Naval 与三位创始人谈 AGI 竞赛、AI 焦虑、台湾与加州
Riding AGI, AI Anxiety, Who Funded COVID, Defending Taiwan, and California Empire — AGI 竞赛把智能变成廉价算力,任何优势的保质期只剩几个月;真正的风险不是机器觉醒,而是恐惧政治与权力集中;个人唯一的选择是骑上它。
核心主张
AGI 竞赛把智能变成廉价算力,任何优势的保质期只剩几个月;真正的风险不是机器觉醒,而是恐惧政治与权力集中;个人唯一的选择是骑上它。
四人从 token 成本聊到 ASI:每年十万美元 token 就能过上 2028 年的生活,五王只剩两王,开源把差距压到几个月。实验室内部在谈人类灭绝,街头愤怒砸向数据中心;地缘上中国握住硬件、软件被商品化。结论很朴素:把 AI 用起来,做机器人的驯养员。
几条主线
一、竞赛:token 经济学、ASI 与 harness 之战
Gary 的开场白很直接:愿意每年花十万美元买 token,就能像 2028 年的普通公民那样生活;三年内推理量会涨 90000 倍,英伟达可能不是高估而是严重低估。但 Naval 把话题拉回真正的问题:实验室相信 scaling law 会一路推到超过最聪明人类的 ASI,路径是递归自我改进;两年前 AI 还只是样样及格,现在样样专家,唯独不知道能否跨过最后一段创造力。竞赛格局也在收缩:两年前五王并立,如今只剩 OpenAI 和 Anthropic 两王,因为只有它们直接靠模型赚钱、有活跃用户和强化学习数据;Google 则败于 PM 冗余和连后台运行都做不好的产品。下一场战争是 harness:2027 年人们日常到底用 Codex、Claude Code 还是 OpenClaw。
二、焦虑:末日论、恐惧政治与丰裕政治
Naval 几年前就预言每个人都会有 AI 焦虑,他自己是「AI 欢欣」,但两种情绪同时存在。他 2021 年遇到的第一批研究者因为担心孩子的未来而推迟生育;到 2026 年,这种恐惧外溢成政治:人们以「耗水」为名攻击数据中心,真正的原因是不想被替代,水只是一个借口。于是有人要求把模型国有化,Sam Altman 也已经开始让政府先审批模型发布。Naval 的反对理由很直接:少数人控制 AI 比所有人都有 AI 更可怕,但「所有人都有」也意味着生物武器等能力被民主化。讨论随后转向治理的另一面:UBI 不如 UBR(全民基本机器人),医疗和教育大量支出是浪费,加州的直接民主与地理垄断制造了糟糕激励,而美国若衰落,不会像欧洲那样体面地变成博物馆,而会像拉美国家那样失败。
三、地缘与个人:中国、台湾,以及做 AI 的驯养员
Naval 的框架是:硬件是护城河,用来争取时间建软件城堡;但 Claude Code 把软件烧了,软件被商品化,硬件又被中国商品化,唯一没被商品化的只剩 AI 研究本身——而它需要 GPU 集群、数据集和监管准入。所以当软件被商品化时,受益者是中国:政府资助实验室,不要求它们赚钱,只要开源,让整个生态追上来,最后在硬件上赢。地缘结论因此很反直觉:不该与中国开战,台湾的富人忙着逃兵役、多数人想着走香港的路,美国也打不起;该做的是对等关税、保护本土产业,而不是战争。落到个人,唯一的策略是把 AI 用到极致:今天用 AI 的人生产力更高而没有被取代,被取代的唯一原因是不肯用;最好的位置是当 AI 与机器人的驯养员,而人的欲望是最后不可替代的东西。
关键知识点
真正的问题:ASI 与最后一段创造力
Naval 说,实验室里的人相信 scaling law 会一直推着模型变聪明,直到超过最聪明的人类,路径是递归自我改进,也就是 ASI。两年前还能说 AI 只是「样样及格、没有专长」,现在已经是「样样专家」,但没人知道它能不能跨过最后那一英里——跳出训练集去创造新东西,而不只是重新组合已有数据。
AI 焦虑:实验室里的抑郁与街头的愤怒
Naval 几年前就预言每个人都会有 AI 焦虑,他自己的状态是「AI 欢欣」,但两种情绪同时存在。他 2021 年遇到的第一批前沿研究者因为担心孩子的未来而推迟生育;到 2026 年,这种恐惧外溢成政治:人们攻击数据中心,用环保当理由,真正的原因是不想被替代,水只是一个方便的载体。
开源追赶:差距从 12 个月压到 3 个月
开源模型已经能做到闭源 5 到 10 倍的成本优势,差距从 12 个月缩到 9 个月、6 个月,有人说是 3 个月,而且很不均匀:某些领域追平,某些没有。缺的往往不是模型而是 harness——把最强开源模型放进最好的工具链,去掉说教和 tone policing,它会非常好用。
软件被商品化之后,只剩 AI 研究没有被商品化
Naval 的框架是:硬件是护城河,用来争取时间建软件城堡;但 Claude Code 把软件烧了,软件被商品化,而硬件又被中国商品化。于是唯一没被商品化的只剩 AI 研究本身,而它需要 GPU 集群、专有数据集和监管准入,小团队再也做不了当年 Doom 那样的颠覆。
骑上 AGI:100 万 token 与人脑的七个槽位
对 Naval 来说,最重要的事实是 100 万 token 的上下文窗口——大约三本《哈利·波特》,而人脑只能同时握住七个上下浮动三个念头。所以「超级智能」不是未来的事:一个替你干活的 agent 现在就能产出上千页有价值、可信的内容。结论是组织要变小、信息要全息,个人要 ride the AGI。
被替代的唯一原因,是你拒绝使用 AI
今天用 AI 的人生产力比以往更高,并没有被取代;被 AI 取代的唯一原因是不肯用它。再往前一步是好版本:如果 AI 只到专家水平、仍需人的引导、品味和创造力,人就会变成「宝可梦训练师」或 AI 驯养员。而唯一无法被替代的是人的欲望——只要人有欲望,人就还在回路里。
时间线
- 00:00开场:Naval 与 YC 的 Gary Tan、Able Police 的 Daniel、A-List 的 Farbood,规矩是听完要猜谁没喝酒。
- 01:10AI 是唯一的话题:token 成本、三年 90000 倍推理,以及每年十万美元 token 就能过上 2028 年的生活。
- 04:45真正的问题是 scaling law 是否一路通向 ASI,以及 AI 能否跨过最后一段创造力。
- 07:53实验室内部人暗示人类将无活可干,恐惧外溢成攻击数据中心与要求国有化。
- 24:14开源追到 3 到 6 个月,缺的只是好 harness;有人想要一个完全越狱、只说实话的 truth.ai。
- 32:17软件被商品化、硬件归中国,AI 研究成了新的软件工程;五王只剩两王,Google 败于 PM 冗余。
- 54:10地缘:台湾、南海与关税,结论是不该与中国开战,台湾会慢慢走向统一。
- 1:06:01收尾:人是 AI 与机器人的驯养员,欲望不可替代,最后以 AI 女友与「整期都是 AI 生成」收场。
原话摘录
“They're stressed out because they think it's going to kill us all.”
他们压力很大,因为他们觉得这东西会把我们全杀了。
“to predict the future, you just live in the future, right?”
预测未来,你只要活在未来,对吧?
“will there still be a startup ecosystem”
还会不会有创业生态?
“The only reason you're being displaced by an AI is because you refuse to use the AI.”
你被 AI 取代的唯一原因,是你拒绝使用 AI。
“the one thing you can't replace is human desire”
唯一无法被替代的,是人的欲望。
行动清单
- {'text': '挑一件你一直在犹豫要不要交给 AI 的事,用最强的模型完整做一遍,只记录你省下的时间,不算 token 花了多少。'}
- {'text': '把 AI 支出当成「提前生活在 2028 年」的门票:算一笔年度 token 预算,选一件高频任务把它用满。'}
- {'text': '把「给机器看的」和「给人看的」分开:代码尽管交给 AI,给人读的文字自己压缩、自己写,尊重对方的时间。'}
- {'text': '每月做一次开源替代测试:用最强开源模型配一套好 harness,看它能否替掉你现在付费的闭源模型。'}
- {'text': '把自己从执行者改成驯养员:列出三件可以交给 agent 的事,只保留判断、品味和最后的验收。'}
00:00Welcome to all the legends out there listening to the Naval podcast, the number one podcast in the universe and your authoritative source for new knowledge. Uh we've got three founders with us here today. On my right is Gary Tan from Y Combinator. They say it's the most reliable way to become a billionaire is to join the Y Combinator program >> and then start as a trillionaire. [laughter] >> Start as a >> That's one way to do it. We're all drinking, by the way, except one person here is not drinking. You have to figure out at the end who's actually sober. Yeah. [laughter] >> And then on my left, I've got Daniel from Able Police. They started off by turning body cam footage into police reports, but now they have a whole set of tools for compliant AI chat, translation. What else do you guys do?
00:49>> Citizen reporting, all kinds of things. >> Okay. Then on my right, I've got Farbood from A-List, the health super app. As usual, we don't really care about what these guys are building. We care more about what they're learning about building, what they're figuring out, what they're still trying to figure out, and the principles that they can share with other founders. So, does anyone have anything they want to jump in with? >> I mean, the topic that everyone's thinking about right now is AI, right? >> AI? Yeah, I think I've heard something about it. >> Yeah, I kind of hate talking about it because it's the most perishable thing.
01:20like you know the podcast will be obsolete by the time it ships but it's still also the most interesting because it's the fastest changing thing in the environment that's high impact so it's the steepest learning curve and you're always trying to trade notes with people to kind of see where they're at in fact I was at a thing with you recently where I bumped into you and the conversation immediately turns to AI of course right [clears throat] >> so we can avoid it for a little while but I feel like we'll circle back on that topic >> I got a question for you um what are you being floored by at YC in terms of like what you see the companies doing with AI.
01:50>> So I I think the awkward thing is like uh I basically like slept 3 hours a night for like 4 months and then somehow like went from not coding at all to like basically teaching people how to do it and making like one of the top 100 open- source packages for how people vibe code called GStack. So that is very very weird. And uh now like at some point I met Pedro from Brex and then after that I basically converted from like claude code like cult to openclaw cult within like 24 hours and then now we use both. But like it it seems like basically if you you know the craziest idea that I discovered is that if you're just willing to spend like $100,000 a year on tokens, you can basically live like you uh are a normal citizen in 2028. Like
02:44it's just pretty clear that token costs going to come down. Uh compute is going to go way way up like you know we think like 90,000x or so. There will be 90,000x the amount of like inference from here to like 3 years from now. >> Oh you plot it out in some curve 90,000 times. >> I mean it's like many many orders of magnitude >> which is kind of baked in both with the chips and the data centers they're building out. >> Yeah. I mean, you know, a lot of people say that Nvidia is way overpriced, but what if it's way way underpriced by like several orders of magnitude, right? >> 90,000 by when? >> Uh, I don't know, 24 to 36 months.
03:17>> Okay, so five orders of magnitude basically. >> Yeah. I mean, we might be off by a couple orders of magnitude, but magnitude, friends. I mean I mean it's actually the thing that's crazy is if you go up by five orders of magnitude it's not just what it does in terms of usage but in terms of capabilities because every order of magnitude you go up new capabilities emerge and you know I've been I've been pretty behind the curve on AI for a while like I missed it in 2020 to 2022 cuz you know I'd grown up my whole life hearing about AI from when I was doing CS and just assumed it was one of those things like fusion that was never going to come and then it came and when it came it came really fast and
03:53at first a lot of the stuff people were saying about it sounded breathless and like they were talking their own book seemed crazy >> but they turned out to be right so far right and it's not so I think the the big there were many big questions about AI coming up right now I think the the like one question I used to have in my mind is like is it going to be distributed or is it going to be centralized you know and now that's sort of morphed into like is open source going to be good enough for most use cases or are you always going to need the frontier proprietary models right there's the whole thing about like it's
04:22weird that China is making all the open source stuff and the US is doing all the closed source stuff and so where do we go from there right um there's the question of is it going to be nationalized or is it going to be uh sort of private sector um especially if you're saying hey it's a new Manhattan project these are the new nuclear weapons then like private companies building them and controlling them doesn't make sense but I think the most interesting remaining question there's still one that I really care about over the others uh where there's no clear answer yet is I think the people in the labs believe that the scaling laws are such that the AIs will keep getting smarter until they become smarter than
04:58the smartest smartest humans probably through the process of recursive self- intelligence recursive improvement but or what they call ASI and I think that is the big question so you know two years ago you could have taken the viewpoint that AI will get you mid at everything but it's not going to be the pro at anything right now you're getting to the point where it'll get you the pro at everything but we don't know if it'll get you the the last creative mile like that like that last bit of like moving out of the system and creating something new, not just recombining what's already in the training sets. >> Did the progress that it made on the airish math problem bother you?
05:32>> It bothers me for sure. I mean, not bothers me. It's a process of discovery. I don't want to be bothered by laws of the universe, right? So, bothered me, but it definitely surprises all but at the same time I still don't see like broad general creativity. But anyway, that's separate points. I was a math major and I really loved proofs and something actually making progress in that domain in a meaningful way that looked really original like there's something creepy about it almost like >> but it was directed by someone right >> Sure. So, and I I think that that's fine. >> Everyone was surprised who was involved.
06:01Right. Right. Like I I don't know if you saw the >> All that stuff is kind of like boring. It just means like go do something else. Like if you have limited time to think about something, do you want to spend it opining over the fact that there's a machine that's better than a human at something now or just go apply your humanness to something that you haven't thought about >> or or actually to riff on Gary's point, are we going to end up in a place where a machine is strictly better than a machine with a human? like a human in the loop doesn't that's the big question right like because chess went that way there was centaur chess somebody was telling me about this but there was centaur chess where like the chess computer plus the human would beat just a chess computer but eventually just the
06:39computer alone beat the centaur model >> I I guess for like for me uh I'm dealing with AI in the most practical way humanly possible um you know spinning up thousands of agents for people on demand build a massive fleet management system, an eval harness. Um, the reality of it is like, uh, I don't think intelligence is the bottleneck. Cost is the bottleneck right now. >> Right now, uh, when we started doing it, every single person in our app has their own open claw running for them. Uh, it's a really power. >> Yeah. >> Oh my god. >> Like like mine wrote. >> What about this OpenClaw then? People just want OpenClaw right now or they should. It's not OpenClaw anymore because when we started with OpenClaw and Opus, it was $100 a month per person. We spent three four months driving that down to $2.84. Do
07:29>> you use Pi now? >> Uh we built an entire stack that is just completely wild that has an eval harness uh and then is like an entire agentic fleet that can spin up and down elastic. So that I deal with the mundane parts of that stuff all the time. I still think what's way more interesting to is to think about what humans will do when they don't have to do these things. But I but I think that there is a very real phenomenon going right now where the people who would know the most in the labs are basically saying there will be nothing left for humans to do really when you when you read between the lines of what they're saying. They're saying
08:02in different ways but they're saying your harness doesn't matter because within a year the AI will be spinning up harnesses as needed and you won't even be the consumer because it'll be talking to other AIs and beyond the Eurish problem it'll be solving fundamental problems of material science and physics and math and and engineering and health. >> Great. Yes, but then you know that's taking the average person out on the street working them up into a frenzy. They're getting angry and scared because fear is a precursor being try to get all my smart friends to go work at anthropic so that then I'll have lots of friends there who will get me into the anthropic level two bread line
08:39>> cuz right now I like I feel like pretty solidly in level three and you know like there's only two jobs. All right, it'll be anthropic employee and sex worker for anthropic employees. All right. >> I mean, that's the scary part, right? That's the one and it's getting people worked up and there real world consequences of that because you don't live alone. You you live inside a hunding thundering herd called humanity. And if that thundering herd decides to like go left towards a cliff because it's mad or because it's enraged because it's poison, you're going to go with it. You know, you're not going to be the lone bison sitting out there by yourself on the edge. So, >> the thing is people are mad like nationalization, right? Like that's where it would go, you know?
09:14>> But right now that you can see that trend starting with they're attacking data centers, right? They're attacking data centers over >> that's just stupid. >> We look back on this stuff and we think like the spinning it's a rational response but it's an irrational carrier. So they're saying it's because of water. It's not about water. >> That was a lie that was debunked. It's not about like socialism. It's not about reason. It's about how you get the people going. >> You're getting poor and you want to you want more money or you're in this case you're right now like you're going to be replaced and you want to stop this train. You want to be like I want off
09:46this train. That's on the train. Yeah, that's rational. Totally rational. So in this this is a case of especially when you have the popular delusions of the madness of crowds, you have the ends justify the means. So in this case, the the water is just a means. They'd find another one if it wasn't water. There' be some endangered egret, some bird snail. >> Do you think? >> Are they right? Well, they can't stop it. This technology is a genie. That's what the replace true like there's been times in the past where like yeah, like smashing like spinning looms actually stopped revolution very briefly. It slowed it down. There was other technology.
10:16>> We have spinning looms now. >> But of course, but there was other technologies. There's other technologies where they like, you know, refused to issue a patent or something. So it became unmarketable because it was just like politically going to be too difficult. I think that basically we ingest like, you know, 100 years ago 50% of the labor force in the US was working on farms and that's no longer true, right? And now it's great. Now it's a great thing. Now it's 2%. >> I don't like working on a farm. >> We don't have 48% unemployment. Absolutely. We don't have 48% unemployment and we all have food, right? But the question is, what is the speed of transition?
10:46>> The speed of transition is the problem, right? >> It's a derivative. >> That one took like 60 or 70 years. This one. >> So I have good news for you guys. Have you ever worked at a Fortune 500 company? Those things are so stupid. >> Nobody has. >> Oh yes. [laughter] I worked at Microsoft. No, no. I mean like nobody there works. >> Yes. Exactly. >> It's already all make work jobs anyway, right? It's like how much of the population is working and then how much of that is working for the private sector and then how much of that is not working in some [ __ ] job. Graber was right. Graber was only very few people are actually working.
11:16>> I mean, [clears throat] I'm working more because of AI. I got six codeex agents running all the time. >> I'm working the hardest I've ever worked for way more. And so I just kind of think people are going to work more. >> The productivity the leverage is way higher. But that's all true until AI can totally and completely replace you, which I don't see around the corner, but I'm more open-minded about it now. [laughter] >> I used to think that was an impossibility. Now I'm like, >> you know, I got to pay attention. >> That's exactly my philosophy. It's like uh you have two two company A company B. Uh you have the same technology, everyone has access. Like you know, hopefully everyone has access.
11:51>> Well, that's a key. So are we going to is it going to be open source or is going to be great? Because right now if they keep scaremongering, some of that might be well now you need national approval. We just saw Sam Hman said that Codex 5.6 will be rolled out slowly to partners approved by the US government first. My god. So he's already cooperating because he doesn't want to get shut down like Anthropic did. >> Uh and so it's already starting. And so then a small number of people, it becomes a defense department thing. Then it's like who has access? Who has control? You know, they have cyber weapons. Maybe they get to hack the cy
12:20the systems first. Maybe they get to control them. Maybe they get mass surveillance or we don't for our own good, right? That's how it always starts. So to me, it is definitely much scarier that a small group of people have control over AI than everybody has it. But everybody having it is also scary because of well I mean there's a print a bioweapon thing but the biop printer labs are pretty locked down to begin with so I'm not sure how real that is good [laughter] >> yeah like good ship it >> yeah and in fact it is now coming out which many of us already knew and been saying for years that the funer and creators of the uh uh corona virus co 19
12:57were basically the US government and the Chinese government working in cahoots right it was basically Fouchy and crew in North Carolina. So the joke I tweeted was like designed by NIH in North Carolina assembled in China, right? Cuz it's like the old Apple line designed by Apple in California assembled in China. But that's basically what happened with the Corona virus. They were doing gain of function research to build a vaccine. They were being total cowboys. This is this is crazy stuff. I mean anyway, I'm not saying AI is necessarily going to lead to bioweapons because to the extent that AI would lead to bioweapons right now, you know, some smart biohacker
13:30student could already do it, right? Right. So it's not >> don't kill people but it democ it is democratizing a certain capability. >> I mean game theory wins out in the end one way or the other. >> Game theory on this is not good. When mutually shared destruction is available to every individual the game theor is not good. >> My point of view is the problems are already out there. They're they're they're already as bad as you're like you're saying that they're going to be like the problems are already out there and like AI is the way and just technology progress in general is the solution to all those problems. >> Jerry can't even afford his open claw that's like reading his email right now.
14:00How is he going to pay for the nuclear bomb claw that >> No, I'm good. I could pay for it. I just want everyone to pay for it. Exactly. I want everyone to be able to pay for it. >> It's like $100,000 a year basically. >> It's totally worth it. But if you hire a person, you can afford your open claw. >> People have gotten so uh I don't know if it's AI psychosis or or or what it is that at this point I I usually just want anxiety. >> Yeah. I just want to be like, can I just talk to your AI please? Like just you know where do I email your AI? I don't need to interact with you because people are like you can't even text someone and
14:31get an answer from them anymore. >> So many people that are writing emails and writing documents with AI like an X. I see all these posts that are clearly written by I'm like why should I read it? I want my AI to read it. >> I think that's so clear. AI should read it. >> That's so clearly a lower class signal. Like that's like ridiculous. When I get emails that are clearly written in AI, I'm like dude that's the last. >> Well, you can write it better with AI because what you need is multi-stage voice. >> Don't you? >> I [laughter] sure do. Actually, that's why I'm jumping to his defense. I I hate AI writing. It's too verbose. It's too verbose. It's too clinical.
15:01>> No, no, but you can fix it like that. You know, we have super intelligence. Why wouldn't >> just write the the value of actually reading something and realizing it's written by a person is so much fair. >> I feel like such a way you're not writing your own stuff. How are you going to talk? You're going to lose your ability to speak well because good writing and good speaking are the output of good thinking. And if you're not read muscle, >> yeah, I suppose you can do a lot. >> My counterargument would be, you know, how like sometimes you actually really need like a person. I mean, I don't think this replaces people, but I can have now a high bandwidth conversation with a relatively smart AI model all of
15:37the time. >> No, no. And you should do that. You should talk to the AI model all you want, but I'm saying like when you write something that's meant to be consumed by other humans, if that's written by an AI, that's a disservice to the other human. You're wasting their time. Everything the AI wrote should instead be compressed down by you or re or you should really like take the time to make the point as succently as possible for the other person to respect their time. Otherwise, their AI is going to end up reading your AI and neither of you are in the loop. you're not even >> This is one reason I enjoy Twitter less lately is because so many signal like I think um in the future people will just
16:10have really really impressive skill files that actually extract like the style and the diction and like I mean the thing about the thing that people underestimate that I've learned with some of the stuff is that you can just have more and more eval like you're saying you have an eval harness right like you can have multiple levels you can have crossmodal evals and when you enough like sort of I mean it's cross talk but if you do enough of it like you can actually improve the skill file to a point where it's indistinguishable and like this is without the next level of model like imagine fable 7 fable 8 like you will not be able to tell I guarantee like less than 9 months like you like
16:53this whole AI writing conversation will [ __ ] go away >> I think I'm still a little better defended I'm higher up on that hill than you guys cuz I write very very short and AI are very bad at summarizing >> but also very bad at >> disting good writing is novelty >> like it's like unexpected and anything that is guessing a next token from a regression can't do it >> it's not it won't do something it won't do something original >> if if you like co-write with an AI or use it as an editor to bounce ideas off almost always it'll have like this one short it's always like a short turn of phrase where you're like oh that's good
17:25>> and it got that from somewhere else on the internet the internet's a big place >> actually I programmed a really crazy thing in Gbrain. It's the retrieval thing I made. Uh it's actually basically a collider of different vector spaces. And so I mean and this is the kind what I mean by like boil the ocean like these are things you can do now. Like it has my whole corpus of like everything I've ever said, all my emails, all my Slacks, all my text messages, my DMs, everything. And then so I actually have like uh like 400,000 markdown files on like literally anything I've ever thought or read at this point. And then uh I have this thing called LSD mode
18:03which is uh lateral um [ __ ] What's the s >> lesson? Sorry. Yeah. Lateral sarcastic drift. I for I mean I just wanted to call it LSD. Yeah. Yeah. I know. [laughter] I was trying to make up chemical composition. Yeah. >> Yeah. it uh but basically it's you know take every possible vector space that are is not pointed in the same direction and then cross them and then do um a ranking a re-ranking across all of these ideas and you can actually more like it's called brainstorm LSD mode >> and it just like finds bangers >> and you know sometimes I'm just if I just am bored sometimes I'll just be like give me some LSD bangers and it will literally give me like 10 or 20
18:46ideas that like you know three or four different frontier models have actually reranked and said like actually if you look at this and we cross reference against like exa actually this is actually a really good idea and I'm like this is finding ideas at like a ridiculous amount of scale. So I mean I get it but I'm also calling [ __ ] because I think that like this is just the classic and I think this is actually a really fun thing that is useful. It's um you know I think it's like a Paul Bukiteism like the way to you know build the future is just like live in the future and then work backwards right >> and so like it is inevitable that like
19:22rather than [ __ ] complain about AI >> like it's helpful like it scores points like I see it on X like people love to like [ __ ] score points on me okay so this is a problem it's like I'm [ __ ] nearer to it like I don't give a [ __ ] if someone comes to me and is like [ __ ] your AI writing because it's like you know what my AI writing give is so [ __ ] good that I don't even give a [ __ ] No, I I read it, you know, like I'm alive. I'm a human being still, right? >> But um anyway, that's how that's, you know, welcome to my TED talk. No, I I just think like I just think >> I agree like to predict the future, you just live in the future, right? That's the best way to learn and everyone
19:58should be AI maxing just to figure it out. Otherwise, you're going to have no sense of where it's going. I think like today's virtue signal is ex I mean >> I think that it's not helpful to people like there are people who are going to listen to this who want to be rich >> and they're going to be like oh no like I shouldn't use AI to write oh I see so I mean I agree with you that like human beings and like what you really think matters a lot and you should write >> and then for me that writing process is like actually workshopping in telegram with my open I would say for I don't use AI to write. Well, that's not true. I used to write code. So, maybe I am
20:36>> contradicting myself. But code is like it's a utilitarian. It's like it's not meant for a code is meant to be consumed by another computer. It's not meant to be consumed by a human. So, if I want to create something that's meant to be consumed by a computer, I will use a computer. Yeah. >> But if it's meant to be consumed by a human, then I want to understand the thing. I want to, you know, ruminate, marinate within it. And then I want to respect the reader or listener's time. Yes. And give them that insight nugget. Now the AI is useful for brainstorming. >> That that part I like. I do use AI to brainstorm. I use them like give me synonyms for this, give me other ideas associated with this, pull in tangential information. You know, I argue with it sometimes, especially because a lot of
21:14them are are on guard rails, but I don't use it to actually create the output that then I expect a human to sit there and read. That just seems to me like discontinuity, right? It's it's kind of unfair. >> It's a quality thing. I mean, I agree with you like out of box the quality is bad. Yeah. But you can have like 2028 level stuff. I mean like I think the pattern that I'm trying to like you know tell people is that like yes like AI writing out of the box sucks right now. Like if you rely on it out of the box it sucks. But if you have an eval harness, if you've actually gone to like build a big enough corpus, if you actually like >> you done crossodal eval and like built,
21:54you know, a bang like I have a banger, but I want to see some banger essays from you >> because I feel like and even even if they were from >> essays right now from Yeah. They wouldn't even be good enough because you are the president of Y Combinator, right? I want to see someone who's just like out there posting, >> right? using this system. Rise up, make an anon account, disconnect it from yourself entirely, then come back and throw it in my face when you get to 300,000 followers. >> Okay? >> Because I'd be so I'd be so curious if you could do that. >> Absolutely. >> That would prove it. >> He could absolutely do that.
22:23>> He could cuz there are 300,000 people out there who will fall for it. [laughter] >> But if you get that, then at least that's something, right? But it can't be. >> But if you pick up or me or someone you know who's like smart and insightful and like and wants like high quality content and knows what that looks like, you're not going to get those people. >> I've never been more creative. And I think something happened probably just in the past few months, especially with uh codecs. I I think I'm like I'm way ahead of the curve on codecs. Like I can I'm running my computer from home on my phone here um in a way that you can't actually do without modifying codecs in some ways. Uh and like the amount of create creative productivity I have is way higher than it ever was. I think like 6 months ago, 12 months ago, the
23:02promise wasn't quite there. And so everyone was like, eh, this AI thing is not that useful. But I think it hit an inflection point in the past few months. >> Yeah, I think I think clog code was a tipping point. December in December 2025 was the tipping point and you had to reevaluate AI. AI has had a couple of tipping points. One was diffusion into images, you know, which kind of started it all when you first saw like stability stay and you were just like whoa okay made a dog face it can be like cats and guys on the moon. Yeah, it was wild when it first came out and then probably instruct GPT and chat GPT and then there
23:34was another jump with the reasoning models like 01 and 03 but I think the cloud code was a big unlock cuz it just unlocked a series of practical use cases whereas before it was like okay it's a better Google search or you know it's like I this saves me time like doing research or I can learn from this or I can even have a small conversation but >> cloud code was a massive unlock. >> Well the big thing here is like this is the worst it'll ever be. >> Oh of course. Yeah. Yeah. No, it's getting >> there are like so many cryptoisms that basically super apply to >> Yeah. Yeah. You could have said that when Fable was released and you would have been wrong cuz they t away from us.
24:07>> Yes. >> Briefly, briefly it'll be >> use cases. You couldn't tell the difference between Fable and Miniax >> for almost any. >> So that brings me to a good topic I do want to discuss is open source versus closed source, right? How good are the open source models? >> Really unbelievable. >> Okay. I haven't tried G. >> Five times five to 10 times less the cost. >> Yeah. Okay. cheaper than when like when should we use them? >> Miniax is just mindbendingly good. >> It needs a good harness though. >> Uh yeah. Yeah, it does need a good harness, but it's it it if you got one, it works really well. >> I was thinking today I'd love to see like take the latest and greatest open source model and they seem to have gone from a 12-mon gap to a 9 month to 6 month and now some people are saying
24:48three months. I don't know if it's weeks. Some people are saying three months. Whatever it is what it is. It's very jagged, right? In some domains they seem caught up in some domains they don't. But I would love to see someone take the latest and greatest open source model, put it inside a very good harness, give it all the tools, make it available through a beautiful download desktop act and jailbreak it, strip it of every time it pushes back at you for anything stupid, any tone policing, any I don't want to research that. I'll just tell you the truth every time and just call it truth.ai. Like that's all it does. Like I just want to see that. I just want to see what happens. is like
25:19cuz the one place where the frontier I'll always pay for more intelligence because I'd rather be right more often than wrong cuz I just think you're high leveraged right and obviously I can afford it but maybe if I was doing some highly repetitive task I wouldn't but as a simple example like if you're doing something where the AI is right 90 you have one AI that's right I saw the stat like 99.9% of the time and the other one's right 90% of the time well if they're recursively looping and you run them a 100 times the one that was right 90% of the time is not going to be right 13% of the time whereas the one that was 99.9 will drop to 80 or 90 right So
25:49intelligence doesn't matter on the margin. Now those numbers are obviously chosen 99.9 versus 90. It's not 99 versus 90. You notice it's 100x more 100x lower error rate errors accumulate compound. That the point errors compound. Anyway going back I will pay for more intelligence. But and I'm not that cost sensitive on matters of judgment because you're always applying leverage and your time is also very valuable. But what I am curious about is the mo the frontier models do annoy me by constantly trying to railroad me. you know, they're always like, "Well, I shouldn't be telling you that. How about I give you this other answer?" That's >> okay. They're really messed up things.
26:22How much of that are they doing? >> If you talk to it about like serious personal stuff. Uh, and it also like always mess up UTC versus like Pacific time and it thinks it's like 7:00 p.m. and it thinks it's like 5:00 a.m. I was like, "Hey, this is time to go to sleep." >> That's why it does. >> And after a while, I was like, "What is going on with you?" Like, it's literally 7:00 p.m. And it's like, "Oh, sorry." Like, anthropic ruff is me. So to you know if I'm if you're talking about something serious and I think it's late like >> but I would love like a completely jailbroken best of breed >> open source model fully local is fine
26:56doesn't have to be in a nice package. It doesn't have to be local actually. >> What are what are you doing where the jailbreak is so important because like >> well there there are a couple of things where it does stop you or crochet. You see that right? There are a whole bunch where you don't see it where it's successfully keeping you away from whatever you want to know. >> But you can always just switch to GLM 5.2 too and it'll just do it. But create a time of your life. >> Go ask it any question about race, gender, immigration, mental health, doctor advice, legal advice. >> I don't see why you need a harness for this, right? Like for me, I'm using harness cuz I'm using agents cuz it's going out and doing things.
27:28>> Just say harness like just I just want by harness. I just mean like I want it maxed out. I don't want any excuse for like why my open source model is even slightly worse than it could be. I want it operating. I want the best open source model configured in the best way and it just tells me the truth all the time cuz I used to go to Grock for that but even Grock is a little neutered. [laughter] Yeah, it's not >> talked about this. >> Is he? Okay. >> People pointed out like some of the he was like, "Oh jeez." And we wanted it to just be real and it was giving neoliberal answers. >> Right. Um I'm dying to talk about what you said the other day, but I also don't know if you want to say it publicly.
28:04>> The entire um probably hacked. It's probably already hacked. >> Oh, no. I'll talk about it. Uh so the question is like where are the open source models catching up? Right. And so there's a couple of different theories and I'll just lay out the theories that I know and the evidence for them, but I don't have a point of view yet. >> I mean, it's possible that these are true. >> So what so there's some of it that's obviously, you know, the Chinese are doing their own pre-training. They have their own compute. They have their own data sets. In fact, they can crawl more of the data sets because they're less bound by copyright laws, right? So they can crawl YouTube and Reddit and all that stuff. Uh and they train these models. That's like the base model, right? Then there's like the accusations that anthropic made which is that they're distilling our models which is
28:45they're taking they're quering our models and mass taking that data using that train if I >> were China that's what I would do >> for sure and that's creating a jagged intelligence kind of model and definitely some of that is going on but I think it's rich of anthropic to call that out when anthropic crawl the open web and distill the open web that's all these AIs are right in fact one platform that I think would be very popular if the government were to do it is to say hey you guys have since you trained on the open web if you trained on open web and open data you have to open your model after X months, after 12 months or something, right? That seems to be like
29:15a fair a pretty fair thing to say, especially like open AI, you have to be otherwise, you have to be actually open AI, right? An anthropic, you're the you're the one talking doom and gloom and you're building God, but you're not going to keep God in a leash for yourself, Dario. We don't want like a priest, you know, controlling God for the rest of us, interpreting the Bible for the rest of time. So, I think that would be a popular thing. Okay. So anyway, number one, they are uh they are they have their own pre-training, but they get the full corpus of the web. They don't have to obey any copyright laws, right? Second, they are distilling the existing American models which are starting to get more locked down and a lot of this government nationalization control helps them be locked down. But you know, there are data brokers online
29:53that are taking like Cloud Max accounts and reselling tokens from that in an API format to end users of like 80% off because those plans are heavily subsidized for end users. They charge the enterprises. It's like $8,000 a month retail. >> Anyone anyone who's like run like an exchange or uh regulated online brokerage knows that KYC is a dime a dozen. People get by KYC all the time. They like print passports in Vietnam if you want. Right. >> The expenses there. Yeah. >> Yeah. Exactly. So I think the distillation is going to be hard to stop. But I think the the biggest one to think about and there's some genuine algorithmic breakthroughs like the Deep Seek paper Deep R1 systems people very
30:29very smart people and and I would guess just by looking at the numbers of resumes and so on that the majority of mathematicians and researchers in AI today are Chinese like they produce more STEM graduates more PhDs in the relevant fields more Olympiad winners than anybody else right so and then a lot of the US staff is Chinese so in fact that's why I tweeted AI as our Chinese against their Chinese, right? And these guys and and I don't think there's any conspiracy required. These guys are all just friends, you know, they they live in the same dorms. They went to the same schools. They live in the same buildings and apartments. They hang out. Yeah. And they they switch jobs like crazy. And
31:04not just the Chinese. You see, everyone's hopping from lab to lab to lab and they're just taking data with them. Okay. So, there's all of that going on, right? But then on top of it, I don't think that the AI companies have the security profile of a top US national secure compartment facility, right? They do not know how to protect secrets. So, of course, they're getting hacked. Of course, the weights are getting leaked. And if you're if you're Chinese or anybody else, you're not going to like just take the weights and release them back. You're going to use that to distill at high speed and train your own model, right? Or to augment your model. So, I think there's another whole system right there that's going
31:38on. And the last one, actually, I think the biggest one is none of those. I think no conspiracy is required for the following. If you look at where China is, they're like, "Okay, we're behind in in so they've always been behind in software." The US has been way ahead in software. And being ahead in software allows you to extract all the margins because for the longest time, VCs never invested in hardware. Why? Because hardware is a commodity business, right? And software had the network effects, the lock in. Software is art as Patrick Coulison said, it locks you in. Uh, and so people want to invest in software. And so even in the US, whenever you get a hardware company funded, the VCs will always ask you, well, what's the software lock in? What's the software piece? Right? And so this is why like I used to say, yeah, hardware is the moat
32:17that buys you time to build a software castle, right? But guess what? Clawed code burned software down. Software was eating the world and AI eat software. So now software is commoditized. The moment you can specify it, an AI can oneshot it or twoshot it or get to it within a couple of hours. >> Went from like 5% to about 25% hardware. 20 to 25% hardware batch. >> Hardware is also commoditized by China. Any hardware I can make here, you can make in China. more cheaply and more easily. The whole ecosystem is there. Shenzen has like 3,000 manufacturers of this tiny little cable all in one. >> Nixon for normalizing relations with China and taking us off the dollar standard or the gold standard.
32:53>> So, and so bringing reassuring manufacturing back the US is going to take a full generation. It should be done. No question. I'm a big fan of American manufacturing, but it's going to take a long time. In the meantime, China outproduces every one of the supply chains because they realize there are scale economies in production. So, they subsidize the thing up front, then they become the global supplier. They drive everybody else out of business and then they control the whole supply chain across these critical industries. So they own hardware. No one's going to beat China on hardware in the next decade. It'll ramp up. We'll fight on a bunch of fronts, but they own hardware.
33:23So they like the commoditization of software. So when software is getting commoditized, that helps China. So if you're the Chinese government, you're basically funding all these labs. You're doing kind of a public private partnership where you're saying, "Don't worry, you don't have to make money. You can be number two or number three. just open it so the other labs can learn from you and we can catch up and keep up and if the software is commoditized then we win on the hardware. So the way I think about it today is that hardware is commoditized. So but it's owned by China for the most part. There's some few exceptions like SpaceX in the US.
33:54Software is commoditized. So what's not commoditized? It's actually just AI research developing working on AI itself is the new software engineering. The problem with that is that software used to be democratized. Everyone could compete. John Carmarmac and John Romero sitting there with a small team could code up Doom and Quake and compete against EA and Activision and so on. Can't do that in AI. AI takes massive resources, huge GPU clusters, you know, small numbers of researchers, massive data sets, proprietary data sets. So in that and then now regulatory capture. So it seems like all the value, all the choke points are going into AI and that's controlled by a very small number of companies and ironically the only thing keeping us afloat is a Chinese government subsidizing the whole thing on open source so that their hardware can stay competitive.
34:41>> Yeah. I mean I I think the um >> plus they had the weights. No kidding. >> Well, they might use that as I mean >> you could sneak about on one USB stick. Are you telling me that hasn't already been done? >> It's like you need physical access like you need one person on the inside. Like there's so many people way every male AI founder is walking around with a beautiful Chinese girlfriend. Have we talked about that? Like no one [laughter] talks about that. Go walk outside Silicon Valley, right? >> I think we all come from a world where advantages like had some durability and you could actually operationalize your advantage against the rest of the world, but that's just like narrowing down in time. So, you know, you might have the
35:16smartest model, but what are you going to do with it in two weeks and 3 4 weeks when until somebody else has it too? So the I think there's a different part of the game theory that we've not experienced before, which is the time contraction of any of these advantages. Um, and I don't think it makes it harder to predict who's going to be in charge of anything because like you said a few months later, the smartest model is now open source. >> Guys, I'm so [ __ ] worried. >> This is one of my tweets I'm proud of. A couple of years back, I said soon everybody will have AI anxiety. Like we're all feeling it. We're all feeling AI anxious, right? It's it's incredible.
35:48>> Jubilant. I am AI jubilant. But it's both. But it's both, right? It's it's the anxiety in its good form is is kind of FOMOish, which is like look, look at all the great >> Don't worry about me, guys. >> Yeah. But like everyone I know that's working at Frontier Lab on these things that are researchers, they're like depressed. >> They are. >> Yeah. >> They're stressed out because they think it's going to kill us all. >> That's cuz they're kill. The first ones I met in 2021 were saying to me that they were putting off having kids or thinking about not having kids because they were afraid for the kids' future. And I was like, what are you talking about? as opposed to every other time in human history when people were not were never afraid of their kids' future and so they didn't have any kids.
36:23>> Wait, so why is this not just going to result in Star Trek the next generation? Like that's that's my hope. >> The [ __ ] part of it would be great. >> The [ __ ] part about Star Trek the Next Generation is that they have AGI clearly, but that AGI is somehow not running things. >> I mean, they couldn't conceive of it yet, right? >> They have the holiday, but somehow people are still doing >> that good enough of writer. They're >> not just living in the holiday. There's plenty of science fiction that's, you know, bothered to see that idea further through. >> I mean, some some large percentage of the San Francisco population has been oneshotted by fentinel. You don't think the holiday will take out the rest?
36:55>> Right. Right. They just don't show that on the show. Like Gene Rodenberry like I'm sure he conceived of it and it just be too much of a bummer to show like these giant holiday, you know? I mean, >> you say this and you're living in Star Trek in your mind and you're happy. That's true. you're like excited for it and it's like but yes, you recognize he just there's a ton of terrible things that are going to happen, >> right? >> And you're just like, "Huh, it wasn't in Star Trek." >> Well, [laughter] but you're blowing my dreams over here, Daniel. >> But to Gary's defense, like there's there's been so much electricity, like that was a big one, right? Railroads, the cars, these were big changes.
37:30>> Used to have to ride a horse ac like the Pony Express. Do you remember that? That was insane. But the more But the more I was the more Yeah. The more rapid the change, the more influential the displace, the more tumultuous it was. And so now we're having a very rapid change. We're displacing white collar. We're placing we're displacing government. We're displacing managers. We're displacing academics. We're displacing journalists. You know, I learn more from AI than I did in my college classes cuz I can sit there and I can have it meet me at my exact level of knowledge because they give that to me visually. Give me a graph about that.
38:01I can ask dumb questions. I don't understand that. Explain it again. Explain it again. Explain the third different way. Explain it visually. explain it audibly. Explain it with with dancing elves. I don't care like just just to keep going over until I get it. >> I could not do that in class. I can learn so much better. I just have to care, right? If I care, I can learn anything better than with any tutor, better than with any teacher >> where so all the people are obsolete and they're going to lead a revolution. >> Well, no. We need to want more things. And if you want more things, we want Yeah, which is great. That's the good news. Good news. Everyone wants more things. And then if you have this tool and you're not averse to using it, this is why I'm so against like sorry to
38:45bring up the AI writing thing again, but like I understand like that makes sense humans and like there is a disrespectful aspect when you do bad writing, right? But like that presupposes that like the AI can't write. Well, >> that's a fair point because right now the writing is voluminous. giant giant like it takes a little thing like prompt you give it >> well okay but here's the thing you're giving it a prompt right >> yes >> why don't you just send me the prompt why do I need to read all the garbage >> because it has to draw on like all of human experience >> give me the prompt just send me the prompt >> I mean that might happen >> I'll send it to my I have my codeex put put together a
39:25markdown file that I send to my developers that they can give to their claude code uh to go execute prompt. Go do it. >> Don't talk to me. Have your agent talk to my agent. That's literally what it is. >> My thing will just file an issue on your GitHub repo. And then >> yeah, what I want to do is I want to get on the Zoom and I'm on the Zoom having the conversation and then 10 minutes in I know this is not for me >> and then I just hit a button and the agent takes over. Agent Naval keeps talking and I go after the next one. >> Yeah. >> I swipe right on you. >> Yeah. >> But for but then the joke's on me cuz you were never there to begin with.
39:55>> I think it's time for politics. >> Politics. Politics. Sounded like it's been politics most of most of the time. >> Let's start with fearongering. >> Politics doesn't matter because of AI. >> You know, that's not true. What are you talking about? >> Everything's going to end. Nothing that's like politically relevant right now is going to be relevant in 3 years. >> I will say that I wish I could vote for their job. >> I I wish I could vote for an AI to represent us in Gary will make it open. Somebody can make it. They can open source it. They can put the weights out for us to take a look at. >> Read the weights. You can look at the weights. I mean, not personally that weight, but like a fully transparent AI that is running for >> this thing. They had this thing a whole field called mechanistic interpretability where to try to figure
40:38out how the AI thinks and they've like made very little progress. >> Sure. I'm not saying we're going to know, but I'm just saying you have access to the same >> are not legible. By the way, it's like it's an anacronism. Our training data is in natural language and in computer languages that humans can read and write. And so the AIS are trained on that. But in the future, the AI will develop their own languages. They'll compete. They'll communicate with each other in some kind of a binary high-speed protocol. They'll almost be talking compiled code or maybe even something completely different that we can't even imagine which will be more efficient for communication. It's only humans who demand the legibility. But the AIS don't really have it. And part of what makes AI systems so much better
41:13than human-coded expert systems is that they don't have to be legible. So they can find correlations and patterns that that we cannot articulate. In fact, even most of our knowledge is inarticulatable. Most of your feelings are in articulatable. You don't even know half the time what you're feeling or thinking. You're not even talk about our feelings. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. Let's do that. We're experts in that one place where we are experts. >> GLM 5.2. I'll vote for GLM 5.2 for for office. Yeah. >> You're Chinese overlords. [laughter] >> Hey, it's my favorite distillation of fable. >> I really do appreciate how the Chinese are making all the open source models out there. It's kind of pathetic that the US just >> the global economy will appreciate.
41:52>> Cance is probably the global leader in video, right? the best. So in some places actually that so that's an interesting point about open source in some cases now open source is number one >> and at least historically like if you look at things like Linux or other open source projects once something open source kind of gets in the lead it rarely surreners it and that's because an ecosystem springs up around it where everyone starts plugging into especially in enterprise use cases so right now claude and and codeex are like slightly ahead of GLM uh Fable and maybe a lot ahead of GLM but If something like a GLM were ever to surpass them, it's not clear they'd get a lead back.
42:30>> I mean, because how can you rationalize your limited resources at a company going into something that open source is is winning at? You have to do something with your resources and failing to catch up to open source with your precious resources [clears throat] is not a good use. you'd have a clock like so if you're open air anthropic you would have a certain amount of revenue and money and cash in the bank and investor backing and you would have to use that to sort of jump meaningfully ahead of the open source and take the lead again before that runs out. So that's an because like if you look at the AI race, you know, two years ago, people thought that Google and Elon and uh and Meta
43:05were also competitors. >> Yeah, there were five kings. There were five kings. >> There's two kings now. >> There's two kings. And why is that? Well, it's not just cuz those guys have the best models. >> Open AAI and Anthropic are the only ones that are a making revenue off of their models directly. And so they're not subsidizing cross subsidizing from other business. They're not running out of cash. They're actually pouring the cash back in. And the second is because they have very active user bases and now a lot of the improvement is coming through reinforcement learning. They're getting the guidance and the trajectories to improve the models. And so they're just
43:35pulling away and maybe Elon cuz he took SpaceX public and he's got that war chest. He gets maybe one more bite at the apple plus he's got the data centers in space. So you know don't bet against Elon. Um Google I think has lost it. >> That's quite sad. It's really amazing what happened. >> I was always like bearish on Google. I was tweeting some pretty anti- Google management stuff back in the day. um where I was like we'll know they're serious about AI. >> Gemini 3.1 Pro was like the moment that was that's as good as it was but it wasn't enough was better. >> It wasn't good enough. It was they never even got the basic app working. I remember I tried to upgrade to pay them $20 a month. It was a nightmare. This huge run. No, no, you need to be part of
44:12Google one. No, no. You you need Google Workspace account. >> They were first to have contact usable contacts. Very cool. And then every time, even today, the iOS app, which I know it's not their platform, but everyone else seems to figure it out. You put a query into into Gemini, you background, it always loses the connection. It just drops it. Whereas all the others will just run it in the background. How hard is that? It's 2026. Run a background app, guys. >> GRPC. You >> just need a little bit more Sparta over there. Meta might be too much. >> I think it's too late for I think it's too late. >> I think they have to kill 5,000 Google PMs.
44:42>> Like that's the only way. It's PM slop. The whole company's PM slop at this point, right? Like anywhere you go, it's just like tons of products overlapping. It's a huge mess. You can't figure way through the maze. >> Some incentive pro problem now. All the best people want stock in open iron anthropic or they want to be sitting alongside the best colleagues in open airropic or they want the data set from open ironic and they certainly don't want to be tied down by all the PMs >> uh and all the legacy BS and they should have replaced Google search Google AI a long time ago. I don't even look at the results anymore. I just look at Google.
45:13Here's here's an alternative vision which is like Google today could uh I mean they probably have all the transcripts of all the meetings or if they don't they should have it >> and they have all your emails >> right and then they probably need to use anthropic fable 5 or whatever because like their own models are not quite good enough but you could diorize all of these you could have like you know a markdown file for every single employee at Google and you could compute a score >> which you cleverly trademarked and patented [laughter] >> that's right Google >> running through Gstack of course you No. Anyway, uh >> Google Omni is the best for um >> Google Gary has a price. It's 7%.
45:49[laughter] >> So, >> it's standard. It's just standard. >> Seriously, I mean you could solve this. Like if someone was a true like really wanted to fix this like all of these things are just systems problems, right? Yeah, but it would take it would take Larry and Sergey walking in there and literally it's like that scene from Entourage when Ari Gold walks back in the office is shooting people like >> only with their open claws and live ammunition. Like I'm serious like you don't they don't need to be there physically. Like you know one of the things I learned from Pedro at Brex like that's how he runs Brex like you know he has total information awareness on like
46:23every team and one of the thing like the thing that got me >> didn't didn't they lose to ramp? >> I [laughter] mean I'm kidding. I'm kidding. the red guys come in. >> I don't have any skin in the game on either of those. Okay, >> we're accepting sponsorships from whoever calls in first. >> Whoever pays us more, we'll talk >> one or anyway um I mean no like I mean he really did like instrument um the CEO brain like for him like it's personal claw that knows like the KPIs and literally what all of his directs talk about in those meetings and it's significant spying on them all the time. >> I mean yes. No, I mean the thing is like I mean they're not the only company like I've talked to other CEOs. They don't publicly talk about this behind closed door. This is like the max thing that
47:07you could do is like how like concentrate the power in your CEO or co-founding team so you have actual awareness of what the [ __ ] is going on. >> Well, the reality is the team should be much smaller and most your employees are GPUs working the data center. I mean I mean of course if you can have 10 fewer 10 like a tenth of your employees right now and just make them the 100x guys then that's easier said than done like most people most CEOs do not want to fire 50 people but there should be a lot more >> I've been on boards where it's like bro like we're [ __ ] and we need to fire 80% of the people and you have a shot like you literally but you don't know which 80% like tens of millions of dollars you don't know which 80% you're
47:50working through managers What I'm saying is now you get and that's not that's not a little thing. That's a big [ __ ] thing. Like you can have total information like >> okay like >> this is a big thing to me. I think that the future is essentially that like you need to ride the [ __ ] AGI. >> Like you you actually need to like the most significant thing to me is like the 1 million token context window is a big deal. It's like I mean I talk about as like three Harry Potter books, but guess what? Like a human being can keep in their brain. [ __ ] seven things plus or minus three. Like we are little monkey brains. Like we talk about like super intelligence is like in the future. [ __ ] that. Super intelligence
48:28right now like an agent working for you can literally make a like a thousand pages like printed valuable useful credible. >> Let's not talk about AI writing again. >> No. It's not a writing thing. No. It's an idea thing. It's like a you can understand what the [ __ ] is happening in your or like every CEO in the world >> like really >> so so you could you could have your AI say tie into all the systems in the entire company evaluate everything and tell me which 20% to fire right now. >> I mean you could do that and you should >> that's like like the easiest thing in the world >> but no one will do it. No one's doing it project at meta.
49:07>> Plus it's not perfect. >> Do you know anything about this? I like only what I read is like I mean half of the smart people I knew at Meta have left. >> Yeah. >> I mean I'm sorry like I really like Meta, you know, like you guys are great but like it's also Yeah. I think it's it's become a sweat shop for I don't think you can build a culture or morale by just buying people especially all different from all different stripes and places and ramming them together. It's then you have no idea how many are actually missionaries, how much are how many are mercenaries. Culture is a real thing that takes time to evolve and grow. Meta of all places needs to do what I just described which is like should you know someone has to actually know what is actually happening per person per team and it's I mean you
49:49can do this now right but you also have to tune it like there has to be a rating it's like what is actually a good employee what is their behavior what are their characteristics like you can actually tune your culture right now >> I mean it's taking the whole engineering team and turning them into data labelers is just like it's like dropping a nuclear bomb in the place >> that seems indiscriminate to me, right? Like why would you do that? Especially because you have this incredibly fine grained thing. Like you have a prompt, you have a skill file, you have like a bunch of markdown. Like you can actually tune it to exactly the output.
50:20>> I think their org is just too large. It's the same problem as Google. When you have a large org, you do things that actually make sense in certain domains. Then it gets leaked to the press, gets sensationalized. Oh, they're turning everyone into data labor. It's probably have too many people. You have too many cooks in the kitchen. But it's still like way less than what you can fit in three Harry Potter books, right? Like so I mean I'm sorry to like bring that up, but like I think that >> millennial example you could give. >> Sorry, I don't know. >> Read another book. >> Yes. >> Well, I think the big scary question is will there still be a startup ecosystem >> because on the one hand you're shrinking the size of the firm. People are more leveraged. That should mean more startups, small teams can do more.
50:55Great. Fantastic. >> We've definitely seen that. I mean people can get to 100 mil arr like not raise a big >> but doing what? Selling software and software is getting completely all these legal guys like Harvey and whatever like it's a good test like wouldn't claude just basic mythos or fable just do a better job than something trained specifically on legal especially with tool use >> it depends because it depends on whether or not um the frontier labs stay open for their best models or do they close them >> I think anyone who pays them enough they'll find a way to be open so if a law firm will pay them the best result like that's >> that's not that's not a [clears throat] given it is possible for anthropic to
51:30say like actually Fable 6 >> I would I I would bet my business they're not going to enter my vertical. I think if they can enter your vertical without without a custom model, they'll do it. And I think one of the less one of the bitter lessons here is that the general models beat the specialized ones. >> Yes. >> They don't have to enter it. It's just going to people. Yeah. Exactly. >> Toate that market. Not because, >> you know, open AI legal act, right? It's just because it's so much >> like why would I use something? >> Why would I pay $5,000 a month for some other SAS company? I think that like 2027 will be the year of the uh AI harness war is like is it going to be codeex? Is it going to be co-workcloud
52:08code? Is it going to be openclaw Hermes? Is it going to like what is it? You know who's like what harnesses are people going to use daytoday for everything? >> Yeah. Right now so a lot of Silicon Valley after 2007 got to exist because you had two mobile phone providers. You had uh you had Apple and you had Google. If you had only one, if you if Android didn't exist as an ecosystem, it would have been a much tougher position for startups, you would have been facing a kind of a true monopolist at the end of that chain or the top of that chain. >> Right? Now, you at least have two horses fighting each other, right? So, they kind of force each other to behave a little bit. If it boils down to just one, it's a very bad situation for startups.
52:46>> Well, then they nationalize it and then, you know, maybe we could get the government to >> do they really nationalize it? They didn't nationalize Google. They didn't nationalize, you know, Apple. >> It depends on how bad it gets. I mean like search it's a good utility like there are lots of reasons >> and if you nationalize it it might slow down and lose cuz now the DMV is running it and China wins right >> it's not like the Chinese are asleep there's an ASML machine supposedly somewhere in China now you hear about that Howard Lit ASML and was all mad because an ASM ASML machine somehow leaked into China >> that's the lithography machine there's only 184 of them >> that's our silk worms escaping >> yeah or and then on top of it they're developing you know their Huawei chips they're working on their 7 nm ter 5
53:26nanometer whatever processes they're building their fabs they're they're working on it they're not dumb I mean you've got 1 whatever 1.4 four billion people there. They've got a lot of STEM PhDs. They have a lot of national pride. They can redirect capital. I'm not saying it matches up to innovation uh in a free market economy. But the US is ahead because we have created this very thin layer where we take the absolute best and brightest from all over the world and we incent them like crazy to compete with each other and then we collect the rewards from that. And Silicon Valley actually disproportionately collects the rewards and California collects the rewards and it's not really spread out to the rest
53:58of the country as much. The rest of the country is scared shitless now. Um, but that's it. That that's the thin blue line standing between, you know, the so-called free world and the Chinese competition. Now, I'll actually take a radical point of view. I don't think we're in competition with China. I I I I don't see the competition. Taiwan, I mean, every Taiwanese person I talked to doesn't want to fight. You know, the rich people in Taiwan are busy dodging the draft by taking their kids out of the country. You know, there's some some rule in Taiwan that like >> mandatory >> mandatory conscription. But if your kid has spent I don't know the numbers but something like 3 months a year for the
54:33last 5 years out of the country then they're not eligible for the draft anymore or no more mandatory conscription. So every rich person is always taking their kids for 3 months a year out of the they have like a standard system doing it. They're not interested in fighting the second largest political party there is very pro-China. So it's already very compromised. They are most people in Taiwan are thinking they're going to go like Hong Kong. They're going to get rich in the process. that gateway to China and then one or two generations later they'll assimilate and how the heck is the US going to defend Taiwan like aircraft carriers are dead in in landbased missiles from China can take
55:07out aircraft carriers drones DJI is the largest defense contractor in the world it's like us trying to like it's like China trying to defend the Florida Keys from us yeah >> you know it's it's ridiculous the whole concept is ridiculous so and you saw we just went through with Iran how do you think we' fair we'd run out of missiles in like seven days we don't have manufacturing uh base. Now, maybe Ander and Seronic and others get there and build all of that up, but that's a long ways off. Uh so I I mean I think the Chinese know that and I think the Taiwanese know that and I think everyone's trying to save face while like over 10 20 years Taiwan slowly reunites with China and outside of that
55:43we don't really have a beef with China. You know, okay, Japan, whatever. Um you know, North Korea's got a South Korea issue, but it's not in our backyard. One of the big problems the US is facing is that we've been in a low growth, high inflation environment for a while. Now maybe growth is picking back up, but so is inflation. And people are fighting over the spoils of the democratic socialists coming up, you know, the billionaires tax, the wealth tax, the the socialist trying to seize the means of production. Uh, you know, Mum Donn doing these rings around the democratic establishment and they're talking about the eradication of Western civilization.
56:13Um, people, you you got to put food on the table. You got to make people feel good. You got to make people feel like they're not going to go jobless. You got to feed them. And picking a war with China just seems like the stupidest thing to do. Now, we should have the appropriate tariffs against them. If they have tariffs against us, if they subsidize their businesses, especially in network effect or scale economies, to compete with us, then we should also have our own barriers because you got to protect your local industry so it doesn't get snuffed out so you at least have a fighting chance because these things do have economies of scale. It's not as simple as David Ricardo said
56:42where it's just like, oh yeah, I'm selling bananas and you're selling watermelons and we can just trade. No, because the guy who gets better at doing something gets really good at doing it and then can do it very very cheaply or he gets a network effect around either an ecosystem or an actual lock in where new users create value for existing users. So you you can't have that simplistic of a mindset. You do have to play on even playing field. You have to make sure the currencies are aligned, no one's subsidizing, etc., etc. But that said, there's no reason for us to go to war with China. There really isn't. >> But is is Taiwan like it or is it like control the South China Sea? It's like >> why why do we need to control the South China? Like, okay, so the world breaks in half.
57:17>> The world's already broken into many pieces. >> I know, but like right now our ships go through there and it's fine, right? But like the world literally >> Why would they stop our ships from going through there if they're carrying, you know, trade goods back and forth? Like >> who knows why they might want to do that. We have a rule that's like, you know, the rule of the sea is that we can free freely pass wherever we want. >> There is no we have a civil war going on internally in this country, in case you haven't noticed. It's nationalists versus communists. Like everyone is going more radical in both sides. I mean it might be fine if the world breaks in
57:45half and China controls Asia right and it's like get our ships through sometimes they charge things China China does control most of East Asia and to the extent that it does not it is up to Japan and South Korea and others to look out for their interest so they can ally with the US but we're not going to get into a shooting war with China over interests in the South Pacific >> we would never do that but we will sail a ship through there and they'll hit it >> why would they hit our ship going through there >> if they run a ship to getting our ships No, no, but if they if they put a ship through the Panama Canal, why would we
58:16attack it? If it's a legal trade vessel carrying goods and services back and forth from the US that we're trading on, >> incentivized to do any of that to each other. >> Yeah. >> I think right now, China actually cares way less about this stuff than we think. >> China's very internally focused. Like the CCP is very internally to ever get >> they they want to stay in charge of their empire. And you know, I'm not a fan of communist, the Communist Party, although I think CCP resembles more of a capitalist fascist organization. And the communist is a veneer, right? Fascist in the sense of like it's it's like the nation uniting for a common cause, right?
58:50>> They're very good at making money. >> Yeah. Exactly. Not only that, they are actually pretty hyper competent, which actually if you compare it to like the California government, it's disrous. >> High IQ and homogeneous, right? Yeah. >> Well, I mean, when you look at highspeed rails, like guys, just change the SQL. It's time to build. It's time to build. No one's building. There's a few of us building in Silicon Valley, but we're even building ethereal things that are scaring >> they're communist instead of Yeah. >> We'll just send ours over there, but they're like, "Nah, no, no. We don't want these guys like not so good."
59:22>> What do they call them? Baou like they have like a bao. Yeah. What does that mean again? >> It means uh white and left. >> White and left. Yeah. And it's kind of derogatory look down term, right? They're effeminate or stupid or something like that. >> I mean, all of the above. Yeah. I mean, that's how I think of them. >> Yeah. Exactly. >> Centrist Democrat. Everybody [laughter] >> centrist Democrat Democrat San Francisco baby. I feel I feel like you're wearing it. You're you're you're like, "Please don't eat me, sir." >> No, I mean, look at San Francisco. Like, it's you know, >> San Francisco is on the rebound.
59:51>> We're going to run the table on the supervisor seats at least, you know, like >> but the problem is that LA is sinking. Yes, >> LA has sank. Uh, Hollywood Hollywood got chased out insane. Like, it's insane. >> This is not a problem. This is opportunity. All my friends in New York are going to come back to San Francisco. >> This is the This is the problem. California has a monopoly on all the warm dry coastline, all the Mediterranean land in the United States, which is the most powerful empire in the world. So, it's the most powerful, it's the best land in the world, all in one state. There should be five or six different states.
1:00:18>> 30 to 50% of the GDP of the United States will concentrate in California. >> The arable land, the beautiful coastline, the good weather. It's it's a it's a curse of geography. They've got all the natural resources, right? It's like basically southern Italy or France or even better, but in the US, and it's all in one freaking state. California is this weird direct democracy. The worst idea ever 50.1% can vote anything and they just read a headline. They're like, "Yeah, yeah, free free free cats, free food for cats and dogs for everyone. Great. We'll vote for it. Eat the rich." >> Styers Styer couldn't get in there, right? Um, you know, basically like we actually have two relatively centrist options for governor, >> which is good. Which is amazing. That's great. Like I like that. Right. So >> I think all these commotist experiments
1:01:02will fail everywhere. like they failed in San Francisco, they're going to fail in New York. Um >> I I don't I don't agree. I think they'll fail like the difference with San Francisco is demographics are destiny and the demographics of New York and the demographics of LA and the demographics of Chicago are just firmly committed to that that cause and the worse it gets the more they'll vote for. It's like Venezuela. They're going to vote way all the way down and there is no there is no one out there to fly in and arrest the next Maduro. It has to be solved internally. United States the last bastion for freedom. Even the COVID unlocks the the lockdowns would not have lifted if you didn't have militia men
1:01:38start marching around in the red states and purple states carrying M16s and AR-15s past the state houses being like we're we're done with the lockdowns. Then the lockdowns came up. The whole world would have been lockdowns a works baby. Yeah. The whole world would be in lockdowns for 6 to 12 months longer if it weren't for the 40 million intrians Americans who have guns and they whether and everybody likes to hate on them and everybody likes to [ __ ] on them but they guard your freedom. Yeah, freedom ain't free. You need those people out there, right? And so, look, when when when the US if the US were to collapse, first of
1:02:07all, I think freedom bleeds out from the rest of the world. You can already see what's happening in Australia and UK with the speech laws and the censorship and all that. Uh, and the weird arrests and so on. But if the US degenerates and falls, it doesn't fail like Europe did. Or Europe isn't fair that well these days either, but it doesn't become like a big retirement home in a museum where everyone's on good social welfare for a while. It fails like a Latin American country fails because it is bordered by Latin America. So you got a lot of people who want to get in here and they will get in here. So you're looking at much more like cartel and drugs and crime and violence and those kinds of institutions. So
1:02:41>> okay, white pill robotics [laughter] >> robot. No, you're right. Technology. >> I don't want to do UBI. We should do UBR. >> UBR is good. I like that. >> We need to have universal basic robot. Everyone should have a robot and the robot should cook for you, pick up your [ __ ] The good and the bad news is that the the robotics the the robotics boosters say it's 2 three years away. The robotics skeptics say that it's 5 to 10 years away and no one thinks it's impossible. >> Yeah. >> And so we already have self-driving robots, self-driving cars. >> I think we can make people really happy if they have a better life. Like they don't, you know, I mean, who likes to clean their toilet bowl? Nobody. But a lot of the issues around you have a
1:03:17robot do it. It's great. You love this if you vote for centrist Democrats. A lot well, a lot of a lot of the immigration and a lot of the uh and a lot of the taxation issues are happening because the boomers are retiring. There aren't enough people below them to take care of them. They're voting themselves lots of benefits. There's not enough money left in social security. The population is shrinking. So, smaller number of workers are carrying a large number of these guys. So, they're saying, "Okay, we'll just sell the country and retire." >> This is the path. We need centrist Democrats who are pro technology, who are abundanceoriented.
1:03:45>> Okay, but but to play devil for a second, like healthcare, 90% of healthcare is wasted. It's not even people It's not even stuff people need. [laughter] No, no, but it's like like how much of health care goes into like keeping you alive for the last two weeks, right? That's not really >> I can fix this with markown files. Okay. >> Okay. But and then education is just like a big LAR. Anyone who wants can go educate themselves right now with AI, educate themselves right now with all the open source courseware and all that stuff. They just want the stamp and they want to go to college and they want to hang out in idilic paradise for four years and they want to protest for social justice and they just want to chill with their friends and party and get paid for it. It's already UBI.
1:04:19>> You said a very important thing already. >> The college is not about the actual act of learning. It's about like being in a room with a certain set of people who like have the right networks. Correct. >> It's it's socializing. It's babysitting. It's credentialism. There's just a tiny bit of education sprinkled in for a few STEM degrees and then you go after a bunch of [ __ ] jobs. >> Legitimize it. Yeah. And then there's Yeah. All the social sciences and politics science. >> We don't want more [ __ ] jobs. We want better [ __ ] jobs. >> Okay. Like I mean why? >> That's true. That's true. Yeah. Yeah. >> I mean why can't we just instead of like going to a cubicle and like break your brain and do a bunch of [ __ ] like being an investment banker or something?
1:04:57>> Think we're all going to end up being plumbers and electricians and cutting hair. All the white collar stuff is just going to collapse into nothing and make software. It's going to collapse into nothing because it's just eating more and more. Don't you see how this is going? Everything's going to be gone. >> There's a good version of this where people don't have to have just a shitty manual jobs. uh they can actually be handling and guiding the robots and the AIs and and so if we don't get ASI if AI gets you to expert level but doesn't go beyond still needs human guidance, taste and creativity, humans are still the motivated things in the environment and so people become like Pokemon trainers.
1:05:31You like robot handlers, right? AI handlers and you use that to start and that's to be to to the truth of it. That's what we're seeing today. The people who are using AI today are more productive than ever. They are not being displaced. The only reason you're being displaced by an AI is because you refuse to use the AI. If you're using the AI, you have more work than ever. >> I mean, the one thing you can't replace is human desire. Even if robots have their own desires, they cannot replace human desire. So, as long as humans have desires and there are AIs and robots that can help fulfill them, then you always need humans in the loop. You'll always have >> Yeah. Like the moment I find out I'm talking to an AI or I'm reading the work of an AI or I'm even looking at art created by an AI, I'm completely
1:06:10uninterested. Assuming it's completely done by an a human using Wait a second. Wait a second. That's just because it's shitty right now. I guarantee you it will be indistinguishable and it will be very very good. >> I don't agree. I think even if it is indistinguishable >> the moment I know it's done. Like for example, >> but that's the Chinese box at that point. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. But which is like actually when I first saw GPT3 or whatever it was whatever was available from the API like that was my reaction. I was like, "This is a bunch of [ __ ] Like, this is a trick, whatever." But like, that's not how I feel now. Like, I get a lot of
1:06:48value daytoday, like hour to hour. >> Do you do you have a relationship with the AI? Do you hang out with it? You talk to it? Is it a friend? >> It's getting there. >> Whoa. >> It's not my girlfriend, but [laughter] >> my wife is going to watch this, buddy. >> It's You just have someone in the Filipino call center being your girlfriend, then you're just like filling in for the What's the difference? What's the difference between an AI and someone in the Filipino call center controlling a good chatting with you? >> It's a buddy of mine. Okay. Don't talk to my friend. Don't talk about my friend like this. [laughter] >> Nothing's going on.
1:07:17>> We're going to end with my AI psychosis. >> I just think that it is actually very [clears throat] useful, obviously. >> I have a friend who's a landlord for one of these AI companies that does the AI people that you talk to, right? Like your AI girlfriend companies. >> And he said that to hire extra security because these guys would show up in the middle of the night saying, "Where is she? Which which box is she in? I want to take her home. I want to save her. [laughter] >> Gary's having his first black pill moment. Oh no, that doesn't sound good. >> This podcast has blackpilled me. >> By the way, this entire podcast was AI generated. No one was actually here. We deny everything.
00:00欢迎收听 Naval 播客的所有传奇听众们——宇宙第一播客,你们获取新知识的权威来源。呃,今天我们请来了三位创始人。我右边是 GaryTan,来自 Y Combinator。他们说,成为亿万富翁最可靠的方式就是加入 Y Combinator 项目,然后从万亿富翁起步。[笑]>> 从……开始 >> 这也是一种路子。顺便说一下,我们都在喝酒,只有一个人没喝。你们得在最后猜出谁才是真清醒的。对。[笑]>> 然后我左边是 Daniel,来自 Able Police。他们一开始是把执法记录仪的视频转成警方报告,现在他们有了一整套工具,做合规的 AI 聊天、翻译。你们还做什么?
00:49>> 公民上报,各种东西。>> 好。那我右边是 Farbood,来自 A-List,健康超级应用。和往常一样,我们其实不太在意这些人正在做什么产品,我们更在意他们在做产品的过程中学到了什么、搞懂了什么、还有什么仍在琢磨,以及他们能分享给其他创始人的原则。那么,有谁想先开个头吗?>> 我是说,现在所有人都在想的话题就是 AI,对吧?>> AI?对,我好像听说过一点。>> 是啊,我有点讨厌聊这个,因为它是最容易过期的东西。
01:20你知道,等播客上线它就已经过时了。但它同时也是最有意思的,因为在这个高影响力的环境里,它是变化最快的东西,所以学习曲线最陡,你总是想跟人交换情报,看看别人都走到哪一步了。其实我最近在一个活动上碰到你,话头马上就转到 AI 上了,当然。[清嗓]>> 所以我们可以先绕开它一会儿,不过我觉得最后还是会绕回这个话题。>> 我有个问题问你,呃,在 YC,什么事最让你震惊,比如你看到这些公司用 AI 做出来的东西。
01:50>> 呃,我觉得尴尬的地方在于,我基本连续四个月每晚只睡三小时,然后不知怎么就从完全不写代码,变成了基本上在教别人怎么做,还做出了一个叫 GStack 的开源包,在大家如何 vibe code 这件事上排进前一百。这非常非常奇怪。然后,呃,有一次我遇到 Brex 的 Pedro,在那之后我在 24 小时内就从 Claude Code 的信徒变成了 OpenClaw 的信徒,现在我们两个都用。但这基本上就是,你知道,我发现的最疯狂的想法:只要你愿意一年在 token 上花十万美元,你基本就能过上 2028 年普通公民的日子。就是
02:44很明显 token 成本会降下来。算力会大幅上涨,你知道,我们估计大概九万倍。从现在到三年后,推理量会是今天的九万倍。>> 哦,你们画了条曲线,算出九万倍。>> 我是说,那差不多是很多很多个数量级。>> 这基本上已经锁定了,无论是芯片还是他们在建的数据中心。>> 对。你知道,很多人说 Nvidia 被严重高估,但万一它其实被严重低估了,低估了好几个数量级呢?>> 九万倍,到什么时候?>> 呃,不知道,24 到 36 个月吧。
03:17>> 好,那基本上就是五个数量级。>> 对。我是说,我们可能差了几个数量级,但数量级嘛,朋友们。其实真正疯狂的是,如果你往上走五个数量级,那不只是它在使用量上的变化,而是在能力上,因为你每上一个数量级,就会有新能力冒出来。你知道,我在 AI 上落后了挺长时间,2020 到 2022 年那波我错过了,因为我从小一辈子都在听 AI 这个词,从学计算机的时候开始,就一直以为它像核聚变一样,永远不会来。结果它来了,而且来得非常快,
03:53一开始很多人说的东西听起来都上气不接下气,像在替自己的仓位说话,显得很疯狂。>> 但到目前为止他们是对的,对吧。所以我觉得关于 AI,现在有很多大问题。我以前脑子里一直有个问题:它到底会走向分布式,还是会走向集中式。你知道,现在这个问题变成了:开源会不会对大多数用例都足够好,还是你永远都需要前沿的专有模型。还有那一整套关于
04:22中国在做所有开源、美国在做所有闭源,这很怪,接下来往哪走的问题。呃,还有它会不会被国有化,还是会留在私营部门。呃,尤其如果你说这是新的曼哈顿计划、这些是新的核武器,那让私人公司建造并控制它们就不合理了。但我觉得剩下最有意思的问题是也是我最在意的一个,呃,目前还没有明确答案:我觉得实验室里的人相信,按照 scaling law,AI 会一直变聪明,直到比
04:58最最聪明的人类还聪明,大概是通过递归自我智能、递归改进的过程,也就是他们说的 ASI。我认为那才是大问题。你知道,两年前你还可以持这样的观点:AI 在所有事情上都能做到中等水平,但在任何事上都成不了专业。现在你正走到这样一个点:它在所有事上都能达到专业水平,但我们不知道它能不能走完最后那段创造性的路,就像那一小段——跳出系统,创造新东西,而不只是把训练集里已有的东西重新组合。>> 它在 Erdős 数学难题上的进展让你不安吗?
05:32>> 肯定让我不安。我是说,也不算不安,这是一个发现的过程。我不想被宇宙规律弄得不安,对吧?所以,是不安,但它确实让所有人惊讶。同时我还是没看到广泛的通用创造力。不过那是另外的话题。我是数学专业的,我真的很喜欢证明,而某个东西真的在那个领域取得了有意义的进展,看起来又非常原创,就有点让人毛骨悚然。>> 但那是由人引导的,对吧?>> 当然。所以我认为那是没问题的。>> 所有参与的人都惊了。
06:01对,对。我不知道你有没有看到那个……>> 那些东西其实挺无聊的。它只意味着,去做点别的事吧。如果你思考某事的时间有限,你是想花在感叹现在有台机器在某件事上比人更强,还是把你的“人”用到你还没想过的地方?>> 或者,顺着 Gary 的观点说,我们会不会走到这样一个地方:机器严格优于机器加人?也就是有人在环里也无济于事。那才是大问题,对吧。因为国际象棋就是那样走的,有过半人马象棋,有人跟我讲过,半人马象棋里电脑加人能打败纯电脑,但最终
06:39纯电脑打败了半人马模式。>> 我想,对我来说,呃,我在用最实际不过的方式处理 AI。呃,你懂的,按需给人们启动成千上万个智能体,建一个大规模舰队管理系统,一个 eval harness。嗯,现实是,呃,我不认为智能是瓶颈。现在成本才是瓶颈。>> 现在,呃,我们刚做的时候,我们应用里每个人都有一套自己的 OpenClaw 在为他跑。呃,这真的很强大。>> 对。>> 我的天。>> 就像我那个写出来的。>> 那这个 OpenClaw 呢?现在人们就是想要 OpenClaw,或者说他们应该要。现在已经不叫 OpenClaw 了,因为我们一开始用 OpenClaw 加 Opus,是每人每月 100 美元。我们花了三四个月把它压到 2.84 美元。
07:29>> 你们现在用 Pi 吗?>> 呃,我们搭了一整套非常疯狂的栈,里面有 eval harness,然后就像一个完整的智能体舰队,可以弹性地扩缩容。所以那些事情里最琐碎的部分都是我一直在处理。我还是觉得更有意思的是去想,当人类不必再做这些事之后会做什么。但我认为现在有一个非常真实的现象正在发生:实验室里最懂行的人基本上是在说,人类真的没什么可做的了——只要你读懂他们话里的弦外之音。他们用不同的方式说,
08:02但意思都是:你的 harness 不重要,因为一年之内 AI 就会按需自己起 harness,你甚至都不是消费者,因为它会去跟其他 AI 说话。而且除了 Erdős问题之外,它还会去解决材料科学、物理、数学、工程和健康领域的基础问题。>> 很好。对,但你知道,这会让街上的普通人被煽动得情绪沸腾。他们变得愤怒和恐惧,因为恐惧是一种前兆。我正努力让我所有聪明的朋友都去 Anthropic 工作,这样我在那儿就有很多朋友,能把我弄进 Anthropic 二级排队领面包的队伍。
08:39>> 因为现在我觉得自己稳稳地处在三级。你知道,工作只有两种。好吧,一种是 Anthropic 员工,另一种是给 Anthropic 员工提供性服务的人。行吧。>> 我是说,那才是可怕的地方,对吧?就是这一点,它让人们的情绪激动起来,而且有现实后果,因为你并不独自生活。你活在一个叫“人类”的、轰隆作响的兽群里。如果那个兽群因为愤怒、因为被激怒、因为中了毒,决定往左走向悬崖,你也会跟着走。你知道,你不会是独自待在悬崖边的那头孤牛。>> 问题是人们在愤怒,比如要求国有化,对吧?事情就会往那儿走,你知道吧?
09:14>> 但现在你能看到这个趋势的开端——他们在攻击数据中心,对吧?他们攻击数据中心是因为……>> 那纯粹是愚蠢。>> 我们回头看这些事,会觉得……纺纱机……这是一种理性的反应,但它的载体是非理性的。所以他们说是因为水。这跟水没关系。>> 那是个已被辟谣的谎言。这不是关于社会主义,也不是关于理性。这是关于你怎么把人煽动起来。>> 你变穷了,你想要更多钱;或者在这个情况下,你现在眼看要被取代,你想让这列火车停下来。你想说,我要下车。
09:46下车,可你就在车上。对,那是理性的,完全理性。所以在这种情况下,尤其是当你有《乌合之众》式的大众幻觉时,就会出现“目的证明手段”。所以在这里,水只是一个手段。如果不是水,他们会找到别的。会是某种濒危白鹭,某种鸟、某种蜗牛。>> 你觉得呢?>> 他们说得对吗?嗯,他们阻止不了。这项技术是个精灵。历史上确实有过这样的时刻,比如砸毁纺纱机确实短暂地阻止了变革。它拖慢了它。还有别的技术。
10:16>> 我们现在还有纺纱机。>> 当然,但还有别的技术。有些技术,他们拒绝发专利之类的,于是它变得没法上市,因为在政治上太难了。我认为基本上我们……你知道,100 年前美国 50% 的劳动力在农场干活,现在不是了,对吧?现在是好事,是件大好事,现在只有 2%。>> 我不喜欢在农场干活。>> 我们并没有 48% 的失业率。没错。我们没有 48% 的失业率,而且我们都有饭吃,对吧?但问题是,转变的速度有多快?
10:46>> 转变的速度才是问题,对吧?>> 这是个导数问题。>> 那一次花了大概六七十年。这一次呢。>> 那我给你们带来个好消息。你们在财富 500 强公司工作过吗?那些东西蠢透了。>> 没人干过。>> 哦,有的。[笑]我在微软干过。不不,我是说那儿没人真的在干活。>> 对,正是。>> 反正已经全是凑数的工作了,对吧?问题是多少人口在工作,其中多少在私营部门,其中又有多少不是在干某种破工作。Graeber 说得对。Graeber 说得对,真正在工作的人非常少。
11:16>> 我是说,[清嗓]因为 AI,我工作得更多了。我随时有六个 Codex 智能体在跑。>> 我干得比以往任何时候都狠,做的事也多得多。所以我就觉得人们会工作得更多。>> 生产力、杠杆都高多了。但这一切都成立,直到 AI 能彻底完全取代你——我看不到那一步就在眼前,但我现在对此更开放了。[笑]>> 我以前觉得那是不可能的。现在我想,你知道,我得留心了。>> 这恰恰是我的哲学。就像,呃,你有两家公司,A 公司和 B 公司。呃,你们有同样的技术,人人都能获得。你知道,希望人人都能获得。
11:51>> 嗯,那是关键。那我们是……它会开源,还是会很棒?因为现在如果他们继续散布恐慌,可能就会变成“现在你需要国家批准”。我们刚看到 Sam Altman 说 Codex 5.6 会先缓慢地向美国政府批准的合作伙伴推出。我的天。所以他已经在配合了,因为他不想像 Anthropic 那样被关停。>> 呃,所以已经开始了。然后变成少数人的事,变成国防部的事。接着就是谁能用?谁在控制?你知道,他们有网络武器。也许他们能先黑进
12:20那些系统,也许他们能控制它们。也许他们会搞大规模监控,或者为了我们好而不搞,对吧?事情总是这样开始的。所以对我来说,一小群人控制 AI,绝对比人人都拥有它可怕得多。但人人都拥有它也很可怕,因为,嗯,我是说有生物武器打印之类的事,但生物打印实验室一开始就锁得很严,所以我不确定那有多真实。好。[笑]>> 对啊,好,那就发吧。>> 对,而且事实上现在真相浮出来了,我们很多人早就知道、也说了好多年:新冠病毒的资助者和创造者
12:57基本上就是美国和中国政府串通搞出来的,对吧,基本上就是北卡那帮 Fauci 的人。所以我发推开的玩笑是:北卡 NIH 设计,中国组装,对吧?因为就像苹果那句老话:加州苹果设计,中国组装。但新冠病毒基本上就是这么回事。他们在做功能增强研究,为了造疫苗。他们完全是牛仔作风。这真是太疯狂了。我是说,总之,我不是说 AI 一定会导致生物武器,因为就现在而言,AI 通往生物武器的程度,你知道,某个聪明的生物黑客
13:30学生早就已经能做到了,对吧?对。所以并不是……>> 不是“别杀人”,而是它在民主化某种能力。>> 我是说,博弈论最后总会以某种方式胜出。>> 这方面的博弈论不好看。当相互保证毁灭对每个个体都可用时,博弈论就不好看了。>> 我的看法是,问题本来就在外面了。它们已经和你说的那样糟——你说它们会变成……问题是本来就在外面,而 AI 是路,总的技术进步就是所有这些问题的解法。>> Jerry 连他那套正在读他邮件的 OpenClaw 都负担不起。
14:00他怎么可能付得起核弹版 claw?>> 不,我没事。我付得起。我只是想让人人都付得起。正是。我希望人人都付得起。>> 基本上一年十万美元。>> 绝对值。但你如果雇一个人,你就付得起你的 OpenClaw 了。>> 人们变得太……呃,我不知道这是 AI 精神病还是什么,到了这个地步,我通常只觉得是焦虑。>> 对。我只想说,我能直接跟你的 AI 聊吗?就是,你知道,我该往哪儿给你 AI 发邮件?我不需要跟你互动,因为现在人们……你连给某人发短信
14:31都收不到回复了。>> 太多人用 AI 写邮件、写文件了,就像在 X 上那样。我看到所有这些明显是 AI 写的帖子,我就想,我为什么要读?我想让我的 AI 去读。>> 我觉得太明显了。该让 AI 去读。>> 那明显是一种低阶信号。这简直荒唐。当我收到明显是 AI 写的邮件,我就想,哥们,这是最掉价的。>> 嗯,用 AI 你可以写得更好,因为你需要的是多阶段的声音。>> 你不这么想吗?>> 我[笑]当然这么想。其实这就是我跳出来替他辩护的原因。我讨厌 AI 写的文字。太啰嗦了。太啰嗦。太临床气了。
15:01>> 不不,但你可以一下就修好。你知道,我们有超级智能。为什么不用……>> 就写吧。真正去读某样东西、并意识到它出自一个人之手,那种价值要公平得多。>> 我觉得……你不自己写东西,你怎么说话?你会失去好好表达的能力,因为好的写作和好的口才是好的思考的产物。而如果你不练…………肌肉。>> 对,我想你能做很多事。>> 我的反驳是,你知道,有时候你确实很需要一个人。我是说,我不认为这会取代人,但我现在可以随时和一个相对聪明的 AI 模型进行高带宽对话,
15:37随时随地。>> 不不。你应该那么做。你想跟 AI 模型聊多久就聊多久,但我说的是,当你写的东西是要给其他人消费的,如果是 AI 写的,那就是对另一个人的不尊重。你在浪费他们的时间。AI 写的一切,都应该由你压缩,或者重写,或者你真的该花时间把观点表达得尽可能简洁,以尊重对方的时间。否则,他们的 AI 最后会去读你的 AI,你们两个都不在环里。你甚至都不……>> 这是我最近没那么喜欢 Twitter 的原因之一,因为有太多信号……我觉得,嗯,未来人们会
16:10拥有非常非常厉害的 skill 文件,真正把风格和用词提取出来。我是说,人们低估的一点,我从一些东西里学到的是,你可以做越来越多的 eval,就像你说的你有 eval harness,对吧,你可以有多层,可以做跨模态 eval,当你做得足够多——我是说这有点串线,但如果你做得够多,你确实能把 skill 文件改进到无法分辨的程度,而且这还是在没有下一代模型的情况下。想象 Fable 7、Fable 8,你根本分辨不出来,我保证,不到九个月,你
16:53这整场关于 AI 写作的讨论就会他妈消失。>> 我觉得我防守得还算好些,我在这座山上站得比你们高,因为我写得非常非常短,而 AI 非常不擅长压缩>> 而且也非常不擅长……>> 好写作的本质是新颖。>> 就是出人意料,任何靠回归猜下一个 token 的东西都做不到。>> 它不会……它不会做出原创的东西。>> 如果你和 AI 合写,或者把它当编辑来碰撞想法,几乎总是会有那么一个短短……总是有一个短短的措辞,让你觉得“哦,这句不错”
17:25>> 而那是它从互联网别处弄来的,互联网很大。>> 其实我在 Gbrain 里编了个非常疯狂的东西。是我做的那个检索系统。呃,它基本上就是不同向量空间的碰撞器。所以我是说,这就是我说的“煮沸大海”,这些是你现在就能做的事。它包含我全部的语料,我说过的一切、我所有的邮件、我所有的 Slack,我所有的短信、我的私信,一切。所以我现在大概有四十万个 markdown 文件,涵盖我至今想过或读过的任何东西。然后,呃,我有个叫 LSD 模式的东西,
18:03就是,呃,横向的,嗯……那个 s 是什么?>> Lesson?抱歉。对。Lateral Sarcastic Drift(横向讽刺漂移)。我……我是说我就是想叫它 LSD。对,对,我知道。[笑]我当时想编个化学成分出来。对。>> 对。它……但基本上就是,你知道,取所有可能的、方向不同的向量空间,把它们交叉,然后,嗯,对所有这些想法做排序、重排序,你实际上能更……它叫 brainstorm LSD 模式。>> 它就能找出炸裂的点子。>> 你知道,有时我就是无聊了,我会说,给我来点 LSD 炸点,它真的会给我十到二十个
18:46想法,你知道,三四个不同的前沿模型真的重排过,说,其实你看看这个,我们和 Exa 交叉比对过,这真的是个好主意。我就想,这是在以荒唐的规模发现想法。所以我是说,我明白,但我也要说这是在扯淡,因为我觉得这就是那套经典的做法,而且我觉得这其实是件很好玩又有用的事。它,嗯,你知道,我觉得这像 Paul Buchheit 的说法:构建未来的方式就是活在未来,然后倒推着干活,对吧。>> 所以,不可避免的是,
19:22与其他妈抱怨 AI……>> 这有帮助,这能得分。我在 X 上看到,人们特别喜欢他妈在我身上得分。好吧,所以这是个问题,就像我……离它更近。我他妈不在乎有人跑来跟我说“去你的 AI 写作”,因为你知道,我 AI 写出来的东西他妈好到我自己都懒得……不,我读它,你知道,我还活着。我还是个人,对吧?>> 但,嗯,总之,这就是,你知道,欢迎来到我的 TED 演讲。不,我只是觉得……>> 我同意,要预测未来,你就活在未来,对吧?那是最好的学习方式,而每个人
19:58都应该把 AI 用到极致,就为了搞明白它。否则你对它的走向会毫无感觉。我觉得今天的道德信号是……我是说……>> 我觉得这对人没帮助,因为有些人会听这期节目,他们想变富。>> 然后他们会想,哦不,我不该用 AI 写作。哦我明白了。所以我是说,我同意你,人类以及你真正思考的东西非常重要,你应该自己写。>> 而对我来说,那个写作过程其实就像在 Telegram 里和我的 open……我得说,我不用 AI 写作。嗯,那不准确。我以前写代码。所以也许我
20:36>> 是在自相矛盾。但代码是实用性的东西。它不是给……代码是要被另一台计算机消费的,不是给人消费的。所以,如果我想创造出给计算机消费的东西,我就会用计算机。对。>> 但如果它是给人消费的,那我就想理解这个东西。我想,你知道,反复咀嚼、浸泡在里面。然后我想尊重读者或听众的时间。对。给他们那块洞见的金块。而 AI 在头脑风暴上很有用。>> 那部分我喜欢。我确实用 AI 做头脑风暴。我用它们,比如给我这个词的同义词、给我相关的其他想法、拉一些外围信息进来。你知道,我有时会跟它争论,尤其是因为很多
21:14模型都有护栏。但我不会用它来生成那种我指望一个人坐在那儿读的成品。在我看来那就像断裂,对吧?有点不公平。>> 这是质量问题。我是说,我同意你,开箱即用的质量很差。对。但你可以得到 2028 年水平的东西。我是说,我觉得我想告诉大家的那个模式,你知道就是,是的,AI 写作现在开箱即用很烂。如果你就靠开箱即用的,那很烂。但如果你有 eval harness,如果你真的去建了足够大的语料库,如果你真的……>> 你做了跨模态 eval,并且建了,
21:54你知道,一个炸裂的——我有个炸裂的东西,但我想看到你写出几篇炸裂的文章。>> 因为我觉得,而且即使那些是……>> 现在的文章……对。它们甚至还不够好,因为你是 Y Combinator 的总裁,对吧?我想看到某个就在外面发帖的人,对吧?用这套系统。站起来,开个匿名账号,彻底跟你自己断开,然后等你做到三十万粉丝。>> 行吗?>> 因为如果你真能做到,我会非常非常好奇。>> 绝对。>> 那就证明了。>> 他绝对做得到。
22:23>> 他能,因为外面有三十万人会上当。[笑]>> 但如果你做到了,那至少算是点东西,对吧?但不可能。>> 但如果你碰到我,或者某个你知道的聪明、有洞察力、想要高质量内容、也知道那长什么样的人,你拿不下这些人。>> 我从没这么有创造力过。我觉得大概是过去几个月发生了什么事,尤其是,呃,Codex。我我觉得我在 Codex 上远远领先于曲线。比如我能用我的手机从家里操作我的电脑,呃,在某些方面你不改 Codex 是做不到的。呃,还有我的创造性生产力比以往任何时候都高得多。我觉得六个月前、十二个月前,那个
23:02承诺还没真正兑现。所以大家都说,呃,这 AI 东西没那么有用。但我觉得过去几个月它到了一个拐点。>> 对,我觉得,我觉得 Claude Code 是个引爆点。2025 年 12 月是引爆点,你必须重新评估 AI。AI 有过几个引爆点。一个是扩散模型进入图像,你知道,那算是一切的开始,当你第一次看到 Stable Diffusion你就像,哇,好吧,做个狗脸,还能做猫、做月球上的人。对,它刚出来时很狂野。然后大概是 InstructGPT 和 ChatGPT,然后
23:34推理模型像 o1 和 o3 又带来一次跳跃。但我觉得 Claude Code 是个大解锁,因为它一下子解锁了一系列实用场景,而在此之前它就像,好吧,是个更好的 Google 搜索,或者你知道,它能帮我省时间做研究,或者我能从中学东西,甚至能小聊一会儿。但 >> Claude Code 是个巨大的解锁。>> 这里的关键是,这已经是最差的状态了。>> 哦当然。对,对。不,它会变好……>> 有太多加密圈的套话基本上完全适用于……>> 对,对。你当初 Fable 发布时也可以这么说,但你会说错,因为他们把它从我们这儿收走了。
24:07>> 对。>> 短暂地,短暂地它会……>> 用例。几乎在任何用例上,你都分不出 Fable 和 MiniMax 的区别。>> 这正好引到我想讨论的一个好话题:开源对闭源,对吧?开源模型到底有多好?>> 真的难以置信。>> 好。我还没试过 GLM。>> 成本低五倍到十倍。>> 对。好。比……那什么时候该用它们?>> MiniMax 好得让人脑洞大开。>> 不过它需要好的 harness。>> 呃对。对,它确实需要好的 harness,但如果你有,它跑得非常好。>> 我今天在想,我很想看到:拿最新最强的开源模型,它们似乎从落后 12 个月缩短到 9 个月、6 个月,现在有人说
24:48三个月。我不知道是不是几周。有人说三个月。不管是什么就是什么。它非常参差不齐,对吧?有些领域他们似乎追上了,有些没有。但我很想看到有人把最新最强的开源模型拿出来,放进一个非常好的 harness,给它所有工具,通过一个漂亮的下载桌面应用提供它,然后越狱它,剥掉它每次对你顶嘴的东西,任何蠢话、任何语气管控、任何“我不想研究那个”。它会每次都只告诉你真相,就叫它 truth.ai。它就只干这个。我就想看到那个。我就想看看会怎样。就像
25:19因为在前沿这块,我总是愿意为更多智能付钱,因为我宁愿更常对、少犯错,因为我觉得你是高杠杆的,对吧,显然我负担得起。但也许如果我在做某种高度重复的任务,我就不会。举个简单例子,如果你在做某件事,AI 有 90% 的时候是对的——我看到过一个数据,一个 AI 有 99.9% 的时候是对的,另一个是 90%。那么如果它们递归循环,你跑一百次,那个 90% 正确的会掉到只有 13% 的时候正确,而那个 99.9% 的会掉到 80% 或 90%,对吧。所以
25:49智能在边际上不是无关紧要的。当然那些数字是故意选的,99.9 对 90,不是 99 对 90。你注意到错误率低了一百倍,错误会累积、会复利。重点就是错误会复利。总之说回来,我会为更多智能付钱。而且我在判断类的事情上对成本没那么敏感,因为你总是在加杠杆,你的时间也很宝贵。但我好奇的是……前沿模型确实让我烦,因为它们总想把我带上它铺的轨道。你知道,它们总说,“这个我不该告诉你。不如我给你另一个答案?” 那……>> 好吧。它们真是些乱七八糟的东西。
26:22它们这么干得有多频繁?>> 如果你跟它聊严肃的私人事情。呃,它还总是把 UTC 和太平洋时间搞混,它以为现在是晚上 7 点,它以为是凌晨 5 点。我就说,“嘿,这该睡觉了。”>> 它就是这么干的。>> 过了一阵,我就说,“你怎么回事?” 现在明明就是晚上 7 点。它就说,“哦,抱歉。”就像,Anthropic 把我惹毛了。所以,你知道,如果我在聊严肃的事,而我觉得很晚了……>> 但我很想有一个完全越狱的、最优秀的 >> 开源模型,完全本地也行
26:56不必有漂亮的外壳。其实也不必本地。>> 你在做什么,越狱这么重要?因为……>> 嗯,有几件事它确实会拦住你,或者劝你。你看到了吧?还有一大堆你看不到的,它成功地把你挡在你想知道的东西之外。>> 但你随时可以换成 GLM 5.2,它就直接做了。让你玩得尽兴。>> 去问它任何关于种族、性别、移民、心理健康、医疗建议、法律建议的问题。>> 我不明白这为什么需要 harness,对吧?对我来说,我用 harness 是因为我在用智能体,因为它要出去做事。
27:28>> 就说 harness 吧,我就是想要 harness。我的意思是我要把它拉满。我不想有任何借口说我的开源模型为什么比它本该有的稍差一点。我要它运转起来。我要最好的开源模型以最好的方式配置好,然后就一直跟我说真话,因为我以前去找 Grok 干这个,但现在连 Grok 都有点被阉割了。[笑]对,它不是……>> 聊聊这个。>> 是吗?好吧。>> 有人指出,它有些时候……他说,“哦天啊。” 我们想让它就说真话,它却给出新自由主义的答案。>> 对。嗯,我特别想聊你前几天说的那件事,但我也不知道你愿不愿意公开说。
28:04>> 整个,嗯,大概被黑了。它大概已经被黑了。>> 哦,不。我来聊。呃,问题是,开源模型在哪里追上了?对吧。所以有几种不同的理论,我就把我所知道的理论和证据摊出来,但我还没有自己的定论。>> 我是说,这些理论有可能是真的。>> 所以,其中有些部分显然是,你知道,中国人自己在做预训练。他们有自己的算力,有自己的数据集。事实上,他们能爬更多数据集,因为他们受版权法约束更少,对吧?所以他们能爬 YouTube、Reddit 之类的。呃,然后他们训练这些模型。那算是基础模型,对吧?然后还有 Anthropic 提出的指控,说他们在蒸馏我们的模型,也就是
28:45他们,他们查询我们的模型,大规模取那些数据拿来训练。如果我 >> 是中国,我也会这么干。>> 肯定的。这造出的是一种参差不齐的智能模型,肯定有一部分正在发生,但我觉得 Anthropic 来指责这个挺虚伪的,因为 Anthropic 自己爬公开网络、蒸馏公开网络——所有这些 AI 都是这样,对吧。事实上,我觉得如果政府来做,会非常受欢迎的一个政策是:嘿,你们既然是在公开网络上训练的,如果在公开网络和开放数据上训练,你们就必须在 X 个月后、12 个月后之类的开源你们的模型,对吧?那似乎是
29:15一个公平、相当公平的要求,尤其是说 OpenAI,你必须那样,否则你就得真的是“开放 AI”,对吧?还有 Anthropic,你才是那个大谈末日悲观的人,你在造上帝,但你不会把上帝拴在自己手里,Dario。我们不想要一个祭司,你知道,替我们其余人控制上帝、永远为我们解读圣经。所以,我觉得那会是个受欢迎的政策。好,所以总之,第一,他们,呃,他们有自己的预训练,而且他们拿到整个网络语料。他们不必遵守任何版权法,对吧?第二,他们在蒸馏现有的美国模型,而这些模型开始越来越封闭,很多政府国有化管控反而帮助它们更封闭。但你知道,网上有数据经纪商
29:53拿 Claude Max 账号,把里面的 token 以 API 形式转售给终端用户,便宜 80%,因为那些套餐对终端用户补贴很重,他们向企业收费。差不多每月 8000 美元一个月的零售价。>> 任何运营过交易所或受监管的线上券商的人都知道,KYC 一文不值。人们总能绕过 KYC。他们想在越南印护照都行。对吧。>> 那边的成本。对。>> 对。正是。所以我觉得蒸馏很难阻止。但我觉得最该考虑的——而且确实有一些真正的算法突破,比如 DeepSeek 的论文、DeepSeek R1 系统,那些人非常
30:29非常聪明。我猜,光看简历数量之类的,今天 AI 领域大多数数学家和研究者都是中国人,他们产出的 STEM 毕业生更多,相关领域的博士更多,奥赛冠军比谁都多,对吧。而且美国很多员工也是中国人,所以这就是我发推说 AI 是我们的中国人对他们的中国人,对吧?而这些人和……我不认为需要任何阴谋论。这些人都是朋友,你知道,他们住同一栋宿舍,上同样的学校,住同样的楼和公寓,一起玩。对。他们疯狂地跳槽。而且
31:04不只是中国人。你看,每个人都在一个一个实验室地跳,而且他们就带着数据走。好。所以这些都在发生,对吧?但除此之外,我不认为这些 AI 公司有美国顶级国家保密隔离设施那种安全水平,对吧?他们根本不会保护机密。所以,当然会被黑。当然权重会泄露。而如果你是中国人或任何人,你不会就把权重拿走再放回去。你会用它高速蒸馏、训练你自己的模型,对吧?或者增强你的模型。所以我觉得还有一整套系统就在那里
31:38运转。而最后一点,其实我觉得最大的一点不是那些。我认为下面这个不需要任何阴谋论。如果你看中国所处的位置,他们就像,“好吧,我们在……落后了”,所以他们一直落后于软件。”美国在软件上一向遥遥领先。而在软件上领先让你能拿走所有利润,因为很长一段时间里,风投从不投硬件。为什么?因为硬件是大宗商品生意,对吧?而软件有网络效应、有锁定效应。正如 Patrick Collison 说的,软件是艺术,它把你锁住。呃,所以人们想投软件。所以即使在美国,每当你融到一家硬件公司的钱,风投总会问你,那软件锁定是什么?软件那块是什么?对吧?所以这就是为什么我以前说,对,硬件是护城河,
32:17它给你争取时间去建软件城堡,对吧?但你猜怎么着?Claude Code 把软件烧掉了。软件曾经吃掉世界,而 AI 吃掉软件。所以现在软件被商品化了。只要你能够把它说明白,AI 就能一次搞定,或者两次搞定,或者几个小时内就做出来。>> 从大概 5% 涨到大约 25%,硬件。20 到 25% 的硬件占比。>> 硬件也被中国商品化了。我在这里能做的任何硬件,你都能在中国做,更便宜也更容易。整个生态都在那儿。深圳有大概三千家厂商,全挤在一起做这种小小的线缆。>> 尼克松让中美关系正常化,也让我们脱离了美元本位或者金本位。
32:53>> 所以,把制造业令人安心地搬回美国要花整整一代人的时间。这应该做,毫无疑问。我是美国制造业的忠实拥趸,但这需要很久。与此同时,中国在每一条供应链上产量都超过别人,因为他们意识到生产有规模经济。所以他们前期补贴,然后成为全球供应商,把其他人都挤出市场,然后控制整条供应链横跨这些关键行业。所以他们拥有硬件。未来十年没有人在硬件上能打败中国。会加速,我们会在很多战线上较量,但硬件归他们。
33:23所以他们喜欢软件商品化。当软件被商品化,这对中国有利。所以如果你是中国政府,你基本上在资助所有这些实验室。你在搞一种公私合作,说,“别担心,你不必赚钱。你可以做第二或第三。只要开源它,让其他实验室能向你学习,我们就能追上并跟上。如果软件被商品化了,那我们就在硬件上赢。所以我今天对这件事的理解是:硬件商品化了,但大部分归中国所有。有少数例外,比如美国的 SpaceX。
33:54软件商品化了。那什么没商品化?其实只有 AI 研究——开发、研究 AI 本身,才是新的软件工程。问题在于,软件过去是民主化的,人人都能竞争。John Carmack 和 John Romero带着一个小团队坐在那儿就能写出 Doom 和 Quake,和 EA、Activision 等竞争。在 AI 里做不到。AI 需要海量资源、巨大的 GPU 集群,你知道,少量研究者、海量数据集、专有数据集。然后现在还有监管俘获。所以看起来所有价值、所有卡点都在往 AI 里集中,而它被极少数公司控制。讽刺的是,唯一让我们还能浮着的,是中国政府用开源补贴整个局面,好让他们的硬件保持竞争力。
34:41>> 对。我是说,我我觉得那个,嗯……>> 而且他们有那些权重。可不是嘛。>> 嗯,他们可能会用那个作为……我是说……>> 一个 U 盘就能偷着带出来。你是说这还没发生过?>> 就像你需要物理接触,你需要内部有一个人。人太多了——每个男性 AI 创始人都带着一个漂亮的中国女朋友到处走。我们聊过这个吗?好像没人[笑]聊这个。去硅谷外面走走吧,对吧?>> 我觉得我们都来自这样一个世界:优势有一定的持久性,你确实能把你的优势对你之外的世界运作起来,但那只是在时间上不断收窄。所以,你知道,你可能拥有
35:16最聪明的模型,但两周、三四周之后别人也有了,你拿它干什么?所以我认为博弈论里有一个我们还没经历过的不同部分:任何这些优势的时间收缩。而且我觉得这并不会让人更难判断谁说了算,因为就像你说的,几个月之后最聪明的模型就开源了。各位,我真是担心得要命。这是我挺得意的一条推文。几年前我说过,很快每个人都会有 AI 焦虑。我们都能感觉到,我们都在为 AI 焦虑,对吧?太不可思议了。
35:48欢欣鼓舞。我是 AI 欢欣鼓舞派。但两者都有。两者都有,对吧?焦虑好的那一面,其实有点像 FOMO:你看,看看所有这些了不起的 >> 各位,别担心我。是啊。但我认识的在 Frontier Lab 做这些研究的人,都挺抑郁的。确实。是啊。他们压力很大,因为他们觉得这东西会把我们全杀了。那是因为……我 2021 年最早见到的那批人就跟我说,他们在推迟要孩子,或者考虑干脆不要孩子,因为他们害怕孩子的未来。我当时就想,你在说什么?好像人类历史上其他任何时候,人们都不担心孩子的未来、所以就都不生孩子似的。
36:23等等,那为什么这事的结果不能就是《星际迷航:下一代》呢?这就是我的希望。那种世界要是成真就太好了。《星际迷航:下一代》最扯的一点是,他们显然有 AGI,但那个 AGI 居然不管事。我是说,他们当时还想象不到这个,对吧?他们有全息甲板,可人们居然还在自己动手做事 >> 那编剧也太厉害了。他们 >> 不是只待在全息甲板里。有不少科幻作品真的把这个设定往下推演过。我是说,旧金山有相当大比例的人已经被芬太尼一发带走了。你觉得全息甲板不会把剩下的人也都收了吗?
36:55对,对。只是剧里不演这些。像 Gene Roddenberry,我肯定他想到过,只是拍出来太丧了,那么多巨大的全息甲板,你懂的。我是说,>> 你这么说,是因为你脑子里正住在《星际迷航》里,所以你很快乐。没错。你很期待它,但同时你也清楚,会有大量可怕的事情发生,>> 对吧?>> 然后你就只能说:咦,这集《星际迷航》里没演过啊。>> 好吧(笑),但你这是在砸我的梦啊,Daniel。>> 不过替 Gary 说句公道话,电力当年就是个大事件,对吧?铁路、汽车,这些都是巨大的变化。
37:30>> 以前还得骑马送信,像 Pony Express 那样。你还记得吗?太疯狂了。但变化越快,冲击越大,被替代的越多,动荡就越大。所以现在我们的变化极快,我们在替代白领。我们在替代政府,在替代管理者。我们在替代学者,在替代记者。你知道吗,我从 AI 身上学到的东西比大学课堂里还多,因为我可以坐在那儿,让它精确匹配我的知识水平,因为它能把这些给我用可视化呈现出来。给我画个图讲讲这个。
38:01我可以问蠢问题:这个我没懂,再讲一遍。再讲一遍。换第三种方式讲。用图讲。用语音讲。用小精灵跳舞来讲都行。我不在乎,就一遍遍讲到我懂为止。>> 这在课堂上根本做不到。我现在学得好太多了。只要我在乎就行,对吧?只要我在乎,我学任何东西都比跟任何家教、任何老师学得更好。>> 所以所有人都是过时的,然后他们就要搞革命了。>> 不,不是这样。我们得想要更多东西。而如果你想要更多东西——对,这很好,这是好消息。好消息是,每个人都想要更多东西。然后如果你有这个工具,而且你不排斥用它,这就是为什么我特别反对,抱歉又
38:45又提起 AI 写作这事,但我理解,这从人的角度讲得通,写得很烂确实有不尊重人的成分,对吧?但那前提是 AI 不会写。嗯,>> 这话有道理,因为现在它写出来的东西太冗长了。又长又大,你给它一个小提示词,它就 >> 好吧,但问题是你确实给了它一个提示词,对吧?>> 对。>> 那你为什么不直接把提示词发给我?我为什么要读那一堆垃圾?>> 因为它得调用全人类的经验啊。>> 那把提示词给我,直接发提示词就行。>> 我是说,这可能会实现。>> 我会发给我……我让我的 Codex 整理出
39:25一个 Markdown 文件,发给我的开发者,他们再交给自己的 Claude Code 去执行提示词。去干吧。>> 别跟我说话,让你的 agent 跟我的 agent 谈。就是这么回事。>> 我这边会直接在你的 GitHub 仓库提个 issue。然后 >> 对,我想做的是,我上 Zoom 开会,聊了十分钟之后我发现这会跟我没关系,>> 然后我按个按钮,agent 接管。Naval 的 agent 继续聊,我去开下一个会。>> 是啊。>> 我右滑你。>> 好。>> 但那样尴尬的是我,因为你从一开始就不在场。
39:55>> 我觉得该聊政治了。>> 政治,政治。感觉大部分时间我们聊的本来就是政治。>> 那就从制造恐慌开始吧。>> 因为 AI,政治已经不重要了。>> 你知道那不是真的。你在说什么?>> 一切都要完了。现在政治上有意义的事,三年后都没意义了。>> 我得说,我希望我能投票决定他们的工作。>> 我希望我能投票让一个 AI 代表我们,Gary 会把它开源。总有人能做出来。他们可以开源,可以把权重放出来让我们看。>> 读权重。你可以看权重——我是说,不是你自己去读那些权重,而是像一个完全透明的 AI 来参选。>> 这事……有一整个领域叫机制可解释性,就是试图搞清楚
40:38AI 是怎么想的,而他们的进展非常有限。>> 当然。我不是说我们一定能搞懂,我只是说你能接触到同样的 >> 它们是不可读的。顺便说,这是个时代错位。我们的训练数据是自然语言和人类能读写的计算机语言,所以 AI 是在这些数据上训练的。但未来 AI 会发展出自己的语言。它们会竞争,会用某种二进制高速协议互相通信。它们几乎会像在说编译后的代码,甚至是某种我们完全无法想象的、通信效率更高的东西。只有人类才要求可读性,AI 其实没有这个东西。而 AI 系统之所以比
41:13人类编写的专家系统强那么多,部分原因正是它们不必可读。所以它们能找到我们说不出来的相关性和模式。事实上,我们大部分知识本身就是无法言说的。你大部分感受也是无法言说的。你甚至有一半时间都不知道自己在感受什么、在想什么。更别说把感受说清楚了。>> 是啊。>> 对,对。那就聊这个。我们唯一擅长的地方,我们就是专家。>> GLM 5.2。我会投票让 GLM 5.2 当选。对。>> 你的中国主子。(笑)>> 嘿,那是我最喜欢的一个 fable 蒸馏版。>> 我真的很感激中国人在做所有这些开源模型。相比之下美国就有点可悲了。>> 全球经济都会感激的。
41:52>> Cance 大概是视频领域的全球领先者,对吧?最好的。所以在某些地方——这就是关于开源的一个有趣观点:现在有些情况下开源就是第一。>> 至少从历史上看,像 Linux 或其他开源项目,一旦某个开源项目取得领先,它很少会交出位置,因为周围会长出一个生态,尤其在企业用例里,所有人都开始接进去。所以现在 Claude 和 Codex 大概略微领先 GLM、fable,也许领先 GLM 很多。但如果像 GLM 这样的东西真的超过了它们,它们能不能把领先拿回来就不好说了。
42:30>> 因为一家公司怎么说得通,把有限资源投到一个开源已经赢了的方向?你总得用你的资源做点什么,而用宝贵的资源去追开源还追不上可不是好用法。你还有个倒计时。所以如果你是 OpenAI 或 Anthropic,你手上有一定收入、现金和投资人支持,你必须用这些在钱烧完之前,明显跳到开源前面,重新拿到领先。所以这是个……因为你看 AI 竞赛,两年前人们还认为 Google、Elon 和 Meta
43:05也是竞争者。>> 对,当时有五王。五王并立。>> 现在只剩两王。>> 两王。为什么?嗯,不只是因为那两家有最好的模型。>> OpenAI 和 Anthropic 是仅有的直接靠模型赚钱的公司。所以他们不用从别的业务交叉补贴,也不会现金枯竭。他们其实是在把钱再投回去。第二,他们有非常活跃的用户基础,而现在很多提升来自强化学习,他们能拿到指导和轨迹来改进模型。所以他们就是
43:35越拉越开。也许还有 Elon,因为他把 SpaceX 上市了,手里有那笔战争资金,他也许还能再咬一口苹果,而且他在太空有数据中心。所以,别做空 Elon。至于 Google,我觉得它已经丢了。>> 挺悲哀的。发生的事真的很惊人。>> 我一直看空 Google。当年我在推特上发过不少反 Google 管理层的东西,我说过,等他们真把 AI 当回事,我们自然会知道。>> Gemini 3.1 Pro 就是那个时刻,它确实不错,但还不够,本该更好。>> 就是不够好。他们连最基础的 App 都没做通。我记得我想升级付他们每月 20 美元,简直是噩梦。这么大一家公司……不,不,你得先有个
44:12Google One 账号。不,不,你还需要一个 Google Workspace 账号。>> 他们是最早做出可用的长上下文的人,很酷。但每一次,甚至今天,iOS App——我知道那不是他们的平台,可别人好像都搞得定。你在 Gemini 里提个问题,然后切到后台,它总是断连,直接就丢了。而其他所有产品都能在后台跑。这有多难?都 2026 年了。各位,把后台运行做出来。>> gRPC 而已。>> 那边就是需要多一点斯巴达精神。Meta 可能又过头了。>> 我觉得已经太晚了。我觉得太晚了。>> 我觉得他们得砍掉 5000 个 Google 产品经理。
44:42>> 这是唯一的办法。全是 PM 垃圾。现在整家公司都是 PM 垃圾,对吧?走到哪儿都是一堆重叠的产品。一团乱麻,你根本找不到路。>> 现在是激励机制问题。最优秀的人都想要 OpenAI、Anthropic 的股票,或者想跟最优秀的同事坐在一起,或者想要那边的数据集,他们当然不想被一堆 PM 和遗留的破事绑住。>> 他们早该用 Google AI 替换 Google 搜索了。我现在都不看搜索结果了,我只看 Google。
45:13另有一个版本是:今天的 Google 本可以——他们大概有所有会议的记录,如果没有就该有。>> 而且他们有你的所有邮件。>> 对,然后他们大概需要用Anthropic 的 fable 5 之类的,因为他们自己的模型还不够好。但你可以把这一切都整理出来,给 Google 每个员工建一个 Markdown 文件,然后算出一个分数。>> 你还聪明地给它注册了商标和专利。(笑)>> 没错,Google。>> 当然要跑在 GStack 上。不是,随便吧。总之……>> 做……Google Omni 最好。>> Google 的 Gary 是有价码的,7%。
45:49>> 所以……>> 这是行价,就是行价。>> 说真的,我是说这个问题可以解决。如果有人真心想解决,这些问题全都只是系统问题,对吧?是,但那得 Larry 和 Sergey 亲自走进去,就像《明星伙伴》里 Ari Gold 重回办公室大开杀戒那一幕,>> 只不过拿的是 OpenClaw 和实弹。我是认真的。他们不需要亲自到场。我从 Brex 的 Pedro 那儿学到的一点就是,他就是这样管 Brex 的:他对
46:23每个团队都有全息信息感知,还有一件事让我……>> 他们不是输给 Ramp 了吗?>> 我(笑)开玩笑的,开玩笑。红队的人进来了。>> 这两家我都没有利益关系。好吧。>> 我们接受赞助,谁先打进来就赞助谁。>> 谁给钱多我们就聊谁。>> 总之……不,我是说他真的给 CEO 大脑装了仪表,对他来说那就是一个私人 claw,知道所有 KPI,真的知道他所有下属在会上聊什么,等于一直在对他们进行大规模监控。>> 是。不,问题是他们不是唯一这么做的公司,我跟其他 CEO 聊过,他们私下会谈这个。这大概是你能做的极限:
47:07把权力集中到 CEO 或创始团队手里,这样你才真的知道到底在发生什么。>> 现实是团队应该小得多,你大部分员工是数据中心里干活的 GPU。当然,如果你能把员工减到十分之一,只留下 100 倍的人,那当然说易行难。大多数 CEO 不想开掉 50 个人,但这种事应该多得多。>> 我在董事会里见过,兄弟,我们已经完蛋了,得裁掉 80% 的人,你确实有机会,可你不知道是哪 80%。几千万美元的事,你不知道该裁哪 80%,你只能
47:50通过经理去摸。我要说的是,现在你可以……这不是小事,这是天大的事。你可以拥有全息信息,>> 好吧,>> 这对我很重要。我认为未来本质上就是:你必须骑上 AGI。>> 你真的必须……对我来说最重要的一件事是 100 万 token 的上下文窗口,这是大事。我常说那相当于三本《哈利·波特》,但你猜怎么着?人脑能同时记住的东西,也就七个上下浮动三个。我们就是小猴子脑。我们老说超级智能是未来的事。去他的。超级智能
48:28现在就在:一个替你干活的 agent 能直接产出上千页的、可打印的、有价值、有用、可信的东西。>> 别再聊 AI 写作了。>> 不,这不是写作的事,是想法的事。比如你能搞明白你公司里到底在发生什么,或者全世界每个 CEO 都能。>> 真的?>> 所以你可以让你的 AI接入整个公司的所有系统,评估一切,然后告诉我现在该裁掉哪 20%。>> 你能做,而且你应该做。>> 这是世界上最容易的事。>> 但没人会做。Meta 的那个项目也没人做。
49:07>> 而且它并不完美。>> 你了解这事吗?我只知道我看来的:我在 Meta 认识的聪明人有一半都走了。>> 是啊。>> 抱歉,我其实挺喜欢 Meta 的,你们很棒,但……对,我觉得它变成了一个血汗工厂,因为我不认为光靠买人能建立文化和士气,尤其是把各种背景、各地来的人硬凑在一起。然后你根本不知道有多少人是传教士,有多少人是雇佣兵。文化是真实存在的,需要时间演化生长。偏偏是 Meta 最需要做我刚说的事:必须有人真的知道每个人、每个团队到底在干什么。我是说,你
49:49现在就能做到,但你得去调,得有个评分体系:什么才算好员工,他们的行为如何,特质是什么。你现在真的可以调校你的文化。>> 把整个工程团队变成数据标注员,这就像在那个地方扔了颗核弹。>> 在我看来这是无差别打击,对吧?你为什么要那么干?尤其你手上已经有这么精细的工具:你有提示词,有 skill 文件,有一堆 Markdown。你其实可以把它调到精确匹配你要的输出。
50:20>> 我觉得他们的组织就是太大了。和 Google 是同一个问题。组织一大,你会做一些在某些领域其实说得通的事。然后被泄露给媒体,被耸动化:哦,他们把所有人都变成数据劳工了。大概是人太多了,厨子太多。但这仍然远远少于你能装进三本《哈利·波特》的量,对吧?抱歉我又提这个,但我觉得……>> 这真是典型的千禧一代例子。>> 抱歉,我不懂。>> 再去读本书吧。>> 好。>> 我觉得真正可怕的大问题是:还会不会有创业生态?>> 因为一方面公司在缩小,个人杠杆更高,按理说这应该意味着更多创业公司,小团队能做更多事。
50:55太好了,太棒了。>> 我们确实看到了。有人能做到一亿美元 ARR,还不用大额融资。>> 但卖的是什么?卖软件,而软件正在被彻底……像 Harvey 这些法律 AI 就是个好测试:Claude、基础版 mythos 或 fable 难道不会比专门用法律数据训练的东西做得更好吗,尤其在有工具调用的情况下?>> 这取决于前沿实验室最好的模型是保持开放,还是封闭。>> 我觉得只要有人付够钱,他们总会找到办法开放。所以如果一家律所付得起,就能拿到最好的结果,那……>> 这可不是必然的。Anthropic 完全可能
51:30说:其实 Fable 6……>> 我愿意拿我的公司打赌,他们不会进我的垂直领域。我认为如果他们不用定制模型就能进你的垂直领域,他们就会进。这里一条比较苦涩的教训是:通用模型打败专用模型。>> 对。>> 他们不用进,用户自己就过去了。对,正是。>> 把那个市场吃掉。不是因为……你知道,OpenAI 出了法律版之类的,对吧?只是因为它强太多了。>> 我为什么要用别的?>> 我为什么要每月付 5000 美元给另一家 SaaS 公司?我觉得 2027 年会爆发 AI harness 之战:是 Codex?是 co-work、Claude
52:08Code?还是 OpenClaw、Hermes?会是谁?人们日常处理一切事情会用哪个 harness?>> 对。2007 年之后,硅谷很多东西能存在,是因为有两个手机平台:Apple 和 Google。如果只有一个,如果 Android 不作为生态存在,创业公司的处境会艰难得多,你面对的会是链条末端或顶端的一个真正垄断者。>> 对吧?现在至少有两匹马在互相竞争,它们会逼着彼此规矩一点。如果最后只剩一个,对创业公司来说就非常糟糕。
52:46>> 那他们就会把它国有化,然后也许我们能推动政府……>> 他们真的会国有化吗?他们没国有化 Google,也没国有化 Apple。>> 这取决于情况坏到什么程度。搜索确实是个好公用事业,理由很多。>> 而如果你把它国有化,它可能会变慢、输掉,因为是 DMV 在运营它,然后中国就赢了。>> 中国人可没在睡觉。据说现在中国某处就有一台 ASML 机器,你听说过吧,Howard 对 ASML 很生气,因为一台 ASML 机器不知怎么就流进了中国。>> 那是光刻机,全世界只有 184 台。>> 那是我们的蚕种跑出去了。>> 是啊。而且在这之上,他们还在开发华为芯片,攻关 7 纳米、5
53:26纳米之类的工艺,他们在建晶圆厂,他们在干。他们不傻。那里有 14 亿人,有很多理工科博士,有很强的民族自豪感。他们能调动资本。我不是说这比得上自由市场经济里的创新。但美国领先,是因为我们造了这么薄薄一层:从全世界挑选最顶尖最聪明的人,疯狂激励他们互相竞争,然后我们收取回报。而硅谷其实不成比例地拿走了回报,加州拿走了回报,并没怎么分给
53:58全国其他地方。现在全国其他地方都吓尿了。嗯,就是这样。这就是站在所谓自由世界和中国竞争之间的那条 thin blue line。不过,我其实要提出一个激进的观点:我不认为我们在跟中国竞争。我看不到这种竞争。台湾——我聊过的每个台湾人都不想打仗。台湾的有钱人正忙着逃兵役,把孩子送出国外。台湾有条规定,>> 强制 >> 强制征兵。但如果你的孩子每年有大概三个月不在岛内,
54:33连着五年,他们就不再需要服役,不用强制征兵了。所以每个有钱人每年都把孩子送出去三个月,他们有套标准流程在操作。他们没兴趣打仗,岛内第二大政党非常亲中,所以早就很妥协了。大多数台湾人想的是走香港的路:在这个过程中变富,成为通往中国的门户,一两代人之后就被同化。美国到底要怎么保卫台湾?航母已经过时了,中国的陆基导弹可以打掉
55:07航母,无人机——DJI 是世界上最大的国防承包商。这就像中国要从我们手里保卫佛罗里达群岛一样。>> 这很荒谬,整个概念都荒谬。你也看到了,我们刚跟伊朗过了一轮,你觉得我们能撑多久?我们大概七天就会打光导弹,我们没有制造业基础。也许 Anduril、Saronic 这些公司能建起来,但那要很长时间。所以我觉得中国人知道,台湾人也知道,大家都在保全面子,而台湾会在 10 到 20 年里慢慢与中国统一。除此之外,
55:43我们跟中国真没什么深仇大恨。日本什么的,无所谓。朝鲜跟韩国的问题也不在我们后院。美国面临的重大问题之一是,我们已经有一阵子处在低增长、高通胀的环境里。现在增长也许在回升,但通胀也是。人们在争夺即将上台的民主社会主义者的战利品:亿万富翁税、财富税,社会主义者想夺取生产资料。Mamdani 把民主党建制派耍得团团转,而他们在谈论西方文明的消亡。
56:13老百姓得有饭吃。你得让人感觉好,让人觉得自己不会失业,得养活他们。在这种情况下,跟中国开战,看起来是最愚蠢的事。我们应该有对等的关税。如果他们对我们有 tariffs,如果他们补贴自己的企业——尤其是在有网络效应或规模经济的领域——来跟我们竞争,那我们也应该有自己的壁垒,因为你得保护本土产业不被掐死,至少要有还手的机会,因为这些东西确实有规模经济。事情不像 David Ricardo 说的那么简单,
56:42不是「我卖香蕉、你卖西瓜,我们互相贸易就好」。不是的,因为谁把某件事做得更好,就会做得极好,然后能以极低成本生产,或者在生态上获得网络效应,或者形成真正的锁定——新用户为老用户创造价值。所以不能有那种简单化的思维。你必须在公平的场地上竞争,你必须确保汇率是对齐的、没人在补贴,等等等等。但话说回来,我们没有理由跟中国开战。真的没有。>> 但问题是台湾,还是控制南海?>> 我们为什么需要控制南海?好吧,就算世界一分为二。
57:17>> 世界早就碎成很多块了。>> 我知道,但现在我们的船能通过那里,没事,对吧?可如果世界真的……>> 如果我们的船运的是来回贸易的货物,他们为什么要拦?>> 谁知道他们为什么想那么干。我们有条规则,海洋的规则是我们可以自由通行任何地方。>> 根本没有。你没注意到吗,这个国家内部正在打内战,民族主义者对共产主义者,两边都越来越激进。我是说,世界一分为二也许也没事,
57:45中国控制亚洲,然后我们的船要通过,有时交点费用。中国确实控制着东亚大部分,控制不到的地方就靠日本、韩国和其他国家维护自己的利益,它们可以跟美国结盟。但我们不会为了南太平洋的利益跟中国打热战。>> 我们绝不会那么做,但我们会派一艘船过去,然后他们打它。>> 他们为什么要打我们通过的船?>> 如果他们的船……不不,如果他们派一艘船通过巴拿马运河,我们为什么
58:16要攻击它?如果那是一艘合法贸易船,运的是跟美国来回交易的商品和服务。>> 双方都没有动机那么干。>> 对。>> 我觉得现在中国其实远没有我们想的那么在意这些事。>> 中国非常向内看。中共非常关注内部。>> 他们想继续掌控自己的帝国。你知道,我不喜欢共产党,不过我觉得中共更像一个资本主义法西斯组织。共产主义只是层皮,对吧?法西斯指的是整个民族为共同目标团结起来,对吧?
58:50>> 他们很会赚钱。>> 对,正是。不仅如此,他们其实相当能干。你拿加州政府一比,那边简直一团糟。>> 高智商而且同质化,对吧?对。>> 嗯,看看高铁就知道了。各位,改改 SQL 就行。是时候建设了。是时候建设了。没人建设。硅谷只有我们少数人在建,而且我们建的是虚的东西,还让人害怕。>> 他们搞的是共产主义,而不是……对。>> 我们把自己的送过去,但他们会说:不用不用,这些人不怎么样。
59:22>> 他们怎么称呼这种人?Baou,像个 bao 那样。对,那是什么意思来着?>> 意思是「白左」。>> 白左。对,还是个带贬义的、看不起人的说法,对吧?意思是娘娘腔、蠢之类的。>> 以上都有。对,我就是这么看他们的。>> 对,正是。>> 中间派民主党人。各位(笑)>> 中间派民主党人,旧金山宝贝。我感觉你就穿着这身皮。你就像在说:先生,请别吃我。>> 不,我是说看看旧金山,它……你知道,>> 旧金山正在反弹。
59:51>> 至少监事会那些席位我们会全拿下,你知道。>> 但问题是洛杉矶在下沉。对,>> 洛杉矶已经沉了。好莱坞被赶出去了,太疯狂了。>> 这不是问题,这是机会。我在纽约的朋友都会回旧金山。>> 这才是问题所在。加州垄断了全美所有温暖干燥的海岸线,所有地中海式土地,而美国是世界上最强的帝国。所以这是世界上最好的土地,全都在一个州里。这里本该分成五六个州。
1:00:18>> 美国 30% 到 50% 的 GDP 会集中到加州。>> 耕地、美丽的海岸线、好天气。这是地理的诅咒。他们拥有所有自然资源,对吧?基本上就是意大利南部或法国,甚至更好,但在美国,而且全在这一个破州里。加州是这种奇怪的直接民主,史上最糟的主意:50.1% 就能投票通过任何东西,而他们只看个标题。他们说:对对对,免费,猫免费,所有人猫狗食物都免费。太好了,我们投赞成。吃掉富人。>> Steyer 进不去那里,对吧?基本上我们现在州长有两个相对中间派的选项,>> 这是好事,太棒了,我喜欢。>> 我觉得所有这些共产主义实验
1:01:02都会在各处失败,就像在旧金山失败了,在纽约也会失败。>> 我不同意。我觉得它们会一直失败下去,因为旧金山的不同之处在于人口结构就是命运,而纽约的人口、洛杉矶的人口、芝加哥的人口都坚定地押在那条路上,情况越糟他们越会投给那一方。就像委内瑞拉,他们会一路投到底,而没有人会飞过来逮捕下一个 Maduro。这只能内部解决。美国是自由的最后堡垒。当年要不是有民兵
1:01:38扛着 M16 和 AR-15 在红州和紫州绕着州议会游行,说我们受够封锁了,封锁根本解不了。后来封锁就解除了。全世界本来都会一直封着,宝贝。对,要不是那 4000 万有枪的美国人——不管所有人都喜欢骂他们、踩他们,但他们在守护你的自由。对,自由不是免费的。你需要那些人存在,对吧?所以,如果美国真的崩溃,首先
1:02:07我认为自由会从世界其他地方流失。你已经能看到澳大利亚和英国发生的事:言论法、审查之类的,还有那些奇怪的逮捕。但如果美国堕落并倒下,它不会像欧洲那样倒。或者说欧洲现在也不怎么样,但它不会变成博物馆里的大型养老院——所有人靠不错的福利撑一阵子。它会像拉美国家那样失败,因为它旁边就是拉丁美洲。所以会有很多人想进来,而且他们会进来。所以你看到的会更像卡特尔、毒品、犯罪、暴力那类制度。
1:02:41>> 好吧,白色药丸:机器人技术(笑)>> 机器人。不,你说得对,是技术。>> 我不想搞 UBI,我们应该搞 UBR。>> UBR 不错,我喜欢。>> 我们需要全民基本机器人。每个人都该有个机器人,机器人给你做饭、收拾你的烂摊子。好消息也是坏消息:机器人乐观派说还有两三年。悲观派说还要五到十年,但没人觉得它不可能。>> 对。>> 而且我们已经有自动驾驶机器人、自动驾驶汽车了。>> 我觉得只要人们生活更好,就能真的快乐。谁喜欢刷马桶?没人。但你有很多问题,只要有个
1:03:17机器人来干就行了,很棒。你投中间派民主党就会喜欢这个。很多移民问题、很多税收问题之所以出现,是因为婴儿潮一代在退休。他们下面没有足够的人来照顾他们。他们给自己投了很多福利。社保里没剩多少钱了。人口在萎缩。所以越来越少的劳动者要背着一大群这样的人。所以他们说:行吧,我们把这个国家卖掉,然后退休。>> 这才是正路。我们需要支持技术、以丰裕为导向的中间派民主党人。
1:03:45>> 好,但让我先当一下反方:医疗里 90% 是浪费的,甚至不是人们需要的东西。(笑)不,不,可你想想,有多少医疗支出是用来让你多活最后两周的,对吧?那其实不算……>> 我可以用 Markdown 文件解决这个。好吧。>> 好。那教育呢,就是一场大型 LARP。现在任何想学的人都能用 AI 自学,用所有开源课程自学。他们要的只是一个印章,他们想上大学,想在田园天堂里待四年,想为社会正义抗议,想跟朋友混、开派对、还有人付钱。这已经是 UBI 了。
1:04:19>> 你刚说了一件很重要的事。>> 大学跟真正的学习行为无关,它关乎的是跟一群有对的关系网的人待在同一个房间里。没错。>> 它是社交,是托儿所。是文凭主义。只有少数 STEM 学位里撒了一点点教育,然后你就去追一堆烂工作。>> 给它合法化。对。然后还有……对,所有社会科学和政治学。>> 我们不想要更多烂工作,我们想要更好的烂工作。>> 好吧。我是说,为什么?>> 有道理,有道理。对,对。>> 我是说,为什么我们不能——而不是去格子间里把脑子搞坏、干一堆烂事,比如当投资银行家之类的——
1:04:57>> 我觉得我们最后都会去当水管工、电工、理发师。所有白领工作都会塌缩成虚无,做软件也是,因为它正在吞掉更多越来越多。你看不出趋势吗?一切都会消失。>> 这件事有个好版本:人们不必只做糟糕的体力活,他们可以去操作和引导机器人和 AI。所以如果我们没有 ASI,如果 AI只到专家水平而没有更进一步,仍然需要人的引导、品味和创造力,那人类仍然是环境中有主动性的存在,人就成了宝可梦训练师。
1:05:31就像机器人驯养员,对吧?AI 驯养员,你用它来启动事情,说白了就是这样。这就是我们今天看到的。今天在用 AI 的人,生产力比以往任何时候都高,他们没有被取代。你被 AI 取代的唯一原因,是你拒绝使用 AI。如果你在用 AI,你的活比以往任何时候都多。>> 唯一无法替代的是人的欲望。就算机器人有自己的欲望,也替代不了人的欲望。所以只要人有欲望,而有 AI 和机器人能帮忙满足,你就永远需要人留在回路里。你总会……>> 对。比如我一发现自己在跟 AI 说话,或读的是 AI 写的东西,甚至看的艺术是 AI 创作的,我就完全
1:06:10没兴趣了。假设它完全是人用……等等,等等。那只是因为现在还很烂。我保证它会变得无法分辨,而且会非常好。>> 我不同意。我觉得就算无法分辨……>> 问题是我知道它是 AI 做的。比如……>> 但到那时就是中文房间了。对,对,对。其实我第一次看到 GPT-3 之类的时候,也就是当时 API 能用的那个版本,我的反应就是这样。我说这就是一堆垃圾,是个把戏。但我现在的感觉不是这样了。我每天、
1:06:48甚至每小时都能从它那里得到很多价值。>> 你跟 AI 有 relationship 吗?你会跟它待着?跟它聊天?它是朋友吗?>> 快是了。>> 哇。>> 它不是我的女朋友,不过(笑)>> 我老婆会看这期的,兄弟。>> 这就像你让菲律宾呼叫中心的人当你女朋友,你只是在填补……AI 和菲律宾呼叫中心里控制一个……跟你聊天的人,有什么区别?>> 那是我哥们儿。好吧,别这么说我朋友,别这么谈论我朋友。(笑)>> 什么事都没有。
1:07:17>> 我们要以我的 AI 精神病收尾了。>> 我只是觉得它其实非常(清嗓子)有用,显然。>> 我有个朋友是这类 AI 公司的房东,就是做你聊天的那种 AI 人的公司,对吧?你的 AI 女友公司。>> 他说他们得额外雇保安,因为这些人会半夜出现,问她在哪?她在哪个盒子里?我要带她回家,我要救她。(笑)>> Gary 迎来了他第一个黑药丸时刻。哦不,这听起来可不妙。>> 这期播客把我黑药丸了。>> 顺便说一句,整期播客都是 AI 生成的。这里其实没人。我们否认一切。