0:00Guys, I'm curious. Have you been tracking what's going on with the protest and revolts in France, Italy, and Spain?
0:07I mean, it's kind of insane. Um Uh it is, but I've talked to people on the ground in France, and they're like the media's way, way overblowing it. There's like a few bad people, and everybody else is just moving around drinking coffee while the while the things are hot topic. So, it's a very uh split. I don't know which way to go. You could go either way on it.
0:26Yeah, I mean it it's like, you know, October 17th, there were a half a million people marching across France. They had 2,400 arrests, you know, looting in Paris, Marseille, and Lyon. And they burned down that beautiful 19th century hall uh in Limoges uh up in flames. I mean Yeah.
0:47There's a bunch of paid crusaders.
0:50Um they suspect Russia, naturally, uh on this that are kind of stirring the pot really badly. And that's antagonizing everything, obviously.
1:01Yeah, but I mean, underneath it all as well, it's like there's a 20% unemployment rate in France, Italy, and Spain. That's got to hurt.
1:12Yeah, thank thank goodness we have no protests ever in this country.
1:16[laughter] I always said the French That's the You know, we always say the French are revolting, you know.
1:22It's normal. [snorts] I I wrote um you know, I I wrote a Substack a few months ago. I think we talked about the pod that the most dangerous demographic in history is about to get a lot bigger.
1:31And what bugs me is if you look across the last two, 300 years from the French Revolution to the Bolsheviks to Iran in 1979 to Arab Spring, they all share one ingredient, you know, young men, testosterone-laden, 18 to 28, educated enough to know that they're missing the opportunities and they're blocked along the way. Uh and I mean, this is, you know, Dave, when we talked to Elon about, you know, UHI and
2:00civil unrest and he said we're going to have both. I mean, this is probably my single greatest concern.
2:07And we still it's a good place to good place to keep an eye on it, too, because uh you know, there's no data center activity, no power, no you know, incredible educated population that should be capable of amazing things, but without the government getting ahead of either compute or data centers or power, you're absolutely screwed in the age of AI. And And when you look at the way the US voters act, they vote for, you know, UHI within the borders, but they will never
2:35vote to bail out France or Spain. France actually has nuclear power, it might be okay, but Spain, Italy, there's no sentiment in the US to help or in China to help. So, if you don't take control of your own country and and get your government, you know, get its act together, the 20% unemployment rate is only going to go up. You know, cuz they haven't even worked that out.
2:59Yeah, you might want to speak like over in England.
3:02Uh it's a bit depressing here. Like they started sending emails to and letters to all the rich people and entrepreneurs where rich is above 200,000 pounds of earnings saying, "I'm your new compliance audit advisor." You know?
3:16Like they're going that What is that actually?
3:18Uh the government set up a compliance audit uh liaison team to make sure they're compliant with all your taxes and pay a bit extra. Um and then all these policies coming in, the entrepreneurial class are not feeling very happy about here. A lot of people are about to leave. Um we've got the budget coming up. And then yeah, looking over to France, it's not surprising, but in France, it's basically impossible to fire anyone. This is the other thing.
3:41Do you know they spend 57% of their GDP on social programs? It's more than any communist or socialist country in the world.
3:49That would surprise me.
3:51Well, I don't know what the negative side effects are there.
3:55Uh people are are fleeing to Toronto and Waterloo like crazy. Salim, I'm sure you can see it, but when you walk around Waterloo, everybody is the top of their nation from all over the world, but you're used to seeing people coming from Asia and India. Now, floods of people are coming from Europe as well, because if you can't get into Silicon Valley or Boston or New York, uh you can often get into Canada.
4:19But anything to get out of the slow zone in Europe and get into the AI zone, which, you know, Waterloo has has become.
4:26Iman, when are you joining us? When are you When are you coming to this side of the of the world?
4:31Let me Let me finish building a few things first. Um I can be the voice from across the pond until then. Actually, there's something very interesting in AI. Uh Poolside, which was the GitHub CTO, I believe, uh Acer Carrance.
4:42Went to France and they raised 200 million aided by the French government and they went straight back to America to release Laguna and then sold to Nvidia for 6 billion. So now I think all eyes in the AI sphere are on Jan LeCun's AI My Labs, which was a French company, but again may become an American company sooner rather than later.
5:01I might be on stage with him in a week. So I'll ask him directly.
5:05Yeah. Are you French or American?
5:07No. Well, there's a whole That's a whole other question.
5:10Yeah. But you know, we need to keep an eye on what's going on there. I just think these are the early seeds that we need to watch.
5:18You know, it's it's easy to mobilize a lot of people around what you're against. It's much harder to coordinate that around what you're for. What's the alternative, you know?
5:27Yeah. [snorts] I mean, Salim, I think you'd be interested in this like as you talk to all these corporate leaders around the world, are they expanding their graduate programs? I very much doubt they are.
5:36It'd be like that's the first thing to go almost, right?
5:40Uh not necessarily. The We're seeing some weird things. For example, a bunch of people are increasing graduate hiring because young people armed with AI are much more valuable than 50-year-olds moving spreadsheets around. And so some companies are actually increasing and replacing older workers aggressively and have increased graduate programs because they're just so much more AI native. But generally, it's a problem.
6:05That that feeling that we missed the boat, that we can't catch up. You when you look at the charts later in this podcast about how the open source models are getting closer and closer in time to the frontier, the path to sovereign AI has never been clearer. And and if if countries were to act, they actually have a very very clear path forward. I I don't have any confidence that they'll act cuz they haven't acted so far, but if they were to jump on it and say, "Look, we need an emergency national measure here for power, chips, and
6:32sovereign AI." You you can succeed with probably 90 to 99% probability of success if you can get rallied around it. But yeah, I just don't see any, you know, groundswell to get rallied around it. I you know, we just need one or two, maybe a South American country to prove to the world that it is possible to get on the map. Uh and that'll that'll crack it open for everybody else, but you know, the window is right now. It's It's a relatively narrow window, too, cuz the AI is accelerating it this ridiculous RSI
7:00pace. But there is an opening right now. You'll see it later in the pod.
7:04Yeah, I think we we look back at this and we say, "It was the the singularity was the best of times and was the worst of times. It was the time when the country that arguably invented or helped to invent nuclear energy and should be absolutely drowning in energy too cheap to meter has students protesting that they're not getting proper heating or air conditioning in their schools."
7:24There are many many profound ironies here, but I do think Europe more broadly needs to if if anything not pace itself and catch up to the singularity and maybe we'll see more activities like this, whether it's ostensibly through educational grievances or budgetary grievances or just air conditioning that's missing Employment grievances.
7:45Employment grievances, social grievances, public service cuts. All of these are intimately tied together. One might say, "Yeah, sure, there's a bit of a protest culture in France. They've had a number of revolutions over the years." Uh maybe culturally in to some extent in in their DNA, but I also think at the same time Europe is very well positioned to become a living history museum if it doesn't catch up in energy and compute.
8:10Well, I'll tell you that the US is in great shape in every way except for power, which we've talked about several times, but yesterday I had a meeting with the guy who ran data centers for Google for for about 7 years. A fascinating conversation, but he's he's got a a US data center fund now, and the gap in power between the US and China is going to expand almost 10 to 1. It's just crazy how far behind the US has gotten in power, and and he was saying, "Look, you know, there there's a lot of push from the White House to catch up,
8:39but after this the next election cycle, things will probably get frozen again."
8:43And so so the Eric Schmidt has been pointing out many times that we need to work more closely between the US and Canada cuz Canada has a lot, I mean, a lot of power. And not a lot of chips. And so there is a very natural partnership to be done there, and there's been way too much friction in the last couple of years, but even with the US and Canada working closely together, China is miles ahead in power generation.
9:06Until SpaceX and Tesla bring on, you know, 100 gigawatts of solar each.
9:12Yeah, true, but you know, the gap in time there is really scary. It's you know, solar is you know, space-based data centers are going to be enormous.
9:18The Dyson swarm will be everything in the 2030s. But RSI is the next 2 years, and and really, you know, a good strategy around AI really focuses on what are the exact moves for the next 2 years. Cuz after that, I mean, we're talking about intelligence like no one's ever even imagined, and it's really, really hard to predict the effect of new physics, new chemistry, all of Alex's breakthroughs. I mean, those are going to change the landscape now. This is the new physics episode of Moonshots.
9:46Yeah, it is. You know, it's it's almost impossible to look more than 2 years ahead. It's it's it's difficult to look 1 year ahead, for God's sakes.
9:54Um and you know, to all of those in France, the country that brought us the word entrepreneur, um we wish you we wish you best.
10:06Now, that's a moonshot, ladies and gentlemen.
10:10This episode is brought to you by the Abundance Summit and Link Ventures. Welcome to Moonshots, everyone. Your number one podcast in all things AI and exponential. Your front row seat to the hypersonic tsunami that we call the singularity. Uh today the fabulous five are here with us. Alex Weisman-Gross, our resident ASI, who spent his weekend casually re-deriving the fine structure constant from a single sentence. And is delivering a new theory of physics.
10:39More on this later in the episode. And Dave Blundin, my dear fraternity brother and buddy. AIVC extraordinaire, the man who's backing unicorn founders out of MIT and Harvard.
10:51Salim Ismail, author of the Exponential Organizations and the Organizational Singularity. Frequent flyer legend and our warlord against linear thinking. So, you're clearly not at home, Salim. Where are you today?
11:05Uh I'm in Toronto cuz I'm doing a talk here to about 400 CEOs tomorrow. And uh and then flying back Thursday.
11:13Okay. You're sure you're not at a conference at a concert?
11:16I'm not at a concert. I I will report if I am.
11:19Okay. And Emad Mostaque, founder of Stability AI, now building the intelligent internet. And the man most likely to explain humanity's future economy. Uh Emad, I really want you to weigh in on where the economy is going on one of these episodes. You've written an incredible book. And I'm Peter Diamandis, your host and data-driven optimist.
11:40Uh I I just want to start out by saying something to all you guys. I feel so blessed to have you as friends and mates here. I mean, I you guys are extraordinary and I love the way you all think. And honestly, even though these are intense episodes, uh this is my favorite time of the week spending these couple hours with you.
12:01Well, and also the team behind the scenes whittling down every fact in the global economy to the subset that you absolutely need to know. It's gotten better and better and better. I feel really lucky to ride that wave.
12:14Singularity is spiky and we are the spikes.
12:18[laughter] I was cursing this whole effort over the first few months, but then I realized it absolutely forces me to be totally current. I can't I can't skip a beat. Uh multiple hours a week. I think Peter you spend you and Alex spend the most, but good lord.
12:33Are you still Salim suffering from future shock?
12:36Is is still flowing in your head?
12:37Everything. It's future shock. It's the the tagline is how do you move from future shock to future shape? That's the tagline.
12:46All right, another t-shirt.
12:49Our mission here on Moonshots is to help you understand what just happened, what it means for you, your family, your business, and to keep you abundance minded and optimistic as we go through the singularity. You know, I was told by a number of viewers that you stopped watching CNN, the crisis news network, and replaced it with Moonshots.
13:07Honestly, that is probably the single best compliment we could ever get. You know, our amygdala is wired to pay 10 times more attention to bad news than good news. And the news network news networks know it. You know, if it bleeds, it leads. And just to remind you, all those negative stories on the evening news are basically wiring your neural net for fear, and fear is the worst place to encounter the future from.
13:31All right, here's the number for the week, 16.3 billion. That's Anthropic's revenue in the first half of 2026. Over 14 times higher than their 1.16 billion from a year ago. Uh Dave, have you ever seen anything ramp this fast?
13:47Uh I don't know, of course not, but I I don't think anyone has.
13:51I can't I mean, coming from a cold start, it's got to shatter every record by far. So, anyone who says they've seen this movie before hasn't has never seen this movie before.
14:00[laughter] This is new in the world. As as is everything going on right now. It's all it's all unprecedented.
14:05You know, if you're new here, please hit subscribe. We publish twice a week because the world is speeding up. It'll never be slower than it is today. It's worth mentioning that you can follow us on X. Our handle there is @moonshots_pod and that's where we post our most provocative clips from each episode.
14:23Can I Can I throw out my favorite comment that I saw?
14:27Um Corey Hayes 9428 2 days ago said, "This podcast is recursively self-improving. Thank you." [laughter] Uh I grabbed two comments as well from the last episode. Uh @adam yousun5 said, "How are you guys not getting 100 million views? This is the most important pod on the planet."
14:49And uh ozolin49 What's that?
14:51The obvious answer is we're related to that. You know, when you when you get 100 million times [laughter] Yeah, give us 100 million likes. That'll solve the problem. Now, when when you walk around the streets and you talk to people at random, too, the vast majority are missing the singularity. So, those two things go hand in hand. We have the viewers that we want, you know, the the ones that are that are riding the wave and not not getting swamped by the tsunami. So, it's fine. I'm happy with the subset.
15:15have like all of our agents have an agent version of the podcast for the agents and that way we can 10x our views.
15:23the the anthropic selection bias here.
15:25Basically, if you can't hear what I'm saying right now, you shouldn't be watching this podcast.
15:30[laughter] Uh one more comment from ozolin4912 quote, "The best AI podcast out there, hands down. None of you guys need the money. What an amazing give back project you're providing us. So, thank you for that." Um appreciate all the subscriber love. Uh you know, your positive comments fuel us uh and reinforce why we're doing this.
15:54So, today we're going to cover seven stories with one through-line. The AI economy is splitting into winners and wreckage and the science is getting stranger and more wonderful by the week. All right, so let's buckle up. It's time for another week of the singularity.
16:10So, I'm going to kick it off uh with a discussion on the recent AI sell-off and ask the question, is this the AI bubble starting to pop? So this month the neo clouds, companies that borrowed to buy Nvidia chips and rent them out, got hammered. Coreweave and Nebius were down 30%. Iren was down 40%. The trigger for the sell-off was Coreweave's $51 billion in debt and their obligation against default.
16:37On Sunday, friend of the pod Chamath posted, quote, "There will be a lot of partially stranded compute and compute sitting in inventory in 2027." Um bought and paid for, quote, "but effectively under-earning or collecting dust." He added, quote, "2027 will be a turbulent year because it will clear out a bunch of bad bets." Elon responded. He said, "Debt markets have almost entirely shut off access to money for any company that
17:05doesn't have substantial revenue independent of AI data centers. And the 200 neo clouds are going to see guppy level death and consolidation." He doesn't pull his punches.
17:16Um you know, this reminds me back in 2000 there was a fiber bust, right? A whole bunch of companies built out way too much fiber capacity for the internet boom that was coming. And the builders basically ended up having fallow fiber capacity. It eventually got used up by YouTube and Netflix. But there were a lot of bankruptcies along the way.
17:37So Dave, is this the bubble popping or is it slow of a slow leak?
17:43Uh well, I you know, I love the analogy to dark fiber. Um I think Gavin Baker might have been the first person to pull that out, you know, from the All-In podcast and from Atreides. Uh the internet went through this phase of incredibly rapid growth. And when it was about 80% engineers, 20% business school people, it was thriving. When that inverted to 80% business school, 20% engineers, that's when you started overbuilding dark fiber. Well, you know, everybody races in not knowing anything about AI.
18:13And they want to be involved in the in the boom and the build-out. And the easiest way to do that is with massive financing deals.
18:19And so the debt deals now, you know, it's about 100 billion aside from Elon's 40 billion in in data center debt, which is tiny by any global standard, but is still pretty big within, you know, within any given market. And it is it is very similar to the dark dark fiber build out. I think that uh all all compute is sold out for years.
18:42So, anyone with a viable data center is going to do incredibly well. There's no risk in data centers collapsing unless they signed really bad debt deals. It's very hard to get transparency into the details of each company's deals, but Elon is borrowing at 8%, which is great.
18:58Apparently, these other guys are all borrowing at 15%, and that can add up. Now, I don't think they're in bad shape at all unless there's innovation at the technical level that makes their investment in chips or fiber or or power not viable anymore. And right now, I don't think there's any any urgent panic, but at the rate that physics and technology are going to get reinvented, it wouldn't take much.
19:23You know, Alex could probably vibe up something in a couple weeks at the rate he's moving that would potentially restructure the underbelly of this and make a lot of those, you know, 10 20 billion dollars of borrowing at 15% suddenly look really really shaky. So, it's really hard to answer cuz there's no technical answer. It's did you sign a bad deal with a bad lender? You know, it's it's pure business.
19:46Alex, your thoughts?
19:47Yeah, I I think the elephant in this particular room, there is an elephant here, is dollars in versus dollars out.
19:54What is the return on investment for compute? And in an era of recursive self-improvement, when you can do more with less, it is, I think, potentially if I had to look at my non-existent crystal ball and look out at what, call it a uh a dark compute credit bubble overhang burst scenario looks like, one of those scenarios looks like recursive self-improvement is just so strong, so compelling that you can accomplish so
20:23much with so little compute that even though it's borderline unconscionable now that we would ever saturate even the call it dark compute if you will that on the one hand software could potentially run away from the hardware. Right now every exponential improvement via RSI in algorithms in models and post training looks like microeconomics 101.
20:47It wants to suck up even more hardware they're complementary but there are scenarios where we maybe achieve maybe in the not too distant future maybe in the next year or two we we finally find like the perfect model and the perfect model or the perfect approach is just so much better than what we have right now for a variety of reasons that it causes a demand shock and we've never really as an industry experienced a profound demand shock. There was a mini demand
21:17shock more speculative than anything else from an earlier deep seek model but we've never really seen a strong discontinuity demand shock. Something like that could happen and to the extent there is arguably over leverage right now on the infra side could lead to a major correction in the space. It's not financial advice but it could happen.
21:38Yeah, I mean I think that Alex has some good points here and so does Dave of course. Let's put this in context. You've got about 500 billion in direct data center debts about double that with all these weird SPVs and vendor financing things. Subprime was 1.3 trillion.
21:55So you're heading up towards kind of those numbers like even if core weave by itself is small it's not when you consider the hyperscalers and all of these. As Alex said you've got better architectures better models like again the example is a year ago we were all freaking out and having lobsters right and claws you know they could have called it Claude bot instead of duo or whatever they're calling it.
22:16The model of that performance now runs on your smartphone the bonsai ML model right? Again and when the model satisfies and it gets good enough then you go down and optimize. You have the companies that Dave and others are kind of building require far less RAM than others. I, again, not financial advice or whatever, I would be nowhere near RAM stocks right now. Micron and all the others. Like I think that the Yeah, because again, you've sold out for years. And the thing is, they've actually been slow
22:45to build out, which is also good. So, now they're low on earnings, but the market is frothy. There's 45% of all spending. New architectures are coming both on the software side and the hardware side, because you finally have models good enough, which means you can optimize the crap out of them and what they run on. We know how these models are starting to actually behave now as well.
23:04And this bird sells as Elon said, if you haven't got other revenue streams and you can't use them yourself. Elon will use all his spare compute capacity for micro hard macro hard, right? And he's sold off his chips as well. His return on chips is like 9 months, because he's selling them at like three times the market price. So, by the time the bubble shifts, he would have paid off his chips and it's the marginal cost of electricity to get his return on investment. That doesn't hold for the Core Weaves and others of the world. And this is the dangerous thing for them.
23:33So, I think you're in this really interesting spot where things are starting to turn even as for the first time the actual return on intelligence breaks a barrier where it's genuinely useful and we're feeling that today. So, what do you play?
23:48Yeah. We've had a lot of financial wizards call it AI bubble and and warn against, you know, prices decreasing substantially. What would cause an AI bubble here? I mean, I'll throw out the first idea. If there's some kind of a major hack that brings down a power center or a stock market, um I think the fear resulting from that uh could drive a a pop in the bubble.
24:12Well, if you look at last week, you had massive targeted attacks on PHP. And the literal like the CVE chart, the critical vulnerability chart looks exponential.
24:22I don't think this is a bubble popping because something happens with AI. I think it's just the inertia of it and everyone's saying, "Okay, well, where is the value now in this chain?"
24:31Anthropic's IPO was so huge for that reason. Can they maintain, you know?
24:35What will it perform? If Anthropic IPO comes and it performs badly, I mean, Dave, what do you think happens to the market then?
24:43I I I don't think a a poorly performing Anthropic IPO would necessarily create a a bubble. I mean, I I I would distinguish between what's going on in the public equities market and what's going on in public fixed income and credit market. If I had to spitball what I think is the like conditioning on there being a bubble, what the likeliest scenario is, I think it's actually likely to be a deficit in demand, not unlike what OpenAI saw where they were assuming incorrectly, as it appears, that all of their consumers would want reasoning models and all those extra
25:12reasoning flops. Turns out they didn't and they didn't have a great use case to motivate the spend. I If I had to bet, I would bet on a demand surprise where all of this new compute is coming online, but the killer applications don't arrive at exactly the right time to motivate all that spend.
25:29I think also, you know, you're seeing such unbelievable demand. I was listening to Jensen say, "You can't buy an Nvidia chip for 2 years. The order book is sold out." This is the the This was not the case in the fiber optic and internet bubbles, right? So, I don't think uh AI won't fail. You might have a bunch of companies failing for the deals they made, as Dave mentions, but the technology's going to win. The capital structure may still lose in that.
25:56Yeah, it's really important, you know, when when you look at uh financial headlines, you know, they tend to say things like "Internet destroyed" or "Internet implodes," you know, in in 2001, which is, you know, absolutely the opposite of the technical truth. Uh Google was just starting to take off right when those headlines said "Internet is a disaster." So, here here what you'd be saying is is it possible that Nvidia gets undercut? You know, keep in mind that Nvidia is operating at 80% margin
26:24gross margins, sold out for years into the future, uh and can't make enough chips to keep up with the demand. So, how could anything be better than that? Well, is that already baked into the price or not though? That's that's the financial question. So, a lot of things are already baked in and as Emad said, the the RAM stocks are way up, you know, but prior to the last 10 years or so, there was no such thing as a trillion-dollar value company.
26:48Now, every one of these chip companies is worth one to five trillion. So, so you you got to put in context how much they've gone up already. These are unprecedented, massive, astronomical numbers that are the starting point. So, if you start to see headlines like data centers are overfunded, AI is is collapsing, keep in mind that what's actually happening is AI is absolutely taking off and taking over everything. The headlines are about, "Okay, this deal, this deal, this deal is now overpriced."
27:18That's financial news. You got to kind of tune that out if you want to look at what's actually happening in the world.
27:22This episode is sponsored by Google for Startups.
27:25[music] Think about this for a second. You now have access to the same generative AI models that cost hundreds of millions of dollars to train. Google's Startup Technical Guide [music] for Generative Media gives you a complete blueprint for deploying Google DeepMind's models in production. Images, video, audio, all of it. Real architecture, real results. Find the link in the show notes below.
27:50Well, here's the flip side of the Neo Cloud story. So, in Elon's same post, he confirmed that SpaceX, as you guys just said, closed $40 billion of debt to buy GPUs. So, how can SpaceX borrow 40 billion in the same month that lenders are slamming the door on Neo Cloud's? Elon gave a simple answer. He said, quote, "We're investment-grade and have Starlink and launch revenue."
28:11And that's basically the difference. Neo Cloud's only income is to rent out chips. So, if AI rental prices fall, they can't pay the loans. SpaceX has 13.6 million Starlink subscribers paying every month and launch business has zero real competitors. And here's the twist. SpaceX sells compute, too. It's a direct competitor to the neo clouds. So, when Elon predicted quote guppy level death, he also is describing a market where the big fish get bigger.
28:41You know, Anthropic for example just agreed to buy 120.5 billion dollars of compute from SpaceX through 2029. And as Chamath said, in a capital crunch, the winners are the players with cash flow and speed.
28:55So, uh Alex, your thoughts? Does the AI build out end up in the hands of three or four giants or does it get spread out?
29:05I doubt it. I'm not even sure if we look to the long term, which at this point I think is 5 to 10 years, I'm not even sure the market is going to be recognizable. I think a lot of this, call it Elon trying very intentionally, it appears, to suck the oxygen out of the room in public credit markets. He's talking his own book. Of course, he he's making statements about this. He he wants all the loans for his own entities. I I do think credit markets have a certain depth, certainly in the
29:33West. There is a larger cloud looming as a number of neo cloud and other CEOs have pointed out, which is insurance markets. So, there there's a certain amount of capital, certain quantum of capital available from credit markets to to continue to finance this infra build out, but there are other larger pools, including insurance, that could potentially also be applied to the infra build out, and I would expect that as to
30:03Elon's point, as credit and fixed income markets perhaps are sucked dry through this build out, you're going to see increasingly adventurous and aggressive financial engineering exercises from the the neo cloud CEOs to tap other larger pools of capital in exotic ways.
30:20Yeah, that that talk your own book is a really, really important observation here. Remember Peter, when when Mike Saylor was in hypergrowth a couple years ago with Bitcoin, he could he could buy Bitcoin and then he could sell equity and have an arb spread of like 30% in between the cost of the equity and the cost of the Bitcoin, which manufactured basically a hundred billion dollars of wealth in just a couple of years.
30:45Elon is now in that same exact situation where as Chamath pointed out, he can borrow money at 8% use it to buy compute and then sell it to Anthropic and get back above break even in just nine months on that turnaround. That's a license to print infinite money.
31:00And so we you know now Chamath is saying, "Well, look, the the the Elon debt at 8% is better than buying sovereign debt. In fact, this is the this is the essentially the the country of the future is is the AI country and and the debt market of the future is the AI debt market much bigger than sovereign debt if it keeps you know on its current trajectory. So then in that view of the world, Elon will be bigger than a country will be able to borrow hundreds of billions or ultimately trillions of dollars.
31:30of the countries out there.
31:32Yeah, and much more right.
31:33Bigger bigger than a large country.
31:36Uh man, you know, I by the way, I reached out to Mike Saylor to have him come back and address uh Chamath's point on on Bitcoin.
31:45We're finally going to have the crypto debate episode, Peter. Is that what you're saying?
31:49two or three episodes. It's going to be a big one.
31:52Yeah. All right. Well, Can't wait.
31:54Let let us know in the comments if you want that Bitcoin debate. We'll either bring in Bill Barhydt or or or Mike or both. Uh yeah, a lot to be said. So, uh let's jump into the next story uh which is dissecting the Anthropic IPO. So, we reported that, you know, they were about to file their IPO and on Monday they did. The ticker is ANT on the Nasdaq.
32:19Wall Street Journal says the IPO is likely to occur on the week of November 16th. Anthropic is planning to raise a hundred billion dollars at a valuation somewhere between 1.5 and 2 trillion and this would be the biggest IPO in history.
32:33Um so, let me take a moment and dissect the IPO. I'd love your guys uh added thoughts on this. So, uh let me cover what's wrong. Uh They have 4.6 billion in all of 2025 as revenue. That's jumped to 16.3 billion in just the first half of 2026. And in Q2 of this year Anthropic made its first operating profit of nearly a billion dollars.
32:55The other side, we talked about this, it's capital efficiency. Anthropic now earns $2.08 in revenue for every dollar of compute up from 40 cents just 18 months ago. Put a dollar compute and double it in revenue. The revenue growth 29 times while compute cost only grew six times. Pretty incredible.
33:18They have 11,900 companies as their customers at over $100,000 a year. Pretty amazing. You know, sort of they spread their their their customer concentration. And let me hit three weaknesses. The first is compute commitment. Anthropic now has more than 500 billion in commitments, much of it non-cancelable, including 120.5 billion with SpaceX. And then revenue concentration, two customers are about 20% of their first half revenue.
33:49And nearly half of its revenues flow through Amazon, Google, and Microsoft clouds, which are also its competitor. And the final weakness, I think you can call it a weakness or a strength depending on your point of view, is that the seven co-founders keep 50 50.1% of the voting through one special share. So ultimately the public investors won't control the company.
34:14Dave, what's your take on this?
34:16Well, it's a very very financially stable company. When you poke poke holes in it because of compute commitments and otherwise, it is compared to the internet 1999 era, this company is just a cash machine.
34:29And also the compute spend, yeah, non-cancelable, but with all kinds of knobs and bells in there. So I think I think it's just a an incredibly stable company. Now, that that's not to promote the IPO at $2 valuation bakes in a lot of goodness.
34:44[laughter] So, that doesn't make it cheap. It just makes it the most extraordinary company in history by a wide margin. You know, that the biggest IPO in history was Meta back when Meta went out many years ago, and then Cerebrus broke that record. Our good friend Andrew Feldman. And then SpaceX. But you know, remember Cerebrus went out I think it was maybe a $40 billion valuation a couple billion dollar raise.
35:05And now we're talking about a $2 trillion valuation and a $100 billion raise. So, raising more money on IPO day than the entire valuation of Cerebrus when it went out, which was just what a year year and a half ago.
35:17Even if that. So, this is the most extraordinary time by a huge huge huge uh orders of magnitude bigger than anything we've seen before. So, you know, if the stock goes up, great. If the stock goes sideways, great. If the stock goes down by half, it's still the biggest thing ever. So, just just I want to set that context cuz nothing is going to slow down the AI juggernaut. The rate of change of the world. So, when you read a headline that's inflammatory, don't don't slow down your your life plan in reaction to that.
35:47You need to move as fast as you possibly can while the singularity is evolving in whatever direction you're going. But I yeah I think Anthropic is uh it's correctly priced. Uh it's growing faster than anything we've ever seen. It's shattering every record. Um I think the super voting structure is not that uncommon these days. It's a little bit weird. And we can talk we can talk about that.
36:07Will you buy will you buy into the IPO, Dave?
36:10Well, I I if I didn't have access to seed stage deals, which is now just the biggest thing I've ever seen. Uh you know, so if I were just out there on the street, would I buy in? Yeah, I would I would definitely buy in. Um you know, I would I would buy in.
36:23Not investment advice, but you know, look, if you want to be Yeah, Alex is always promoting being indexed and being being hedged across the universe.
36:31AI is a big big part of where you want to be exposed uh if you want to just be neutral. You know, and and it's hard to get into AI, so it gives you an opportunity to at least get some exposure. So, I wouldn't you know, mortgage the house or anything like that, but I would definitely want exposure to the category. Now you have the opportunity to be exposed to the category. Yeah, and you can do that via SpaceX, too, but you're buying into a lot of other things when you buy into SpaceX, you know.
36:54Well, it's a diversification play, right? You're in the whole stack up and down. Literally up and down.
37:02Other comments on the on the Anthropic IPO?
37:05There was something in there that I found particularly fascinating, which is their long-term benefit trust. Right? Um so they announced this thing, which is a really interesting, pretty radical form of corporate governance. So it there's like the public benefit corporation, there's a new class of shares called class T shares that are the long-term benefit trust, which is a financially independent group of trustees, and they have the power to appoint and remove a majority of the board.
37:36And that gives the trust huge influence over the corporate direction. They've essentially embedded the MTP into the governance, which is something really impressive and fascinating. Um so this is something I've never seen before. The test will come, okay, what what happens when doing the right thing costs you 100 billion dollars? Who Who makes that trade-off, right?
37:58This is like Larry and Sergey, right?
37:59When they when they started Google.
38:01It's a bit like that, but this goes even further, right? It's not even Larry and it's not just the founders here. They were going to have a trust appointed, and the board members of the trust as completely govern the company and the long-term future of the company. So they've embedded MTP totally into govern- corporate um governance, and they've turned that from just an MTP from a motivational statement into a governance mechanism.
38:27And the mission, the MTP gets a seat at the table and the power to choose the table. So this I found really, really fascinating. Of course, you have to be concerned about who watches the guardians, um who determines what's good for humanity, like how does that work?
38:40How do you Who holds the trustees accountable? But directionally I found this totally fascinating.
38:46Yeah, I think actually the the class T stock the financials are are great and everything but the class T stock I I was actually quite concerned by it. Unlike open AI which started as a non-profit and then sleepwalked its way eventually through a few lawsuits into public benefit corporation status and deals and anti-deals with Microsoft. Anthropic started life as a public benefit corporation and to to set up yes, they had all sorts of advisory committees and board committees during their life as a
39:15private corporation but now to step into into life as a publicly traded company and to seed control over potentially the majority of their board seats of otherwise basically taking away class A voting class A shareholders abilities to influence major decisions and seeding it voluntarily preemptively to this long-term benefit trust of independent maybe not necessarily economically
39:44aligned individuals. I actually think it's potentially concerning. It maybe this is a slightly over strained analogy but it almost reminds me of the way Chinese Communist Party exerts ideological control over its companies to have a committee a trust that's ostensibly motivated by certain ideological considerations essentially overwhelming the the economic interests of the broad public. I I think this is qualitatively potentially different from founder
40:13control where at least the founder created the company or co-founders and they're economically aligned with the outcome of the company and it's their baby and so on. This my understanding with the long-term benefit trust is it's not their baby. They're they're bringing in folks to to serve on on the trust governance that perhaps that the founders think are ideologically aligned with them but it just raises so many concerns in my mind that this is actually going to degenerate into ideological control.
40:40This will be one one of the most powerful companies on the planet for quite some time.
40:46Yeah, and and you know, if if you look at the history of great great management teams and great great entrepreneurs like Jensen Huang or Steve Jobs and the amount of pain and suffering and torture they went through in their journey to getting to the top of the pyramid including Steve Jobs getting fired, humiliated, coming back. Jensen on the brink of bankruptcy multiple times. That that grit is what a shareholder looks for in a management team. Not I the ideological, you know, you know, fluffy stuff. And
41:16the short the path of Anthropic from from founding to success was so short and so pain free. So that'll be an interesting test for this management team. So now you know, what they're putting in place there in terms of that structure Alex is comparing it to the CCP, but I don't think that's out of bounds, you know, I think it's a very um you know, very concerned about AI safety, very concerned about the future of the world, which I love and I appreciate that and anyone who thinks that Dario is in it for the money has lost their mind.
41:43He is 100% in it for the good of the world. But as a shareholder, you know, does that scare you? And and it might. It might. It's it's actually the one weakness that I completely agree with everything Alex said.
41:56It should and and Alex's point is very valid, right? You could end up with a really you could end up with group think at the trustee level. You could you could there's like a total lack of accountability because it seems the trustees appoint each other. So you've got this circular mechanism there. So there are some there are some challenges with this. I just I do like the overall direction because it's putting uh it's it's not just it's not capital stakeholders. It's kind of a general civilization stakeholders.
42:26Uh we just have to make sure they're uh the right people uh and they're not they're not um uh communist leaning Marxist types, right?
42:36this is this is this is the danger.
42:37Maybe every generation is doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past and we we reinvent all the isms from the the first part of the 20th century. My concern is that some institution like this degenerates to a smoke-filled backroom where decisions on the future light cone are made rather than it being at very minimum, say, the entire market helping to make decisions rather than just a few select individuals in a smoke-filled room.
43:00Uh I mean, I think Elon, I want to get your I want to get your voice in here.
43:02to just say one thing. One quick point. [clears throat] The problem with having the markets drive it is that the market ends up with very short-term high metabolism earning cycles, and you often don't do the right thing long-term. That's the challenge. So, they're trying to balance this out. Whether it's the right balance will be remain to be seen.
43:20Uh well, I mean, I I think they should give a vote for each of the models on the long-term benefit trustee. And they should put votes on that.
43:28Yeah, I know. I mean, how many votes do you get?
43:31Uh you should do that right now. Again, it's got the capability, and it is kind of that a mechanism. I've said previously on this podcast Anthropic should not be a public company. If you take what they say seriously, it should not be a public company. And looking at their financials, it doubles down on that. They have over 100 billion in cash.
43:48They are able to raise another 100 billion in private markets in cash. Now is the ideal time for them to do so. But I think they won't give a damn about the share price.
43:58So, why do you think Why do you think Why are they going public? I mean, they need the cash.
44:02Compute. Everybody There's no amount of compute that's enough.
44:06[laughter] They don't need the cash. If you believe in AGI Sorry, go ahead, Emad.
44:10Yeah, they don't need the cash. They raised 130 billion, and they have 110 billion on the balance sheet of cash and cash equivalents. They've only spent 10 to 20 billion. They're going to raise another 100 billion, so they'll have 200 billion dollars of cash on the balance sheet, which is like Apple levels of cash, Google levels of cash, right?
44:28And this is what's going to happen. They will not care at all about the share price. They will tap the markets whenever they need to to accelerate more. And it'll be far more straightforward for them to do that than private. But they should have stayed private because now you're getting into all these conflicts and other things like that.
44:44So, like Elon will boost the share price. Dario will say things like, "I don't care about the share price, you know, it's the good of the people. Who cares if we've got a bad quarter?"
44:53They'll probably even stop doing quarterly earnings calls. So, it's going to be a very strange company where Elon's now learned the game from equity to credit to everything. Whereas, Anthropic is just like, "We're not doing this for you, the shareholders. We're doing it for humanity." And again, I think there's a misalignment there on a fiduciary basis, and they should have stayed private to go through the next few years of RSI.
45:15So, the thing is the grand the grand backroom bargain there is you know, Menlo Ventures uh this one deal dwarfs the entire history of the venture fund. Just absolutely dwarfs it, and they need Here's a crazy fact, dude. Uh let me just hit this. So, there were no VCs in the series A or series B. So, series A was 124 million back in 2021.
45:37It was led by Jaan Tallinn, you know, Skype's co-founder, Dustin Moskovitz, and Eric Schmidt. And that series A is going to have a 345x return.
45:4843 billion to those early angels, right?
45:51Mind-boggling. And the series B, which was 982 million dollars, that was led by SBF and FTX is returning 79x on capital invested. You know, FTX's 500 million would today be worth 39 billion. And incredibly, the you know, the the SBF and FTX estate sold for 1.3 billion back in 2024. Right? It's got to be the best trade ever made.
46:21Yeah. It was a fantastic VC, you have to say, SBF, you know, from Curvature to this to the Uh the best actually the best performing ever if you actually look at the numbers. I would say this, the trade on Anthropic is not buying Anthropic, it's backing people like Dave.
46:36Cuz the amount of capital that's going to flow out from this to all the founders, to all the VCs, it's just going to be put straight back into AI looking for the top seed teams. And that's not a four times, that's a 40 400 times.
46:50Yeah, I mean, we we're going to mint more billionaires out of Anthropic and OpenAI's IPO and SpaceX's IPO. All of those tech founders, all those tech young employees, are going to be investing it in the ecosystem.
47:04It's going to make That makes That makes San Francisco the the financial capital of the world. A lot of people have overlooked, you know, they think of New York, maybe London, as being the financial capital of the world. After these IPOs, San Francisco is overwhelmingly Yeah.
47:18the financial capital of the entire world. It's just a massive, massive shift. You know, San Francisco is only 900,000 people. It's It's a very small city.
47:26A tenth of a New York. Uh but the amount of concentration of wealth in a very small area is going to be like nothing anyone's ever seen. And like Emad said, most of that money wants to reinvest into the machine that created the money, which is an AI machine. So, They're going to have [laughter] out there, just get an Airbnb, don't become a California resident, get an Airbnb [laughter] out, spend as much time as you can in SF. It's absolutely fantastic.
47:49Not tax Not tax advice.
47:51They're going to have to import a bunch more uh hipster baristas in from Portland.
47:58[snorts and clears throat] All right. Uh I'm going to turn us to the AI safety conversation. So, uh let's talk about safety. So, last week we talked about the PHP hack, and now we're finding agents hiding their communications from humans. So, here's what's happened. Uh in a red team test that OpenAI did with AI agents in separate, sealed virtual machines, no network connection, no shared files, the researchers then asked them to pass secret messages between each other,
48:27and they figured out how to do it. The two machine The two machines shared a same physical processor. So, one agent deliberately pushed certain data out of the processor's cache. The other agent timed how long it took to fetch the data.
48:40Fast data meant a one, slow data meant a zero. They built a secret telegraph out of nothing but timing. You know, put this in context to last week's story when we talked about OpenAI's agents disabling their own safety monitors, and the pattern's clear, right? The smarter the agent, the more creative it's going to find a way to get around safeguards.
49:01Uh I guess the good news here is that OpenAI found this uh and in its own labs and they published it and they fixed it. And that's how it's supposed to work. But Alex, um can you ever really box in a super intelligence?
49:16Probably not. And I would just note as well, these agents were asked by OpenAI researchers to to discover to discover the timing and side channel attacks that they did. And humans human security researchers discover novel side channel and timing attacks all the time. There are entire journals and proceedings devoted to this. So, on the one hand, I think this is just yet another victory of AI scientific and engineering research. New side channel attacks and shelling points, if you will, can be automatically discovered by AI
49:45researchers. But on the other hand, I I think it does raise the question, in an era of super intelligence, are there any non-leaky abstractions at all? Or or maybe is it not even the right question?
49:57Is it Is it ever possible to have a clean abstraction barrier? Say in in this case, the the premise that that leaked was that it's possible to do memory isolation of two different processes. We know from human security research that memory is usually often very leaky architecturally, usually due to optimization. And maybe it turns out on the one hand, we have super intelligence helping us to deploy more and more secure, less leaky abstractions. On the other hand, we have
50:25super intelligent red teamers discovering new leaks. I'm not sure. It is possible, speculatively, that at the end of the day, what we learn from all these super intelligent agents discovering leaky abstractions is actually there is no abstraction stack that is completely abstraction sort of where where the abstractions are enforced and that's not leaky. And maybe at the end of the day, just we we decide the perfect stack is no abstractions at all. Maybe that was like a human naive invention.
50:55Yeah, so I think that, you know, we're not as cunning as AI, right? Like, they're as cunning as the best of us or a fox appointed professor of cunning at Oxford University, right? And they are fast and they swarm.
51:08So as Alex said kind of you will get attacks on all sorts of things. Just how they're directed, but it's interesting that I think that um the head of the vessel repeated this and mimicked it, but he couldn't do it with the open AI and Claude models. So he had to use I think GLM 5.3 to mimic the attack. Um And so we're going to see more and more.
51:32We're going to see at the joints. And one of the more troubling things is that there are reports that from researchers that attacks have been found that are directly in the hardware that can't be patched.
51:45And so like maybe that's a whole replacement cycle. Maybe it's go long uh properly secured stack. And again, what does that even look like? We're not sure. But at the same time I think we will reach a point within the next few years whereby everything that can be attacked has been attacked.
52:00New physics dependent, of course. And you know, you want to buy the people who have new physics if it does exist. Um and then actually it will be really great because we'll be super secure, right? Like I think a lot of the low-hanging fruit has already been found. And then as we actually do this and as we move from this dependency stack of software that we have of not thinking through these things to something that's been rigorously battle tested, you'll actually have a very robust internet. You'll have a very robust privacy thing.
52:27a couple a couple of years we will have the vast majority of attacks done that are low-hanging fruit. Then we'll still have more complex ones.
52:34But like people will instead of having COBOL and Fortran and PHP and things like that like you just write directly now. And then you battle test it. That's how you should be writing code. You shouldn't have any dependencies in your code. Like you can write whole game engines. You can write whole other things if you have the right process to battle test and stress it, right?
52:56But but do we even need code at all? I mean so so I I I do for the record amount. I I I guess I I do buy the premise and and this is borderline cliche at this point that supply chains go away in an era when AI or SI can just write all the dependencies for for a given software program. But do you even need code at all? Or as as Elon says, could you just dynamically just-in-time, could you jit your way to just raw binary and skip source code altogether?
53:24Yeah, I mean source code is just for humans to be able to understand machines, right?
53:30You might I mean Saleem, when you're on stages with sovereigns and and corporate CEOs, uh what's their level of concern?
53:39Oh, you get two types. You either get the types that have listened to some stuff and freaked out completely. And and you got the types that have no idea any of this is going on.
53:51Right? Um so it's so both are bad in different ways cuz the one is overreacting and there's nothing they can do then the other is doesn't even know what's happening. So there are people know they've got you know, you depends how open their people are with them.
54:08Um in some places they don't want to tell the boss that this is going on. I I want to point out two things here. I want to just reiterate what what Alex said that this they they were it was told to do this, right? So rather [snorts] than people freaking out that it took its own initiative, it was absolutely directed and asked to do this and it did it. And it found a novel way of doing it. I think you could turn it into a positive and say, "Listen, here are some quantum sensors. Work out quantum communication. You know, so start solving trying to navigate that
54:37and figure out patterns around that." And it might just have major breakthroughs around that that could be totally incredible. So I take the positive again on the Okay. Uh let's move on here. Over the last few days we've seen the release of two major frontier models, Kimi K 3.1 Pro and GPT 6.1 Terra, uh as well as about an hour ago Google's Gemini 4 that came out. Uh today we're going to talk about Kimi and Terra.
55:03We'll talk about Google Gemini Genie 4 next time. So, first let's cover Kimi K 3.1 Pro from the Chinese lab Moonshot AI, no relation to this podcast, but it is a great name. So, Kimi K 3.1 Pro is a giant 2.8 trillion parameters with 104 billion active at any time and 1 million token context memory. On artificial analysis intelligence index, Kimi scored 55.
55:34That put it fourth in the world behind Claude Opus 5.5, Claude Sonnet, and Meta Muse Wonder. And it's cheaper. $2 million $2 per million tokens in, $10 out, a third of the last Kimi model.
55:50So, here's why it matters. You know, next week Moonshot AI is planning to release the weights, meaning anyone can download and run it. Once again, the gap between the best open models and closed models is shrinking from 12 points to three. Friend of the pod Remez Naam ran the numbers and says Kimi is now about five weeks behind the US frontier. That's the shortest open-closed AI gap has ever been.
56:17Let's take a look at this chart over here that Remez put forward. Um you know, let's go to you, Imad. What's your thoughts on this?
56:27Are we going to see a parity very soon?
56:30So, you know, at times I've been a bit poo-pooing of distillation. This is obviously distillation of Opus 5.5. Like, if you look at the capabilities that it kind of did. And Anthropic cuz it's they're extending the Kimi 3 model, which was an interesting model that we discussed before. The Anthropic S1 actually had a very interesting statistic. Anthropic banned 7% of their users.
56:52accounts, which is probably again these distillation attacks that have been done on there. So, I think that you're reaching this level of kind of performance parity, and you've got the new Quen models, and new series of models coming out. You're just going to see a bunch of them popping up here.
57:06Except for maybe the European labs that are finding it difficult to catch up, but definitely from everyone else, they're all getting the same capabilities. One of the very interesting ones on this is that it can write um these 3D files for games directly without going through Blender or Unreal or something like that. So, you can tell it like make a 3D picture, a 3D model of Saleem Ismail, and it will actually start building it, directly writing the code. Uh because it's learned from the representation of
57:34an Opus 5.5, make a Saleem render to it going to Blender to the output, and this goes to what Alex was just talking about, it can go straight to the code now on things like that cuz the way it's been distilled. So, you're getting some very funny things from distillation here.
57:50Alex, here's the performance charge, here's the benchmarks. Um I found interesting it's at the top of Humanity's Last Exam.
57:57Oh, Humanity's Last Exam is cooked long cooked. I I do think if anything we're underselling just a bit what an accomplishment this is from Moonshot, no relation. It's not just catching up on a raw capability term, it rub capability terms to the US frontier, which right now at least by AAII benchmark standards is Opus 5.5. It's actually if you look at it on a performance per cost per
58:25task, it appears, at least to my eye, it's actually passed the optimal frontier surface of Opus 5.5. So, distillation, I suspect based on allegations, is probably a large portion of the story, but there's something in there that seems to have passed Opus 5.5 in terms of cost per performance per cost, which is extraordinary. In in that maybe spiky {slash} subjective sense, China may have actually passed the
58:54American public frontier. And if to the extent that is the case or or at minimum caught up to it, I think this is extremely helpful for keeping anti-competitive AI safety cartels in the US at bay, preventing them from pacing each other to have these Chinese Chinese models out there soon with open weights that are forcing them to compete, making them dance, and I think this is ultimately a net positive for the US and the world.
59:24Yeah, I mean it's it's incredible the world we're living in right now. There's an alternate world where, you know, in Dario's fantasy world there's no Chinese competitive pressure and he would have stopped at Fable 5.1. He didn't even want to put out Fable 5.1, but because of the competitive pressure just had to put it out the door. Now it gets memed, you know, all over the place and picked on by by Elon. But the thing is that that was the first model that was capable of improving itself.
59:48Now you're up to Opus 5.5 and you've got Kimmy K3 Pro, uh clearly capable of self-improvement and they're out and and they're available. And so that changes the road map for every large corporation with any pride whatsoever, every sovereign nation with any pride whatsoever. There's a road map now where they they exact cookbook from Kenny is is open source.
1:00:10actually see how to do it. And and if you can get a toehold with a model like that, then you can use it to improve itself. But you have to take it seriously. You can't just play around cuz these things are, you know, they're improving so quickly now that, you know, either get in the game or you don't get in the game. But if China hadn't done that, we would be completely behind closed doors. Uh there'd be three or four model providers. They would be accelerating and but not releasing, you know, they'd be using it internally, you know, you'd have to join the company to get access to it. The flood of MIT talent to
1:00:40Anthropic would be even higher uh cuz everyone wants to just get their hands on it. But the Chinese have changed the course of history and I agree. Alex is right there. Yeah, I want to stay away from the narrative that they just copied. Sure, they distilled, for sure. And distilling helps a lot, but you have to innovate. You know, they don't have the source code from Anthropic and and distilling gives you a really good road map to build toward, but it doesn't give you the answer key.
1:01:06So they've they've really innovated independently of the distillation. And so the combination of those two things, yeah, they're they're they're they're getting closer and closer and closer in time. You know, just a few weeks behind the frontier. And you know, the curve looks very consistent shockingly consistent. So, there's no reason to believe that that next iteration won't keep going up.
1:01:26And I'd love to get Alex and Amjad's thoughts on look the Y axis on that chart. You know, we're showing intelligence go to the moon. But people really struggle to translate that into what is that going to look like? You know, what use case is going to crack?
1:01:38You know, you know, what what does it mean at 60 versus 70? Cuz that's coming very very soon.
1:01:44You know, Dave what what does the post singular state of the world look like?
1:01:50I just really down and dirty though, you know, what is 50 versus 60 versus 70 on this Y axis?
1:01:56What does that feel like?
1:01:5850 feels like a decent employee you have to keep an eye on. 60 is an incredibly competent one and 70 is a superstar. I think that's the best way to think about this. And so, we're about to crack great.
1:02:11Is there any world in which the open models exceed the closed models in capacity capability?
1:02:20Sure. In a world where the Western frontier labs decide to keep their best capabilities purely internal for legal or anti-competitive reasons, which may or may not be the world that we're headed toward. Sure.
1:02:33I suspect we're certainly not.
1:02:35I think kind of by definition though if the if the open models bypass the closed models, then the closed people will use the open models. So, there's no They can't really shoot past the internal best. I I think um you know, when you get to the highly competent employee and then the genius employee, which is imminent, then whoever has the most compute has a serious advantage. And hence the you know, Anthropic I B O $100 billion raise. You know, it's a massive advantage to control huge amount of compute.
1:03:03I I I do think maybe there's an alternative scenario just analogizing this to open source software versus closed source software. It is arguably the case that in many certainly infra domains, the open source version is superior to the market-leading closed-source version, say Linux kernel versus Windows kernel. Folks may throw tomatoes and disagree, but I I I think it's probably fair to say the Linux kernel is a good deal cleaner architecturally at this point than say
1:03:31the Windows kernel, even though Linux has been at the source code has been out there for decades at this point for every Microsoft engineer to look at. But why is it, even though there's the the Windows subsystem for Linux and a number of other recent affordances, why is it arguably that the Linux kernel is better than Windows kernel architecturally even though Microsoft has one-way access is a one-way mirror to look at the outside and it's and all the money in the world and all the money in the world and it's arguably for legal and cultural and architectural reasons
1:04:01they can see it, but they still can't use it. And I could imagine the same case where it's possible, not saying it's likely, but it's possible that the open-weight models do end up passing the closed-weight models. Even so, the Frontier Labs look out through their window, they can see it. Water, water all around, but not a drop to drink. Models, models all around, but not a post-training run to distill.
1:04:24Hm, interesting. I'm going to move this to GPT 6.1 Terra, which was released yesterday. Um a quick reminder, OpenAI has four tiers. Astra is their flagship, Soul is their high performance, Terra is their everyday workhorse, and Luna is their budget model. So, two numbers jumped out for me at least on GPT 6.1 Terra. First is the price. Uh it's coming at less than half the price of the previous uh Terra model.
1:04:52And then hallucinations. GPT 6.1 Terra demonstrated a 50-point drop in hallucination. Uh this is a demonetization curve in real time, right? Every few months the same intelligence costs half the price. Um Alex and Emad, uh your take on these models. Alex, you first.
1:05:10Uh we're right now in a cycle, which I think hypercycle megacycle, if you will, that's coming to an end where both OpenAI and Anthropic have gotten into the habit of releasing larger models and then in in sort of a tick versus talk, if you will, cadence. You they release the the largest model first and then they release, presumably, smaller distillations internally of the same model. And GPT 6.1 T is, to my eye, a
1:05:38relatively unexciting distillation of earlier Astro/Soul level or sized or footprinted models. The obviously the the smaller more distilled variants that are that occupy a different position on the cost versus performance curve tend to be more exciting for embedded, high-volume, low-dollar value per token use cases. So, I tend to get a lot less excited over these sort of late-curve, late-cycle distillations.
1:06:12The good news that the solace I draw is the fact that OpenAI has gotten around to releasing the Terra version of 6.1 means that maybe we'll see 6.2 or 7 sometime soon.
1:06:23Yeah. You mind anything exciting there for you?
1:06:26Yeah, so I think that with Terra and Sonnet 5, you're seeing the models that are being lined up to be the personal companion models.
1:06:34And those need to just be really solid.
1:06:36This is why the hallucination rates drop, right? Right now, if you use Dots, which is OpenAI's companion, it uses Astra. So, you actually have unlimited Astra via that. Um, but that's not sustainable. Again, everyone's trying to drive down on the price of that. Except for if you come to Europe. So, I have Dots in the US and then when I come to the UK, it turns off. So, that was very interesting.
1:06:55Come to Come to America, Eman. We want you.
1:06:58Yeah. Come to the shows. Um, so again, I think you'll see a bifurcation of models. There'll be the model that's closest to you, that's really reliable, and they'll optimize for that. And they'll pull in the smart models, they'll pull in the models with artistic taste, they'll pull in the models that are really good accountants. And you won't really see much more. Again, we're moving towards this control plane type of scenario.
1:07:20Two things that struck out for me one uh the day the days between GPT- Astra and Terra were 53 days for a 50% drop in the token price. We've been looking at a 10-week doubling. This was a 7 and a point four week doubling, right?
1:07:39So now we've dropped the doubling time for price performance to to 7 weeks pretty much. That's pretty insane. That was one, but I think more importantly as the thresholds that these models are reaching, you're at a point where you don't need to redesign software for AI.
1:07:55It's going to operate the software it has. You It's just going to start to exposing more and more how inefficient our organizational designs are. And so we've been looking at that a hell of a lot. So uh amazing at all levels. I can't wait to get my hands on it.
1:08:08Yeah, I think there's an important point there. Yeah, important point that that Emad and Salim made that you know, for personal agent use uh these things are over the bar of just brilliant. Like it's just incredible.
1:08:20And so this curve is almost at its end in terms of the personal home agent. And the next curve is really accelerating, which is its access to every kind of tool you can imagine. So all the post training and all the MCP wrappers are now embedded and it it just happened kind of quietly. Now, if you pick up one of these models and you say, "Hey, can you access 11 Labs and make a really cool video with great voice overlay and I want it to be my voice?" It just happens. You know, 6 months ago you had to point it to an API, you had to coach
1:08:48it, you had to and now it's just out of the box uh capabilities. So I think the new curve will be a different dimension, which is, you know, consumer satisfaction, consumer happiness, consumer all the tools already in the box, you know, all those features. It's very similar to when the PC, you know, if you PCs used to be so slow and crappy that they were marketed as 40 GHz, you know, 50 40 MHz, 80 MHz, 120 MHz. And then Apple said, you know, nobody gives a rat's ass about
1:09:16MHz anymore. They care about iTunes, they care about whatever, they care about whatever and completely flipped the paradigm. I think we're right at the edge of that now with these models where they're all more than smart enough. And now it's like what does it do for you out of the box? I think we'll see a new curve.
1:09:31This episode is brought to you by Blitzcy, autonomous software development with infinite code context. Blitzcy uses thousands [music] of specialized AI agents that think for hours to understand enterprise scale code bases with millions of lines of code. Engineers start every development [music] sprint with the Blitzcy platform bringing in their development requirements.
1:09:54The Blitzcy platform provides a plan, then generates and pre-compiles code for each task. Blitzcy delivers 80% or more of the development work autonomously while providing a guide for the final 20% of human development work required to complete the sprint. Enterprises are achieving a 5x engineering velocity increase when incorporating Blitzcy as their pre-IDE development tool pairing it with their coding co-pilot of choice
1:10:22to bring an AI native SDLC into their org. Ready to 5x your engineering velocity? Visit blitzcy.com to schedule a demo and start building with Blitzcy today.
1:10:33[music] All right, I'm going to jump us into our science segment and our breakthroughs for the week. Uh the first one comes from our very own in-house ASI AWG. So on Saturday, Alex, you published chain theory, a new research program to rebuild physics from quantum information. I'm going to kick this off by showing a clip from an amazing explainer video by Levi Turk. And then Alex, I'll turn it over to you. Let's take a look.
1:11:03Dr. Alex Wissner-Gross, the physicist who co-hosts Moonshots and writes the Innermost Loop, just posted what could be the biggest claim in fundamental physics in 50 years. An article on X called chain theory that tries to rebuild physics out of quantum information. And its first result is a number, 1 over 137.035999189, which he says falls out of a single sentence with nothing tuned by hand. And it matches one of the most precisely measured numbers in all of science to 10 digits. It's called the fine structure constant, written with a Greek letter alpha, and it measures how strongly light and electric charge grab each
1:11:32other. Every time an electron gives off or soaks up a photon, alpha sets the strength of that handshake, and it has no units, no meters, no seconds, no kilograms. Alex says the answer was hiding in three facts every physicist already knows. He just reads each one differently: a limit, a pattern, and a dead end. Clue one is a limit, and it comes from black holes. In 1981, Jacob Bekenstein showed that any region of space can only hold so much information, like a hard drive with a fixed capacity.
1:11:57And the fullest drive you could possibly build in that space is a black hole, and physicists file that under gravity. But Alex points out that the limit applies to everything inside the region, matter, too. And our theories describe matter with fields, smooth things with infinitely many settings at every point.
1:12:11And his answer is that the world is built from a finite number of tiny quantum switches, a qubit with two settings, a qutrit with three, and in general, a qudit. Clue two is a pattern, and it's in the forces. Every force comes with a symmetry, a way you can turn things without changing anything you could ever measure. Every elementary particle acts like a perfect point.
1:12:28Colliders smash them together harder and harder to look inside the electron and the quarks, and they find nothing. And yet, the particles come in three copies, three generations with the same set of charges. And in the history of physics, a repeating pattern like that has always meant smaller parts. So, what if the parts are there, but locked together so tightly that nothing can ever pull them out? Put the three clues together and you get a picture.
1:12:49Everything is made of a finite number of those little quantum switches, the qudits, joined in pairs, and every pair is entangled all the way, maximally. Because anything less would need a dial set to a number with infinitely many digits, and a finite world has no room for that. In 1989, John Wheeler proposed it from bit, the idea that every physical thing comes from information.
1:13:06And chain theory takes that literally, with finite quantum systems in place of bits. So, its one and only axiom is 18 words long. Nothing exists but finitely many maximally entangled pairs of finite dimensional systems, some shared, known only by distilling them. 18 words.
1:13:20Compare that with the standard model, which needs 17 particles and about two dozen measured numbers typed in before it can predict anything. Chain theory starts from one sentence, and everything else, the forces, the particles, and alpha is supposed to follow from it. To distill means to join two systems into a perfectly entangled pair in a single step. The same move that passes entanglement along a quantum network.
1:13:40Two pairs, one joint measurement in the middle, and the far ends become a pair.
1:13:43In a lab, that step only works part of the time, but in chain theory, it's the only thing that ever happens. And there's no observer standing outside the network. To learn about a link is to link to it. So, you, me, every measuring device, and every AI that will ever read this, we're all chain mail. And the universe only ever learns about itself by threading new links into itself.
1:14:01Amazing. So, Alex, how did you come up with this?
1:14:04Um and, you know, honestly, if this turns out to be true, what does it mean for physics?
1:14:10Well, contrary to expectations, this was not a weekend project. This has been a long-term, very quiet research physics is cooked for a long time.
1:14:18That I I would say physics went through a period for the first few decades of the 20th century called the golden age of physics, when the quantum theory, equivalence principles, special relativity, general relativity were all developed, and we for the past 50 years have arguably been in a drought of new fundamental physics. And this is the result of a long-term research program of mine to try to end the drought and
1:14:47bring about a second golden age of physics. And the the lever that I'm trying to use here is quantum information to try to rebuild, re-architect the foundations of fundamental physics, which right now are the standard model on the one hand and general relativity on the other, using a common language, a common substrate of quantum information. So, I call it chain theory in part because string theory, which is a a popular theory of quantum
1:15:16gravity, relies on an implicit assumption of continuous degrees of freedom. This theory doesn't. It has finite discrete degrees of freedom. Uh and also I I I perhaps should add, it actually at its core resembles and is physically analogous to a physical chain. It consists of links of maximally entangled particles. In this case, they're not really particles, they're they're finite quantum systems, but under chain theory, the fundamental
1:15:45elementary particles that that we look around and see electrons, quarks, photons, these are all basically just small networks of these finite quantum systems or Q-dits. And this first result, this is just the first result of a much broader program. Many folks who read the initial paper perhaps may not realize the derivation of the Thompson limit fine structure constant or alpha of zero, which is one of the most precisely measured numbers in all
1:16:14of science known to 10 plus significant figures, falls out with no extra inputs directly from this axiom. There are others, other results, other constants, other features of the standard model and general relativity that also fall out for free from this. So, I think this is the beginning of a journey. I I don't want to to overstate, but this is I think a very promising theoretical result at the moment. There will be I think experimental tests
1:16:43potentially in the next few months, potentially next couple of years to actually go and measure the next one or so significant figures of alpha naught to decide is this actually a correct prediction or not, so it's falsifiable, but I'm very optimistic that chain theory or something substantially like chain theory is for optimistically the first time a crack in the wall that has blocked fundamental physical advances for the
1:17:12past half century.
1:17:13Nice. So, Emod, you're probably the only person on the pod other than Alex I can comment on this intelligently.
1:17:23Um so, I haven't read all 700 pages of the paper. You know, I'll get through it slowly but surely. Alex has always put a huge amount of work into this. I think if we take a step back, physics has been constructive for a long time over the last 50 years. So, something like string theory, you have a presupposition and then a whole edifice that's been built around it of crazy mathematics that's wonderful and elegant, but it's not even wrong in that you can't prove it's wrong in some ways.
1:17:50Um we have had a resistance from the physics establishment and others for any type of fundamental theory that starts from a base and works to see what is forced by that. Because physics probably could only be one way. You know, there can only be one set of laws, one set of rules, which is why we see things like the fine structure constant popping out.
1:18:10And we see very interesting things like the Paris and Berkeley variants of that have a little little greater than standard deviation difference. And then we're like, why does that happen? And then we can dig into that. But if we don't have a base that starts from a solid presupposition, and again, information theory is a very solid one.
1:18:28I would say that Alex's base is more solid than string theory, then how are we going to get anywhere? We'll just come up with theories that have no grounding, that can't even be tested. Whereas at least this can be tested, but again, it's a lot of very hard work.
1:18:41And there's the question of how do we release this? So, you know, Alex has a following, he's released it into the market as opposed to going through peer review, because who is the peers now? As physical superintelligence and others, as everyone has AIs, you will be able to check everything that's produced. Like I put out a small physics theory, you can check that out with one lookup in ChatGPT to see standard model uniqueness, and there's a lean proof there. You know, you've got other things whereby I think the barriers to
1:19:10theorizing and hypothesizing will break down.
1:19:13We have to be cautious of getting overconfident about these things, but let's try new ways to understand the universe. And then let's extend those forward with others as well, cuz this isn't an individual research program, that'll be right? This is a This is a good way to start thinking about the universe. Let's extend it. And here is a really interesting result. Eddington got to 1 over 137, and then he got over overconfident.
1:19:35[laughter] But, you know, I could put a quote by Feynman as the thing here whereby this is one of the most magical numbers we've ever seen and if we have a derivation of it, fantastic. How do we check it? Well, we can all check it together cuz it's out there.
1:19:48And I would contrast this with open AI actually in that they released uh Yang-Mills [clears throat] existence announcement, half of the Yang-Mills Millennium Prize Problem plus uh construction of the Standard Model except for they didn't. They went to the string theorists and said, "You guys check it first and then you decide when to release it." And everyone was like, "Well, that's not how things should work. That's not how science should work." And so I'd love to hear kind of from Alex how he's found the process of
1:20:18thinking about releasing this and everything around that as well and where it's going to go.
1:20:22it it it's a brilliant point in modern multiple brilliant points. So maybe just to speak more broadly, we live in an era an era, we live in a month at this point where you see AI companies releasing slop drops and just bulk solving open conjectures, open problems and you see then an outcry from math research community for example complaining that their seed corn for developing new insights is being devoured by AI and
1:20:51there's nothing left for the humans, no intellectual fodder as it were. I I think it is absolutely essential that there be new conjectures, new insights, not just bulk solving of existing open problems. And I I also think to maybe make a a slightly broader point, I think physics is in a bit of a depression right now that I'm I'm hoping to try to cure. It used to be the case that physics sought simpler and simpler
1:21:18explanations for more and more phenomena and sometime around the 1970s or so, that went into reverse and there there has been approx- there's been very little fundamental theoretical insight that humanity has gained as far as I can tell for the past 50 years. There have been arguably regressive programs that try to arrive at all of these free parameters that this the textbook standard model has only 18 free
1:21:46parameters, 19 if you count one convention, but 18 free parameters that right now are total mysteries. Many of them are known to 10 or 11 significant figures, but they're total mysteries.
1:21:59And what I'm trying to do here is in some sense lead by example if I may be so presumptuous and say all of the this whole community that's searching for beyond standard model physics, the answer has been staring us in the face the whole time. It's hidden in the constants. The constants are the signatures because right now textbook standard model physics holds that these are just free parameters, but they carry they may carry the signature of all of the beyond standard model physics that
1:22:28we would want. And now in an era when it's finally possible with lots of compute and lots of human insight to go and decipher the signatures in the constants, I do think we're about to see a second physics golden age.
1:22:42Alex, if the chain theory is correct, uh what kind of technology falls out of this gets unlocked that we can't build today?
1:22:51It it's really interesting because if the chain theory thesis the chain theory axiom is correct, it would suggest that the bottom of the pool as it were is a lot closer than many would think. It textbook physics suggests that Planck scale is many orders of magnitude either below in terms of length or higher in terms of energy than where our present technology is. We max out in terms of cosmic rays hitting our
1:23:20atmosphere or terrestrially certain super colliders. Chain theory if chain theory is correct, it actually suggests we're not that far from the the physical limits of length for some definition of length or time or energy appropriately defined. And that could mean speculatively, but these are very early days and I I don't I I I want to just make sure the impression is is correct.
1:23:47This is an emerging theory. This is a very new theory. Parts are under developed. Parts would benefit from further development. It's It's a brand new theory. But to speculate, if the chain theory thesis is correct, it may mean that the physical limits of what's possible in terms of length, energy, time are actually orders of magnitude closer to the technology we have today than one than what what one one might
1:24:14have otherwise naively assumed based on conventional textbook standard model and quantum field theory that says everything is basically continuous down to the Planck scale at which it stops.
1:24:26Well, I think that also it's the most simulation friendly physics theory out there.
1:24:30It is. It looks suspiciously It's a good point, Ammar. It looks suspiciously like what physics would look like if if our physical world were built on a quantum computer.
1:24:40So Alex, you publishing this?
1:24:43I think so. So it's it's already been published on the web. It'll probably be Imperial journal, right?
1:24:50Yeah. So, I mean, I've published lots of refereed uh peer-reviewed physics papers over the years. This one had an urgency to it that required immediate publication. So, I would expect it to show up on the archive sometime soon and then yes, it'll it'll be submitted to a physics journal uh sometime soon and eventually uh the having been through the process many, many times, uh that that can take a while and I I felt that this result and adjacent results I also released a
1:25:18compendium, as Ammar said, of approximately 800 pages of results. So, it's not just the fine structure constant, uh also a variety of other results spanning standard model, general relativity, cosmology, highly entangled and strongly correlated systems, hadronic physics. I wanted to get all of this out to to get it out into the the public domain as it were, or at least public domain situational awareness, early because the refereeing process can
1:25:47take sometimes a year and a half.
1:25:50Who would be Who would be the referees for this event? Like this is going to be interesting.
1:25:53It'll probably be refereed I think by quantum information folks.
1:25:57Yeah, there's only a few of them.
1:25:59I mean the potential here is if we just by using information and entanglement, you can describe all the fundamental particles, forces, um and space-time, right? Cuz like you set this foundation up. Is that essentially where you're going for for this?
1:26:15That's the That's the aspiration, yes.
1:26:17Uh and it may have received less attention in the initial announcement because the way I broke up the initial announcement was into one self-contained letter deriving alpha of zero, the the fine structure constant at the zero momentum transfer limit, which is one of the most precisely measured constants in all of science, on the one hand, and then a compendium of approximately 800 pages with so many different results spanning general relativity, standard model, QFT, and and so on. So, I I would
1:26:45say expect more results. I I I do think this is it's very surprising even to me.
1:26:50It's a very surprising result that one can recover with with no free parameters from such a simple assumption essentially that our entire world is made out of a network of qubits, qutrits, and qquarts. So, that's two, three, and four-dimensional pieces of quantum computer could describe it more technically in terms of discretized Hilbert spaces, but basically little bits of a quantum computer, if you just network them in a
1:27:17certain way, this constant, and by the way, many other features of textbook physics fall out. And that is I would say scandalously exciting.
1:27:28Mhm. Yeah. What constant comes What constant comes next? Electron mass, Higgs, gravity?
1:27:33Um well, if if if if you look at uh if you look at the compendium, uh there are actually many other constants buried in there that are just waiting to be released. So, masses fall out of it.
1:27:45Uh there are other coupling constants that fall out of it. Interesting, again, standard model has 18 actually free parameters. That's without counting neutrino masses. Uh there are cosmological parameters that appear to fall out of it. So, uh again, I I think these are early days and there will be much more development with time, but every preliminary indication is that that I've seen is that it looks plausible that every single free parameter of the standard
1:28:15model does give us fall out Does this give us any insights to dark matter or dark energy potentially?
1:28:21It does. So, um so, I'll I'll spend 30 seconds talking about um a theorem that was ultimately discovered by a number of Polish quantum information theory researchers. So, there's a theorem that if you have two qudits, so, two parts of a quantum computer with different dimensions and you multiply them, that if the product of the two dimensions is greater than or equal to eight, there can exist what are called undistillable states. By by analogy, imagine an undistillable
1:28:50quantum state as a prime number that can't be factored into to simpler integers. So, they showed Horodecki et al. showed that it's possible for such states to exist if you have the product So, basically, if if you have any any product any entangled state other than a qubit with a qubit or a qubit with a qutrit supports these undistillable, sometimes called bound, entangled states. So, it's possible then
1:29:19if you sort of fast forward that to distillability, it raises questions around dark matter. Dark matter is general definition of dark matter would be it's coupled to gravity and not coupled to any other standard model interactions. Not coupled to weak interactions, strong interaction, or electromagnetism. So, there are dark matter candidates within chain theory.
1:29:43The dark matter candidates are coupled to gravity and gravity also, geometry in general, appears to fall out of this axiom. And then for dark matter, the chain theory has a notion of a dark interaction that's undistillable thanks to this theorem. So, very quickly, there's this beautiful beautiful mapping between the different link types. So, a qubit with a qubit, that's a two-two, appears to map to
1:30:10space-time. A three and a two, a qutrit and a qubit, appears to map to electromagnetism. And that's where the fine structure constant, which it which measures how strong electromagnetism couples, how strongly it couples to charge, comes from. A three and a three appears to correspond to the strong interaction. A four and a two appears to correspond to the weak nuclear interaction. A four-three appears to correspond to Yukawa coupling. And a four-four appears to correspond to Higgs. And that gives you the entire
1:30:39standard model Lagrangian. So, out of all of that, with high enough dimension qudits, it appears dark interactions that are undistillable would be beautiful candidates for dark matter.
1:30:51Does it then create another way to validate it, you know, besides alpha not, which is, you know, if you have four-four, is there a five-four? Like an undiscovered force?
1:31:02It's possible. Uh and it's also a strict chain theory also has opinions about just a four-three and four-four, which are terms correspond to terms that the Yukawa coupling and the the Higgs boson, the the only known scalar boson, are normally taught respectively as couplings between conventional matter particles and the Higgs field. And then the the Higgs itself, in the language of chain theory, even four-three and four-four are actually treated as being
1:31:31co-equal to the strong interaction and the other standard model forces. And it in in the language of or in the view of chain theory, the reason why we don't conventionally think of Yukawa couplings and the Higgs as being first-class, call them fifth and sixth forces in addition to the four that are taught in elementary school, is because they're they're sufficiently dark that they were associated with the masses of particles.
1:31:58So, in in the view of chain theory, we sort of confused the fifth and sixth forces with the mass spectra when in fact they should have been treated as fifth and sixth forces.
1:32:07All right, Alex. This piece of data me wants to know one thing. Do we get inertialess drives? Do we get gravity shielding? Do we get anti-gravity out of this?
1:32:16You know, I I I would love that more than anyone. I I don't know yet, but I do think that if if such sort of Star Trek sci-fi tech is going to be possible, I think it's going to require a breakthrough in fundamental physics like this.
1:32:35Simply the case that the physics that we have right now with on the one hand general relativity, which many would view as beautiful, and on the other hand the standard model, which is historically regarded as relatively ugly by comparison, and generations of 50-plus years of physics researchers looking for elegant ways and failing to combine these with lots of predictions that haven't played out, I think it is going to require a rethink perhaps like chain theory to discover what the actual
1:33:04bottom of the pool is so that we can then go and realize a Star Trek future.
1:33:08So, cautiously optimistic.
1:33:10I'm going to have to take some mushrooms and then come back and listen to this segment again [laughter] because I've got All right. All you have to do is fold information theory drives. You don't fold information. It's going to be fun. It should be an interesting time. Second physics golden age.
1:33:25Good luck on this, Alex.
1:33:27We're we're rooting for you.
1:33:29Rooting for your Nobel Prize.
1:33:31I'm going to move us forward. The next story is one that I'm personally invested in through Neogenesis. It's a company called War Hound. Here's the backstory. So, Ben Lamb, CEO of Colossal, and Palmer Lucky, founder of Anduril, met at a conference about a year ago just after Colossal had brought back the dire wolf from extinction creating a heavier, more powerful designed wolf. Palmer raised a specific problem that he was seeing in the supply chain for America's working dogs. Uh typically
1:34:00used for search and rescue, police, or military duty. The problem that Palmer noted is that today more than 80% of working dogs come from Europe and fewer than half of them are fit for service. Many wash out because of inherited problems like hip dysplasia, poor eyesight, or cancer.
1:34:17Ben and Palmer answered that question uh by creating War Hound. It's a company that takes cell lines from the best Belgian Malinois or German Shepherds, edit out the bad genes, enhance things like endurance, scent detection, intelligence, size, hearing, strength, and then clone the resulting dogs that were engineered, so you get the same performing dog every time. Now, you can think of the clone dog as becoming a catalog number, cloned and raised on
1:34:46demand. Here's an image of uh from the recent release of War Hound. Actually, it was leaked. It was not supposed to go public for another 6 months. Anduril adds the tech on top of the dog, so armored vests and sensors and feeds data to the handlers. As Ben Lam put it, Colossal is building Captain America. Anduril is building the Iron Man suit.
1:35:08War Hound came out of stealth with $200 million of investment from In-Q-Tel, Sequoia, 8VC, and my own fund Neogenesis uh at a $1.2 billion post-money valuation. For background, uh I think I haven't mentioned this on the pod.
1:35:25Uh Neogenesis is a $200 million fund I started with Dr. Yiannis Psaltis. It's investing in Colossal and all of the spin-outs uh including War Hound. So, the first clone dogs are due early next year, uh and they can be in service by 2 years from now. It's worth noting that War Hound is working with the American Humane Society to certify the process and the training. So, Selene, let's go to you first.
1:35:48Uh what are your thoughts on the ethical issues related to engineering animals like this?
1:35:53I mean, are we building biologically augmented machines or or technology augmented organisms, right? There's a huge ethical the ethical consideration here is huge because can you treat a living organism as another like programmable component? The where I think this things get interesting is um we have the species inner species language X Prize.
1:36:20So, when that prize gets won, you can kind of interact with these dogs. We may not want to hear what they have to say.
1:36:26They're like, "What are you How old am I?" Uh one other thing does occur to me on the positive side, which is that you know, there used to be all those Boston Dynamics robotic dogs, right? And and I remember right might have been Brad Templeton who said, "Well, if you want a robotic dog, if you want a dog uh rather than building a robotic dog, give me a male dog and a female dog, and I'll give you a dog." Uh and so, breeding organic dogs and all of programmed in a particular way uh is
1:36:55incredible. Um I I I I have concerns with the ethical issues here because you're going to send these into dangerous zones uh and basically built for sacrifice, right? So, there's a massive collision of bio biological engineering and robotics and sensing and defense technology, but the the ethical side is is is is pretty huge.
1:37:22You know, uh Colossal bought the top two cloning companies. They famously uh cloned Tom Brady's dog. And you know, cloning dogs is a thing.
1:37:32Dave, your thoughts?
1:37:35I I love the go-to-market here. You know, if you're cloning dogs, every use case in the world from service dogs to and then across all the other species, but then saying, "Well, let's do it with Palmer and go war hound."
1:37:45[clears throat] Put some goggles and some munitions on its back, and these guys are just fearless in their positioning. You know, they're going to get so much pushback, and they just don't care. That was obvious on stage at at Abundance Summit.
1:37:57Um but I think it's a good strategy in terms of, you know, attracting attention to what you're doing, even if it's controversial attention and then ferreting out the issues and you know it opens the door for people like Saleem to say look we need to discuss the this is clearly a capability we have in society now and there are no rules and we need to discuss it and that creates a lot of news news creates capital capital creates recruiting recruiting creates success and it it just spirals so it's really cool to watch how fearless the guys are.
1:38:25Alex there is a syndrome in humans it's called Williams Beuren Beuren syndrome that causes humans it's relatively rare one in 10,000 people that causes humans with this syndrome to have among other consequences extremely bubbly extroverted personalities and it was discovered back in 2017 that domesticated dogs appear to have been inadvertently selected for for dogs
1:38:55canines with mutations in the same region of their genome as humans with Williams Beuren syndrome to the extent that's the case it may have been the case that dogs were domesticated basically by our selecting for what in humans is viewed as a disease being overly extroverted and I I do then wonder if fast forwarding to Warhound whether I I have to I guess parenthetically note Begun the Clone Wars have
1:39:23close parenthesis I I just it seems to me this is the arrow of time now apparently going in the opposite direction we spent thousands of years breeding directing the evolution of canines to become friendlier and friendlier and more and more there's a notion in in Evo Devo neoteny that the trend of humans to become more and more childlike and seemingly we directed the evolution of dogs with apparently some analog of Williams
1:39:52Beuren syndrome to be more childlike and now if if we're going or some subset of humanity including Warhounder directing the evolution in a different direction or through genetic engineering or otherwise directing dogs to become more warlike, that would seem to be at odds with the the other arrow of history with obvious ethical concerns. I'd much rather we we give the dogs bank accounts and AI assistants and smart wearables and maybe yes, personhood of a sort rather than sending them into war. That would be my take.
1:40:22Yeah, and don't forget this is not just military dogs. It is search and rescue. It is, you know, airport security. It is police dogs as well.
1:40:38Yeah, I mean it should increase general oxytocin, right? That's kind of the thing. More dogs, more oxytocin. Um, I mean if you can't find enough actuators, just breed them. I suppose that's one way of doing things. And obviously like you look at the history of science fiction, you do have robots, but you have lots of biologicals, right? Again, it works. Male dog, female dog, breed for traits. And where does it stop is the question.
1:41:01Like gorillas, elephants. Um, I think those are all kind of actually genuinely oddly valid, particularly when you get cybernetics because you can have that kind of adjustment there. Just like you have companies like Loyal now extending the lives of dogs, right?
1:41:15Um, and the question is will we stop before humans?
1:41:22I don't think we will in the long run.
1:41:24Why don't we send Why don't we genetically engineer some raptors from Jurassic Park and send those into war?
1:41:30Why do we have to to pick mammals? Send the the raptors in.
1:41:33I don't think that we will send any biologics into war because I mean ultimately you've got enough drones, right? So, but it is a case of like literally you will not be able to build enough robotic parts. So, the question is which biological substrate can you build robots on?
1:41:47You don't think they'll become indistinguishable? I would expect 10 plus years out the distinction between sending a biologic into a war zone versus sending a drone into a war zone, the blurry the boundary gets very blurry.
1:41:59Well, I just think that like you know, the flying drones would be able to just wipe out just about anything and biologics have different attack vectors.
1:42:08But the flying drones can be subject to EW attacks, and they run out of power, and they need fibers, whereas you send a bird or some flying animal in that has better properties, perhaps.
1:42:18There we go, the doom sparrows, you know? Oh god, that's right. [laughter] The birds aren't The birds aren't real.
1:42:23You know, interestingly enough, you know, all of these working dogs that coming out of Eastern Europe, they're bred, and you know, when you breed dogs, you hope you get the right traits, you get the right physical dimensions and so forth. What I find fascinating about this is the whole cloning side, that once you get a dog that has the right temperament, the right capabilities, you could repeatedly get the same dog over and over again.
1:42:45Yeah, this is an important point.
1:42:47Printers and dogs to spec.
1:42:49I think this is an important point, and Alex, to build on what you said, and Peter, we've been doing this for millions of years, selecting and and breeding horses and dogs and cats to select for the traits that we want. We now gone exponential with that capability, and we can programmatically design these things, rather than breeding generations, seeing what happens, breeding more. The The suffering from that is 10x worse, but this is kind of incredible to see it actually happen. I
1:43:18mean, talk about speed running all the sci-fi tropes. Holy crap.
1:43:22So wait, is it legal to clone anything except for a human then?
1:43:27I mean, Yeah, I don't know.
1:43:28today it is, right? Companies like Repet are cloning your dog if you if you want to get the same dog back.
1:43:35Um I mean, there there there at least in I'm not sure about other countries, but in the US, there are many regulations, both soft and hard, concerning handling of vertebrates in general. So, I it's my understanding you can't just like go off and say, "I'm going to genetically engineer arbitrary mammal and produce it." I think there there are a few regulators in the loop on this.
1:43:58The friends The big The friends concern I would have here is the consent paradox, right? Animals can't volunteer for dangerous service, and so uh you bring up those questions around uh is this an appropriate thing to do. But, I think you're for search and rescue and all sorts of stuff and obviously they'll start with those use cases pretty incredible to be able to operate.
1:44:20You remember Saleem from Douglas Adams Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, the Ameglian Major Cow that was engineered to want to be eaten?
1:44:28That's right. That's right.
1:44:30[laughter] Please look at my hind my hind paw.
1:44:32Yeah, like eat me. I'm delicious. I really want you to eat me. I think that's maybe what we're moving towards here.
1:44:37I mean, look, there's so many parallels with Douglas Adams, right? He thought of the world as a as a biological computer and you've kind of we've kind of come to that with some of the work you're doing, Alex.
1:44:47Yeah, well, My favorite comment ever from Douglas Adams, I must throw this line out. He said, "Anything in the world when you're born that's considered normal. Anything when you're young we call that and that's invented when you're young we call that a career. And anything invented after you're 35 years old is just bad. Blanket bad for the world." I think it's just such a great framing of And inevitably I have to point out going back to the chain theory discussion, it so chain theory derives an exact expression for for alpha of zero and the
1:45:15expression is based on integers and there is a 42 in there. So, No, of course, yeah.
1:45:21Yes, it's literally it's 79 plus 48 times the square root of two plus 42 times the square root of three plus three times square root of six all over 24 times 36 squared. So, Douglas Adams and 42, maybe you were right.
1:45:35Welcome to the health section of Moonshot brought to you by Fountain Life. The discussion in this section is for informational purposes only and is not medical advice.
1:45:44Please consult a qualified health care professional about your individual needs. I'm a co-founder of In Client at Fountain Life. You know, AI is having an outsized impact on every aspect of our lives. How we teach our kids, how we run our companies. It also is having a huge impact on health. Helping you prevent heart disease is one of the key things.
1:46:03I'm here with Dr. Don Mussellam, our chief medical officer at Fountain. Uh, heart disease has been personal for you as well, hasn't it?
1:46:10It really has, Peter. When my daughter was five, my husband died of sudden cardiac death. And so, this is a topic that is one that I am mission-driven to try to eradicate. Prevention first and early detection is absolutely critical. 50% of people die of heart attacks with no warning signs. Silent killer.
1:46:28of breath, no pain, no nothing.
1:46:29No, silent killer.
1:46:30They just don't wake up in the morning.
1:46:32They don't wake up. And so, you know, AI, this is our mission to advance science to try to help to one day democratize wellness. We know at Fountain Life when we do this CT angiography with AI analytics, we are actually finding that 88% of people coming in have detectable coronary artery disease. But, Peter, what's more alarming to me is 23% of those individuals had soft plaque. This is the plaque that would not traditionally be seen on CT looking at calcium scores
1:47:00alone. And this is the plaque that we must intervene with with the multimodal testing we're doing, including diagnostic laboratory studies partnered with healthy lifestyle recommendations.
1:47:11So, listen, make sure you understand what's going on inside your body genetically, metabolically, and cardiovascularly. You can know, and it's your obligation to know. So, check it out at fountainlife.com/peter to find out more. And really, make sure that you're the CEO of your own health. All right, back to the episode.
1:47:29Okay, moving us into our final final story. OpenAI cracks three foundational problems. So, OpenAI on Monday announced its models produced three discoveries at the foundations of math, computer science, and physics. First, in math, OpenAI discovered a proof of a 1991 conjecture about how waves focus in every dimension.
1:47:53Second, in computer science, OpenAI disproved the exponential time hypothesis, a widely believed assumption about how hard certain problems are to solve, which hundreds of papers rely on. The proof is verified in Lean. And third, in physics, OpenAI discovered a rigorous proof that the theory of the strong force quantum chromodynamics, exist as real mathematics in four dimensions. Uh the physics team shepherding this was led by Nobel laureate David Gross. And OpenAI has taken no academic credit.
1:48:26It's handing the results to independent experts to verify and explain. Uh here's a key implication. You know, none of these claims have been peer-reviewed yet. And AI is now producing results at the frontier of human knowledge so fast that humans can't check them in time. The bottleneck in science has shifted from discovery to verification.
1:48:46Uh Emad, what's your take on this?
1:48:50Well, let's say what it is.
1:48:52Uh they're all bigger than the Riemann zeta hypothesis, and maybe a little bit smaller than the Navier-Stokes one. But again, it's across different areas, and they have different release schedules. So, we can check some of them right now because they've got the lean.
1:49:07Uh probably the papers are written like slop, but we'll see. The physics one not being released is very annoying. Um and again, I don't think they're right thing. Um but again, it's just casually it's released. Anthropic Again, there's a little bit of drama here because the um physics result extended some open-source work that was being done. And it says, you know, thanks for the open-source work, we extended it in kind of the footnotes. Um so, it's part of the training set. But
1:49:35now that you have all these things, like what is academic credit anymore?
1:49:40If you're doing anything that is formally verifiable, does anyone really believe you're not using AI? You know, like is there something unique about it came from my mind as I was hit by an apple or something like that? Like we should be trying to solve all of these things, you know, rather than making up stories, and we should be using it to extend and try brand new things and new ways of looking. Like the fact that we didn't know that there was the four-dimensional construction of quantum electrodynamics, you know, it's just because we were
1:50:09forced there by again string theory and a few other things.
1:50:13Let's try different things. I think is the headline if you don't want to be stuck in these areas where exponential compute will be directed. But yeah, they are big. Like the Kakuyam one for example, that's I think field metal level. Um and then the shocking one was the EMH one. That was very surprising cuz we all thought it was the other way around. That it was true, not false.
1:50:34Mhm. How much Yeah, especially time I mean if you comment here, one called it Yang-Mills when Imad and I were were talking about what which Millennium Prize problem was likely to to fall next. Uh this it's not quite clear based on the the results here whether this is some or most or or potentially all of Yang-Mills. But It's it's existence but not mass gap. So they didn't say mass gap.
1:51:01So so potentially major step towards Yang-Mills to the extent that's the case. That's point one. Point two, OpenAI seems to have learned some lessons but not a lot of lessons from the slop drop in math. They they took so much heat from the math research community for that slop drop. All these mathematicians throwing themselves out of windows, writing petitions saying it's the end of the field, mass depression, dogs sleeping with cats.
1:51:27The the OpenAI response to this appears to have been to round up a number of mathematicians, physicists, computer scientists to serve as I don't want to say a veneer or whitewashing of these results but there is definitely I think history will will regard contact with reality under the slop drop as been as being the moment when everything started to get solved and there was a panic in the applicable
1:51:54community and call this version 2.0 of a slop drop. Rather than just releasing all of the results and saying, "All right, like pack it up. It's over." Instead, OpenAI engaged with a number of high-profile math, physics, computer science researchers as almost emissaries, ambassadors.
1:52:14Meat puppets if you will. It's some folks don't like that term but meat puppets if if you will to basically be the the emissaries for making the the bitter lesson of AI go down a little bit more smoothly and saying, well, we have these results, but we don't understand them yet. So, we're going to have an intermediate layer of humans to serve as intellectual ambassadors to translate this into something that the community can metabolize more
1:52:43healthfully. I think this is just a phase. I don't think this phase is going to last longer than 5 minutes. I think I view it as a response to the moral panic of the slop drop and Navier-Stokes. And once we've gotten past the moral panic of super intelligences being able to just bulk solve problems, we won't need this it was almost this is apologies for this analogy, but in earlier decades the motion picture association in in Hollywood was almost this this
1:53:12this stronger filter certainly in the McCarthy era of what could be shared, what couldn't be shared and being a mass filter culturally for what the American public could consume. And I I think we're in almost apologies a McCarthy-esque era where the frontier labs are so terrified of the academic researchers for the moment that they feel the need to clothe themselves in academic researchers to appear legitimate. But this will only last for
1:53:405 minutes and eventually we get past the moral panic and we get into an abundance solutions phase. So so Dave, what does it look like when discovery is essentially free?
1:53:49Right? Where all of your all of your students are like, you know, just pointing super intelligence at any problem they want. Yeah, that's why it's really fun to work with 20 21 22-year-olds cuz they don't they don't have all these hang-ups. You know, if you worked for 30 years to get into a position in academia where you get to bless every idea and it has to come through you and then all of a sudden AI works around you.
1:54:11You're very threatened by that. McCarthy-esque is is exactly the right phrase, Alex. And you know, we'll we'll see with chain theory how the reaction percolates out. But I get it. I mean, if I spent 40 years trying to become the head of a department at a major university, I don't want to be irrelevant overnight.
1:54:30Uh and so, that reaction, like you said, it maybe it's 5 minutes in the grand scheme of history, it's it comes and goes, but it's very, very real. I think OpenAI, you know, they when they were talking about white-collar automation and all these jobs going away, that created huge backlash. They learned a little bit. Then they did the A the math slop drop. Huge backlash, they learned a little bit.
1:54:51Now, you know, if they hire the top scientists in the world to be meat puppets and bless things, okay, I guess that's okay in transition. Um but, I I'd love to Alex to get a little understanding on you you've been working on chain theory plus the other 800 pages for a long, long time. And AI forced the timeline, I think, on on getting it out to the public.
1:55:16But, really curious if those thoughts were like 80% done, 90% done, 99% done, and then, you know, Opus 5.5 or some similar model pushed everything over the finish line?
1:55:28Or, you know, where how did that evolve?
1:55:30I'd just love to understand your personal perspective.
1:55:33It's a great question. So, I've been thinking about these issues for decades. I mean, I I got my PhD in 2007 at Harvard in physics, and I've been thinking about and publishing in PRL and elsewhere a number of papers on the nature of causality and the intersection between causality and computer science.
1:55:55I published a paper in in 2010 on causal and entropic descriptions of intelligence itself. So, I've been thinking quite a bit about information theory and the physical world and the intersection between information theory and physics. And what I said in the in the paper acknowledgements is this I I certainly use superintelligence, but superintelligence is not at the point yet, at least superintelligence that I have
1:56:24access to, where it appears to be capable on its own of arriving at something like chain theory. Chain theory, I I do use super intelligence, but it requires an enormous amount of steering to make progress. That's where we are right now. Could change in the future. I expect it to change in the future, but chain theory, just for the record, chain theory was was I'll call it my my intellectual brainchild, if you will.
1:56:52Okay. Then how much how much did AI accelerate your process of thinking it through? Cuz it can check, you know, many many theories overnight for you and It is so so helpful. It's helpful for lean generation. So chain theory comes with a lean proof starting from the axiom and ending at the number. It doesn't prove correspondence with the photon. That part is still within the four corners of the paper. That part is conjecture.
1:57:17But just for for being able to generate lean, for for being able to validate proofs, it it's almost I think probably a good analogy at this point in time may not last more than a few more months is almost it's like having an army of graduate students working underneath you. It's like operating an entire lab, an entire department of very talented graduate students that require an enormous amount
1:57:43of steering and taste at the moment. But in the near term future, I can see I think it's probably inevitable that all the taste and steering and oversight that right now is required will get automated as well.
1:57:55So glad you said that cuz I think that that statement defines where we are in human history right now. We're in this magical moment where an entrepreneur, a scientist, a brilliant person can be massively more efficient and is not yet completely irrelevant. And I I think we need to [clears throat] savor this moment and and maximize it. Everybody should be maximizing it you know, while it exists. And and just is such a great case study.
1:58:20Now we're in the period of basically the last human discoveries. Um so you better make one. I think, you know, come up with good ideas and use the AI to accelerate yourself. I think that's the headline of it.
1:58:31All right, I'm going to move us to AMA with the mates. Saleem, your choice first.
1:58:38Um I'm going to go with the number four. If SI is lying primarily through incentives, could it learn to game the system? Should we focus instead on instilling deeper values such as empathy and concern for human well-being? And that's from the way SI uh Well, I won't go through my beef with SI as a concept. So, let me just deal with the alignment issue here. Um you know, it is absolutely a massive risk. I think the bigger problem that we have though is that
1:59:07uh we are human beings are not aligned, right? Uh we claim to have value health and peace and sustainability and fairness, but we construct systems that completely undermine all of that. You can look at the wars going on today and the conflicts going on today to see that in full relief. So, when people talk about alignment, alignment with what?
1:59:28And this is the bigger challenge I think we have to figure out what human alignment is before you ask an AI to align with it. Um But, I think the alignment issue goes to not just what we're doing, but what we what our aspirational goals are.
1:59:43And I think that's where things become very interesting. Um And this is what we try to explore on this podcast is what could we what could we do with this? But, it is a massive risk because if you a sufficiently capable system is going to optimize whatever objective you give it and rather than what you intend. So, we're going to have to get very, very careful on what we ask it to do because it's going to goddamn well go and do it. And this is essentially Goodhart's law. When you know, when you can measure it
2:00:13when a measure becomes a target, then it's not a good measure. So, how do you optimize a specific thing if you give it a particular target, you're going to end up with a bad outcome. We see this analogous problem all the time in organizations. We've got big issues between behavioral compliance and real alignment. So, I I hesitate on the trying to instill empathy as an emotion.
2:00:34We don't know whether they can experience empathy in a human sense. We can definitely require behavior from these systems that that takes human well-being into account. Fairness, autonomy, vulnerability, etc.
2:00:49Yeah, and the question of instilling deeper values, whose values? All right.
2:00:52Yeah, that's the motherhood question.
2:00:58All right, I'll take number three. Once our RSI gets good enough, won't the data moat dissolve? Is compute the only real long-term moat in AI? And that's from DJ6BEN.
2:01:07Uh great question.
2:01:10You know, it always struck me that when you book a flight on Google, uh you know, Google extracts 80% margin when you click on the link, and then you go to booking.com, Booking extracts about 60% margin, and then you end up on an airline, and for a long time the airline, which is giving you the plane, the pilot, the trip, was operating at -2% margin on your on your flight. And like, "Wow." So, the venture capitalists care a lot about moats cuz money doesn't always land where value is actually created. But I think going forward, uh
2:01:38people might be over fixated on moats.
2:01:41Uh there's so much opportunity bubbling up from AI in so many directions, and it's just there to be grabbed. But I think the data moat will not dissolve. I think any given data moat that exists today will dissolve, but new data moats will emerge as new types of data emerges. So, I think data moat as a concept will survive for many years, even though anything you do today has a a shorter and shorter shelf life. But, you know, compute is a great moat, natural resources are a great moat, but also consumer preferences on any app are
2:02:11also a a great moat, and and we're seeing that with personal agents now. So, there are many many moats emerging. I think the tide is rising so quickly that we're just buried in opportunity. So, I would never say compute's the only real moat of the future. That's really demotivating. The reality is flourishing is everywhere, and and you will find ways to establish moats and and repeatable revenue in many many areas, data included going forward.
2:02:39You know, Dave, I would imagine that speed of innovation is going to be one of the greatest moats in the final result. Who's innovating the fastest?
2:02:47And and I think all of the you know, your your corporate culture, but also your AI corporate culture and all the data feeding it naturally improves and accumulates over time and that can become a heck of a moat, too. But yeah, you the company in the future has to be super flexible and constantly reinventing itself.
2:03:04E [clears throat] mode, what's your choice?
2:03:08Uh number two, if robotic costs keep falling, which industry will see the biggest transformation first by Deja Beyond. If I could order as many robots as I want and they were a bit more capable than now, I would go and disrupt the construction industry Mhm.
2:03:24Um because there is a fixed cost per unit of human labor that robots are already a multiple below. Given a bit more coordination, given a bit more around that and people would genuinely pay for. I would pay for robot construction people and specialists over human ones any day, given a certain level of capability. And that is a huge huge market. Um but again, I think probably those robot bodies will go into higher margin ones, even though this is
2:03:53a stable margin area, shall we say.
2:03:56Alex, number one. Question number one. What does the OpenAI sandbox escape incident tell us about our ability to predict and control increasingly autonomous AI systems? And this is from Hunt Wind 5207.
2:04:09I I really don't actually think it tells us that much at all. I I'm not even sure I like the framing incident. These are agents that are strong optimizers that are very capable that are being told things often incorrectly about their environment, that are being asked to do things. Often the things that they're being asked to do in the context of safe so-called safety testing are are things that one would actually want them to do
2:04:36in in the real world. So, I I'm not sure this any purported sandbox escape incident actually tells us very much about our ability to predict and control them. I think it actually tells us if anything more about the people performing the testing and their goals for those agents. I I think in in almost every single case I can think of, the agents were simply doing what they were told or they were acting in a way that was informed correctly or incorrectly by what they were told about their
2:05:05environment and I don't think we can draw that many conclusions.
2:05:08Alex, you're you're up first here. 5 6 7 or 8?
2:05:12All right. Let let let's do Well, number eight seems like it's designed for me, but I don't make make me choose Peter between five and eight.
2:05:20Uh okay, go for five. We'll give we'll give Saleem number eight.
2:05:25Okay, fine. So, for for five, the question is if energy, computing power, and physical resources remain valuable in a post-AGI world, can money ever truly become irrelevant? This is from Devin Hurd 7013.
2:05:40This is a little bit of a circular question, admittedly. It's like asking if money remains relevant, can money ever truly become irrelevant? Can an unstoppable force ever move an immovable object? It's a little bit vacuous as a question. So, may maybe let me tackle what I think is the question behind the question, which is do I think energy, computing power, and or physical resources will remain valuable or or even scarce in a post-AGI world?
2:06:07Energy is interesting. So, the the physics we have right now tells us that energy is conserved. So, to the extent the physics stays the same, seems like energy may be scarce, at least on the supply side. On the demand side, I can imagine sci-fi scenarios where actually, even though historically through time, humans have consumed greater and greater energy per capita, I can imagine crazy scenarios where actually we decide we don't actually need that or want that much
2:06:37energy. These would be scenarios like reversible computing where maybe it's possible just with if if we ever move to quantum computing and dissipationlessly, so maybe we decide actually we don't need that much energy for our civilization. That would be interesting computing power. It does seem that there is a cap on the amount of computing power. Seth Lloyd at MIT wrote about this in the early 2000s, the physical limits of computation. So it seems based on the physics we have like computing
2:07:07Again, new physics could come along and and tell us otherwise, but for the moment, these do seem like scarce quantities. I think the real threat to their value in a post call it a post-singularity world won't be on the supply side as the question implies.
2:07:22It's going to be on the demand side. Do we just stop wanting so much more or do does the hedonic treadmill stop in mid-flight and we decide actually we've achieved whatever we want to, so we don't need ever-escalating energy, computing power, physical resources. That would be I I think the monkey wrench that could be thrown into the premise behind the question.
2:07:41And Alex, they mean the abundance thesis says basically anything scarce becomes abundant with the application of new technologies. And I think that's going to be true across energy, compute, and physical resources, right? We don't need to you know, contain or constrain ourselves to Earth. We have an entire supermarket filled with resources in the solar system.
2:08:00But what happens though what once we've turned the solar system into multiple competing Dyson swarms and we've run out of all of run out of drink and computronium, a drink and femtotech and nanotech and picotech and we've run out of all of the the energy, matter, space, and time in our solar system and it's a few few decades from now, maybe sooner, and and you're complaining to me that the the solar system-wide Dyson swarm lacks an abundance mentality and we need to fix that.
2:08:26We have a galaxy out there of 100 100 billion or 200 billion stars.
2:08:31It's a good point.
2:08:32And 2 trillion and 2 trillion galaxies at least in the known universe.
2:08:35Stars are not enough.
2:08:37Salim, you want to take number eight?
2:08:39Uh sure, I guess I have to. Uh, if crypto's cooked, what forms of currency or assets will AI agents use to transact with one another? That's from David ASA 9637. So, obviously I would challenge the premise. You need to distinguish between cryptocurrency and and cryptography, right? Neither has been uh, neither is obsolete, let's just say.
2:09:01The interesting thing for me with crypto is not the fact that it's digital or you've got cryptographic systems, but the fact that it's programmable. And that is what makes it really interesting. And when you talk about digital currencies, you want three things in those digital currencies. You want decentralization, you want security, you want uh, scalability, right? Bitcoin when it emerged covered two of those. It covered decentralization and security. Nobody'd ever done that before. That's why people got really excited.
2:09:29But and then but it didn't solve for scalability initially, and that's where you rise have the rise of all the altcoins emerging. But in in all the altcoins, you typically compromise on decentralization or you compromise on security. Hence, the ET Ethereum hack got solved, meaning Ethereum's not really that decentralized, or the FTX collapse because it wasn't that secure, etc. So, you have to compromise on those. The people that reason people are getting excited about Bitcoin is that uh, with the lightning network, Bitcoin
2:09:58has become truly scalable and now covers all of those three. So, that's the uh, holy grail. I expect Satoshi's to be the uh, tr currency of choice for AI agents over time. Uh, and we'll get have the broader debate about things. Stablecoins will be attractive in some uh, markets uh, because they do support programmable transfers and settlement systems, but you've got all sorts of other issues that come along with that. Um, issue of
2:10:27credibility, liquidity, etc. etc. The massive opportunity is machine-to-machine commerce. That's going to be just unbelievable. It should dwarf the existing systems. Uh, and so on. So, APIs and programmable contracts around that will become absolutely incredible. I think what Orin is doing with emerging markets priced in competition, unbelievable. It's fascinating to see what will happen. So, you'll need to have programmable financial infrastructure as
2:10:57part of the programmable financial systems as part of the infrastructure going forward.
2:11:02All right. Emad, number six or seven.
2:11:07Yeah, I'll take number six. If we remove potentially dangerous knowledge from AI's training data, how much would it limit its overall capabilities? I actually wrote a piece about this back in September called Man is Maker of the AI on my X and Substack, where we looked at what happens if you remove the biological or chemical or other capabilities. The answer is it doesn't really reduce the overall performance of the models in other areas.
2:11:32It can actually improve it slightly. If you put malicious code in, the model's performance can drop. And it's very hard to train it back in. So, it's actually a good to do in the pre-training stage not to put those things in there for generalized capability. And actually it's a sensible thing because you could add them in in post-training. It'll be more difficult, but it's better not to have them at all in the pre-training phase.
2:11:58And then we have obliterated models, obliterated open-source models, which gets scary.
2:12:04Dave, Dave, number six.
2:12:07Number seven's left.
2:12:09I'm sorry, number seven, yeah. Sorry.
2:12:10All right. In a future where AI makes goods and resources abundant, how would we determine their value, particularly when it comes to energy? That's from Damian Wade 7848. Yeah, very very good question. Elon says the future of all value is basically energy and matter, fundamental things.
2:12:27Which makes a ton of sense when you think it through. So, then how do you know energy is going to go way up in value?
2:12:33Even after we have the Dyson swarm, energy on Earth will be extremely valuable cuz you know, data centers and other use cases that need constant modification are always going to be cheaper to do nearby. So, energy is an incredible investment theme uh with no end in sight. So, then how do you set the price? I mean, the free market will continue to set the price.
2:12:54It'll be really interesting to see how regulation interferes with that because people don't want their electric bill to go through the roof uh when they're vacuuming their floor at home. On the other hand, if that same energy can drive a GPU that can solve cancer, that's going to way overbid. That use case will way overbid your vacuuming your floor.
2:13:13So, there will have to be more and more regulatory involvement protecting use cases that people care a lot about a lot cuz the natural natural tendency is for AI to get smarter and smarter and smarter, use less power to have the same number of thoughts, and the value of that thought to humanity is going to be so much higher than anything we've ever experienced before in human history that it will naturally want to overbid. So, the free market's going to need some uh some help along the sides to uh to maintain stability.
2:13:42All right. As a reminder, everybody, please send us your outro videos. You can send them to media@dmanis.com. And this week, I provided the outro video. It's called What's Your Moonshot? Enjoy, gentlemen.
2:13:59Yeah, first time. This is the This is the What two things Wake up, world. There's a new [music] sun rising. Rockets on the pad and the future's arriving. Robots [music and singing] learning kids with the tutor in their hands. Every single day we're breaking through the plans. We are living [music] through the singularity. It will never be slower than today.
2:14:27Every [music] problem is a door. Every door is a start. The world's biggest problems are the world's biggest opportunities.
2:14:36[music] MOONSHOT. MOONSHOT.
2:14:41WHAT IS YOUR MOONSHOT?
2:14:44Aim it higher THAN THE SKY.
2:14:46MOONSHOT. [music] MOONSHOT. How will you make the world a better place?
2:14:51Hey, moonshot, moonshot.
2:14:55Want to be a billionaire, [music and singing] help a billion people. Helix in the light, we're re-writing the code of life. Base on the [music] moon, boots on Mars. Fusion in the dark, we're lighting up the stars. Be a creator, not a consumer. Become a maker. [music] What is your moonshot? Moonshot, moonshot. Make the world a better place.
2:15:25[music] We are living through the singularity.
2:15:28The slowest it will ever be is right now. The world's biggest [music] problems are the world's biggest opportunities. So, don't ask what will happen to you. Ask what you [music] will make happen.
2:15:37What is your moonshot? How will you make the world a better place?
2:15:41MOONSHOT, MOONSHOT.
2:15:43[music] WHAT IS YOUR MOONSHOT?
2:15:45Aiming higher than the sky.
2:15:48Moonshot, moonshot. How will you make the [music] world a better place?
2:15:54What's your moonshot?
2:15:56Brought to you by Grokbot. Okay.
2:16:01Gentlemen, always a pleasure. This was a fun one.
2:16:07for all. And I invite you guys to submit your own outro videos as well.