正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

سعدت اليوم بلقاء الدكتور الجزائري مهدي شويتن، مؤسس أول مؤسسة للذكاء الاصطناعي في فرنسا، والرئيس التنفيذي لشركة Datategy المتخصصة في علوم البيانات الضخمة وتحليلها وتحويلها إلى قرارات عملية. مهدي نموذج جزائري للنجاح في مجال الابتكار التكنولوجي، وقد اكتسح بإبداعاته ومشاريعه الساحة التقنية الأوروبية، ويسعى لفتح آفاق جديدة في الجزائر...

derradjihafid's profile picture

hafid derradji حفيظ دراجي

3,536,149 subscribers

37,971 次观看 • 5 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

艺术科学技术
LIVE

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

Through Technology, a Centuries-Old Battle Is Coming to a Head "A Discussion of Open-Source AI with Travis Oliphant" Travis Oliphant Travis Oliphant is an entrepreneur and CEO and co founder of OpenTeams (OpenTeams®), a company that “helps organizations deploy, support, and own [AI] technology at enterprise scale.” One of their tag lines is “Connecting Companies with Communities.” As a data scientist and software developer, Travis is known for his contributions to Python and as the creator of NumPy and a founding contributor to SciPy, which together formed a foundation for modern AI and machine learning. When I was in Salt Lake City in the first week of June, Travis and I went into a studio to record this interview, continuing a conversation we had started when Travis and his team visited the Solari team in the Netherlands in early 2026. Our discussion focuses on how we can understand and manage the growing presence of AI in our lives. Travis has an impressive intellectual and entrepreneurial background. After earning Bachelor and Master of Science degrees in mathematics and electrical engineering at Brigham Young University, he completed a PhD in biomedical engineering at the Mayo Clinic. As an assistant professor at Brigham Young’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering from 2001 to 2007, he directed the Biomedical Imaging Lab, where his research centered on computational imaging techniques. He then went on to start several companies, each time identifying the need for a new standard, building the open-source infrastructure, and helping enterprises adopt it at scale. Brilliant, open-minded, deeply caring, and generous, Travis is someone who can help us understand what is happening and what we do about it. My hope is this will be the first of many conversations as we navigate the acceleration in technological innovation (and skullduggery) and seek to ensure that tools such as AI serve the health and prosperity of a human civilization. Full Report: Subscribe to
3:51

Through Technology, a Centuries-Old Battle Is Coming to a Head "A Discussion of Open-Source AI with Travis Oliphant" Travis Oliphant Travis Oliphant is an entrepreneur and CEO and co founder of OpenTeams (OpenTeams®), a company that “helps organizations deploy, support, and own [AI] technology at enterprise scale.” One of their tag lines is “Connecting Companies with Communities.” As a data scientist and software developer, Travis is known for his contributions to Python and as the creator of NumPy and a founding contributor to SciPy, which together formed a foundation for modern AI and machine learning. When I was in Salt Lake City in the first week of June, Travis and I went into a studio to record this interview, continuing a conversation we had started when Travis and his team visited the Solari team in the Netherlands in early 2026. Our discussion focuses on how we can understand and manage the growing presence of AI in our lives. Travis has an impressive intellectual and entrepreneurial background. After earning Bachelor and Master of Science degrees in mathematics and electrical engineering at Brigham Young University, he completed a PhD in biomedical engineering at the Mayo Clinic. As an assistant professor at Brigham Young’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering from 2001 to 2007, he directed the Biomedical Imaging Lab, where his research centered on computational imaging techniques. He then went on to start several companies, each time identifying the need for a new standard, building the open-source infrastructure, and helping enterprises adopt it at scale. Brilliant, open-minded, deeply caring, and generous, Travis is someone who can help us understand what is happening and what we do about it. My hope is this will be the first of many conversations as we navigate the acceleration in technological innovation (and skullduggery) and seek to ensure that tools such as AI serve the health and prosperity of a human civilization. Full Report: Subscribe to

The Solari Report | Catherine Austin Fitts

10,858 次观看 • 3 个月前

🚨NEW: Whitney Webb describes how Leslie Wexner has turned New Albany, OH into "Wexnerville" with his own public–private government. "Over 120 [data centers are] in New Albany" "It's an insane amount of taxpayer subsidies" "A lot of these people are... linked to... JD Vance" "[These] particular guys are part of this crowd of, if you want to call them, accelerationists or, you know, fans of the quote–unquote Dark Enlightenment. They're interested in privatizing government entirely, and then having it be ruled by a CEO dictator, which is basically the model proffered by Curtis Yarvin, who is cozy with all of these people." This clip of Webb (Whitney Webb), author of One Nation Under Blackmail and contributing editor of unlimitedhangout(.)com, is taken from an interview with Jimmy Dore (Jimmy Dore) posted to Rumble on March 26, 2026. ---------------Partial transcription of clip---------------- "So, essentially, over time, New Albany became a public–private partnership, where the New Albany Company is in a public–private governing partnership, with the local government, the city of New Albany. And later, he got the— Wexner lobbied to get the law changed even more. "So it could be a de facto private government that's independent within Ohio, can tax citizens, issue bonds, controls it, in a way that the local, you know, regional government cannot, which is kind of crazy, in and of itself. "But beyond that, the New Albany company has become one of the main drivers of, in attracting data centers to Ohio. So the state is currently fourth in the country for most data centers. It has, I think, 193. But over 120 of those are, like, in New Albany, in the New Albany area, where that real estate is sold, to those companies that are courted, to that area, you know, by the New Albany company that Wexner controls. "So he's been making bank off of all of this. And the way that these companies are courted are through these other public private partnerships, the model of which Wexner created initially in Columbus, but now it's spread to every region of the state, where taxpayer money is used to create these large incentive packages, to court these companies over there, even though 75% of them would have relocated anyway. "But it's an insane amount of taxpayer subsidies that's being funneled to these people through this network that, you know, Wexner created. And as I note in the article, I mean, we can get into some of the specifics, but the corruption is absolutely off the charts. I mean, it's, it's very crazy. "It's like Banana Republic kind of stuff, going in, in Ohio, and you have these, you know, venture capitalists and other people, you know, coming in and basically buying, you know, buying politicians and using it to privatize major aspects of Ohio regional and state governments. And, you know, a lot of these people are directly linked to people like the current vice president, JD Vance, who was an Ohio senator, or, you know, the guy who's currently running for governor of Ohio, of Vivek Ramaswamy. "And those particular guys are part of this crowd of, if you want to call them, accelerationists or, you know, fans of the quote–unquote dark enlightenment. They're interested in privatizing government entirely, and then having it be ruled by a CEO dictator, which is basically the model proffered by Curtis Yarvin, who, you know, is, is cozy with all of these people. "So that effort to basically privatize government in Ohio, it was started by Wexner and Epstein. And as far as the Epstein connection, you know, when Ghislaine Maxwell was interviewed by Todd Blanche, the Deputy Attorney General, she said that Epstein ran New Albany. And as I note in the article, Epstein is all over New Albany. And his billionaire investment company had a branch operating there. "And it seems to be the same entity that was actually the Wexner Investment Company, or the New Albany Property company, which the Wexner Foundation admitted was a Wexner-related role that Epstein was involved in. Which in itself, you know, just flies in the face of the whole narrative that's been put forth for how Wexner doesn't really have any. Anything to do with any, anything bad Epstein ever did. "But, you know, I mean, Wexner just runs Ohio. He had members and probably, you know, has a lot of influence over the national governance as well. You know, he was redacted in the Epstein files at first as an alleged co-conspirator. He had members of Congress come to his house to depose him. I mean, none of that is, is normal."
4:03

🚨NEW: Whitney Webb describes how Leslie Wexner has turned New Albany, OH into "Wexnerville" with his own public–private government. "Over 120 [data centers are] in New Albany" "It's an insane amount of taxpayer subsidies" "A lot of these people are... linked to... JD Vance" "[These] particular guys are part of this crowd of, if you want to call them, accelerationists or, you know, fans of the quote–unquote Dark Enlightenment. They're interested in privatizing government entirely, and then having it be ruled by a CEO dictator, which is basically the model proffered by Curtis Yarvin, who is cozy with all of these people." This clip of Webb (Whitney Webb), author of One Nation Under Blackmail and contributing editor of unlimitedhangout(.)com, is taken from an interview with Jimmy Dore (Jimmy Dore) posted to Rumble on March 26, 2026. ---------------Partial transcription of clip---------------- "So, essentially, over time, New Albany became a public–private partnership, where the New Albany Company is in a public–private governing partnership, with the local government, the city of New Albany. And later, he got the— Wexner lobbied to get the law changed even more. "So it could be a de facto private government that's independent within Ohio, can tax citizens, issue bonds, controls it, in a way that the local, you know, regional government cannot, which is kind of crazy, in and of itself. "But beyond that, the New Albany company has become one of the main drivers of, in attracting data centers to Ohio. So the state is currently fourth in the country for most data centers. It has, I think, 193. But over 120 of those are, like, in New Albany, in the New Albany area, where that real estate is sold, to those companies that are courted, to that area, you know, by the New Albany company that Wexner controls. "So he's been making bank off of all of this. And the way that these companies are courted are through these other public private partnerships, the model of which Wexner created initially in Columbus, but now it's spread to every region of the state, where taxpayer money is used to create these large incentive packages, to court these companies over there, even though 75% of them would have relocated anyway. "But it's an insane amount of taxpayer subsidies that's being funneled to these people through this network that, you know, Wexner created. And as I note in the article, I mean, we can get into some of the specifics, but the corruption is absolutely off the charts. I mean, it's, it's very crazy. "It's like Banana Republic kind of stuff, going in, in Ohio, and you have these, you know, venture capitalists and other people, you know, coming in and basically buying, you know, buying politicians and using it to privatize major aspects of Ohio regional and state governments. And, you know, a lot of these people are directly linked to people like the current vice president, JD Vance, who was an Ohio senator, or, you know, the guy who's currently running for governor of Ohio, of Vivek Ramaswamy. "And those particular guys are part of this crowd of, if you want to call them, accelerationists or, you know, fans of the quote–unquote dark enlightenment. They're interested in privatizing government entirely, and then having it be ruled by a CEO dictator, which is basically the model proffered by Curtis Yarvin, who, you know, is, is cozy with all of these people. "So that effort to basically privatize government in Ohio, it was started by Wexner and Epstein. And as far as the Epstein connection, you know, when Ghislaine Maxwell was interviewed by Todd Blanche, the Deputy Attorney General, she said that Epstein ran New Albany. And as I note in the article, Epstein is all over New Albany. And his billionaire investment company had a branch operating there. "And it seems to be the same entity that was actually the Wexner Investment Company, or the New Albany Property company, which the Wexner Foundation admitted was a Wexner-related role that Epstein was involved in. Which in itself, you know, just flies in the face of the whole narrative that's been put forth for how Wexner doesn't really have any. Anything to do with any, anything bad Epstein ever did. "But, you know, I mean, Wexner just runs Ohio. He had members and probably, you know, has a lot of influence over the national governance as well. You know, he was redacted in the Epstein files at first as an alleged co-conspirator. He had members of Congress come to his house to depose him. I mean, none of that is, is normal."

Sense Receptor

60,568 次观看 • 6 个月前

A shocking incident was reported from #Bengaluru on Friday after #CJRoy, a well-known businessman and founder of the #ConfidentGroup, allegedly attempted suicide by shooting himself in the head with a revolver. The incident took place on #LangfordRoad near #RichmondCircle. CJ Roy was seriously injured and was immediately shifted to a local hospital. On the same day, officials from the Income Tax Department carried out raids on offices linked to the Confident Group. Police sources said it is suspected that CJ Roy took the extreme step due to fear and stress related to the #ITRaids. However, officials have clarified that the exact reason behind the suicide attempt is still under investigation and no final conclusion has been reached. After receiving information about the incident, police rushed to the spot and secured the area. CJ Roy was found in a critical condition and was shifted to hospital without delay. Doctors earlier said that his injuries were serious, and he was put under close medical observation. Dr Roy Chiriankandath Joseph, popularly known as CJ Roy, was the founder and chairman of the Confident Group, a major real estate, hospitality, and entertainment company. He built a large business empire in Bengaluru and expanded operations to several states across India. The group also has a strong presence abroad, including in Dubai and the Middle East. CJ Roy was known for developing over 65 projects and following a zero-debt business model. He also served as the Honorary Consul of the Slovak Republic and was known for his interest in luxury cars and social welfare activities. Apart from real estate, the Confident Group is involved in hospitality and entertainment ventures. CJ Roy was often seen at business and social events and was regarded as a prominent figure in Bengaluru’s business circles. The news of his suicide attempt has come as a shock to employees, associates, and the wider business community. Police said further investigation is underway to understand the full sequence of events. Officials are also looking into the circumstances surrounding the IT raids and the incident.
0:21

A shocking incident was reported from #Bengaluru on Friday after #CJRoy, a well-known businessman and founder of the #ConfidentGroup, allegedly attempted suicide by shooting himself in the head with a revolver. The incident took place on #LangfordRoad near #RichmondCircle. CJ Roy was seriously injured and was immediately shifted to a local hospital. On the same day, officials from the Income Tax Department carried out raids on offices linked to the Confident Group. Police sources said it is suspected that CJ Roy took the extreme step due to fear and stress related to the #ITRaids. However, officials have clarified that the exact reason behind the suicide attempt is still under investigation and no final conclusion has been reached. After receiving information about the incident, police rushed to the spot and secured the area. CJ Roy was found in a critical condition and was shifted to hospital without delay. Doctors earlier said that his injuries were serious, and he was put under close medical observation. Dr Roy Chiriankandath Joseph, popularly known as CJ Roy, was the founder and chairman of the Confident Group, a major real estate, hospitality, and entertainment company. He built a large business empire in Bengaluru and expanded operations to several states across India. The group also has a strong presence abroad, including in Dubai and the Middle East. CJ Roy was known for developing over 65 projects and following a zero-debt business model. He also served as the Honorary Consul of the Slovak Republic and was known for his interest in luxury cars and social welfare activities. Apart from real estate, the Confident Group is involved in hospitality and entertainment ventures. CJ Roy was often seen at business and social events and was regarded as a prominent figure in Bengaluru’s business circles. The news of his suicide attempt has come as a shock to employees, associates, and the wider business community. Police said further investigation is underway to understand the full sequence of events. Officials are also looking into the circumstances surrounding the IT raids and the incident.

Hate Detector 🔍

21,272 次观看 • 8 个月前

Big pharma just handed the AI industry one of the most important reality checks of 2026 (Save this). david friedberg revealed that Anthropic approached major life sciences companies with a pitch, share your proprietary data, sign an NDA and we will give you early access to a specialized life sciences model and nearly every company they spoke with said no. Here is what these pharma companies understood that many enterprises still have not. A large pharmaceutical company may have spent decades and tens of billions of dollars generating proprietary datasets, clinical trial results, genomic sequences, drug interaction data, compound libraries. That data is the business and the competitive moat that separates them from every other player in the industry lives in those datasets. Handing it to an AI lab in exchange for early access to a model is essentially handing your most valuable asset to a company whose entire business model depends on combining your data with everyone else's and then selling the output back to you and to your competitors. Palantir CEO Alex Karp made this exact point that enterprise leaders are paying for AI tokens that generate no tangible business value while simultaneously surrendering their most sensitive operational data to external providers. He called this transferring a company's alpha, the unique advantage that secures the business directly to a third-party lab. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella echoed the same concern independently, warning that entire sectors might find their accumulated knowledge commoditized if they do not build their own data and model ownership layers. The structural problem is not unique to pharma but it applies to every enterprise sector. Every time an employee runs a query through a third-party frontier model, proprietary workflows, customer data, and strategic processes pass through infrastructure the enterprise does not control. The data already shows the market moving, Open-source captured 67% of all AI tokens processed in the first half of 2026, up from a fraction of that just twelve months earlier. The performance gap between proprietary frontier models and open-source alternatives has nearly closed, DeepSeek costs approximately 1/36th of GPT-5 for comparable workloads. What pharma figured out and what enterprises across every sector are starting to realize is that the model is not the moat but the data is. And once you hand your data to a model company, you have permanently surrendered the asset that took you decades and billions of dollars to build.
3:21

Big pharma just handed the AI industry one of the most important reality checks of 2026 (Save this). david friedberg revealed that Anthropic approached major life sciences companies with a pitch, share your proprietary data, sign an NDA and we will give you early access to a specialized life sciences model and nearly every company they spoke with said no. Here is what these pharma companies understood that many enterprises still have not. A large pharmaceutical company may have spent decades and tens of billions of dollars generating proprietary datasets, clinical trial results, genomic sequences, drug interaction data, compound libraries. That data is the business and the competitive moat that separates them from every other player in the industry lives in those datasets. Handing it to an AI lab in exchange for early access to a model is essentially handing your most valuable asset to a company whose entire business model depends on combining your data with everyone else's and then selling the output back to you and to your competitors. Palantir CEO Alex Karp made this exact point that enterprise leaders are paying for AI tokens that generate no tangible business value while simultaneously surrendering their most sensitive operational data to external providers. He called this transferring a company's alpha, the unique advantage that secures the business directly to a third-party lab. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella echoed the same concern independently, warning that entire sectors might find their accumulated knowledge commoditized if they do not build their own data and model ownership layers. The structural problem is not unique to pharma but it applies to every enterprise sector. Every time an employee runs a query through a third-party frontier model, proprietary workflows, customer data, and strategic processes pass through infrastructure the enterprise does not control. The data already shows the market moving, Open-source captured 67% of all AI tokens processed in the first half of 2026, up from a fraction of that just twelve months earlier. The performance gap between proprietary frontier models and open-source alternatives has nearly closed, DeepSeek costs approximately 1/36th of GPT-5 for comparable workloads. What pharma figured out and what enterprises across every sector are starting to realize is that the model is not the moat but the data is. And once you hand your data to a model company, you have permanently surrendered the asset that took you decades and billions of dollars to build.

Milk Road AI

16,317 次观看 • 2 个月前

🚨 AI AGENTS ARE HERE… and they’re destroying, disrupting and transforming industries. So today we had an emergency debate about it… I think “AI agents” might be the most disruptive technology of our lifetime. This is an AI team member that can browse the open internet and make decisions on its own - essentially acting as a free employee - and you can have 100s or 1000s of them working for you at once. This completely changes the way the world and business works. You can now build your own AI agents in minutes to solve problems you have in your business or personal life. A friend of mine who runs a big company that you probably know - has gone from 7,000~ team members to 3,000~ because they’re now using AI agents instead of hiring people 😳 So I brought together three of the most vocal minds when it comes to AI for a debate unlike anything we’ve ever done before. Amjad Masad is the founder of Replit, a billion dollar company that is leading the AI Agents race and has become one of the fastest-scaling AI companies in Silicon Valley history. Bret Weinstein is a biologist and evolutionary theorist who believes AI could lead us to a societal collapse. Daniel Priestley who is a futurist entrepreneur who says this wave of AI Agnets is as big as the industrial revolution. This was one of the most fascinating conversations we’ve ever hosted. What is your honest feelings towards AI? Does it scare you or are you leaning into it? Watch the full episode now on YouTube: search “The Diary of a CEO AI Debate” or click the link in the comments.
1:32

🚨 AI AGENTS ARE HERE… and they’re destroying, disrupting and transforming industries. So today we had an emergency debate about it… I think “AI agents” might be the most disruptive technology of our lifetime. This is an AI team member that can browse the open internet and make decisions on its own - essentially acting as a free employee - and you can have 100s or 1000s of them working for you at once. This completely changes the way the world and business works. You can now build your own AI agents in minutes to solve problems you have in your business or personal life. A friend of mine who runs a big company that you probably know - has gone from 7,000~ team members to 3,000~ because they’re now using AI agents instead of hiring people 😳 So I brought together three of the most vocal minds when it comes to AI for a debate unlike anything we’ve ever done before. Amjad Masad is the founder of Replit, a billion dollar company that is leading the AI Agents race and has become one of the fastest-scaling AI companies in Silicon Valley history. Bret Weinstein is a biologist and evolutionary theorist who believes AI could lead us to a societal collapse. Daniel Priestley who is a futurist entrepreneur who says this wave of AI Agnets is as big as the industrial revolution. This was one of the most fascinating conversations we’ve ever hosted. What is your honest feelings towards AI? Does it scare you or are you leaning into it? Watch the full episode now on YouTube: search “The Diary of a CEO AI Debate” or click the link in the comments.

Steven Bartlett

110,275 次观看 • 1 年前

Dario Amodei just dismantled the biggest myth in the AI industry. Open source AI isn’t free. It never was. Amodei: “It’s not free. You have to run it on inference and someone has to make it fast on inference.” For decades, open source meant something real. It meant a teenager in a basement could download the same tools as a Fortune 500 company. Could read the code. Could modify it. Could build something that competed with the giants. That was genuine democratization. That actually happened. AI is different. Fundamentally. Physically. In ways the ideology hasn’t caught up to yet. Downloading the weights is the easy part. The part that actually costs something is turning the weights into a running system. Into responses. Into intelligence operating in real time at scale. That requires compute. Power. Infrastructure. The kind measured in billions of dollars and years of construction. Amodei: “These are big models. They’re hard to do inference on. Ultimately you have to host it on the cloud. The people who host it on the cloud do inference.” The open source debate was never about who owns the model. It was always about who owns the cloud. And Amodei goes further. When a competitor drops a new open model, he doesn’t ask whether it’s open or closed. He doesn’t care about the licensing. He doesn’t engage the ideology. Amodei: “I don’t think it mattered that DeepSeek is open source. I think I ask, is it a good model? Is it better than us at the things that matter? That’s the only thing that I care about.” That’s the ruthless clarity of someone actually trying to win. While the media debates licensing frameworks, Amodei is asking one question. Is it better. Everything else is a distraction. Amodei: “I don’t think open source works the same way in AI that it has worked in other areas. Here we can’t see inside the model.” This isn’t Linux. You can’t read it. You can’t fork it. You can’t understand it the way generations of developers understood the tools they inherited. You can download it. And then you need a data center to run it. The teenager in the basement who was supposed to be empowered by this revolution needs a billion dollars of infrastructure before the empowerment starts. The era of the basement coder rewriting civilization on a laptop is over. The future belongs to whoever commands the compute, owns the power grid, and can actually turn the intelligence on. Open weights without infrastructure isn’t democratization. It’s a promise the physics of the universe won’t let us keep.
1:40

Dario Amodei just dismantled the biggest myth in the AI industry. Open source AI isn’t free. It never was. Amodei: “It’s not free. You have to run it on inference and someone has to make it fast on inference.” For decades, open source meant something real. It meant a teenager in a basement could download the same tools as a Fortune 500 company. Could read the code. Could modify it. Could build something that competed with the giants. That was genuine democratization. That actually happened. AI is different. Fundamentally. Physically. In ways the ideology hasn’t caught up to yet. Downloading the weights is the easy part. The part that actually costs something is turning the weights into a running system. Into responses. Into intelligence operating in real time at scale. That requires compute. Power. Infrastructure. The kind measured in billions of dollars and years of construction. Amodei: “These are big models. They’re hard to do inference on. Ultimately you have to host it on the cloud. The people who host it on the cloud do inference.” The open source debate was never about who owns the model. It was always about who owns the cloud. And Amodei goes further. When a competitor drops a new open model, he doesn’t ask whether it’s open or closed. He doesn’t care about the licensing. He doesn’t engage the ideology. Amodei: “I don’t think it mattered that DeepSeek is open source. I think I ask, is it a good model? Is it better than us at the things that matter? That’s the only thing that I care about.” That’s the ruthless clarity of someone actually trying to win. While the media debates licensing frameworks, Amodei is asking one question. Is it better. Everything else is a distraction. Amodei: “I don’t think open source works the same way in AI that it has worked in other areas. Here we can’t see inside the model.” This isn’t Linux. You can’t read it. You can’t fork it. You can’t understand it the way generations of developers understood the tools they inherited. You can download it. And then you need a data center to run it. The teenager in the basement who was supposed to be empowered by this revolution needs a billion dollars of infrastructure before the empowerment starts. The era of the basement coder rewriting civilization on a laptop is over. The future belongs to whoever commands the compute, owns the power grid, and can actually turn the intelligence on. Open weights without infrastructure isn’t democratization. It’s a promise the physics of the universe won’t let us keep.

Dustin

688,333 次观看 • 7 个月前

📹 Pavel Durov, in his first video interview in seven years, revealed to Tucker Carlson some fascinating facts about Telegram Messenger, doing business in Dubai and his personal crypto wealth: • Pavel Durov launched ВКонтакте (Russian social media platform) at the age of 21 but had to sell the company and leave the country after refusing to share user data with the Russian authorities. • Durov says his life goal is to give people freedom and privacy. • Telegram is not controlled by the Russian or U.S. governments, yet the FBI allegedly tried to create a backdoor in Telegram Messenger by recruiting one of its developers. Agents also meet Durov at the airport and ask him questions whenever he comes to the United States. • Once, he fought three robbers who tried to steal his phone in San Francisco after meeting Jack Dorsey, the former CEO of Twitter. • Partially because of that and the attention from U.S. agencies, he decided not to HQ his company there. He was also put off by the bureaucracy in Germany, Britain and Singapore and opted for Dubai as a neutral ground. • Durov received two letters from U.S. senators: Democratic Party senators wanted to get access to the Jan. 6 rioters’ personal data, claiming that otherwise, Telegram violates the U.S. Constitution. The team ignored the request. Later, Republican Party senators sent a conflicting letter stating that the company would have broken the law if it had shared the data. • According to Durov, there’s a lot of pressure coming from Apple and Google, and they have become the #1 source of online censorship. • Durov owns 100% of Telegram and wants to keep it independent, with no plans for an IPO. • Currently, 30 people are working at Telegram. The team doesn’t spend a budget on marketing, yet the user base keeps growing. The goal is to achieve one billion users in the next few years. • Maintaining the current level of privacy is getting harder. There may be a need for protected smartphones to ensure confidentiality in the future, and Durov says he doesn’t trust his phone and assumes he is being tracked. • He was in favor of the purchase of Twitter by Elon Musk, and Durov believes it will have a positive impact on the social networking industry. • Durov stopped dealing with Mark Zuckerberg after the latter allegedly stole his idea of in-built apps for social media. • Durov has a few hundred million dollars in his bank account and owns $BTC, but he doesn’t spend it on anything, as it would undermine his freedom. Instead, he opts to invest everything back into Telegram.
0:44

📹 Pavel Durov, in his first video interview in seven years, revealed to Tucker Carlson some fascinating facts about Telegram Messenger, doing business in Dubai and his personal crypto wealth: • Pavel Durov launched ВКонтакте (Russian social media platform) at the age of 21 but had to sell the company and leave the country after refusing to share user data with the Russian authorities. • Durov says his life goal is to give people freedom and privacy. • Telegram is not controlled by the Russian or U.S. governments, yet the FBI allegedly tried to create a backdoor in Telegram Messenger by recruiting one of its developers. Agents also meet Durov at the airport and ask him questions whenever he comes to the United States. • Once, he fought three robbers who tried to steal his phone in San Francisco after meeting Jack Dorsey, the former CEO of Twitter. • Partially because of that and the attention from U.S. agencies, he decided not to HQ his company there. He was also put off by the bureaucracy in Germany, Britain and Singapore and opted for Dubai as a neutral ground. • Durov received two letters from U.S. senators: Democratic Party senators wanted to get access to the Jan. 6 rioters’ personal data, claiming that otherwise, Telegram violates the U.S. Constitution. The team ignored the request. Later, Republican Party senators sent a conflicting letter stating that the company would have broken the law if it had shared the data. • According to Durov, there’s a lot of pressure coming from Apple and Google, and they have become the #1 source of online censorship. • Durov owns 100% of Telegram and wants to keep it independent, with no plans for an IPO. • Currently, 30 people are working at Telegram. The team doesn’t spend a budget on marketing, yet the user base keeps growing. The goal is to achieve one billion users in the next few years. • Maintaining the current level of privacy is getting harder. There may be a need for protected smartphones to ensure confidentiality in the future, and Durov says he doesn’t trust his phone and assumes he is being tracked. • He was in favor of the purchase of Twitter by Elon Musk, and Durov believes it will have a positive impact on the social networking industry. • Durov stopped dealing with Mark Zuckerberg after the latter allegedly stole his idea of in-built apps for social media. • Durov has a few hundred million dollars in his bank account and owns $BTC, but he doesn’t spend it on anything, as it would undermine his freedom. Instead, he opts to invest everything back into Telegram.

Cointelegraph

140,627 次观看 • 2 年前

Peter Thiel gave a speech in a Hilton in 2010 that holds the keys to unlocking the source of many of America’s most severe problems. Key quote: “The task in this world… where politics has become so broken… is to find a way to escape from it. It’s not a way to fix it.” Palantir is currently tightening its grip around all of our data. Elon Musk is diverting untold billions into a Mars fantasy. All of the anarchist, antidemocratic ideas of the PayPal Mafia and the “Dark Enlightenment”—to use technology as an “escape”—were already well in process 15 years ago. —The internet as “alternate virtual reality” so you don’t have to “constantly convince people.” This is why he funded Satoshi (Bitcoin), MAGA3X (Pizzagate, Q), and pushed Musk to buy Twitter —PayPal (now blockchain/crypto/BTC) was to “overturn the monetary system” —“Escape” now more often referred to as “exit” —“Autonomous countries” now known as the “network state” JD Vance is a full member of the cult of the broligarchs. Unfortunately, this has been a very thorough coup and they have backup. It’s worth really absorbing what the living Antichrist, Peter Thiel, is saying here: “I don't think despair is the only answer. And I don't think, and it's because I don't think politics is the only way to go. And my thinking on this, you know, started to take a turn towards a more optimistic perspective in the mid to late '90s when I got involved in the tech boom in Silicon Valley. I ended up being the co-founder of a company called PayPal where -- and the initial founding vision was that we were going to use technology to change the whole world and basically overturn on the monetary system of the world. And, you know, we can debate on how much it succeeded or how little it succeeded. And there were parts of it that I think have worked, and parts of it were, you know, the jury is still out. But the basic idea was that we could never win an election on getting certain things. Because we were in such a small minority. But maybe you could actually unilaterally change the world without having to constantly convince people and beg people and plead with people who are never going to agree with you through a technological means. And this is where I think technology is this incredible alternative to politics. And, you know, there are a number of different technologies we can outline, but the task in this world where politics has become so broken and so dysfunctional is to find a way to escape from it. It's not a way to fix it. It is a way to escape. And there are, you know, a number of different options. I think the promising one of the 1990s and this last decade has been to escape onto the Internet and to sort of create an alternate virtual reality. Questions, of course, is still how does it intersect with the real world? There are, I think, escaping to outer space is a promise, although I think the space technology is not quite there. So I think that's sort of for the second half of the 21st century. I think we can try to, you know, create autonomous countries on oceans, underwater, all sorts of other spaces. But I think technology is the vehicle for how we should be looking to escape and move beyond politics as we find it today.”
2:09

Peter Thiel gave a speech in a Hilton in 2010 that holds the keys to unlocking the source of many of America’s most severe problems. Key quote: “The task in this world… where politics has become so broken… is to find a way to escape from it. It’s not a way to fix it.” Palantir is currently tightening its grip around all of our data. Elon Musk is diverting untold billions into a Mars fantasy. All of the anarchist, antidemocratic ideas of the PayPal Mafia and the “Dark Enlightenment”—to use technology as an “escape”—were already well in process 15 years ago. —The internet as “alternate virtual reality” so you don’t have to “constantly convince people.” This is why he funded Satoshi (Bitcoin), MAGA3X (Pizzagate, Q), and pushed Musk to buy Twitter —PayPal (now blockchain/crypto/BTC) was to “overturn the monetary system” —“Escape” now more often referred to as “exit” —“Autonomous countries” now known as the “network state” JD Vance is a full member of the cult of the broligarchs. Unfortunately, this has been a very thorough coup and they have backup. It’s worth really absorbing what the living Antichrist, Peter Thiel, is saying here: “I don't think despair is the only answer. And I don't think, and it's because I don't think politics is the only way to go. And my thinking on this, you know, started to take a turn towards a more optimistic perspective in the mid to late '90s when I got involved in the tech boom in Silicon Valley. I ended up being the co-founder of a company called PayPal where -- and the initial founding vision was that we were going to use technology to change the whole world and basically overturn on the monetary system of the world. And, you know, we can debate on how much it succeeded or how little it succeeded. And there were parts of it that I think have worked, and parts of it were, you know, the jury is still out. But the basic idea was that we could never win an election on getting certain things. Because we were in such a small minority. But maybe you could actually unilaterally change the world without having to constantly convince people and beg people and plead with people who are never going to agree with you through a technological means. And this is where I think technology is this incredible alternative to politics. And, you know, there are a number of different technologies we can outline, but the task in this world where politics has become so broken and so dysfunctional is to find a way to escape from it. It's not a way to fix it. It is a way to escape. And there are, you know, a number of different options. I think the promising one of the 1990s and this last decade has been to escape onto the Internet and to sort of create an alternate virtual reality. Questions, of course, is still how does it intersect with the real world? There are, I think, escaping to outer space is a promise, although I think the space technology is not quite there. So I think that's sort of for the second half of the 21st century. I think we can try to, you know, create autonomous countries on oceans, underwater, all sorts of other spaces. But I think technology is the vehicle for how we should be looking to escape and move beyond politics as we find it today.”

Jim Stewartson, Decelerationist 🇨🇦🇺🇦🇺🇸

156,800 次观看 • 1 年前

Incredible, and maybe even unprecedented, answer by Arnaud Montebourg - former French Minister of Economy - to the question "what method do the Americans use to wage economic warfare against us?" Here's the translation (by me): "They use military tools. First of all, they use all the listening and intelligence systems that they built on after 9/11. They don't listen to terrorists...well they certainly do and that's very good...but they listen to foreign companies that compete with theirs. So it's very simple, it became clear in 2014 when Snowden revealed that there were 75 million conversations and emails that had been exploited by the NSA on France, on French companies. When Pierucci - a man who should wear the Legion of Honor today because he defended France rather than its interests by agreeing to serve two unjustified years in prison in US jails in the Alstom affair... when Mr. Pierucci was taken into custody in Manhattan by the prosecutors they put under his nose 1 million emails. How did they get 1 million emails? By illegal eavesdropping. 1 million emails: it would have taken a lawyer 3 years to read through them… so he couldn't defend himself. So those are the military tools. Second, they have a tool called extraterritorial law. The Americans are using a form of law, which is an imperialist law, which consists in declaring themselves competent for matters which in no way concern them. Example: Alstom, a contract between Indonesia and a French company. They consider that there was an offense that was committed in this matter 10 years ago and they sue Alstom! The United States is not a victim, no American company was involved in this case. They declare themselves policeman of the world by undermining the sovereign interests. Therefore this is interference. They do it in ALL fields, and especially the economic field. For example ITAR. ITAR is interesting: the United States has set a list of 22,000 components on which it grants itself the right to authorize or not the export by a foreign power. Example: you buy a varnish to put on the wing of the Rafale [a French fighter plane] which is on the ITAR list because it is not produced in France but in the US or elsewhere... because of this single varnish they allow themselves the right to say: 'you have the right to export to such and such a country, but not to this one because it is an enemy of the United States of America'. Why should I care if he's an enemy of the United States of America? The enemies of my allies are not necessarily my enemies! Example: they banned the export of Rafales to Egypt because of ITAR. Is that so, and why? So our urgency should be to produce these 22,000 products in France... Or in Europe, in allied countries which are also victims of ITAR. This is a sovereign policy. I can also tell you about the American Patriot Act. 2001, September 11, what do they do? When a French company is bought by an American company, the American government has the unilateral power to request all the information on a company controlled by an American company. Absolutely all the information: patents, technologies, people, etc. Without any motivation and without judicial authorization, which means that these are illegal searches. This is why in the affair of the takeover of the valves which equip our nuclear submarines and power stations - the Segault valves which are manufactured in Mennecy, Essonne - I intervened by saying 'it is out of question that this business goes under American control' and it is now a company that is controlled by Canadians. Canadians do not have extraterritorial rights, it is not an issue to work with Canadians. But Americans are different because they are predators. This is the reason why I said 'it is out of the question that Segault, who equips our nuclear submarines, gives our information to a foreign power'. Because Canadians do not have the right to do so, if they do it is criminal. But for Americans it is the law to do so!"
5:04

Incredible, and maybe even unprecedented, answer by Arnaud Montebourg - former French Minister of Economy - to the question "what method do the Americans use to wage economic warfare against us?" Here's the translation (by me): "They use military tools. First of all, they use all the listening and intelligence systems that they built on after 9/11. They don't listen to terrorists...well they certainly do and that's very good...but they listen to foreign companies that compete with theirs. So it's very simple, it became clear in 2014 when Snowden revealed that there were 75 million conversations and emails that had been exploited by the NSA on France, on French companies. When Pierucci - a man who should wear the Legion of Honor today because he defended France rather than its interests by agreeing to serve two unjustified years in prison in US jails in the Alstom affair... when Mr. Pierucci was taken into custody in Manhattan by the prosecutors they put under his nose 1 million emails. How did they get 1 million emails? By illegal eavesdropping. 1 million emails: it would have taken a lawyer 3 years to read through them… so he couldn't defend himself. So those are the military tools. Second, they have a tool called extraterritorial law. The Americans are using a form of law, which is an imperialist law, which consists in declaring themselves competent for matters which in no way concern them. Example: Alstom, a contract between Indonesia and a French company. They consider that there was an offense that was committed in this matter 10 years ago and they sue Alstom! The United States is not a victim, no American company was involved in this case. They declare themselves policeman of the world by undermining the sovereign interests. Therefore this is interference. They do it in ALL fields, and especially the economic field. For example ITAR. ITAR is interesting: the United States has set a list of 22,000 components on which it grants itself the right to authorize or not the export by a foreign power. Example: you buy a varnish to put on the wing of the Rafale [a French fighter plane] which is on the ITAR list because it is not produced in France but in the US or elsewhere... because of this single varnish they allow themselves the right to say: 'you have the right to export to such and such a country, but not to this one because it is an enemy of the United States of America'. Why should I care if he's an enemy of the United States of America? The enemies of my allies are not necessarily my enemies! Example: they banned the export of Rafales to Egypt because of ITAR. Is that so, and why? So our urgency should be to produce these 22,000 products in France... Or in Europe, in allied countries which are also victims of ITAR. This is a sovereign policy. I can also tell you about the American Patriot Act. 2001, September 11, what do they do? When a French company is bought by an American company, the American government has the unilateral power to request all the information on a company controlled by an American company. Absolutely all the information: patents, technologies, people, etc. Without any motivation and without judicial authorization, which means that these are illegal searches. This is why in the affair of the takeover of the valves which equip our nuclear submarines and power stations - the Segault valves which are manufactured in Mennecy, Essonne - I intervened by saying 'it is out of question that this business goes under American control' and it is now a company that is controlled by Canadians. Canadians do not have extraterritorial rights, it is not an issue to work with Canadians. But Americans are different because they are predators. This is the reason why I said 'it is out of the question that Segault, who equips our nuclear submarines, gives our information to a foreign power'. Because Canadians do not have the right to do so, if they do it is criminal. But for Americans it is the law to do so!"

Arnaud Bertrand

1,932,550 次观看 • 3 年前

NEW: Whitney Webb describes how Les Wexner, Netanyahu, etc. have "enmeshed" Israeli tech startups into Big Tech companies so "they [can] never meaningfully boycott Israel no matter what happens" "a lot of these startups, of course... are intimately related to Israeli intelligence and Israeli military operations. They're staffed by veterans of one or the other... for lack of a better word, they have an explicit policy of using them as front companies for intelligence" "so, basically, by having all of these Big Tech companies absorb them, the goal is to have a major economic lever of power over the tech industry in particular that would prevent U.S. policy from ever meaningfully challenging Israel, even at this point in time when they have actively been conducting a genocidal war for years in Palestine" This clip of Webb (Whitney Webb), a contributing editor of Unlimited Hangout and author of One Nation Under Blackmail, is taken from an interview with Chris Hedges (Chris Hedges) posted to YouTube on August 5, 2026 ---------------Partial transcription of clip---------------- "Well, looking at a lot of the tech companies and data center companies that have installed themselves in New Albany in particular, the vast majority of them have significant subsidiaries that operate in the State of Israel. "And Wexner, of course, is intimately related to the state of Israel through his own activities. For example, I think several decades ago, he was sort of acting as a middleman in some business capacities between Israel and China and also working on establishing Israeli businesses and helping them establish themselves in the occupied Golan Heights, among other things. "And that's to say nothing of his links to the Mega Group, for example, which, as you noted in your introduction, created Birthright Israel. And also Jeffrey Epstein, who, at this point, is quite known for his ties to former Israeli politicians and the Israeli state. "But I think it also speaks to sort of a broader issue, to have a lot of this infrastructure of technology in the US be intimately intermingled and connected to Israel. "And this was actually something that was furthered and actually developed in conjunction with Netanyahu and the so-called vulture capitalist and significant donor to neoconservative causes Paul Singer, who explicitly created a company called Startup Nation Central with the explicit purpose of making it impossible for the U.S. to ever significantly support the BDS movement or the Boycott Divest Sanctions movement. "And the goal was to basically market Israeli startups to U.S. big tech firms so that they would acquire a lot of those startups and unprecedented numbers and also contract with them so that US technological infrastructure on multiple levels would be so intimately enmeshed with Israeli interests that they could never meaningfully boycott Israel no matter what happened, essentially. "And a lot of these startups, of course, if you've ever looked into the Israeli startup scene, are intimately related to, you know, Israeli intelligence and Israeli military operations. They're staffed by veterans of one or the other. "And, at the same time, coincidentally that Startup Nation Central was created, the Israeli government developed an explicit policy where these startups would be used to conduct operations that previously had been conducted in-house by Mossad, Unit 8200, and other parts of the Israeli intelligence system. "So, for lack of a better word, they have an explicit policy of using them as front companies for intelligence. And so, basically, by having all of these Big Tech companies absorb them, the goal is to have a major economic lever of power over the tech industry in particular that would prevent U.S. policy from ever meaningfully challenging Israel, even, you know, at this point in time, when they have, you know, actively been conducting a genocidal war for years in Palestine."
3:18

NEW: Whitney Webb describes how Les Wexner, Netanyahu, etc. have "enmeshed" Israeli tech startups into Big Tech companies so "they [can] never meaningfully boycott Israel no matter what happens" "a lot of these startups, of course... are intimately related to Israeli intelligence and Israeli military operations. They're staffed by veterans of one or the other... for lack of a better word, they have an explicit policy of using them as front companies for intelligence" "so, basically, by having all of these Big Tech companies absorb them, the goal is to have a major economic lever of power over the tech industry in particular that would prevent U.S. policy from ever meaningfully challenging Israel, even at this point in time when they have actively been conducting a genocidal war for years in Palestine" This clip of Webb (Whitney Webb), a contributing editor of Unlimited Hangout and author of One Nation Under Blackmail, is taken from an interview with Chris Hedges (Chris Hedges) posted to YouTube on August 5, 2026 ---------------Partial transcription of clip---------------- "Well, looking at a lot of the tech companies and data center companies that have installed themselves in New Albany in particular, the vast majority of them have significant subsidiaries that operate in the State of Israel. "And Wexner, of course, is intimately related to the state of Israel through his own activities. For example, I think several decades ago, he was sort of acting as a middleman in some business capacities between Israel and China and also working on establishing Israeli businesses and helping them establish themselves in the occupied Golan Heights, among other things. "And that's to say nothing of his links to the Mega Group, for example, which, as you noted in your introduction, created Birthright Israel. And also Jeffrey Epstein, who, at this point, is quite known for his ties to former Israeli politicians and the Israeli state. "But I think it also speaks to sort of a broader issue, to have a lot of this infrastructure of technology in the US be intimately intermingled and connected to Israel. "And this was actually something that was furthered and actually developed in conjunction with Netanyahu and the so-called vulture capitalist and significant donor to neoconservative causes Paul Singer, who explicitly created a company called Startup Nation Central with the explicit purpose of making it impossible for the U.S. to ever significantly support the BDS movement or the Boycott Divest Sanctions movement. "And the goal was to basically market Israeli startups to U.S. big tech firms so that they would acquire a lot of those startups and unprecedented numbers and also contract with them so that US technological infrastructure on multiple levels would be so intimately enmeshed with Israeli interests that they could never meaningfully boycott Israel no matter what happened, essentially. "And a lot of these startups, of course, if you've ever looked into the Israeli startup scene, are intimately related to, you know, Israeli intelligence and Israeli military operations. They're staffed by veterans of one or the other. "And, at the same time, coincidentally that Startup Nation Central was created, the Israeli government developed an explicit policy where these startups would be used to conduct operations that previously had been conducted in-house by Mossad, Unit 8200, and other parts of the Israeli intelligence system. "So, for lack of a better word, they have an explicit policy of using them as front companies for intelligence. And so, basically, by having all of these Big Tech companies absorb them, the goal is to have a major economic lever of power over the tech industry in particular that would prevent U.S. policy from ever meaningfully challenging Israel, even, you know, at this point in time, when they have, you know, actively been conducting a genocidal war for years in Palestine."

Sense Receptor

34,664 次观看 • 1 个月前

This is the most meaningful interview I’ve done: seeing my friend Francis Pedraza react to conversations we had 8 years ago before his success. Francis Pedraza now runs one of the fastest-growing AI unicorns worth $2 billion, but when I met him a decade ago he was at a low point: broke, recently single, having failed his first company, and struggling with his second. We became fast friends over our love of the Great Books and recorded 6 hours of conversations on philosophy, entrepreneurship, and God. This summer, I invited Francis back to listen to his old self and see how success has changed his views. The first part of this video is our latest interview in 2025 where he reacts to our past conversations and the second audio-only part is the highlights from 2018. What’s so cool is that Francis called his shot. Even when everything wasn’t working, even when he was a “failure” by all accounts, he boldly predicted his success and laid out a laughably ambitious plan that seemed impossible. I called him Don Quixote to his face, but boy am I happy that I was wrong! What’s so beautiful, when you watch these two interviews together, is to see how Francis’ obsession with philosophy, which made him seem like a complete buffoon in 2018, became the cause of his success. It was because of his continued study of the Great Books that Francis was able to come up with ideas no one else saw, persevere through dire challenges, and finally share his newfound wealth in a dignified way. Francis’ favorite book is The Once and Future King, the hero’s journey of King Arthur. He fell in love with this book as a kid and credits it with saving not just his company but his very soul as an adult. What you are about to witness in the next two hours then, is how Francis lived out this book. This is the hero’s journey of Francis Pedraza. Timestamps: 4:47 The Purpose of Education Is Action 19:03 The Anti-Progress Tech Founder 35:05 Billionaires Have No Cultural Appetite 47:48 Turning Failure Into a Billion-Dollar Win 59:28 How Success Corrupts Entrepreneurs 1:06:52 Thinker-Doers: Where Ideas Meet Action 1:11:31 The Brutal Truth About Entrepreneurship 1:36:12 Heroism in an Anti-Heroic Age
2:03:36

This is the most meaningful interview I’ve done: seeing my friend Francis Pedraza react to conversations we had 8 years ago before his success. Francis Pedraza now runs one of the fastest-growing AI unicorns worth $2 billion, but when I met him a decade ago he was at a low point: broke, recently single, having failed his first company, and struggling with his second. We became fast friends over our love of the Great Books and recorded 6 hours of conversations on philosophy, entrepreneurship, and God. This summer, I invited Francis back to listen to his old self and see how success has changed his views. The first part of this video is our latest interview in 2025 where he reacts to our past conversations and the second audio-only part is the highlights from 2018. What’s so cool is that Francis called his shot. Even when everything wasn’t working, even when he was a “failure” by all accounts, he boldly predicted his success and laid out a laughably ambitious plan that seemed impossible. I called him Don Quixote to his face, but boy am I happy that I was wrong! What’s so beautiful, when you watch these two interviews together, is to see how Francis’ obsession with philosophy, which made him seem like a complete buffoon in 2018, became the cause of his success. It was because of his continued study of the Great Books that Francis was able to come up with ideas no one else saw, persevere through dire challenges, and finally share his newfound wealth in a dignified way. Francis’ favorite book is The Once and Future King, the hero’s journey of King Arthur. He fell in love with this book as a kid and credits it with saving not just his company but his very soul as an adult. What you are about to witness in the next two hours then, is how Francis lived out this book. This is the hero’s journey of Francis Pedraza. Timestamps: 4:47 The Purpose of Education Is Action 19:03 The Anti-Progress Tech Founder 35:05 Billionaires Have No Cultural Appetite 47:48 Turning Failure Into a Billion-Dollar Win 59:28 How Success Corrupts Entrepreneurs 1:06:52 Thinker-Doers: Where Ideas Meet Action 1:11:31 The Brutal Truth About Entrepreneurship 1:36:12 Heroism in an Anti-Heroic Age

Johnathan Bi

71,858 次观看 • 1 年前

I've become a missionary with one message. Every time I meet a young person, the same words: have children, get married, build a family. I did not decide on this calling. It overtook me. And it overtook me for a single reason. I had no idea. I genuinely did not understand how much joy, how much meaning, how much sheer beauty pours out of a child until I was holding one of my own and felt the floor of my life drop into something deeper than I knew was there. I grew up white, affluent, secular, comfortable, and insulated. That world does not put babies in front of you. None of my friends were starting families. Out of my whole circle, almost no one has a big one. We were not formed by the presence of children. We were formed by their absence, by the strange quiet of homes built for two careers and no cradle. And a person believes what his world shows him. So we believed. What we believed was a lie. It is a lie with an author, and that the author is the enemy of joy himself. It is the gospel of the world, and its commandment is wait. Wait until you are older. Wait until the career is built and the savings are stacked and the twenties are properly spent. Enjoy your freedom. You are not ready. It does not arrive sounding like temptation. It arrives sounding like wisdom, like prudence, like the responsible thing, and that is exactly why it works. The most effective lies are the ones that wear the face of virtue. And the maddening thing is that it collapses from every angle at once. It is not rooted in biology, because the body is made for this work precisely in the years we are told to postpone it. The flesh keeps a calendar the culture pretends not to see. And it is not rooted in theology either. You will not find this deferral anywhere in the Christian imagination, in any of the fathers, in any of the scriptures. So choose whatever lens you like. Take the cold secular measure or the ancient sacred one. By either light the counsel is rotten. It is bad for the body and bad for the soul and bad for the society downstream of both. This is why I have come to see it as one of the central tragedies of my generation. Every age carries its own wound. The Great Depression was a depression of bread, a scarcity in the world of matter, hunger you could measure. Ours is a depression of a different order. It is a famine of the spirit in the middle of abundance. We have more than any people who ever lived and we are starving in a way our ancestors would not recognize, because the thing we are refusing cannot be bought and cannot be banked. The ones most made to give and receive this love are quietly declining it. They are walking away from the one inheritance that actually compounds, and the cruelest part is that they do not feel the loss as loss. You cannot grieve what you were taught not to want. That is the deepest cut of it. The lie does not only steal the thing. It steals the capacity to know the thing was stolen. A man can spend his whole life on the far side of a door he never knew was a door, mistaking the wall for the edge of the world. Because this beauty is not ordinary beauty. It is not the pleasure of a good meal or a clear morning. It is participation in something that comes down from above, the same generative love that spoke everything out of nothing and called it good. To make a person, to be undone and remade by loving that person more than your own life, is to be drawn for a moment inside the very act that holds the cosmos together. A child does not merely add to your life. A child reorders the soul. It teaches you what you are by asking everything of you, and you discover, kneeling there exhausted at three in the morning, that you had a capacity for self gift you never suspected, a depth in yourself you had no other way to reach. In the Gospel of John, on the last night, Jesus prays, these things I have spoken to you that my joy may be in you, and that your joy may be complete. And I have come to understand why family is the road into that fullness, why it is not one path among many but the one most fitted to the shape of the promise. Consider who is praying. Christ does not come to us as a lone figure dropped out of the sky. He comes out of a family older than the world, the eternal communion of Father and Son, the love between them so total and so alive that theologians dared to call it a third person. Before there was anything, there was a family. The deepest fact about reality is not a force or a law or a void. It is a household. It is begetting and being begotten, giving and receiving, a Father who is only a Father because there is a Son. So when Jesus speaks of joy made complete, he is not pointing away from family toward something higher. He is pointing toward the very thing he came from, the life he has known from eternity and came to share. His joy is the joy of belonging utterly to a Father and pouring himself out for those he loves. When you marry, when you bring a child into the world, when you wear yourself down in the small unseen labors of a home, you are not stepping outside that divine life. You are stepping into a small image of it. Your family is a created echo of an uncreated one. The love you give your child rhymes with the love the Father has for the Son. The exhaustion, the tenderness, the way a parent would tear the sky open to protect a sleeping infant, all of it is the heavens pressed faintly into flesh, the eternal household leaving its fingerprint on yours. That is why the joy is not merely added to family but completed in it. We were made in the image of a God who is, at his very root, relation and gift and generation. To found a family is to do the most Godlike thing a creature can do, to participate from below in the begetting that God does from all eternity. Your home becomes a window. Through it, dimly and imperfectly, you glimpse the country you came from and are going to. And now a word for the young people reading this, the ones who do not yet have children. I want to tell you what it is like from where I stand. When I am out somewhere, a restaurant, anywhere, and a large family comes through the door, the noise and the chaos and the small bodies of them, something happens in me on two levels at once. The first is joy. A pure gladness at the sight, the way you feel watching something good and alive. But underneath it, almost in the same instant, a sadness reaches up and takes hold of my heart. Because I know now, at my age, after my own years of waiting, that I will never have that. I will never know the particular fruit of a family that large, the fullness of that table, the weight of all those lives gathered under one roof. The door to it has quietly closed, and I felt it close. And I am telling you plainly, because I love you and have no reason to lie to you: you will feel this too. You will. The day will come when you see what you passed up, and you will recognize the ache for what it is, and it will be too late to answer it. So please, learn from a man who got it wrong. Let my regret be worth something by becoming your wisdom. Do not wait yourself into a grief you cannot undo. Choose now, while the door is open, so that you may step into a joy that does not end.
8:26

I've become a missionary with one message. Every time I meet a young person, the same words: have children, get married, build a family. I did not decide on this calling. It overtook me. And it overtook me for a single reason. I had no idea. I genuinely did not understand how much joy, how much meaning, how much sheer beauty pours out of a child until I was holding one of my own and felt the floor of my life drop into something deeper than I knew was there. I grew up white, affluent, secular, comfortable, and insulated. That world does not put babies in front of you. None of my friends were starting families. Out of my whole circle, almost no one has a big one. We were not formed by the presence of children. We were formed by their absence, by the strange quiet of homes built for two careers and no cradle. And a person believes what his world shows him. So we believed. What we believed was a lie. It is a lie with an author, and that the author is the enemy of joy himself. It is the gospel of the world, and its commandment is wait. Wait until you are older. Wait until the career is built and the savings are stacked and the twenties are properly spent. Enjoy your freedom. You are not ready. It does not arrive sounding like temptation. It arrives sounding like wisdom, like prudence, like the responsible thing, and that is exactly why it works. The most effective lies are the ones that wear the face of virtue. And the maddening thing is that it collapses from every angle at once. It is not rooted in biology, because the body is made for this work precisely in the years we are told to postpone it. The flesh keeps a calendar the culture pretends not to see. And it is not rooted in theology either. You will not find this deferral anywhere in the Christian imagination, in any of the fathers, in any of the scriptures. So choose whatever lens you like. Take the cold secular measure or the ancient sacred one. By either light the counsel is rotten. It is bad for the body and bad for the soul and bad for the society downstream of both. This is why I have come to see it as one of the central tragedies of my generation. Every age carries its own wound. The Great Depression was a depression of bread, a scarcity in the world of matter, hunger you could measure. Ours is a depression of a different order. It is a famine of the spirit in the middle of abundance. We have more than any people who ever lived and we are starving in a way our ancestors would not recognize, because the thing we are refusing cannot be bought and cannot be banked. The ones most made to give and receive this love are quietly declining it. They are walking away from the one inheritance that actually compounds, and the cruelest part is that they do not feel the loss as loss. You cannot grieve what you were taught not to want. That is the deepest cut of it. The lie does not only steal the thing. It steals the capacity to know the thing was stolen. A man can spend his whole life on the far side of a door he never knew was a door, mistaking the wall for the edge of the world. Because this beauty is not ordinary beauty. It is not the pleasure of a good meal or a clear morning. It is participation in something that comes down from above, the same generative love that spoke everything out of nothing and called it good. To make a person, to be undone and remade by loving that person more than your own life, is to be drawn for a moment inside the very act that holds the cosmos together. A child does not merely add to your life. A child reorders the soul. It teaches you what you are by asking everything of you, and you discover, kneeling there exhausted at three in the morning, that you had a capacity for self gift you never suspected, a depth in yourself you had no other way to reach. In the Gospel of John, on the last night, Jesus prays, these things I have spoken to you that my joy may be in you, and that your joy may be complete. And I have come to understand why family is the road into that fullness, why it is not one path among many but the one most fitted to the shape of the promise. Consider who is praying. Christ does not come to us as a lone figure dropped out of the sky. He comes out of a family older than the world, the eternal communion of Father and Son, the love between them so total and so alive that theologians dared to call it a third person. Before there was anything, there was a family. The deepest fact about reality is not a force or a law or a void. It is a household. It is begetting and being begotten, giving and receiving, a Father who is only a Father because there is a Son. So when Jesus speaks of joy made complete, he is not pointing away from family toward something higher. He is pointing toward the very thing he came from, the life he has known from eternity and came to share. His joy is the joy of belonging utterly to a Father and pouring himself out for those he loves. When you marry, when you bring a child into the world, when you wear yourself down in the small unseen labors of a home, you are not stepping outside that divine life. You are stepping into a small image of it. Your family is a created echo of an uncreated one. The love you give your child rhymes with the love the Father has for the Son. The exhaustion, the tenderness, the way a parent would tear the sky open to protect a sleeping infant, all of it is the heavens pressed faintly into flesh, the eternal household leaving its fingerprint on yours. That is why the joy is not merely added to family but completed in it. We were made in the image of a God who is, at his very root, relation and gift and generation. To found a family is to do the most Godlike thing a creature can do, to participate from below in the begetting that God does from all eternity. Your home becomes a window. Through it, dimly and imperfectly, you glimpse the country you came from and are going to. And now a word for the young people reading this, the ones who do not yet have children. I want to tell you what it is like from where I stand. When I am out somewhere, a restaurant, anywhere, and a large family comes through the door, the noise and the chaos and the small bodies of them, something happens in me on two levels at once. The first is joy. A pure gladness at the sight, the way you feel watching something good and alive. But underneath it, almost in the same instant, a sadness reaches up and takes hold of my heart. Because I know now, at my age, after my own years of waiting, that I will never have that. I will never know the particular fruit of a family that large, the fullness of that table, the weight of all those lives gathered under one roof. The door to it has quietly closed, and I felt it close. And I am telling you plainly, because I love you and have no reason to lie to you: you will feel this too. You will. The day will come when you see what you passed up, and you will recognize the ache for what it is, and it will be too late to answer it. So please, learn from a man who got it wrong. Let my regret be worth something by becoming your wisdom. Do not wait yourself into a grief you cannot undo. Choose now, while the door is open, so that you may step into a joy that does not end.

Kirk Rollins

78,143 次观看 • 3 个月前

There is a beautiful story that just happened in AI so let me share it for a lighter tone weekend post among all the doom stories in our AI field this week. It’s a story of people on three continents building and sharing in the open a new small efficient and state-of-the-art AI model. It started a couple of months ago when a new team in the AI scene released their first model from their headquarters in Paris (France): Mistral 7B. Impressive model, small and very strong performances in the benchmarks, better than all previous models of this size. And open source! So you could build on top of it. Lewis in Bern (Switzerland) and Ed (in Lyon, in the South of France) both from the H4 team, a team of researchers in model fine-tuning and alignment were talking about it over a coffee, in one of these gatherings that often happen at Hugging Face to break the distance between people (literal distance as HF is a remote company). What about fine-tuning it using this new DPO method that a research team from Stanford in California just posted on Arxiv, says one? Hey, that’s a great idea, replies the other. We've just build a great code base (with Nathan, Nazneen, Costa, Younes and all the H4 team and TRL community) let's use it! The next day they start diving in the datasets openly shared on the HF hub and stumble upon two interesting large and good quality fine-tuning datasets recently open-sourced by OpenBMB, a Chinese team from Tsinghua: UltraFeedback and UltraChat. A few rounds of training experiments confirm the intuition, the resulting model is super strong, by far the strongest they have ever seen in their benchmarks from Berkeley and Stanford (LMSYS and Alpaca). Join Clementine, the big boss of the open evaluation leaderboard. Her deep dive into the model capabilities confirms the results: impressive performance. But the H4 team also hosts a famous faculty member, Pr. Sasha Rush, Associate Professor at Cornell University in his daytime, hacker at HF in his nighttime. Joining the conversation, he proposes to quickly draft a research paper to organize and share all the details with the community. A few days later, the model, called Zephyr (a wind like Mistral), paper, and all details are shared with the world. Quickly other companies, everywhere in the world starts to use it. LlamaIndex, a famous data framework and community, shares how the model blew their expectations on real-life use-case benchmarks, while researchers and practitioners discuss the paper and work on the Hugging Face hub. All this happened in just a few weeks catalyzed by open access to knowledge, models, research, and datasets released all over the world (Europe, California, China) and by the idea that people can build upon one another work in AI to bring real-world value with efficient and open models. Stories like this are numerous everywhere around us and make me really proud of the AI community and see how we can build amazingly useful things together. [the video is just me reading this Friday post hahah]
4:30

There is a beautiful story that just happened in AI so let me share it for a lighter tone weekend post among all the doom stories in our AI field this week. It’s a story of people on three continents building and sharing in the open a new small efficient and state-of-the-art AI model. It started a couple of months ago when a new team in the AI scene released their first model from their headquarters in Paris (France): Mistral 7B. Impressive model, small and very strong performances in the benchmarks, better than all previous models of this size. And open source! So you could build on top of it. Lewis in Bern (Switzerland) and Ed (in Lyon, in the South of France) both from the H4 team, a team of researchers in model fine-tuning and alignment were talking about it over a coffee, in one of these gatherings that often happen at Hugging Face to break the distance between people (literal distance as HF is a remote company). What about fine-tuning it using this new DPO method that a research team from Stanford in California just posted on Arxiv, says one? Hey, that’s a great idea, replies the other. We've just build a great code base (with Nathan, Nazneen, Costa, Younes and all the H4 team and TRL community) let's use it! The next day they start diving in the datasets openly shared on the HF hub and stumble upon two interesting large and good quality fine-tuning datasets recently open-sourced by OpenBMB, a Chinese team from Tsinghua: UltraFeedback and UltraChat. A few rounds of training experiments confirm the intuition, the resulting model is super strong, by far the strongest they have ever seen in their benchmarks from Berkeley and Stanford (LMSYS and Alpaca). Join Clementine, the big boss of the open evaluation leaderboard. Her deep dive into the model capabilities confirms the results: impressive performance. But the H4 team also hosts a famous faculty member, Pr. Sasha Rush, Associate Professor at Cornell University in his daytime, hacker at HF in his nighttime. Joining the conversation, he proposes to quickly draft a research paper to organize and share all the details with the community. A few days later, the model, called Zephyr (a wind like Mistral), paper, and all details are shared with the world. Quickly other companies, everywhere in the world starts to use it. LlamaIndex, a famous data framework and community, shares how the model blew their expectations on real-life use-case benchmarks, while researchers and practitioners discuss the paper and work on the Hugging Face hub. All this happened in just a few weeks catalyzed by open access to knowledge, models, research, and datasets released all over the world (Europe, California, China) and by the idea that people can build upon one another work in AI to bring real-world value with efficient and open models. Stories like this are numerous everywhere around us and make me really proud of the AI community and see how we can build amazingly useful things together. [the video is just me reading this Friday post hahah]

Thomas Wolf

169,276 次观看 • 2 年前

The 9 traits Sam Altman looks for to identify founders who can build a $10 billion company “It’s difficult to hear an idea at the very early stage and say: ‘Yeah, this idea has what it takes to be a $10 billion company.’ However, I think you can, with practice, identify founders that have a chance at creating one of those companies.’” The first four traits Sam looks for comes from gmail creator Paul Buchhiet: obsession, focus, frugality, and love. Next, Sam looks for intelligence: “You can give a founder an idea, but the problem is they need to come up with new ideas for the company basically every week… We tried an experiment at Y Combinator where we funded 20 teams of strong founders that didn’t have ideas but otherwise were really good, and they all failed. What we learned is that good founders have ideas all the time.” #6 is communication skills: “So much of your job as a founder is about communication—every time you hire someone, go to raise money, try to sell the product, and set a direction for the company. A huge amount of a founder’s job is being an evangelist for the company. If you don’t have strong communication skills or you don’t develop them quickly, you’re at a big disadvantage.” #7 is execution speed. How quickly can you generate a hypothesis, test it, and implement it? Sam observes that most slow-moving founders who went through Y Combinator didn’t go on to be successful: “A relentless cadence of execution is incredibly correlated with success.” #8 is the rate of improvement of the founder: “If you look at a founder who comes to meet you for a seed round and compare that founder to Brian Chesky, you will be disappointed 100% of the time. That’s the wrong comparison… You should look at the at the growth rate of the founder… Humans always underestimate exponential growth.” #9 is the right motivations: “There a lot of people who start a startup because they think it’s a way to get rich quickly, and unfortunately it’s just not. So startups have become the new default career trajectory for ambitious people… This does not work given the amount of pain you have to suffer for a startup… In our portfolio at YC, every time we thought a company was going to go really well and didn’t, the founder did not have a deep sense of mission.” Video Source: Y Combinator
5:32

The 9 traits Sam Altman looks for to identify founders who can build a $10 billion company “It’s difficult to hear an idea at the very early stage and say: ‘Yeah, this idea has what it takes to be a $10 billion company.’ However, I think you can, with practice, identify founders that have a chance at creating one of those companies.’” The first four traits Sam looks for comes from gmail creator Paul Buchhiet: obsession, focus, frugality, and love. Next, Sam looks for intelligence: “You can give a founder an idea, but the problem is they need to come up with new ideas for the company basically every week… We tried an experiment at Y Combinator where we funded 20 teams of strong founders that didn’t have ideas but otherwise were really good, and they all failed. What we learned is that good founders have ideas all the time.” #6 is communication skills: “So much of your job as a founder is about communication—every time you hire someone, go to raise money, try to sell the product, and set a direction for the company. A huge amount of a founder’s job is being an evangelist for the company. If you don’t have strong communication skills or you don’t develop them quickly, you’re at a big disadvantage.” #7 is execution speed. How quickly can you generate a hypothesis, test it, and implement it? Sam observes that most slow-moving founders who went through Y Combinator didn’t go on to be successful: “A relentless cadence of execution is incredibly correlated with success.” #8 is the rate of improvement of the founder: “If you look at a founder who comes to meet you for a seed round and compare that founder to Brian Chesky, you will be disappointed 100% of the time. That’s the wrong comparison… You should look at the at the growth rate of the founder… Humans always underestimate exponential growth.” #9 is the right motivations: “There a lot of people who start a startup because they think it’s a way to get rich quickly, and unfortunately it’s just not. So startups have become the new default career trajectory for ambitious people… This does not work given the amount of pain you have to suffer for a startup… In our portfolio at YC, every time we thought a company was going to go really well and didn’t, the founder did not have a deep sense of mission.” Video Source: Y Combinator

Startup Archive

85,860 次观看 • 2 年前

Marc Andreessen explains why we are only three years into what is effectively an 80-year technological revolution: He opens with a blunt assessment: "This is the biggest technological revolution of my life. This is clearly bigger than the internet. The comps on this are things like the microprocessor and the steam engine and electricity." But to understand why, you have to go back 80 years. In the 1930s, the pioneers of computing understood the theory of computation before they'd even built the machines. And they faced a fundamental choice. Build computers in the image of the adding machine — hyper-literal, mathematical, capable of billions of operations per second, but unable to understand human speech or deal with humans the way humans like to be dealt with. Or build computers modelled on the human brain. Neural networks. They chose the adding machine. And that single decision shaped everything — mainframes, PCs, smartphones, every dollar of wealth the computer industry created over the next 80 years. IBM itself is the successor company to the National Cash Register Company of America. The lineage runs that deep. But here's what makes this moment so extraordinary. They knew about the other path. The first neural network academic paper was published in 1943. Marc points to a remarkable piece of forgotten history: "There's an interview you can watch on YouTube with the authors. It's him in his beach house, not wearing a shirt, talking about this future in which computers are going to be built on the model of the human brain." That was 1946. The vision existed. The path just wasn't taken. So neural networks spent the next eight decades living in the shadows. Kept alive by a small academic movement — first called cybernetics, then artificial intelligence — that refused to let the idea die. And for most of that time, it simply didn't work. "It was basically decade after decade after decade of excessive optimism followed by disappointment." By the time Marc reached college in 1989, AI was a backwater field. Everyone assumed it was never going to happen. But the scientists kept working. Quietly building up an enormous reservoir of concepts and ideas across those decades of disappointment. And then Christmas 2022 arrived. ChatGPT. And suddenly: "All of a sudden it's like: oh my god. It turns out it works." That moment wasn't the start of something new. It was the payoff on an 80-year-old bet that almost everyone had written off. Which is exactly why Marc's framing matters so much: "We're three years into what is effectively an 80-year revolution." Most people are treating AI like another technology cycle — something to adapt to, ride, and wait out. But if Andreessen is right, we are not adapting to a new cycle. We are standing at the very beginning of the longest and most consequential technological transformation in human history. The road not taken in the 1930s is finally being built. And we have barely broken ground.
3:43

Marc Andreessen explains why we are only three years into what is effectively an 80-year technological revolution: He opens with a blunt assessment: "This is the biggest technological revolution of my life. This is clearly bigger than the internet. The comps on this are things like the microprocessor and the steam engine and electricity." But to understand why, you have to go back 80 years. In the 1930s, the pioneers of computing understood the theory of computation before they'd even built the machines. And they faced a fundamental choice. Build computers in the image of the adding machine — hyper-literal, mathematical, capable of billions of operations per second, but unable to understand human speech or deal with humans the way humans like to be dealt with. Or build computers modelled on the human brain. Neural networks. They chose the adding machine. And that single decision shaped everything — mainframes, PCs, smartphones, every dollar of wealth the computer industry created over the next 80 years. IBM itself is the successor company to the National Cash Register Company of America. The lineage runs that deep. But here's what makes this moment so extraordinary. They knew about the other path. The first neural network academic paper was published in 1943. Marc points to a remarkable piece of forgotten history: "There's an interview you can watch on YouTube with the authors. It's him in his beach house, not wearing a shirt, talking about this future in which computers are going to be built on the model of the human brain." That was 1946. The vision existed. The path just wasn't taken. So neural networks spent the next eight decades living in the shadows. Kept alive by a small academic movement — first called cybernetics, then artificial intelligence — that refused to let the idea die. And for most of that time, it simply didn't work. "It was basically decade after decade after decade of excessive optimism followed by disappointment." By the time Marc reached college in 1989, AI was a backwater field. Everyone assumed it was never going to happen. But the scientists kept working. Quietly building up an enormous reservoir of concepts and ideas across those decades of disappointment. And then Christmas 2022 arrived. ChatGPT. And suddenly: "All of a sudden it's like: oh my god. It turns out it works." That moment wasn't the start of something new. It was the payoff on an 80-year-old bet that almost everyone had written off. Which is exactly why Marc's framing matters so much: "We're three years into what is effectively an 80-year revolution." Most people are treating AI like another technology cycle — something to adapt to, ride, and wait out. But if Andreessen is right, we are not adapting to a new cycle. We are standing at the very beginning of the longest and most consequential technological transformation in human history. The road not taken in the 1930s is finally being built. And we have barely broken ground.

Big Brain AI

382,179 次观看 • 5 个月前

Grok Bot summary of NVIDIA CEO Jensen Huang’s fireside chat at today’s G20 Meeting: Power, data centers, and infrastructure - He said AI has turned a corner: it is now productive infrastructure, like energy or the internet, not just phones and PCs. - Energy is the bottom of the stack. You cannot produce intelligence without it. These systems turn electricity into mathematics, then into something you can sell. - Compute is priced like power: dollars per million tokens, the way energy is dollars per kilowatt-hour. - A data center is land, power, and a shell. Plug energy in, and money starts coming out. - Every country needs this the way it needs water, roads, electricity, and the internet. Local capacity is what activates researchers, students, startups, and industry. - US edge he cited: pro-energy growth and faster regulation. This year, close to a trillion dollars into US infrastructure, and jobs across chip fabs, computer plants, and “AI factories.” - Scale: one gigawatt of this infrastructure is about $50–60 billion (old-school, a $25 billion chip fab felt huge). NVIDIA’s plan: 100 gigawatts by the end of the decade. AI as a growth engine - The “token” is just a number produced by a lot of computation. String enough of them together and you get an image, a paragraph, an answer, or a new idea. That is how you put a price on intelligence. - Once you use it, the value is obvious: more productive workers, more capable engineers, faster education for young populations, a quicker lift for countries building science and tech. - For 50 years, computers were a tool for maybe 10–20 million people who knew how to program. Now anyone can program a computer in human language. He called that the great equalizer. - AI is a five-layer cake: energy, chips, data-center infrastructure, models, then data and applications. The US is trying to lead the whole cake. Other countries do not have to win every layer. They should pick where to invest, and push adoption into education, healthcare, manufacturing, and science. - NVIDIA’s pitch: it runs American models, international models, and models in biology, chemistry, physics, and robotics. - AGI in the next couple of years, and he argued we are practically there now. That does not mean a company plugs into an API and becomes productive overnight. Even a brilliant MIT hire still needs context, purpose, and a harness around them. Same for AI. - Tasks get automated. The job’s purpose (context, meaning, direction) stays. People get supercharged, not replaced. “All the jobs disappear” he called nonsense. - Use off-the-shelf AI where you can, but every country and company still has to build some of its own intelligence. Do not outsource all of it. - Next 5–10 years: things that took 10 years take 1; things that took a year take a month. First time innovators talk about adding $20–50 trillion of benefit to a $100 trillion industry. Robotics and physical AI - AI starts as software. What made LLMs useful was putting an “agent harness” around them: retrieval, working memory, tools, collaboration. - Put that agent in a body and it is a robot. Four wheels: a self-driving car. A manipulator: pick-and-place. Also grocery and logistics vehicles, surgical robots, autonomous drug-discovery labs. - Same idea throughout: a large language model plus an agentic system, using digital tools or physical ones. How countries should play it - Treat AI as infrastructure, then actually build some of it at home. - You do not have to invent every layer. You do have to get AI into your own industries. - The real risk is not using it and getting left behind. Safety and regulation - New tech always looks like magic. Building it is engineering, and the people building it own safety, the way they do for cars and planes. - He wants the tech to advance faster, because advancement is what made it safer (less hallucination, grounded in real truth). - Balance fear-and-safety talk with prosperity talk. Airline analogy: passengers did not want ads about whose plane was safer. They wanted new destinations. Safety is the builder’s job, not the public’s daily burden. - Regulate actual, pragmatic harm, not hypothetical harm. Fold AI into agencies that already exist (FDA, NHTSA, and the rest) instead of inventing a freeze on early S-curve tech. Why GPUs, in his telling - A GPU is a general-purpose parallel processor: physics, chemistry, graphics, and AI. - 14th-generation architecture, in clouds, on-prem, at the edge, in robots and cars. - Because a gigawatt costs $50–60 billion, you want an architecture that is fungible and durable. If models change (and they are changing fast), a too-specialized chip can obsolete the whole investment. That, he said, is why NVIDIA’s growth is accelerating.
30:43

Grok Bot summary of NVIDIA CEO Jensen Huang’s fireside chat at today’s G20 Meeting: Power, data centers, and infrastructure - He said AI has turned a corner: it is now productive infrastructure, like energy or the internet, not just phones and PCs. - Energy is the bottom of the stack. You cannot produce intelligence without it. These systems turn electricity into mathematics, then into something you can sell. - Compute is priced like power: dollars per million tokens, the way energy is dollars per kilowatt-hour. - A data center is land, power, and a shell. Plug energy in, and money starts coming out. - Every country needs this the way it needs water, roads, electricity, and the internet. Local capacity is what activates researchers, students, startups, and industry. - US edge he cited: pro-energy growth and faster regulation. This year, close to a trillion dollars into US infrastructure, and jobs across chip fabs, computer plants, and “AI factories.” - Scale: one gigawatt of this infrastructure is about $50–60 billion (old-school, a $25 billion chip fab felt huge). NVIDIA’s plan: 100 gigawatts by the end of the decade. AI as a growth engine - The “token” is just a number produced by a lot of computation. String enough of them together and you get an image, a paragraph, an answer, or a new idea. That is how you put a price on intelligence. - Once you use it, the value is obvious: more productive workers, more capable engineers, faster education for young populations, a quicker lift for countries building science and tech. - For 50 years, computers were a tool for maybe 10–20 million people who knew how to program. Now anyone can program a computer in human language. He called that the great equalizer. - AI is a five-layer cake: energy, chips, data-center infrastructure, models, then data and applications. The US is trying to lead the whole cake. Other countries do not have to win every layer. They should pick where to invest, and push adoption into education, healthcare, manufacturing, and science. - NVIDIA’s pitch: it runs American models, international models, and models in biology, chemistry, physics, and robotics. - AGI in the next couple of years, and he argued we are practically there now. That does not mean a company plugs into an API and becomes productive overnight. Even a brilliant MIT hire still needs context, purpose, and a harness around them. Same for AI. - Tasks get automated. The job’s purpose (context, meaning, direction) stays. People get supercharged, not replaced. “All the jobs disappear” he called nonsense. - Use off-the-shelf AI where you can, but every country and company still has to build some of its own intelligence. Do not outsource all of it. - Next 5–10 years: things that took 10 years take 1; things that took a year take a month. First time innovators talk about adding $20–50 trillion of benefit to a $100 trillion industry. Robotics and physical AI - AI starts as software. What made LLMs useful was putting an “agent harness” around them: retrieval, working memory, tools, collaboration. - Put that agent in a body and it is a robot. Four wheels: a self-driving car. A manipulator: pick-and-place. Also grocery and logistics vehicles, surgical robots, autonomous drug-discovery labs. - Same idea throughout: a large language model plus an agentic system, using digital tools or physical ones. How countries should play it - Treat AI as infrastructure, then actually build some of it at home. - You do not have to invent every layer. You do have to get AI into your own industries. - The real risk is not using it and getting left behind. Safety and regulation - New tech always looks like magic. Building it is engineering, and the people building it own safety, the way they do for cars and planes. - He wants the tech to advance faster, because advancement is what made it safer (less hallucination, grounded in real truth). - Balance fear-and-safety talk with prosperity talk. Airline analogy: passengers did not want ads about whose plane was safer. They wanted new destinations. Safety is the builder’s job, not the public’s daily burden. - Regulate actual, pragmatic harm, not hypothetical harm. Fold AI into agencies that already exist (FDA, NHTSA, and the rest) instead of inventing a freeze on early S-curve tech. Why GPUs, in his telling - A GPU is a general-purpose parallel processor: physics, chemistry, graphics, and AI. - 14th-generation architecture, in clouds, on-prem, at the edge, in robots and cars. - Because a gigawatt costs $50–60 billion, you want an architecture that is fungible and durable. If models change (and they are changing fast), a too-specialized chip can obsolete the whole investment. That, he said, is why NVIDIA’s growth is accelerating.

DogeDesigner

64,991 次观看 • 29 天前