--:-- Speaker 1: And we have Dylan from semi analysis coming back on the show. Missed him. It's been over a week since we hung out with him later. Is that a And he's not a foldable?
--:-- Speaker 2: Not a duo. It's a Samsung.
--:-- Speaker 1: Oh, Samsung. Living in the future. How long have you had that?
--:-- Speaker 3: I've had this for... I've had foldables for three or four years. Wow. Ahead of the curve. Ahead of the curve. Always.
--:-- Speaker 1: What is your duo review? Is that gonna be enough to pull you over? Were you only in...
--:-- Speaker 3: IPhone Air.
--:-- Speaker 1: IPhone Air. Okay.
--:-- Speaker 3: IPhone Air.
--:-- Speaker 3: Foldable Samsung. This is the elite class.
--:-- Speaker 1: Oh, two phones. You're Priestly class. This is screaming a a a firewall between the investing arm and the research arm here.
--:-- Speaker 3: One one one for one for work, you know, one for Okay. Okay. Okay. One for one for personal.
--:-- Speaker 1: Okay. There we go. There we go. Good.
--:-- Speaker 3: Well, I'm I'm afraid to say that both Jordy and and and and both of you guys, John and Jordy
--:-- Speaker 3: Only have this phone number, not this phone.
--:-- Speaker 1: Oh. Wow. We'll have to fix that.
--:-- Speaker 3: Wow. To be fair,
--:-- Speaker 2: only... Hey. I'm updating my priors. I'm updating our priors on our on our friendship. I thought I was texting the personal the whole time. Wow. I thought we were like
--:-- Speaker 1: that. Like that.
--:-- Speaker 2: Look. Only this...
--:-- Speaker 3: I accept this one.
--:-- Speaker 1: Okay. Okay. Stay safe out there.
--:-- Speaker 2: Do you guys keep a a... Do you guys try to predict black swans? It's effectively it's effectively impossible by definition, but I found myself two weeks ago thinking, like actually trying to like rack my brain on what is what is the most like unpredictable outlier scenario that could change the game on the field, and I think we I think we got it. Unfortunately, I didn't I didn't... I, of course...
--:-- Speaker 3: What were your what were your guesses?
--:-- Speaker 2: I don't know. I think I think a lot of them were much more around individual players in the in the financial web of the entire trade.
--:-- Speaker 1: But Well, the big one the big one that everyone's been, like, waiting for is is, like, some result from the next training run that shows there's not another leg up beyond coding. That is something that taste is the new mode. And for so many white collar jobs, it really does matter that you can sit across the table from someone, shake their hand. And so we're never going to replace the lawyer or the doctor or even augment them to the tune of because you don't even need to do the job displacement thing. It's just the fact that a software engineer can deploy $100,000 worth of AI in a year without people blinking. That hasn't happened for the marketer, for the salesperson yet. And if that does happen, the revenues do go to a trillion dollars. But if it doesn't I
--:-- Speaker 3: don't know if it's a black swan, though. That's not No.
--:-- Speaker 1: It's not black swan.
--:-- Speaker 2: That's I
--:-- Speaker 3: think that's like something we can all debate.
--:-- Speaker 1: Right? Exactly.
--:-- Speaker 2: No. But another another another thing I would say is like I was very confident that at least for the next year Jensen would not let a company, an AI company valued at north of $10,000,000,000 fail. Like, period. Like, he was like, I don't... I'm not gonna have that headline. I have the ability to give any company a meaningful up round and keep everyone in the game because a lot of people want the headline. Even though in the grand scheme of things right now, a $20,000,000,000 company could go to zero, wouldn't really have that much impact. But it didn't feel like Jensen would even tolerate that kind of headline just because the bears would sort of sink their teeth into it and and have a nice tasty meal.
--:-- Speaker 3: Yeah. I mean, it's it's... I think I think the black swan is this. Right? I think we we've all predicted all sorts of things.
--:-- Speaker 1: Totally.
--:-- Speaker 3: Even with all the knowledge and insight and, you know, rumors. I mean, I had even heard about like, you know, rumors which I didn't like Yeah. Put much credit to, but like people in the industry were like, oh, yeah. Jensen does this with someone at... I mean, at at NVIDIA. I was like, oh.
--:-- Speaker 2: Woah. Palmer like No. But that's another Yeah. That's another thing we've asking. Right?
--:-- Speaker 1: No. You don't
--:-- Speaker 3: like, you know, you hear That's certainly not to this
--:-- Speaker 1: extreme degree. Like, there like, are plenty of this is so different than the Bezos story, so different than the Gates story, so different than the Elon story. Like, it is so entwined with the actual business and the business dealings and geopolitics and domestic Elon
--:-- Speaker 3: Elon has slept with employees.
--:-- Speaker 1: But not to this
--:-- Speaker 3: Not with a spy.
--:-- Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah. His get out of jail free card is that he has like 15 baby mamas. So it's you can't like pin that on
--:-- Speaker 2: And and and he has a lot more control. I think the question that we've been We've been waiting control. We've been asking ourselves is like, we on 10/10/2025, we talked we specifically named Mega Speed, we specifically named Alice Huang, we talked about how the whole situation was suspect. Like a lot of the details were basically out
--:-- Speaker 2: In the open. And there was even... There was... All these videos were public, you know, and you could read into the videos and be like, alright, this looks like at at the very least like a a pretty close relationship.
--:-- Speaker 3: Mhmm. I mean, of these videos have his wife and his daughter in the same room. Right? That's the thing that's like...
--:-- Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Which which kind of meant the like the the basic analysis was like, okay. Well, if if the whole family is there, probably nothing's happening. Like, maybe this is purely... Maybe he's the purely rational economic actor. He's playing it as aggressively as you can to grow the business internationally. We don't like that from a chip export position. If you're a China hawk, you don't like that. But there is the letter of the law, and we rarely like CEOs don't get fired for pushing it right up to the letter of the law. And so if you're selling the the absolute max, like the h 20, which was designed to get around the the chip exports, like, a lot of China hawks didn't like that, but they were like, ah, like, that's the letter of the law. You found the loophole. You found the edge. And so it it is it is just a complete black swan in that it's so much further than what what anyone...
--:-- Speaker 2: Yeah. So so overall total lack of judgment just given that this guy as as for as many friends as he has, he has an equal seemingly an equal amount of enemies
--:-- Speaker 2: That that stand to benefit from this. What do you think happens to the the the NVIDIA AI central bank deal pipeline? I assume I assume if you're a number of these companies, you can't lean on, oh, yeah, Jensen, you know, wanted to do 2,000,000,000 and now it seems like those investments, like, when it comes time to actually sign the docs, will probably be going to committee.
--:-- Speaker 3: Yeah. I I think I think, like, that's the biggest, like, worry for NVIDIA is that now it's like a committee of people doing stuff. Yeah. And that's just gonna make decisions slow. Technically, they could fall behind because of this. Obviously, the other big aspect... There's sort of three main things. Right? There's the technical side. NVIDIA is so ingrained in helping make decisions there. There's no one clear technical lead. I mean, maybe Jonah is, but then, like, there's a lot of people who are also directly reporting to Jensen doing technical stuff, so it's hard there to move as fast. Supply chain wise, right, NVIDIA wants to make aggressive things, do aggressive things, lock up supply, convince the supply chain to do things that they've never done before in terms of technology and supply and locking it up to NVIDIA. And that's probably a lot harder to do given, you know, whoever the CEO is is probably not as charismatic as Jensen, and they're not going to, you know, be like, yeah, sure, NVIDIA, you can have 60% of my capacity or 70% of my capacity, at a price that's below market rate. Like, that's just probably tough. And then the third leg of it is like, you know, NVIDIA is propping up a lot of things in the supply chain. Right? Open source in America would not exist without Jensen. Both reflection and thinking machines are pushing the open source frontier in America, and both of them have massive investments in backing from NVIDIA, as do many other companies across the ecosystem. And all these application companies rely on, you know, open models. Right? Whether it's the Harvey's, the Instincts, the Sierras, they all use open models. Mhmm. All the inference providers, which are, you know, multiple of the 10 plus billion dollar companies, all rely on open models from China. And if we're slamming the hammer down now on China way harder because the biggest defender against restrictions was Jensen and his team, what now happens is given their credibility is out the window and they're being investigated and subpoenaed and whatever is going on on that side, then there's gonna be a lot more restrictions, in which case Chinese models are... You know, do they continue to progress at this current pace? And if they do continue to progress, do they open source everything? These are these are real questions out there. I think the biggest loser is the open source ecosystem for sure Mhmm. You know, if you're talking about outside of NVIDIA. Mhmm.
--:-- Speaker 1: How do you think about the technical role of of the CEO position at NVIDIA? You know, you see Jensen, you hear about the deal making, you see him at events and on podcasts and news hits. I think if there's some deep... Deeply technical work that's happening, that's behind the scenes. How how real is that? Is he involved in the architecture of the next chip, or is this something where he... Like, his technical role is more recruiting and finding the next generation of great, the the
--:-- Speaker 3: I mean, I think technical like, inspiring No doubt inspiring people and bringing them in. He's not he's not designing the architecture Yeah. But when there's a decision... You know, I think the the common thing that everyone sort of, you know, who's following NVIDIA ends up seeing is that you hear real valid things about option a, b, and c. And Nvidia could be doing all three at once. Mhmm. And then at the last second Jensen is pushing all the weight behind one.
--:-- Speaker 3: Now if there's a, b, c, and d, which which one gets chosen? Is it a committee? Who's who's deciding? Who's now chosen a and getting all the suppliers on b and c to not be pissed off and actually just push behind a?
--:-- Speaker 1: Oh, yeah. That's the founder mode thing.
--:-- Speaker 3: And if a starts fucking up
--:-- Speaker 3: You switch to b on a dime.
--:-- Speaker 1: That's really It's
--:-- Speaker 3: these things.
--:-- Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. I remember in Meta, at one point, they had two different operating systems for their virtual reality strategy. They had XR and AR and VR or something, and, like, it was just so much extra work being done, then Zuck had to go in founder mode and be like, look. There's gonna be some people that are getting reassigned. There's gonna be some layoffs. Like, it's gonna be aggressive, and and that's the benefit of the founder mode company. So who is on the shortlist for potential successors? Can Colette not do it? Are are there... Is that... Does she not want it? How does this develop from here?
--:-- Speaker 3: I'm not sure what Colette wants. Mhmm. I think she's awesome. But at the end of the day, she cannot lead technically the company. Sure. I think internally, the two people that I think would be best suited would be Ian Buck and Jonah Alvin. Mhmm. I think that Ian is great. I think Jonah is not so much in the public light, but he's technically, like Mhmm. The closest to the leader, and and is technically, like, in charge of most of the technical orgs. And so I think those are the two that are the most important from that perspective. But, like, you know, yes, Ian is charismatic, probably, you know, really probably pretty good at wheeling and dealing, not nearly as good as Jensen will ever be. But then is he going to be as good on the technical side? Is he going to be as good on the supply chain side? Or Jonah, is he going to be good on the supply chain side? Or is he going to be good on the wheeling and dealing? And so, you know, I don't know if, you know, someone can be propped up and not... And and take over the role of Jensen, like, in that way. And if you do, like, if Jonah is now or Ian is now in charge, do... Is the stuff that they were in charge of fall down to some extent, like, in terms of, like, the focus that they had on it, the relentless effort? So now my favorite picks for CEO would be from an external perspective.
--:-- Speaker 3: It would be Charlie Kuasse. And Johnny Shoji. These two guys, Charlie is number two at Broadcom and has been for a long time and is is fucking awesome. Yeah. And Johnny is the head of hardware at, Apple, and he's the one who's basically led the chips team and strategy. Those are the only two people, I think, in the world that can, navigate a supply chain, and technical details like like that. I think, obviously, there are... You know you know, it'd be better if it was Hakten or Lisa Hsu, but I don't think either of them will do this. I think they're just like
--:-- Speaker 1: Yeah. What about leaders from Tranium organization, TPU organization? I mean, you're highlighting Apple. There's plenty of people that are leading huge semiconductor efforts, but they're still two rungs down from the true CEO or the true founder.
--:-- Speaker 3: Good. Mean, Andy Jassy is the one who wanted to buy Annapurna Labs. Well, he's not gonna leave Amazon's CEO to be NVIDIA's CEO.
--:-- Speaker 3: You take some steps down. I think there are really great people there. I really love the teams at Amazon. They work and move super fast. I think Google's awesome.
--:-- Speaker 1: But Yeah.
--:-- Speaker 3: I don't think they have like a single person that Sure. Could do all of the above. I mean, if anything, like, you know, I think, Amin Verrat is at Google is like, you know, the lead of all this infra stuff, but I I I don't know if... I've never asked him. I just have a feeling he wouldn't want to do this. Right? I have a feeling that, like, the leaders of Tranium, I know they very much wanna be in the background and, like, you know, of all the Amazon chip stuff, I don't think they wanna do this.
--:-- Speaker 1: Yeah. What about a wild card? Sean Maguire was throwing out Nakasharora, someone who's, you know, already in the CEO seat but not running a trillion dollar company. Is... Do you have any
--:-- Speaker 2: Humble just to just to couple 100,000,000,000.
--:-- Speaker 1: Yeah. Tiny company. Right?
--:-- Speaker 3: I I don't know Nikesh too well. I've met him once. I mean, I think he's awesome, but, like, technically... Like, Palo Alto has shipped hardware. Right? Like, that's definitely a part of their business, but, like Yeah. Is it is it the same thing as NVIDIA leading edge doing crazy stuff? I mean, like, look at... Blackwell was amazing. Black well, if they did not do what they did with Blackwell, they would have lost a lot of market share. They decided at the last second what to do. I mean, shoot. You know, with with Volta, they added... They decided to add the Tensor Core like three months before they taped it out. Who would have said, yeah, let's just push out the current thing. Let's add it into the current thing. They would have been like, oh, let's add it to the next thing.
--:-- Speaker 3: If added it to the next thing, how much further behind would they have been in AI? NVIDIA never would have established dominance. Right? Yep. It's these... And and and it's not like you're fighting like no no no knocks against Palo Alto Networks, but their competitors are, like, not that amazing versus NVIDIA's fighting an OpenAI chip team, a Broadcom chip team, a Google chip team, an Anthropic chip team, a Meta chip team. You know, these guys... Amazon chip team. These guys are fucking good. Like, you know, AMD. They're all really good, and all these startups.
--:-- Speaker 1: Right? That's what I want to ask you about....
--:-- Speaker 3: To the startups. They're all good. Yeah. It's not like they're incompetent. You know, I think it's it's it's very different. Right? You know, as great as Lisa Sue is, she took down intel who's incompetent. Right? Like, what is what is the person who defined a category and created it and kept all the invaders at bay? It's very different than being second place or, you know, making smart tactical business decisions, innovating on something, you know, that, you know, once there's already a category established, it's just very different.
--:-- Speaker 2: How do you think, Chinese labs are reacting and and updating their their road maps?
--:-- Speaker 3: It's it's no, it's an open secret that the Chinese labs are super... Working super closely with NVIDIA. Even if NVIDIA is not selling them chips directly, they have engineers constantly from both The US as well as their Shanghai offices going to these labs, talking to them, helping them optimize, understanding what they're doing and bringing those optimizations over to NVIDIA software stack and open source. I think the Chinese labs have already started updating. Right? Companies like Xipu, who are, SingXion and DeepSeq, are heavy users of different types of chips. Zippu like seven different Chinese accelerators. They're not as good as Nvidia's, but like, hey, they work. DeepSeq is super close with, Huawei. There is there is a lot of probably updates on priors. And it's the Chinese labs that relied heavily on NVIDIA probably are weaker now than the Chinese labs that relied heavily... That were like already diversifying. You know, think it's the same applies to Anthropic versus OpenAI. I obviously, OpenAI has their own chip and has been working on it longer, but they're 90 plus percent NVIDIA, whereas Anthropic is like one third or less NVIDIA. And so it's just a completely different level of like impact on them. OpenAI works more closely with NVIDIA than than Anthropic does. Hey, this is a positive for Anthropic versus an OpenAI. Hey. Anthropic pushing back open source and, you know, open source being weaker now. This is great for Anthropic. Right? Like, sorts of things flow through not just the Chinese labs, but also American labs. In general, the closest source is winning.
--:-- Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. That makes a lot of sense.
--:-- Speaker 2: Any predictions on how this will impact the the Macours and and various, like, data companies, given that there's gonna be more scrutiny on on basically any type of business relationship with, China?
--:-- Speaker 3: I I don't know about Merkor specifically, but I do know a lot of the data companies sell tons of data to China. Actually, it's a really funny way to distill. Even if the Chinese labs don't directly have the closed source models, some of the biggest customers are all the data companies, like the Mercos and so on and so forth. And so they generate data, and their pipelines for generating data involve a lot of language models from the frontier labs and extracting and filtering and all that. And if you're making environments or whatever you're making with these frontier models and you sell them to China, that's a some... In in some way, you're kind of distilling the info out of them. It's not like traditional distillation. I imagine selling chips to China is gonna be in a lot lot more scrutiny. Renting chips to China and clouds is gonna be under a lot more scrutiny. Selling data is something that has not had any scrutiny yet, and it will probably fall into the guise. Right now, people will focus on hardware, but it... There's... You know, in Jensen and, you know, all the people in NVIDIA that were defending, you know, Lutnick and David Sachs and all these people that were, like, sort of preventing, you know, some of the restrictions on NVIDIA into China Mhmm. Are heavily... You know, especially Lutnick and Jensen are heavily discredited now in any argument to, you know, allow China to have some stuff. I I... You know, we have been pro certain types of restrictions for years. It's been our biggest point of contention with NVIDIA. You know, I think they they really dislike that. You know, they they didn't... They they, like, could understand when we were excited about AMD or, you know, Google, and they viewed that as, like, a... Can out engineer them. But I think, like, when it came to, like, China, it was a different aspect. Right? You know? And and now the cover is gone, and and, you know, we... I I kind of hope that, you know, the government is is smart with the restrictions. Like, right? Make sure that chips don't get sold of certain kinds. Really, iron packed. Make sure TSMC and and memory companies don't sell to China, make sure equipment of high end is not going to China that makes chips. You know, maybe maybe some restrictions around data, but don't, you know, restrict renting chips. Right? Mhmm. There's sort of a whole waterfall full, or renting chips from, let's say, hyperscalers. Maybe restrict random chip companies like Mega Speed from renting chips to China. Yeah. Right? Or re... Diverting, but maybe not the like, hey, if Google is going to rent to ByteDance, maybe that makes sense because Google can always pull away the chips when they need to. Or if the government tells them to, and Google can always, you know, charge way more margin to ByteDance, and so that makes ByteDance less profitable than Meta. You know, these are the sort of things that are, like, you know, relevant for US competition and and leadership. And that's what I hopefully all restrictions are not like... You know, obviously, pendulum will swing and there'll be a lot of brash actions, but hopefully, the focus is on how do you make America win.
--:-- Speaker 1: Yeah. No. I like it. I remember when you branded yourself not as a China hawk, but as a bald eagle. I thought that was a good way to put it. How are you reflecting The video
--:-- Speaker 3: you guys made is so good. We gotta repost that.
--:-- Speaker 1: Yeah. We gotta repost that today. How are you reflecting on the predictions in AI 2027? When I look at the model capabilities, I feel like it's incredibly accurate. We're completely on track. Huge congratulations to the whole forecasting team there. I'm still a little uncertain about two predictions. One is they forecasted that there would be a 100,000 person anti AI pro... Protest. The midterms were kind of that, so I don't I don't... I think the midterms might kind of stave off a little bit of that. But the more interesting question is right around this time, AI twenty twenty twenty seven predicts that in around November 2026, China wakes up. And I've been sort of interrogating that. It's very hard to get accurate data. How do you feel we are progressing along the line of, like, China waking up? Is this an example of China waking up because they're honey potting our most powerful AI CEO? Or are they asleep? Caught.
--:-- Speaker 2: Yeah. We have to... There there there's always a possibility that they believe NVIDIA chips have backdoors in them and Oh, they don't want them there. Okay. And Jensen is Jensen's the Jensen's the asset.
--:-- Speaker 1: Yeah. There's a million to play hockey.
--:-- Speaker 2: It doesn't it doesn't seem like you're waking up if you're like, hey, there's a bunch of GPUs in Hong Kong, but keep them them there. We don't want them in here.
--:-- Speaker 1: That's a good point.
--:-- Speaker 2: Yeah. How can you process you think that there's some group that has much longer timelines.
--:-- Speaker 3: Yeah. I would say, as far as AI 2027, I mean, I'm I'm very AI pilled, and I thought AI 27 was was a big stretch. But hey, turns out 70% of the verifiably, like, like things that they predicted so far this year have turned out to be inaccurate. Yep. Which is incredible. Incredible. Right? Like, wow. Yeah. I I I'm I'm still skeptical on, like, you know, some of the diffusion aspects, but I think RSI is looking more and more true.
--:-- Speaker 3: China waking up is probably a big, big likelihood. Mhmm. That's the other thing. Right? If we go too gung ho on the pendulum of, like, banning stuff in China, does China now swing their pendulum and prevent the supply chain? It's, you know, every Nvidia server has China content.: Sure.: Every Google TPU server has China content.:
--:-- Speaker 3: Like, every every one of these things has China content. China can stop it if they want.: Sure.: so there's some level of, like, actually, like, please, you know, what is the what is the amount of stuff that you can... Minimal amount of stuff you can give China in AI and give them in everywhere else, sort of, to prevent them from cutting off the supply chain. Yeah. It is a view of the world that could be, you know, construed. As far as, like, you know, China waking up, it it... It's it's probably possible. Right? I don't... Another one that you mentioned, like China honeypotting Jensen, I actually don't think she's a spy in the colloquial sense.
--:-- Speaker 3: And I don't think she's a honey pot in the colloquial sense.
--:-- Speaker 3: She's a well connected individual in the Chinese, you know, business world and family. Her family's well connected. And if you're well connected in China... Shit. If you're well connected in America, you will talk to intelligence agencies when they tell you to, and you will tell them the shit that they want to hear. I just don't think people are gonna be like, you know, no, or like, you know, there's just a lot of pressure there.
--:-- Speaker 1: Yeah. The CIA was asking me for your personal phone number and I had to tell him to take a hike. It was brutal.
--:-- Speaker 3: Feel like we gotta I only
--:-- Speaker 1: got this phone if you want. We gotta figure out where he got that jacket. John, can you get us Dylan Patel's personal phone number? And I said, look, I'm kind of second fiddle in his world.
--:-- Speaker 2: Just a professional connection.
--:-- Speaker 3: Phone up until a few months ago.
--:-- Speaker 1: Okay. Okay. I'm a little less hurt. No.
--:-- Speaker 3: But anyways, I think that, you know, just be... You know, they they were getting some info. Yeah. Right? She was clearly like showing everyone on WeChat she is close to Jensen and can get them chips in China. Yeah. Jensen, did he know? Probably. I mean, I don't know, but like probably he knew.
--:-- Speaker 3: But, like, Super Micro didn't have to honeypot Jensen to ship billions of dollars of servers to China.
--:-- Speaker 1: Yeah. Totally.
--:-- Speaker 3: Right? Like, this is like... Yeah.
--:-- Speaker 2: We know us.
--:-- Speaker 3: I I think there's
--:-- Speaker 1: a lot more They story might have been having an affair. We don't know. Well, let's not jump in. I'm sure. I'm sure. Anyway, what does this mean for the venture capital community? We've seen a lot of VCs sort of rallying around Jensen. Is that purely because of the open source ecosystem? Like, what does it mean for the other... I mean, you mentioned wrapper companies, but are are VCs effectively out of the big lab trade and so that's why they're rallying around Jensen a little bit more than you expect?
--:-- Speaker 3: You know, before I answer that question, you know, it'd be... You know, Jensen has the... You know, it it depends on how bad this stuff is. Right? Right? There's a lot of info coming out. I don't know. Yeah. But if their China stuff is like really gung ho, what if Jensen just like goes to China and starts a
--:-- Speaker 1: Woah. You
--:-- Speaker 3: know, a 100 That's billion dollar wild card. Of like... I don't know. Don't know. Like, you know, that's a that's a... I don't I
--:-- Speaker 2: don't But know how but but but Yeah. Why would why would he not go to Taiwan that Because
--:-- Speaker 3: The US still has interest in Taiwan, I guess I would say. Yeah. I mean I mean it depends on like did he break laws?
--:-- Speaker 3: Right? True. Is he is he gonna be called in front of Congress for months and months and months and berated and and he broke laws?
--:-- Speaker 3: I don't know.
--:-- Speaker 1: If he didn't break laws, I think he's going to Saint Bart's.
--:-- Speaker 3: But anyways, as far as the venture ecosystem, you're totally right. They're out of the lab trade. The labs are going public. OpenAI probably just did their last round. Yep. It wasn't that great. Then Anthropic is going public. Yep. You know, they they got liquidity. Some of but them then like everything downstream. Right? Like all of these inference clouds, how can they secure compute without credit and without financing and without a backstop? This is a real challenge. Yeah. Who's gonna be willing to do that? And then how how does how does, you know, BaseTad and Fireworks and whoever go from a billion dollars of revenue to $10,000,000,000 of revenue without access to compute and without Chinese models being, you know, continually updated and sold, externally. Yeah. This is a big challenge and risk.
--:-- Speaker 1: Big deal.
--:-- Speaker 3: Likewise, with all these, like, companies like Instinct and Harvey and Sierra who are making awesome businesses, can they continue to ramp and improve the capabilities of their product, do they have to turn to closed source models? In which case, if they have to use closed source models, their product is a wrapper. But if they can switch to open source models and they own the customer relationship, they're not a wrapper. Yeah. And so I think like this is a big big worry. I think, you know, Jensen is the venture ecosystem's strongest ally and he's propped up a lot of companies. NVIDIA's very active in venture and investing. So, you know, I don't know if they're gonna be as active now.
--:-- Speaker 1: Mhmm. Mhmm. I had one last question. Jordy, do you have anything? I think the
--:-- Speaker 2: What a... Yeah.
--:-- Speaker 1: Yeah. Sorry. I'll tell
--:-- Speaker 3: you my phone number. 789998212.
--:-- Speaker 1: Wait. What is that from? Is that
--:-- Speaker 3: Oh, come on.
--:-- Speaker 1: That that's a regional commercial from Georgia or something.
--:-- Speaker 3: No. No. No. What is that? It's a Oh, look at that.
--:-- Speaker 2: Is it that song? There's a song about it.
--:-- Speaker 1: Right? In LA we only know Dos Penta Dos Penta Dos Accidentes.
--:-- Speaker 1: Okay. I know 867...
--:-- Speaker 3: Soulja Boy. Soulja Boy.
--:-- Speaker 1: Oh, yeah. Yeah. Soulja Boy who's now an AI spokesperson. He
--:-- Speaker 3: signed with... And Soldier Boy is so cheap to hire. Really? I went on a boat, some startup for their, like, series, whatever, launched. They rented a boat, hired Soldier Boy 25 k.
--:-- Speaker 1: Wow. Maybe at the next time.
--:-- Speaker 3: And he performed. He performed, like like an hour long. He had his whole entourage, and his own DJ come.
--:-- Speaker 1: We need him with semi analysis con 2027.
--:-- Speaker 3: Speaking... We're not a venture backed company that loses money.
--:-- Speaker 1: GDPPN, were you surprised by the, like, the moderate jump in progress? I saw the 5.2. Was it Mythos five
--:-- Speaker 3: point think it Got
--:-- Speaker 1: like 16%. I mean, speaks to the quality of the benchmark that it wasn't immediately 100%, but take me through a little bit of your reaction to the results there.
--:-- Speaker 3: Yeah. So, GDPX and our benchmark, Yeah. We tested Anthropix model and launched it, and it, you know, took a day or two to run the tests. But, more like two days. But anyways, it it was it was such a big improvement in some areas, software engineering and chip design.
--:-- Speaker 3: And and it was... There are areas where it just didn't improve at all. Interesting. Which was like really interesting. I mean it speaks to reinforcement learning environments are the vector for scaling. Yep. If you do not have unique data in environments in certain spaces, you will not scale quality of model in those places.
--:-- Speaker 3: And so chip design drastically improved. Right? And I think it speaks to like what is Anthropics focus? Well, just hired a bunch of chip people and we're making a chip Yeah. And we're making model way better than a chip. Yep. And in the past Anthropics view was we're not gonna make a chip because it's not AGI pill. By the time we get a chip out, it's too slow. Mhmm. Now, the model can make the chip. And so it's like, you know, I think I think they're really accelerating on that, front. Likewise, software engineering continues to gain like mad. Anthropic is so much better than everyone else in software engineering and chip design. It's incredible. And then other areas, they just didn't improve. I think I think it speaks to the volume of like how important data is
--:-- Speaker 3: In these data companies and these data vendors. But also, you know, the durability of, some of these categories. Right? Some of these categories, they didn't improve on at all and, like, they're probably not spending a ton of data on. Yeah. Or, you know, maybe the benchmark is just so difficult, like, you know, that, like, it's it's... It did improve slightly in all domains, but, like, generally, the, like, you know, scaling size is not going to get you improvement every benchmark. Right? You really have to scale techniques, algorithms, and data.
--:-- Speaker 1: On the data side, how much of it is how much value is there in, like, the data flywheel, the data that comes through the harness directly just given to the company, to the lab for free versus bought from a data broker specifically? Do you have a balance on how valuable each is?
--:-- Speaker 3: Yeah. So we've we've established a relationship with a lot of the chip design data companies Mhmm. And and AI chip design companies. Anthropic, as far as I understand, buys very little of this. Okay. They've been building it themselves. Yeah. Is is the only answer. Right? How else would they do this? Yeah. That makes sense. And... But at the same time, like, some of the spaces like bio, you know, Anthropic started their own wet lab Yep. And they're collecting data there, but also they're buying a lot of data elsewhere.
--:-- Speaker 3: So I think it's it's it's it's, you know, I think other folks have different strategies
--:-- Speaker 3: You know, in terms of what do I build internally, what do I build externally. But I think the data vendors are are really important. And and given models are getting so good, a general large scale data vendor where we're connecting you to a bunch of people that are like, okay, data labelers, that's not what's valuable. Right? It's experts. It's experts. And so if you're an expert in material science and you're making data there, you can make a great business. But how scalable is that actually going on?
--:-- Speaker 1: Totally. Totally. Yeah. Well, we'll find out next time you're on the show. Thank you so much for coming on. We'll let you get back to work. Have a good one. What a week. Goodbye. Good luck, guys. What a week. One for the history books. Have a great
