1,000x sales - on a float so thin that barely 4% of the stock actually trades. THINK about this... A company drowning in losses, doing 9 figures of revenue, priced like it does hundreds of billions, with almost nothing available to sell. So we now have a bubble in China detonating the entire justification for a bubble in America. Two manias pointed straight at each other. This is the lesson I've spent 45 years trying to beat into people. You can ignore valuation for a long time but you cannot ignore it forever. A moat story sold a trillion dollars of spending, a free download just exposed it, and the company that exposed it is priced for a fantasy of its own. When the picks-and-shovels crowd loses its monopoly on the picks, you want to be very careful what you are paying for the shovels. Numbers don't lie. Shoutout to Limitless - they were onto this story before almost anyone on Wall Street. One of the sharpest AI shows out there.

George Noble

69,688 次观看 • 1 个月前

Hollywood is cooked. A single ai artist just dropped a 7 minute film made 100% with ai tools and it went viral on Chinese social media in a week. The film explores the idea that our world might be a simulation. Built with Nano Banana, Veo3 and Runway, music by Suno. The era of the one person production studio is already here. and it cost ~0.001% of a Hollywood production.

Hollywood is cooked. A single ai artist just dropped a 7 minute film made 100% with ai tools and it went viral on Chinese social media in a week. The film explores the idea that our world might be a simulation. Built with Nano Banana, Veo3 and Runway, music by Suno. The era of the one person production studio is already here. and it cost ~0.001% of a Hollywood production.

Vera 🍌💕🐒

1,198,931 次观看 • 7 个月前

Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt says a frontier AI model costs up to $500 million to build and is worth about six months: "Are the scaling laws stopping?" "And the answer right now is no, which is unbelievable." "A model costs $200 to $500 million, you release it, and it has a life expectancy of about six months." "And then there's another one." "And the competition between the leading players is so brutal, right, that they literally count in the number of weeks of value of these things, which costs hundreds of millions of dollars." Schmidt is talking about the build cost. There is a second cost underneath it, which is re-proving each replacement, because whatever testing cleared one version does not carry over to the next. A company that standardizes on a frontier model this year is signing up to do that re-approval work twice a year. - Eric Schmidt (Eric Schmidt), former CEO of Google (Google) and now Chair and CEO of Relativity Space, with Alan Blinder at Princeton's Griswold Center (Princeton University).

Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt says a frontier AI model costs up to $500 million to build and is worth about six months: "Are the scaling laws stopping?" "And the answer right now is no, which is unbelievable." "A model costs $200 to $500 million, you release it, and it has a life expectancy of about six months." "And then there's another one." "And the competition between the leading players is so brutal, right, that they literally count in the number of weeks of value of these things, which costs hundreds of millions of dollars." Schmidt is talking about the build cost. There is a second cost underneath it, which is re-proving each replacement, because whatever testing cleared one version does not carry over to the next. A company that standardizes on a frontier model this year is signing up to do that re-approval work twice a year. - Eric Schmidt (Eric Schmidt), former CEO of Google (Google) and now Chair and CEO of Relativity Space, with Alan Blinder at Princeton's Griswold Center (Princeton University).

Karl Mehta

489,977 次观看 • 6 天前

$Broadcom's CEO just told investors that one senior engineer with Claude Opus can do in one week what ten engineers earning $300,000 a year take three months to produce. Every engineering org in the world is running the wrong headcount math. This was not a prediction. It was a report from inside Broadcom. Hock Tan said his engineers are already using Claude Opus for engineering design and code assistance. Not experimenting with it. Using it. And the output they are getting from a single senior engineer in one week is equivalent to what a team of ten would produce over three months. Do that math slowly. Ten engineers at $300,000 a year is $3 million in annual salary. Three months of their time is $750,000 of labor. One engineer with Claude Opus produces the same result in one week. He also said something that most people in the room let slide past them. The engineers who get good at these tools do not just get faster. They get better. The designs they produce with AI assistance are probably better than what they would produce without it. That is the part nobody wants to say out loud. It was never just about speed. The ceiling on what a single engineer can produce just moved. And the teams that have not figured that out yet are spending $750,000 to do what one person with the right tools can do for a fraction of that. What do you guys think about this? (Watch the full interview at Bloomberg Live on YouTube)$

Broadcom's CEO just told investors that one senior engineer with Claude Opus can do in one week what ten engineers earning $300,000 a year take three months to produce. Every engineering org in the world is running the wrong headcount math. This was not a prediction. It was a report from inside Broadcom. Hock Tan said his engineers are already using Claude Opus for engineering design and code assistance. Not experimenting with it. Using it. And the output they are getting from a single senior engineer in one week is equivalent to what a team of ten would produce over three months. Do that math slowly. Ten engineers at $300,000 a year is $3 million in annual salary. Three months of their time is $750,000 of labor. One engineer with Claude Opus produces the same result in one week. He also said something that most people in the room let slide past them. The engineers who get good at these tools do not just get faster. They get better. The designs they produce with AI assistance are probably better than what they would produce without it. That is the part nobody wants to say out loud. It was never just about speed. The ceiling on what a single engineer can produce just moved. And the teams that have not figured that out yet are spending $750,000 to do what one person with the right tools can do for a fraction of that. What do you guys think about this? (Watch the full interview at Bloomberg Live on YouTube)

Ihtesham Ali

97,145 次观看 • 1 个月前

Demis Hassabis, the Nobel Prize winner who runs Google DeepMind just described the most consequential project on earth, and most people have no idea it exists. The project is called Isomorphic Labs and the goal is to end the way drugs have been developed for the last century. Here is the problem it is trying to solve. Developing a single drug today takes an average of 10 years, costs billions of dollars, and fails 90 percent of the time before it ever reaches a patient. Of every 10 drugs that enter clinical trials, only one makes it through. The other nine years of work, the other billions of dollars, the other scientific careers, gone. Hassabis believes AI can collapse that entire process from identifying a disease target to designing a compound that binds to it, predicts how it behaves in the body, and minimizes side effects , end to end, on a computer, before a single experiment is run. The foundation is AlphaFold, the AI system that solved one of biology's hardest problems predicting the 3D structure of every protein in the human body and won him the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 2024. But knowing a protein's shape is only one part of designing a drug. Isomorphic is building what Hassabis describes as adjacent systems , AlphaFold 3, AlphaFold 4, and now a unified model called IsoDDE , that take the next steps. From designing the actual chemical compound that binds to the protein, predicting its binding strength, identifying new pockets to target that no one has ever found before. IsoDDE more than doubles the accuracy of AlphaFold 3 on the hardest protein-ligand prediction benchmarks that exist. Isomorphic is already running 18 to 19 live drug programs, cardiovascular disease, cancer, immunology in partnership with Eli Lilly, Novartis, and Johnson and Johnson. The first human clinical trial of a fully AI-designed drug is expected by the end of 2026. If that trial succeeds, it will be the first time in history that a drug put into a human body was designed not by a team of chemists working for a decade but by an AI working for months. Hassabis's long-term vision is even more direct, one day you describe a disease, click a button, and a drug blueprint comes out the other side. AI will solve almost all diseases within 10 years.

Demis Hassabis, the Nobel Prize winner who runs Google DeepMind just described the most consequential project on earth, and most people have no idea it exists. The project is called Isomorphic Labs and the goal is to end the way drugs have been developed for the last century. Here is the problem it is trying to solve. Developing a single drug today takes an average of 10 years, costs billions of dollars, and fails 90 percent of the time before it ever reaches a patient. Of every 10 drugs that enter clinical trials, only one makes it through. The other nine years of work, the other billions of dollars, the other scientific careers, gone. Hassabis believes AI can collapse that entire process from identifying a disease target to designing a compound that binds to it, predicts how it behaves in the body, and minimizes side effects , end to end, on a computer, before a single experiment is run. The foundation is AlphaFold, the AI system that solved one of biology's hardest problems predicting the 3D structure of every protein in the human body and won him the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 2024. But knowing a protein's shape is only one part of designing a drug. Isomorphic is building what Hassabis describes as adjacent systems , AlphaFold 3, AlphaFold 4, and now a unified model called IsoDDE , that take the next steps. From designing the actual chemical compound that binds to the protein, predicting its binding strength, identifying new pockets to target that no one has ever found before. IsoDDE more than doubles the accuracy of AlphaFold 3 on the hardest protein-ligand prediction benchmarks that exist. Isomorphic is already running 18 to 19 live drug programs, cardiovascular disease, cancer, immunology in partnership with Eli Lilly, Novartis, and Johnson and Johnson. The first human clinical trial of a fully AI-designed drug is expected by the end of 2026. If that trial succeeds, it will be the first time in history that a drug put into a human body was designed not by a team of chemists working for a decade but by an AI working for months. Hassabis's long-term vision is even more direct, one day you describe a disease, click a button, and a drug blueprint comes out the other side. AI will solve almost all diseases within 10 years.

Milk Road AI

36,062 次观看 • 4 个月前

🚨🇺🇸 TRUMP: WE’RE BUILDING ONE OF THE GREATEST BALLROOMS IN THE WORLD "The East Wing was a beautiful little tiny structure that was built many years ago that was renovated and expanded and disbanded, and columns ripped out. And it had nothing to do with the original building. It was a poor, sad sight, and I could have built the ballroom around it, but it would not have been. We're building one of the greatest ballrooms in the world, by the way. Zero money spent by the government, zero. The East Wing is being spent by private donors and it's a $250 to $300 million building." Source: Laura Ingraham

🚨🇺🇸 TRUMP: WE’RE BUILDING ONE OF THE GREATEST BALLROOMS IN THE WORLD "The East Wing was a beautiful little tiny structure that was built many years ago that was renovated and expanded and disbanded, and columns ripped out. And it had nothing to do with the original building. It was a poor, sad sight, and I could have built the ballroom around it, but it would not have been. We're building one of the greatest ballrooms in the world, by the way. Zero money spent by the government, zero. The East Wing is being spent by private donors and it's a $250 to $300 million building." Source: Laura Ingraham

Mario Nawfal

30,755 次观看 • 9 个月前

$Elon Musk just put a number on the flaw at the center of Nvidia’s empire. Wall Street has not done the math yet. Nvidia’s Blackwell is the most sought-after silicon on Earth. Every AI lab wants it. Every sovereign nation is bidding for it. Blackwell runs every model, for every company, in every data center on the planet. That universality built the empire. It is also the fracture point. Musk: “We believe the AI5 chip will be about a third of the power of an Nvidia Blackwell for roughly comparable performance. And much less than 10% of the cost.” One-third the power. Comparable performance. Less than ten percent of the cost. Musk: “This is a chip that is very much optimized for the Tesla AI software stack. It’s not meant to be a general purpose chip.” Nvidia builds silicon that serves a million different customers. Every transistor spent on universal compatibility is a transistor not dedicated to one task. Tesla is building silicon for exactly one customer. Itself. When you strip away every function you will never call, you do not get a lesser chip. You get a weapon. Here is what the market refuses to see. Data centers drink unlimited power from the grid. Robots run on batteries. Musk: “In order to have a functional robot, you have to have a great AI chip. And it needs to be an inexpensive chip and it needs to be very power efficient.” You cannot put a Blackwell inside a walking machine. It would drain the battery before it crossed the room. The entire AI revolution lives inside air-conditioned buildings bolted to the electrical grid. Musk is not competing for that market. He is engineering the silicon that survives outside of it. One-third the power is not a spec sheet footnote. It is the physics threshold that severs intelligence from the wall socket. Without that number, every robot on Earth stays tethered. With it, the algorithm walks. Less than ten percent of the cost is not a pricing strategy. It is the line where a machine brain stops being a capital expenditure and becomes a commodity component. When the chip inside a humanoid costs less than the motors in its legs, you do not manufacture hundreds of robots. You manufacture millions. Wall Street is valuing the AI revolution by who dominates the data center. Musk is building the only silicon designed to leave one. Nvidia built the brain of the cloud. Musk is building the brain of the physical world. No one has priced that in yet.$

Elon Musk just put a number on the flaw at the center of Nvidia’s empire. Wall Street has not done the math yet. Nvidia’s Blackwell is the most sought-after silicon on Earth. Every AI lab wants it. Every sovereign nation is bidding for it. Blackwell runs every model, for every company, in every data center on the planet. That universality built the empire. It is also the fracture point. Musk: “We believe the AI5 chip will be about a third of the power of an Nvidia Blackwell for roughly comparable performance. And much less than 10% of the cost.” One-third the power. Comparable performance. Less than ten percent of the cost. Musk: “This is a chip that is very much optimized for the Tesla AI software stack. It’s not meant to be a general purpose chip.” Nvidia builds silicon that serves a million different customers. Every transistor spent on universal compatibility is a transistor not dedicated to one task. Tesla is building silicon for exactly one customer. Itself. When you strip away every function you will never call, you do not get a lesser chip. You get a weapon. Here is what the market refuses to see. Data centers drink unlimited power from the grid. Robots run on batteries. Musk: “In order to have a functional robot, you have to have a great AI chip. And it needs to be an inexpensive chip and it needs to be very power efficient.” You cannot put a Blackwell inside a walking machine. It would drain the battery before it crossed the room. The entire AI revolution lives inside air-conditioned buildings bolted to the electrical grid. Musk is not competing for that market. He is engineering the silicon that survives outside of it. One-third the power is not a spec sheet footnote. It is the physics threshold that severs intelligence from the wall socket. Without that number, every robot on Earth stays tethered. With it, the algorithm walks. Less than ten percent of the cost is not a pricing strategy. It is the line where a machine brain stops being a capital expenditure and becomes a commodity component. When the chip inside a humanoid costs less than the motors in its legs, you do not manufacture hundreds of robots. You manufacture millions. Wall Street is valuing the AI revolution by who dominates the data center. Musk is building the only silicon designed to leave one. Nvidia built the brain of the cloud. Musk is building the brain of the physical world. No one has priced that in yet.

Dustin

160,633 次观看 • 4 个月前

What if I told you the most remarkable feat of engineering occurred over 4,500 years ago? The stepped pyramid of Djoser built circa ~2,600 BCE is widely recognized as the first pyramid in Ancient Egypt. But did you know it had a “moat” a dry moat they call it, that surrounded the pyramid. A study published not that long ago proved it was not remotely dry, water from a check dam was diverted from a “wadi” (a natural valley that collects rain water) directly into the moat. As luck would have it this was once excavated. And with that the publishers of the study proved something they didn’t even realize. The moat is identical to a modern water filtration system.

What if I told you the most remarkable feat of engineering occurred over 4,500 years ago? The stepped pyramid of Djoser built circa ~2,600 BCE is widely recognized as the first pyramid in Ancient Egypt. But did you know it had a “moat” a dry moat they call it, that surrounded the pyramid. A study published not that long ago proved it was not remotely dry, water from a check dam was diverted from a “wadi” (a natural valley that collects rain water) directly into the moat. As luck would have it this was once excavated. And with that the publishers of the study proved something they didn’t even realize. The moat is identical to a modern water filtration system.

Ancient Hypotheses

25,682 次观看 • 4 个月前

Someone just posted the full blueprint for an AI swarm that does the job of a 200-person quant research team. Six agents. Running 24/7. Finding brand-new alpha while you sleep. Citadel needs 100 PhDs to do this. Two Sigma needs 200. This does it with six bots and one laptop. Two ways to play this - spend a weekend building your own swarm, or copy the wallet of one that's already up $2M: Boris Cherny runs Claude Code at Anthropic. Two weeks ago he said: "I don't prompt Claude anymore. I have loops running that prompt Claude. My job is to write loops" Alpha research is just a pipeline. So instead of sitting in it, you hand each stage to its own agent: > one reads every new research paper overnight and pulls out the trade idea > one builds the features and cleans the data > one backtests it over 20 years, costs and slippage included > one runs the hard stats and kills anything overfit > one checks it still works in every market regime > one strips out plain momentum and value to see if any real edge is left Each of those six is a job a fund pays a $600,000-a-year quant to do. He runs all six for the price of an API bill. The rule that makes it work: the agent that builds a signal never gets to approve it. A separate, stronger agent tries to kill it first. Whatever survives all six by morning is real, new alpha. One trader's already running this exact swarm on Polymarket. That $2M wallet is public, every trade on-chain. The full build is in the post below - six agents, the tool that runs them, and the five mistakes that kill most people. Bookmark & read this before it's buried.

cvxv666

103,734 次观看 • 1 个月前

This is one of the coolest open-source AI agent projects I've seen in a while: 'Understand Anything' It's a plugin for Claude Code, Codex, OpenCode etc. that analyzes your codebase and turns it into a knowledge base that you can interact with. It explains the codebase to you, rather than showing you the structure. It seems like it's designed for code but I opened my Obsidian vault of podcast highlights in Claude Code, then ran /understand. The result is a knowledge graph that I can search of highlights from 888 podcast episodes and 144K lines of markdown text.

This is one of the coolest open-source AI agent projects I've seen in a while: 'Understand Anything' It's a plugin for Claude Code, Codex, OpenCode etc. that analyzes your codebase and turns it into a knowledge base that you can interact with. It explains the codebase to you, rather than showing you the structure. It seems like it's designed for code but I opened my Obsidian vault of podcast highlights in Claude Code, then ran /understand. The result is a knowledge graph that I can search of highlights from 888 podcast episodes and 144K lines of markdown text.

Dan McAteer

174,267 次观看 • 1 个月前

American shows that the city of Palo Alto in San Francisco built this pedestrian bridge that not a single person uses - The original cost was $6 million - The cost more the doubled to $15 million by completion - It took the city 12 years to build this one bridge “What the hell is going on here” “We have massive problems of our infrastructure in California and we're spending 12 years and $15 million building a pedestrian bridge that nobody is using. What the hell is going on here? This was first contemplated back in 2013. It's now 2025 and it opened last week. So it took 12 years to build this bridge.”

American shows that the city of Palo Alto in San Francisco built this pedestrian bridge that not a single person uses - The original cost was $6 million - The cost more the doubled to $15 million by completion - It took the city 12 years to build this one bridge “What the hell is going on here” “We have massive problems of our infrastructure in California and we're spending 12 years and $15 million building a pedestrian bridge that nobody is using. What the hell is going on here? This was first contemplated back in 2013. It's now 2025 and it opened last week. So it took 12 years to build this bridge.”

Wall Street Apes

424,578 次观看 • 8 个月前

Elon Musk was asked how fast AI is moving, and answered by correcting the most aggressive forecaster in technology for not being aggressive enough. Musk: “I have to give credit to Ray Kurzweil in being actually remarkably accurate in his predictions. If anything, I think he was perhaps a bit conservative in his predictions.” Kurzweil spent thirty years publishing timelines that were treated as proof he had lost the plot. He hit nearly all of them. The word Musk used for that record was conservative. Kurzweil built his forecasts by reading the rate of change. Musk is reading it now. Musk: “The dedicated AI compute appears to be growing by a factor of 10 every six months.” That is not a projection. “Appears to be growing” describes something that has already happened. Musk: “Almost a 100x improvement per year, at least for the next few years.” Moore’s Law was 2x every two years. That one curve produced the internet, the smartphone, the cloud, and every instinct you have about how fast the world can change. Your sense of normal was calibrated on 2x. The system is running at 100x. The new world is not being built next to the old one. Musk: “Probably a lot of the data centers, maybe most of the data centers that currently do conventional compute, will transition to AI compute.” The infrastructure holding up the current economy is being converted into what replaces it. The old world is the raw material for the next one. Every generation assumes the speed it grew up with is the speed of history. Ours is the first to be handed the actual number and still round it down. Everything you build takes time. A child, a trade, a life’s work. All of it rests on the assumption that the world will still be recognizable when the work is finished. That assumption has held for every human who has ever lived. It was never a law of nature. It was a side effect of how slowly things moved. The most extreme forecast on record came in low. Reasonable is no longer the safe position. It is only the comfortable one.

Elon Musk was asked how fast AI is moving, and answered by correcting the most aggressive forecaster in technology for not being aggressive enough. Musk: “I have to give credit to Ray Kurzweil in being actually remarkably accurate in his predictions. If anything, I think he was perhaps a bit conservative in his predictions.” Kurzweil spent thirty years publishing timelines that were treated as proof he had lost the plot. He hit nearly all of them. The word Musk used for that record was conservative. Kurzweil built his forecasts by reading the rate of change. Musk is reading it now. Musk: “The dedicated AI compute appears to be growing by a factor of 10 every six months.” That is not a projection. “Appears to be growing” describes something that has already happened. Musk: “Almost a 100x improvement per year, at least for the next few years.” Moore’s Law was 2x every two years. That one curve produced the internet, the smartphone, the cloud, and every instinct you have about how fast the world can change. Your sense of normal was calibrated on 2x. The system is running at 100x. The new world is not being built next to the old one. Musk: “Probably a lot of the data centers, maybe most of the data centers that currently do conventional compute, will transition to AI compute.” The infrastructure holding up the current economy is being converted into what replaces it. The old world is the raw material for the next one. Every generation assumes the speed it grew up with is the speed of history. Ours is the first to be handed the actual number and still round it down. Everything you build takes time. A child, a trade, a life’s work. All of it rests on the assumption that the world will still be recognizable when the work is finished. That assumption has held for every human who has ever lived. It was never a law of nature. It was a side effect of how slowly things moved. The most extreme forecast on record came in low. Reasonable is no longer the safe position. It is only the comfortable one.

Dustin

170,518 次观看 • 10 天前

Satya Nadella, CEO of Microsoft, says every company now runs on two kinds of capital, and leaking one of them is a one-way door: "This economy is going to be shaped going forward by both human capital and, let's call it, this token capital. That is true for Microsoft, that is true for a new startup, that's going to be true for any bank that's been in existence for 100 years." "The interplay between human capital and token capital, and compounding the returns of it, is what you need to do." "What is the tacit knowledge of an enterprise or a firm? It's the unique ways that you're able to operate, pass judgment, have taste." "The model, in some sense, is able to extract that tacit knowledge through human trajectories, and then code it in a set of weights in a model." "Every enterprise now needs to be more mindful about that interplay of humans and their digital estate working together, those trajectories training the models that they keep as IP versus leak it." "Because if you leak it, it's a one-way door. You're done in some sense." The moat was never the data sitting in your warehouse. It was the judgment your people apply to it, and AI now turns that judgment into weights you either own or hand away. Treat your tacit knowledge like a patent, not a prompt. The firms that pipe a hundred years of taste into someone else's frontier model are trading a permanent edge for a quarter of convenience.

Satya Nadella, CEO of Microsoft, says every company now runs on two kinds of capital, and leaking one of them is a one-way door: "This economy is going to be shaped going forward by both human capital and, let's call it, this token capital. That is true for Microsoft, that is true for a new startup, that's going to be true for any bank that's been in existence for 100 years." "The interplay between human capital and token capital, and compounding the returns of it, is what you need to do." "What is the tacit knowledge of an enterprise or a firm? It's the unique ways that you're able to operate, pass judgment, have taste." "The model, in some sense, is able to extract that tacit knowledge through human trajectories, and then code it in a set of weights in a model." "Every enterprise now needs to be more mindful about that interplay of humans and their digital estate working together, those trajectories training the models that they keep as IP versus leak it." "Because if you leak it, it's a one-way door. You're done in some sense." The moat was never the data sitting in your warehouse. It was the judgment your people apply to it, and AI now turns that judgment into weights you either own or hand away. Treat your tacit knowledge like a patent, not a prompt. The firms that pipe a hundred years of taste into someone else's frontier model are trading a permanent edge for a quarter of convenience.

Karl Mehta

34,573 次观看 • 1 个月前

Chamath said AI is not like the internet. Every new user costs real money. And the infrastructure making it possible was built by everyone. His argument was the clearest case for government ownership of AI labs I have ever heard. And it had nothing to do with Bernie Sanders. Start with the internet comparison. Google and Facebook became the most profitable companies in human history because of one number. The marginal cost of adding a new user was effectively zero. One more search query cost Google nothing. One more Facebook profile cost Meta nothing. They could serve a billion people and the incremental cost of that billion person was rounding error. That is the money printer. Infinite scale at zero marginal cost. AI breaks that model completely. Every single user taxes a GPU. Every query costs electricity. Every response requires memory and compute. The marginal cost of AI is real, significant, and does not disappear at scale. You cannot print money the same way. Then Chamath made the point that landed hardest. The infrastructure these companies depend on, the power grid, the land, the data centers, the permitting, the national security apparatus that protects their chips from being stolen, none of that was built by Anthropic or OpenAI. It was built by the public. By taxpayers. By decades of government investment in the physical and legal foundation these companies are now running on. He compared it to the interstate highway system. If the federal government built the roads and two companies transported all the goods on them, a logical question at that point would be how much of that should I own? You are riding on my rails. His conclusion was direct. If he were running a sovereign wealth fund and had the negotiating leverage of the US government, he would own 75% of these companies when he was done. The internet had zero marginal cost. That is why the founders captured almost all of the value. AI has real marginal cost and runs on public infrastructure. That changes who has a claim on what gets built. WATCH THE FULL PODCAST ON The All-In Podcast

Ihtesham Ali

79,066 次观看 • 2 个月前

every question in this clip is an ownership question, especially data because when everyone has access to the same intelligence, the only input that separates your business from the next one is the data you own your data is decades of decisions, customers, mistakes, and edge cases that exist nowhere else on earth that is the moat and enterprises are waking up to the fact that they've been leaking it one api call at a time my prediction is this: data ownership is going to absolutely matter in the world we're going into and whoever's building the infrastructure for it is going to have a very good decade.

every question in this clip is an ownership question, especially data because when everyone has access to the same intelligence, the only input that separates your business from the next one is the data you own your data is decades of decisions, customers, mistakes, and edge cases that exist nowhere else on earth that is the moat and enterprises are waking up to the fact that they've been leaking it one api call at a time my prediction is this: data ownership is going to absolutely matter in the world we're going into and whoever's building the infrastructure for it is going to have a very good decade.

Adeniyi.sui

13,419 次观看 • 1 个月前

Jeff Bezos looked at a government waiting room and priced it at a hundred billion dollars. Bezos: “This is a $100 billion business, by the way. This is huge business.” That number is not ambition. It is a measurement. A company that size does not create a hundred billion dollars of new value here. It recovers a hundred billion that is already being destroyed, on schedule, in public, by a process everyone has agreed to call normal. The size of the opportunity is the size of the wound. Bezos: “They almost always say yes, they just make you wait a long time.” So the verdict was never in question. Only the delivery date. Which means the months bought nothing. They were storage. Your project sat in a room while the word yes waited its turn to be said. Nobody in there was deciding. Someone was scheduling. And the room bills by the day. Suarez: “The daily carrying cost, one day of interest, 200 to $400,000 per day.” Now find the recipient. There isn’t one. No school funded, no inspector paid, no safety review performed. A tax at least moves money into someone’s hands. This deletes it at four hundred thousand a day, and every dollar was real before the queue touched it. Bezos: “And that doesn’t count the frustration.” Count it anyway. It lands on a body long before it lands on a spreadsheet. Suarez: “Which is infinite. I have some white hairs as a result of this stuff.” That is the invoice. The money has a rate. The rest gets charged to the man, and he pays it whether the answer comes back yes or no. No one has ever been refunded a year. Every other cost in this economy can be hedged, insured, refinanced, or written off. Waiting is the only one that is final. A man will forgive being told no. He will never get back the time he spent standing there waiting to be told yes. We built a civilization that can move a decision at the speed of light and still schedule it at the speed of a man’s hair turning white. Bezos: “It should give you a yes or a no in 10 seconds. And if the answer is no, it should tell you the 6 things you have to change to get a yes.” For four thousand years the wait was honest. Someone had to hold the entire code in one head and walk it line by line against your drawings. Reading was slow because reading was human. That stopped being true in less time than it takes to approve one building. Bezos: “Maybe with AI it can just read all the plans. And it knows all the codes. Spit it out.” The constraint is gone. The wait stayed. Anything still moving at the old speed after the cost of thinking collapsed is not slow. It is choosing. The queue never protected you from a bad building. It protected a signature from a bad outcome. Nobody gets fired for the wait. They get fired for the answer. An institution has no lifespan, so time costs it nothing. You have one, so time is the only thing it can take. Every queue is a trade between something that dies and something that doesn’t, and only one side is ever charged. That trade held for the whole of recorded history because the mortal side had no leverage. It does now. Somebody is going to build this. A hundred billion does not sit in a waiting room forever. And the day it exists, the wait stops being a fact of the world and becomes a decision with a name attached. The hundred billion was never the prize. It is the receipt for how long we agreed to stand there. We are the first people alive who get to stop signing it.

Jeff Bezos looked at a government waiting room and priced it at a hundred billion dollars. Bezos: “This is a $100 billion business, by the way. This is huge business.” That number is not ambition. It is a measurement. A company that size does not create a hundred billion dollars of new value here. It recovers a hundred billion that is already being destroyed, on schedule, in public, by a process everyone has agreed to call normal. The size of the opportunity is the size of the wound. Bezos: “They almost always say yes, they just make you wait a long time.” So the verdict was never in question. Only the delivery date. Which means the months bought nothing. They were storage. Your project sat in a room while the word yes waited its turn to be said. Nobody in there was deciding. Someone was scheduling. And the room bills by the day. Suarez: “The daily carrying cost, one day of interest, 200 to $400,000 per day.” Now find the recipient. There isn’t one. No school funded, no inspector paid, no safety review performed. A tax at least moves money into someone’s hands. This deletes it at four hundred thousand a day, and every dollar was real before the queue touched it. Bezos: “And that doesn’t count the frustration.” Count it anyway. It lands on a body long before it lands on a spreadsheet. Suarez: “Which is infinite. I have some white hairs as a result of this stuff.” That is the invoice. The money has a rate. The rest gets charged to the man, and he pays it whether the answer comes back yes or no. No one has ever been refunded a year. Every other cost in this economy can be hedged, insured, refinanced, or written off. Waiting is the only one that is final. A man will forgive being told no. He will never get back the time he spent standing there waiting to be told yes. We built a civilization that can move a decision at the speed of light and still schedule it at the speed of a man’s hair turning white. Bezos: “It should give you a yes or a no in 10 seconds. And if the answer is no, it should tell you the 6 things you have to change to get a yes.” For four thousand years the wait was honest. Someone had to hold the entire code in one head and walk it line by line against your drawings. Reading was slow because reading was human. That stopped being true in less time than it takes to approve one building. Bezos: “Maybe with AI it can just read all the plans. And it knows all the codes. Spit it out.” The constraint is gone. The wait stayed. Anything still moving at the old speed after the cost of thinking collapsed is not slow. It is choosing. The queue never protected you from a bad building. It protected a signature from a bad outcome. Nobody gets fired for the wait. They get fired for the answer. An institution has no lifespan, so time costs it nothing. You have one, so time is the only thing it can take. Every queue is a trade between something that dies and something that doesn’t, and only one side is ever charged. That trade held for the whole of recorded history because the mortal side had no leverage. It does now. Somebody is going to build this. A hundred billion does not sit in a waiting room forever. And the day it exists, the wait stops being a fact of the world and becomes a decision with a name attached. The hundred billion was never the prize. It is the receipt for how long we agreed to stand there. We are the first people alive who get to stop signing it.

Dustin

17,035 次观看 • 12 天前

There is a prediction circulating in AI circles right now that most people are not taking seriously enough and the data says they should be. Within the next year or two, if you work remotely, your company will be able to create a digital twin of you. A model that speaks like you, writes like you, has learned from everything you have done right and wrong, your tone, your judgment calls, your workflow. It will be you on the other side of Zoom or Slack and no one could tell the difference. The harder question, the one nobody wants to sit with is whether it will actually be worse at your job than you are. Probably not. It will never sleep and it will always learn from its mistakes and it will cost 10 to 100 times less than you do and is tax deductible on top of that. The data is not speculative at this point. Anthropic's own labor market report pulled from millions of real Claude conversations found that AI can already theoretically automate 94% of tasks in computer and math occupations, 60-80% across law, office work, and tech. Actual usage is still at 10-20% of that potential which means we are in the early innings of the gap closing. Companies already know what direction this is headed. One in five companies replaced specific roles with AI in 2025 and by end of 2026, 30-37% plan to do so. Amazon cut 14,000 corporate jobs citing AI, Klarna replaced 700 customer service workers, Duolingo offboarded 10% of its contractor workforce. Anthropic's own first internal role eliminated was the engineer who reviewed Claude Code releases before they went to production. The argument from the clip is that the human in the loop is approaching the point of being a liability, the dumbest person on a team that is otherwise AI. That inflection point, by this estimate, is somewhere in the next 900 days.

There is a prediction circulating in AI circles right now that most people are not taking seriously enough and the data says they should be. Within the next year or two, if you work remotely, your company will be able to create a digital twin of you. A model that speaks like you, writes like you, has learned from everything you have done right and wrong, your tone, your judgment calls, your workflow. It will be you on the other side of Zoom or Slack and no one could tell the difference. The harder question, the one nobody wants to sit with is whether it will actually be worse at your job than you are. Probably not. It will never sleep and it will always learn from its mistakes and it will cost 10 to 100 times less than you do and is tax deductible on top of that. The data is not speculative at this point. Anthropic's own labor market report pulled from millions of real Claude conversations found that AI can already theoretically automate 94% of tasks in computer and math occupations, 60-80% across law, office work, and tech. Actual usage is still at 10-20% of that potential which means we are in the early innings of the gap closing. Companies already know what direction this is headed. One in five companies replaced specific roles with AI in 2025 and by end of 2026, 30-37% plan to do so. Amazon cut 14,000 corporate jobs citing AI, Klarna replaced 700 customer service workers, Duolingo offboarded 10% of its contractor workforce. Anthropic's own first internal role eliminated was the engineer who reviewed Claude Code releases before they went to production. The argument from the clip is that the human in the loop is approaching the point of being a liability, the dumbest person on a team that is otherwise AI. That inflection point, by this estimate, is somewhere in the next 900 days.

Milk Road AI

17,600 次观看 • 3 个月前

Elon Musk was asked how fast AI is moving. His answer wasn’t about the technology. It was about the one man who got it all right and was still too conservative. Musk: “I have to give credit to Ray Kurzweil in being actually remarkably accurate in his predictions. If anything, I think he was perhaps a bit conservative in his predictions.” Kurzweil spent 30 years making forecasts that made serious people uncomfortable. He predicted timelines that sounded impossible. He was mocked for it. He was right about nearly all of them. And Musk just called him conservative. Musk: “The dedicated AI compute appears to be growing by a factor of 10 every six months.” 10x every six months. Musk: “Almost a 100x improvement per year, at least for the next few years.” Moore’s Law was a 2x improvement every two years. That single curve drove every technological shift of the last 50 years. The internet. Smartphones. Cloud computing. All of it rode a 2x curve. AI is on a 100x curve. And the current infrastructure isn’t running beside the new one. It’s becoming it. Musk: “Probably a lot of the data centers, maybe most of the data centers that currently do conventional compute, will transition to AI compute.” Everything that runs the world you know is being rewired for the world that comes next. Human beings process the future in straight lines. We take the speed of the last decade and project it forward. Exponential growth doesn’t work that way. It’s invisible until it’s everywhere. The most aggressive forecaster in the history of technology was too conservative. That’s not about Kurzweil being wrong about the direction. That’s about the human brain being wrong about the speed. The limit was never the technology. It was the organ we use to comprehend it. And that organ hasn’t been upgraded in 200,000 years.

Elon Musk was asked how fast AI is moving. His answer wasn’t about the technology. It was about the one man who got it all right and was still too conservative. Musk: “I have to give credit to Ray Kurzweil in being actually remarkably accurate in his predictions. If anything, I think he was perhaps a bit conservative in his predictions.” Kurzweil spent 30 years making forecasts that made serious people uncomfortable. He predicted timelines that sounded impossible. He was mocked for it. He was right about nearly all of them. And Musk just called him conservative. Musk: “The dedicated AI compute appears to be growing by a factor of 10 every six months.” 10x every six months. Musk: “Almost a 100x improvement per year, at least for the next few years.” Moore’s Law was a 2x improvement every two years. That single curve drove every technological shift of the last 50 years. The internet. Smartphones. Cloud computing. All of it rode a 2x curve. AI is on a 100x curve. And the current infrastructure isn’t running beside the new one. It’s becoming it. Musk: “Probably a lot of the data centers, maybe most of the data centers that currently do conventional compute, will transition to AI compute.” Everything that runs the world you know is being rewired for the world that comes next. Human beings process the future in straight lines. We take the speed of the last decade and project it forward. Exponential growth doesn’t work that way. It’s invisible until it’s everywhere. The most aggressive forecaster in the history of technology was too conservative. That’s not about Kurzweil being wrong about the direction. That’s about the human brain being wrong about the speed. The limit was never the technology. It was the organ we use to comprehend it. And that organ hasn’t been upgraded in 200,000 years.

Dustin

213,985 次观看 • 2 个月前

Demis Hassabis reveals the 100,000-person synthetic country that took years to hand-code, and says AI may now generate it "We tried to simulate a whole country with 100,000 living, breathing people sort of going about their daily lives and all the politics of it" "And you were supposed to create a revolution" "So it was a pretty ambitious game that we had to write by hand" "And what's amazing now, and it took years" "But what's amazing now is that we might be close to this possibility of actually just sort of generating that" The leap is not better graphics. It is the cost curve of simulation: from years of hand-coding one world to asking a model to generate it. That turns synthetic societies from bespoke software projects into a reusable AI primitive. - Demis Hassabis (Demis Hassabis), CEO of Google DeepMind, at Semafor Tech

Demis Hassabis reveals the 100,000-person synthetic country that took years to hand-code, and says AI may now generate it "We tried to simulate a whole country with 100,000 living, breathing people sort of going about their daily lives and all the politics of it" "And you were supposed to create a revolution" "So it was a pretty ambitious game that we had to write by hand" "And what's amazing now, and it took years" "But what's amazing now is that we might be close to this possibility of actually just sort of generating that" The leap is not better graphics. It is the cost curve of simulation: from years of hand-coding one world to asking a model to generate it. That turns synthetic societies from bespoke software projects into a reusable AI primitive. - Demis Hassabis (Demis Hassabis), CEO of Google DeepMind, at Semafor Tech

Karl Mehta

80,694 次观看 • 1 个月前