AI Rollup: AI Robots and The $10T Arms Race

Welcome to the AI rollup brought to you by the Limitless podcast where we stay up to speed with the emerging trends and developments in the AI space. I'm David Hoffman here with my two co-hosts Jaws and Josh. Jaws, how you doing? I'm doing well, David. Um, it's been quite the week. Uh, less model Frontier model breakthroughs this week. No Frontier model breakthroughs this week. I think that's a first. There's a few, but we're putting them on the back burner because there's some more important things to talk about. It's been an M&A week. So, you know, billions of dollars are being spent to

purchase or acquire some of these AI startups that we've spoken about previously on the show. But I think more importantly, I think AI's looked like kind of like this gargantuous cloud, right? And it's kind of ominous. I'm kind of like, is this cloud going to rain on me or is it just going to pass by peacefully and just like kind of like be nice to look at? And I'm starting to see the light. I'm starting to see the kind of formation of what this AI stuff is going to look like. And the reason is um I think we've spoken about a bunch of different things, right? We've spoken about agents. We've spoken about

autonomous execution. Like, hey, these agents are going to go run and do a bunch of things for you, run companies for you. We've spoken about all these like amazing models and like how smart they are. But we haven't really pieced together what the end goal is going to look like. We're starting to see a lot more of that this week by some of the moves made by OpenAI and Anthropic. So, I'm really excited to get into that. Yeah, as we talk more and more about AI, I think we are all starting to synthesize a little bits of the conversations that we've had on previous episodes. Put them all together and kind of understand the contours and the shapes as this thing comes uh makes

becomes more and more real. Josh, uh I introduced this as the AI rollup brought to you by the Limitless podcast. That is the first time that this uh has ever been uttered on this podcast feed, which is the Bankless podcast feed. Uh but we are launching Limitless this week, which is very exciting. Talk to me Josh about Limitless. Oh man, big week. Uh Limitless kind of stemmed from like a natural extension of our curiosity at Bankless. Bankas is mostly a crypto company. We started getting interested in AI and then naturally we kind of spread out to robotics and manufacturing and energy and and all this weird stuff

that's happening as downstream effects of this new wave of AI. So Limitless is a place for that. It's the home for all the stuff that is not crypto, is not economic, is not macro related. It's all the frontier technology, the AI stuff. That's where this show is actually going to be living is on the Limitless feed. So if you are interested in tech, if you are interested in frontier technology of any sorts, if you are interested in AI, Limitless will be the new home base for all of that and we're launching this week. Yep. Yeah. Yeah. So that is the call to action. If we are what we are doing is we are taking all of the AI

content, all the frontier tech content, which we've been pretty aggressively exploring at Banklist, we're putting it into its own feed, which it totally deserves. Uh, and I know there's a lot of people who are have been following Banklist for the AI stuff, but not for the crypto stuff. Uh, and so we are creating a dedicated feed for that. There's also followers of Banklist, listeners of Banklist who are like, "Ah, another AI episode." Weird reaction, but I get it. Uh, it's interesting. Like me and Jaws and Joshua, we're all here in New York and we'll go to crypto events that are about AI. Uh, and so it's actually a crypto event by crypto people

for crypto people, but it's about the AI subject. So like AI has brought appeal so we're giving it its own dedicated uh podcast feed. You're still going to be hearing these episodes on the banklist feed as we incubate the new Limitless podcast. So there is a link in the show notes to go subscribe to the podcast to get that podcast in your podcast player and also subscribe to the YouTube uh because we are making some AI first uh AI primary content there. And then we're also going to do the regular bank list thing of interviews with big founders, big uh investors, entrepreneurs in the space who are really helping shape this

future. Uh, and also just to double down on on what Josh was saying, AI as definitely, but also Frontier Tech. So, we're talking like rockets, we're talking robotics, we're talking everything that's going to make the future even weirder than it already is because it feels like that is coming very, very soon. But this is the AI rollup, which again also happens every single week. Topics of the week that we're going to talk about, JA has already hinted at. Open AI making big moves, a $3 billion arms race to gobble up all of the valuable startups in the AI space. Visa is giving AI agents credit cards, letting them go wild on the internet. uh what happens when you

put an LLM into a robot, a real physical robot. What happens next? And lastly, the hard problem of interpretability, why it's important for making sure we can save the future of humanity by cracking this interpretability problem. But Jaws, we are going to start with OpenAI making three big big moves, a $3 billion arms race. Uh what happened in OpenAI news this week? Okay, so let's get into it. Um, this has been basically the headline news all week and and everyone just couldn't stop talking about it yesterday. Um, OpenAI is officially making its first major

acquisition by purchasing a company called Wind Surf for $3 billion with a B. Um, now if you're wondering what on earth Windsurf is, you might have heard David Josh and I speak about a company previously um on this series called Cursor. And cursor is basically this kind of vibe coding platform where you can type in a prompt typically like you do on chat GBT but instead you could ask it to create a new app for you or a new piece of software or maybe even a fun game u that you know and love and it

would just code it all right up in front of you. And the let's say the environment or the software that allows you to do that is something called an IDE which stands for integrated development environment. If you're wondering what that is, think of it as a software suite, which includes like uh a coding editor, um uh a compiler, and a bunch of other things that you need to basically make software. It just makes it really, really easy for you, and then it adds AI on top of it. So, you just speak to it like a normal person, and it just kind of like pops up an app. Now,

um Windsurf is in the top two of these types of companies. You got Cursor, then you pretty much have Windsurf at this point. Um, and OpenAI will now compete directly with things like Cursor, Lovable, and Replet, which do very similar things. And in my opinion, this confirms that there's pretty much an arms race to build the best AI coding assistance um, ever. So imagine if you could be like the number one tool or platform uh, to the leading software engineers and companies of tomorrow. That's basically the TAM, the total

addressable market. That's that's basically the the market that you're going after. Now, one kind of like interesting caveat that I want to include here is that this is this happened after OpenAI tried to buy Cursor, that's the number one platform that does this twice. So, they had to get the second best. Yeah, they basically had to get the second best. And like kind of like my initial gut reaction when I read that was, huh, I wonder if Curs is either holding out for like a Google or a Meta to purchase them and go for an even bigger number cuz they, you know, don't want to be bought

by like, you know, Sam Alman's startup. But um, you know, it's a curious move. And a few other things I want to highlight is this acquisition follows um, some major moves by other companies that are doing something similar. So Google, for example, launched their own cursor competitor called Firebase. And if you pull up this tweet, David, it's actually pretty good. And and I think this um this example will be quite a good visual example so people can understand, you know, what on earth this does. So what you're watching right now um for those of you who are just listening is a video of someone just

sketching out a very it looks like a three-year-old's drawn it um kind of layout of a website um of an app that can basically help someone draw. And then what you see on the right side is the um Google's Firebase platform creating it. and you can actually interact with the tool and draw and paint just like you did like Microsoft Paint. Very simple basic example could but can you imagine this being extended out to something else? It's pretty insane. What's your what's your take on this David? I think for the for the listeners just imagine Microsoft Paint

but on the other side of it outcomes an application a functioning application. So you know Microsoft Paint on one side functioning application on the other. Uh I'm actually curious to hear Josh's uh take on what's going on here. I I think it's cool. I think it the second I saw this news, it reminded me of news from a few weeks ago, which was Google acquiring Whiz for $32 billion, I think it was. Um, I think this is an attempt at OpenAI to kind of make their way up the stack. And it's not just about serving their own stack better. It's about like now actually embedding themselves in the decision-m layers

above that stack so they could shape the flow of traffic regardless of the endpoint. Um, in the case of Whiz, Whiz was kind of like a security aggregator company. So Google owns Google cloud but it doesn't have any control over AWS or uh Microsoft's Azure servers. So what um acquiring whiz does is it allows them it gives them upstream upstream access to that like security telemetry the customer data flows the threat intelligence a lot of the data that they wouldn't otherwise have and I think that's kind of what openai is doing here with windsurf where chat GBT clearly dominates the consumer product space um

they own that they do very well but in enterprises a lot of companies are looking for a thing that people are calling model orchestration which is kind of like which model will serve my use case the best and they're looking for aggregators to decide and make that decision for them. Well, OpenAI just bought that aggregator and they now own this routing and orchestration layer that acts like across this load balancing metric. So now strategically they get visibility over influence um over who's using what what they're using for and they could optimize their models for these use cases because they have

the data. So now going forward you might see chat GPT starts to get chosen a lot more by these aggregators because it has all the data of why it's choosing another model that isn't theirs. And I think that's like a pretty interesting play. Is there a parallel here between like there are deals that Google has made in the past with browsers about like hey uh we will pay you x amount of money to make us the default search engine in your browser. So when you type a question into the toolbar it automatically routes to Google. Uh it makes a Google query and Google gets the data from that and the information for that to make their product better. It

sounds like this is something similar where they are just acquiring this uh endpoint which has a direct relationship with its users. So uh windsurf has ownership over the users. It has a user relationship but in the back of windsurf there's chatbt. So chatbtd now just acquires that user relationship. It gets uh chatbt to be used by wind surf. Uh and so there's just uh it's just more usage for chat and then there's also information about what chat how it needs to adapt the information the data like you said goes back into chach. Is that

is there a parallel there that or am I hallucinating here? probably it feels like there's a fine line where people go to Windsurf as Windsurf customers. They don't want to be spoonfed chat if it's not the ideal model. So that could hurt with customers. I assume they probably won't do it that explicitly. But the implicit thing that they could extract value from is understanding the users needs and the wants and when certain models are chosen and kind of optimize future versions of the chat GBT language model to serve those people. So the ideal case is that chatb will actually be able to serve all of these um while

still gaining data from what people like about the other models. You could also argue that it's just to your point Josh data that they want. Data is the endgame, right? Um in whatever shape or form it comes in in whatever kind of outlet that you can extract it from, that's what they want. If they want developer activity, if they want to grab it at the consumer level, they already have it at the end uh consumer level. So now they want to try and get like all the developer activity as much as they can. Um I I I wonder what type of a model or even endto-end

experience you can create based off of that, right? Um and to kind of like strengthen your argument here, um I noticed that Google launched something um associated with integrated computer use this week as well. um within they have something called AI studio which is kind of um like this environment that you're describing Josh which doesn't just include kind of like the end user stuff uh which open AAI dominates on but it also allows developers to kind of like build this kind of like synonymous end toend app experience right um and

what I noticed about this integrated computer use thing is that you know they they really want to just own end toend product development um the entire pipeline and um if you think about it like you you allow them to use their noode prompt friendly platform to build your product right leveraging their models and you can inference it through their like cloud system and then on top of that you can allow anyone to use it for themselves via computer use so if you're an end user right and you're saying hey I really like that app that this developers built well you can run

it locally on your um computer now and you can inference any model that you want say like hey I don't like that it's using this model can we use something else sure like uh Google's AI studio solves for that. And I think that's like a really important nuance that's going to make it super super sticky. Um how they personalize this experience for users, I don't actually quite know. I wonder if you have any ideas, but um just a very subtle but important improvement that I think is is worth noting. I've brought this metaphor up before in the past on the show, but uh the whole entire um vertical, the gaming

vertical of uh like League of Legends and Dota is like Arena Battlers or whatever uh bu billion dollar industry in just that one type of gaming structure. And that gaming structure was created by a uh Starcraft mod. So, some individual using the Starcraft map editor and like map editing engine created uh this like mod of Starcraft that created this structure that basically is is what uh the MOA arena battler League of Legends mobile multiplayer online battle arena. Thank

you. I don't play League of Legends. Uh but but like a billion multi-billion dollar industry got created because of this modding ability because of the mod ecosystem around this one base game which was very very valuable called Starcraft but now it spawned like you know an an insane amount of value and so what I'm seeing here is like this is a modding engine for apps and the the downstream like value that could come out of this as just give creativity give creative tools

to people who want to be creative And now it's not even developers. It's anyone who's like frustrated that they are using this app, but there's this one button that's missing that they wish they could press and it could do something. And now all of a sudden the creation of that app if they truly uh discover value in it, maybe so do other people as well. And they just need that one extra little module to hook it into the app. And now all of a sudden that is a valuable piece of infrastructure that is free to roam the internet. And so that's that's what I'm seeing here and why I'm pretty excited about this. Yeah. you know something you just reminded me

of something David um when you describe that kind of open modding kind of ecosystem it's it's kind of what we're seeing amongst a lot of AI trends today right so we've spoken about reinforcement learning which is like you know a very popular post and pre-training method to get AI models to become smarter and it doesn't require a hell of a lot of compute it just requires you to give it kind of like some reasoning logic and it gets better and better um I've noticed that the primary way that a lot of these models are learning is through open uh

reinforcement learning gyms. So, think of it as like a kind of like a Pokemon gym, right? And you could take your Pokemon, but in this case, your Pokemon is a model. You can put it in the gym and you could train it. It battles over and over again until it gets smarter and smarter and you can like orient it around like math, coding, whatever it might be. Um, the thing that accelerates reinforcement learning, David, is just allowing a bunch of anyone, any humans to create their own environments and then you could just send your model to all of them in a day or you could just

pick the best ones and it it kind of like ranks itself via an open source method. Another example is in training, right, where um previously like it was just one specific data center, then it was like, "Oh [ __ ] we need more uh power. Let's move all the data centers together." but like let's keep them close because you know we need like a high uh feedback loop and now it's getting even more distributed and we'll talk about that later but I'm just noticing it's like this dare I say open-source ecosystem that is like purely benefiting the way that we

advance AI right now we talked last week about um the downstream implications of OpenAI's memory update and how it can memory memor all of its chats with you this saga continues this arc continues what happened in the last seven days of JS okay so to give context on when we last mentioned in this update, David. Um, it was really positive, right? Because we were like, "Hey, ChachiBT is going to remember everything you've ever said to it." Across turning into a friend is turning into an ally. Oh. Oh, not just a friend, your best friend. Your best friend and could be like

Exactly. Exactly. You're going to offload your conscious to this thing basically and and you're going to love it. Right. and and there were a lot of like you know you know kind of ominous implications from that but overall it was like net net good because the more personalized your AI experience is you could argue the better and more sticky the product is going to be. Now, there's a dark side to this, and OpenAI, funnily enough, didn't really announce this on any major headlines, which is they updated your memory in a much more creepier way such that in whatever way you prompt in chat GPT, you know,

sometimes it does a web search for you. So, let's say like, hey, can you tell me some of the hottest recipes? I don't know why I keep talking about recipes on this show, by the way. I think I'm just like hungry when I do this episode. But let's say you prompt ChatGBT and you say like, "Hey, like pull out the top five recipes to create roast chicken or something, right?" It does a web search for you. But now with this update, ChatGpt has the permission, rather your explicit permission to change the way you've worded your prompt. Now, the the way the reason they're giving to you

there is just so that they can make your prompt more effective. Right. But more attuned to what you're interested more attuned to what? And I'm like, well, hang on a second. How do you how do you know what I want better than I want, right? And we get into like this really weird territory where it's like, hey, can you tell me like what kind of clothes do you think might fit my vibe for this evening? And it starts, you know, pulling like ad sponsors type situation, but then it feeds it to you as if like, hey, this is what you really want, right? And I'm thinking, hang on, like, how can you like change my words

and like am I held legally liable to that? like it gets super weird and I'm curious, you know, how this can get kind of like taken out of context to like some kind of Black Mirror episode. Um, the the pattern that I'm seeing here is like the pre205 era of the internet, which was already starting to decay at this time, but um, you know, Facebook and and Cambridge Analytica and all of that debacle, what we all learned was that Facebook was showing conservatives one version of the internet, one version of the truth. It was showing liberals a

different version of the internet. And people were all learning like oh my version of the internet is attuned to me based off of the data that I have exposed about myself to the internet. And all of a sudden like my internet is not your internet. It all used to be one internet. We all you looked at the internet and we saw a single source of truth and the algorithms hadn't corrupted that. We were all looking at the same facts. We were all looking at the same news articles. But as algorithms u uh became more precise about what their goals were like, oh, we can get uh this user to stay online on our platform more if we feed them

content that is more attuned to what their beliefs then then we're going to do that. And all of a sudden, you know, everyone got their own interpretation of the internet. And we also started to like society started to split into factions, right? The right got more right, the left got more left. Uh and it's because uh of this curation, which we all want. I want chatbt to curate the best for me, the best for my my likes. Uh but this is the same pattern that I'm seeing is like chat GPT is now profiling me and judging me and putting me into a box that I'm not necessarily aware that

it the box that it is putting me in but nonetheless that is the box that I'm going into and all of a sudden I will be in a box that other the rest of society will not be in and they will be in their own box and now of a sudden we are not again connected as a as a species. we are now like profiled and segregated based of our interests and our and how chat GBT is being tuned. So that is what is triggering in in in me in this hearing this. It's this uh this like increasing hyperpersonalization that we're seeing. There's there's two trends which is the hyper personalization things are created specifically for you

and also the relinquishing of all your privacy and data for the better experience which is just a trend that I do not see stopping anytime soon and the results are probably a more fractured idea space because things do become personalized to you and you're seeing this different reality than everybody else. Um the question is is that better and and what is the incentive from the person who's serving it to you? Is the incentive to get you to maximize your time spent on the service or is it to give you a truthful answer so you can leave? Like I love the example you used

last week, David, where you said you use like 5 or 10% of your screen time on chat GBT and it's the most valuable time that you spend. Is that going to be the outcome where you come, you get served, and you leave? Or is it an attempt to just trap us in ecosystem lock, maximally extract, uh that type of thing? And that's it's definitely a step towards that direction. Yeah, I I definitely see that as an emerging theme of these conversations, the AI roll up, the things that the news that we're processing on this space. There's like the dark path and the light path. There's like the utopia and the dystopia. And there's the utopia where

we want where this chatbt intelligence is minimally invasive and maximally value add to our lives and allows us to be human, connect with each other better, be informed, be more intelligent. And that's the happy path. And then there's the dark path of it encourages brain rot. It encourages isolation. You guys see like the the meta Zuckerberg announcements of like, oh yeah, we we're actually just going to make online uh AIs and you're going to be friends with them. And so like the original Facebook uh notion was like we're going to make everyone connected.

We're going to connect everyone. And now it's now the modern day mission of Facebook implicit mission of Facebook is we're going to isolate everyone. Uh and you know the modern day uh the the happy path of chachi is we're going to make everyone superpowers. We're going to give everyone like godlike intelligence. And then like the the unhappy path is we're going to do brain rot even faster, even better this time. And uh the I I'm worried that the incentives point towards the brain rot all the time. Well, I mean what's the saying around

show me who makes the money and I'll show you the incentives. So maybe it's like the the other way around. It's like, let's show you the outcome. Exactly. Right. So, let's let's track it all the way up to the top. Okay. Open AAI has an amazing product and they state all these different things like, hey, we want to help you out. We want to make you a better person, a better learner, blah blah blah blah blah. But, you know, to your point, like they want retention, they want max usage 24/7 of people on this thing. And where I get even more worried or concerned is in the

case of like Facebook, Snapchat, Instagram, you can you can you can take the phone away, right? You can you can put it away. You can stop. There's only so many pictures you can post in a day and then you're like, "Okay, right, I'll put it down." But when it becomes your entire life, your thinking vehicle and your in some cases your personality. I I I saw the most random thing of like I think we mentioned it last week of PhD students using uh chat GPT prompts to pick up dates and stuff. And I'm just

like, well, hang on a second. Like now it's getting involved in your actions. It's going to tell me what to buy. It's going to tell me how to look. And I'm like that that is an incredibly more stickier function than like Facebook trying to influence your opinion on certain things. So I I really hope that it is not going to become the darker outcome, but I can't see a path where it doesn't unless for some reason shareholders of these, you know, corporate companies are kind of like, oh yeah, you know what, we don't want to [ __ ] humans up too much or or like too bad. Um but actually um quite

interesting on that case, guys. Uh, did you see the the news around um Open AI's uh well, I don't want to say restructuring, but rather structuring which kind of like confirmed what they were before. Did you guys see that? Mhm. I'm I'm going to need to be informed here. Yeah. Okay. So, basically, um, OpenAI uh I I'll actually take this direct quote from from Sam on his blog post. OpenAI was founded as a nonprofit is today a nonprofit that oversees and

controls the forprofit and going forward will remain a nonprofit that oversees and controls the forprofit. That will not change. Now what he's referencing here is a longlasting uh highly publicized um debate or debacle rather that OpenAI was founded as a nonprofit and Sam was all like this is for the good of AI. This is back in the day when both Elon Musk and Sam and if you guys didn't know this had founded OpenAI and they were working on creating AI for the

betterment of human humanity and and the people. But at some point Sam decided, you know what, I kind of want to make this a forprofit cuz there's a lot of money to be made in this AI thing. Well, also he needed to to keep OpenAI alive because you need the profit incentive to attract the best talent, to attract investors to stay ahead of the game. And so yes, it was a trap. It it always needed to be like this. As soon as there was any amount of legitimate competition, the the nonprofit model was a failure scenario. Yes. Primarily to raise money for training because in

order to do those big training runs, you needed money and in order to attract investors, you needed to have some sort of promise to give them money back. Right. Exactly. So, so, so that is like, you know, the green field really good way to to look at this. And I think like arguably to this extent that's what Sam's been doing. You know, he set up what's it called? Stargate or or whatever it's called, like the biggest basically data center factory that is being built, I think, in in Texas or or somewhere like that. And um he he's investing the funds that he's raised in exactly where he said he was going to do it. But at what point does the forprofit

then become maybe a bit of an issue? Now, I personally don't really see an issue in this turning into a for profit. In fact, I think it actually should be a for-profit. If I'm going to be using this product, I want it to eventually get better. I don't want it to become some kind of communist table staked AI kind of thing. I'm just going to I'm just going to go to the product that that works better. Um, so I don't really get why there's been so much kind of backlash against this. I think it's because Sam had quite the lead with OpenAI and now it's become kind of like table stakes and maybe this is a bit of a competitive move from, you know, uh, X

and Elon Musk and Open AAI and stuff who have been filing a lawsuit against him. But really interesting to see that like OpenAI's kind of backed down and said, "Okay, okay, okay. We'll keep it at we'll keep the nonprofit in control of the forprofit and we'll wait until everything everyone's calmed down and then we'll kind of maybe flick it back to a a for-profit. I I think ultimately all of this is going to turn into a nothing burger. The nonprofit wrapper around a for-profit company is just the same thing as a board of directors around a for-profit company. It's the same structure. It's just a for-profit company with extra steps. Uh we've

already figured out like general CC Corp incentive structures. There's a reason why the Delaware CC Corp is what it is. It is a science that has been well attuned. We don't need to reinvent the wheel here. I don't know why. I don't know the story behind the nonprofit genesis of OpenAI. Like maybe it was just an anomaly. Ultimately, as time progresses, I think this is just going to be this weird anomaly about how Open AI got started. And it's going to ultimately look like a for-profit company like all the rest, kind of like how it already looks. I don't know, Josh. That's my take. What do you think? Yeah, the the inception of open AI and

the reason it's called open AI is because at the time Google had invented the transformer. They were becoming a powerhouse in the world of AI and Elon and Sam had this vision that they wanted a counterbalance to a monopolistic super intelligence and the counterbalance wasn't open source AI that's for the people. So that was the idea on paper. Um in practice you need a lot of money to uh buy these training mod you need to to buy the GPUs to train the models. You need a lot of funding. there are profit motives that are required in order to create consumer products that get this product out there. So, it got kind of clouded over time and I think if they

had just started as a for-profit organization, none of this would have made a difference. The thing that I'm really interested in less than the company structure because it feels kind of irrelevant. They are for-profit. they will hopefully send some gimmies out. Is where they stand on the open part of it is is where will they where will the company state like hey we are going to release these models to the public as a public good service and we're going to keep these models closed. I'm more interested in that internally is how they're thinking about releasing those models to the public and actually maintaining the the open sense that initial mission of distributing the

computes and the intelligence. We we've talked in the past on this uh podcast about how all of the frontier models just become owned by the the value of these models become owned by the public domain pretty quickly because of the the the rat race of open source. Like open source is I don't know 6 months behind nine months behind the frontier models. It is not more than a year behind. Uh, and so the value of the frontier models, whoever's got their best frontier model, that that value will show up in the open source domain within 12 months, you

know, and so I'm not sure what the value is like. Does it does it matter if open AI keeps their models behind a silo, a closed silo, and maybe they're a hypocrite, but I'm not sure that matters because ultimately the open- source arena always catches up to the value of the best model that we've produced somewhere on the earth. And that and that is inclusive of like all the models coming out of China, too. This has been true in the past. I think the scales are a bit different. I actually saw this interesting post by Kevin Wheel this morning. Um he's like the chief product officer of OpenAI and

it was about a blog post where other countries are actually reaching out to OpenAI to build project Stargates in their own country and that diminishes the the free marketization of these large language models where now there's not a free market competing for the best spot and releasing it. there is a country that wants to consult with a single company that wants to integrate their AI into the way that they populate AI through their country. So it feels like the scales are increasing and the like breadth of this is narrowing in the

sense that they are looking for a source of truth from one person instead of this open source version and that feels like where things can get a little shaky. Interesting. Okay. Okay. So what you're saying is that the uh assumption that there's compression amongst all the frontier models, there's like seven, eight frontier models out there, all these different AI labs, many of them all ruthlessly competing. And because of that competition, uh there's an great equalization because the learnings of one frontier model become the learnings of the other and that value gets passed around and then because it's just passed

around, it becomes uh available in the open source domain. What you're saying is that that assumption that that is going to be the way that it is is not a perfect assumption and we should be wary that actually there are very strong economies of scale here and the possibility of one or two or a very low number of frontier models make a break for it and actually become very large and have economies of scale is a possibility that we should uh watch out for. That's that's what I've just heard from you. Yeah, that that feels about right. And um yeah, I think as things kind of