Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

Why the largest enterprises will not use Chinese models and how regulation will enforce that "Given the regulatory environment in the US, it's probably more likely that we see a great American open-source competitor arise. We're going to have at least one massive, multi-hundred-billion-dollar, if not trillion-dollar, American company...

19,299 просмотров • 4 дней назад •via X (Twitter)

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

.Josh Wolfe: Anybody Using DeepSeek App Is 'Absolute Fool' "Anybody using the DeepSeek app is an absolute fool. If you're using DeepSeek on companies like Together Compute, one of Lux's companies, which can get rid of the CCP censorship, then it's probably okay. But remember, the open-source movement is something we deeply believe in. Most great technologists, entrepreneurs, and venture capitalists are on the side of open source. The closed-source models that have consumed tens of billions of dollars are the ones that are really going to be at risk. When you look at Hugging Face, a major repository, or Together Compute, Runway ML, and a lot of Lux's companies, they have been pioneers in open source. Now, why am I not worried about open source, even with the DeepSeek model? As long as you don't have the CCP censorship on it, the models with their open weights allow people to run on their proprietary data. This means companies like pharma or defense companies that have their own siloed, proprietary data—think about Bloomberg with their proprietary longitudinal data, or Meta with their data—are the ones who will have the edge. Even as open source takes hold, these companies will still dominate. I’m not worried about open source being the problem. I’m more concerned about people overfunding closed models with no proprietary source. A lot of capital is going to be burned there, and we’re already seeing that with people worried about OpenAI in some aspects."

Josh Caplan

39,985 просмотров • 1 год назад

🚨David Sacks: There is no White House decision to ban open source models. Trump is listening to a chorus of voices — and Sacks says it would be a tragic mistake to take action against the open source ecosystem. His argument: Anthropic is the fastest growing tech company at scale in history. $10B ARR at the start of the year. $70B now. This is not a company that needs government protection. And yet they've spent enormous energy trying to panic Washington into banning American developers from using Chinese open source models. If distillation by Chinese companies was really their primary concern — a genuine national security threat — they would push to ban Chinese access to American models. Instead they're pushing to ban American access to Chinese models. Because this helps Anthropic's competitive position. Sacks: "That's the way you know the whole distillation thing is fake." He went further. If distillation is happening at industrial scale, it's obvious to see. Anthropic has 90% gross margins. Why aren't they stopping it at the source? Answer: because KYC'ing their customers would slow their growth. So instead of fixing their own house, they're asking the government to kneecap their competitors. "The question should be on Anthropic to explain why it's doing such a bad job — not on the whole American open source ecosystem to be punished for Anthropic's failure." Trump's AI Czar on The All-In Podcast.

KanekoaTheGreat

48,164 просмотров • 15 дней назад

Yahoo Finance asked why Jensen Huang is “rooting for Chinese AI.” The question itself exposes the disease in Western media. The host instinctively treated Chinese technological progress as a geopolitical threat, while the analyst kept dragging the discussion back to basic reality: Better open models create more applications. More applications create more demand. More demand means more chips, more compute, and more data centers. Jensen is not “rooting for China.” He understands the market. NVIDIA sells the engine. It benefits when more people build cars—whether the model is American, Chinese, French, or open-source. The analyst also dismantled the lazy attempt to equate “Chinese open source” with cybersecurity backdoors. Open-source software can be inspected, tested, challenged, and repaired by anyone. Its code is exposed to scrutiny rather than hidden behind corporate walls. The analyst understood technology and business. The host understood only containment, suspicion, and Cold War reflexes. That contrast says everything about the American debate on Chinese AI: The people who understand the technology want competition. The people who understand only ideology want a blockade. Wall Street hears “Chinese open-source AI” and asks whether America is being betrayed. Engineers hear it and ask how much more compute the world will need. One side sees a market. The other sees an enemy.

𝘊𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘦

13,374 просмотров • 14 дней назад