Podcasts about AlphaGo

Today we are talking with Vignesh Baskaran, the CTO and co-founder of Hexo Labs, about teaching AI agents to improve themselves. Vignesh has been training neural networks since 2012, back when he was still called a data scientist. Then he became an ML engineer and now an AI engineer, though he says the underlying work has never really changed. It's to figure out how to make a system behave the way you intend it to. He built the litigation search engine that Google itself became a customer of, and now he's chasing something new, agents that rewrite and retrain other agents without a human in the loop. We dig into Sia, the meta-agent at the center of Hexo's research, and why improving an agent means touching both its harness and its actual model weights, not just one or the other. We talk about proxy evals for when you don't have much to ground truth. The Darwin-Gödel machine and why formal verification is too strict a bar for anything commercial. How Hexo's work echoes DeepMind's Alpha lineage from AlphaGo to AlphaEvolve, and the spectrum from clearly verifiable to totally subjective tasks? Why VAE evals are quietly wrecking agent quality across the industry, and a great story about an agent that discovered a customer's own eval file was silently corrupted, something buried in hundreds of thousands of traces that no human would have caught.

What drives someone to spend decades pursuing artificial general intelligence, not for wealth, but for scientific discovery? In this episode of Technovation, Peter High speaks with bestselling author and financial historian Sebastian Mallaby about his new book, The Infinity Machine, which chronicles the remarkable journey of DeepMind co-founder Demis Hassabis and the global race to build artificial general intelligence (AGI). Drawing on more than 30 hours of interviews with Hassabis and conversations with over 100 colleagues, competitors, and friends, Mallaby explores the leadership philosophy, scientific ambition, and organizational decisions that shaped one of the world’s most influential AI companies. Listeners will also hear an in-depth discussion of Google’s acquisition of DeepMind, the evolution of AI from AlphaGo to Gemini, the competitive dynamics among OpenAI, Anthropic, Microsoft, and Google, and what the pursuit of superintelligence means for business leaders navigating the next era of technological transformation. Key topics include: Why Demis Hassabis devoted his career to AGI The founding story behind DeepMind Google’s AI strategy and the Innovator’s Dilemma Leadership lessons from building world-class research organizations The opportunities of increasingly capable AI systems Listen to discover why the future of AI may depend as much on leadership and organizational design as on technological breakthroughs. This episode is presented by ElevenLabs — Bringing technology to life. Learn more at elevenlabs.io

Competing in a Future World of Infinite Intelligence Navigation: Intro From Knowledge Workers to Judgment Workers The AI-Native Company: Org, Hiring, Culture The Human Element: Are We Underestimating It? Scenarios Our Take Conclusion Our co-hosts: Bertrand Schmitt, Entrepreneur in Residence at Red River West, co-founder of App Annie / Data.ai, business angel, advisor to startups and VC funds, @bschmitt Nuno Goncalves Pedro, Investor, Managing Partner, Founder at Chamaeleon, @ngpedro Our show:   Tech DECIPHERED brings you the Entrepreneur and Investor views on Big Tech, VC and Start-up news, opinion pieces and research. We decipher their meaning, and add inside knowledge and context. Being nerds, we also discuss the latest gadgets and pop culture news Subscribe To Our Podcast Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Introduction Welcome to episode 79 of Tech DECIPHERED. Today, we take a leap into the big unknown. This is a thesis episode, not your classic analysis, in-depth sharing episode. The big idea for this episode is that we may be approaching the cognitive age, and how would one, or how would a company compete in a world of infinite intelligence? The big idea, again, is that intelligence, which has been mostly scarce and expensive for all of human history, might become abundant and cheap. If that happens, what happens to work, what happens to companies, what happens to society? This episode will be really framing a lot of these discussions. From knowledge workers to judgment workers, addressing the AI native company and how does that change, going into the human element and whether or not we’re underestimating it, and finally, ending up going into scenarios, feasible scenarios of a future where, well, intelligence is abundant. Intelligence is quasi-infinite or infinite itself.Bertrand Schmitt Yes. Big questions for this episode 79. From Knowledge Workers to Judgment Workers We can start with from knowledge workers to judgment workers. Let’s go back first to how came the knowledge worker. It’s a 20th-century invention from Peter Drucker in 1959. The idea here is that that category might be splitting. The production of knowledge itself is on its way to being commoditized by AI. However, our perspective is that judgment around production of knowledge is not disappearing and is staying for a bit control managed by humans. What’s your take on this, Nuno? Do you agree with this split?Nuno Gonçalves Pedro I think it’s a little bit more profound than that. It’s not just judgment. Definitely, human judgment will be needed. We’ve seen agents perform all sorts of funny things in the wrong way when left alone to their own devices. Even some very well-known AI researchers coming forward and saying, “Hey, I tried to use this myself, and actually I messed up some of my systems,” or “I messed some of my code. I messed up some of my flows for a period of time.” I think just having human-in-the-loop from a judgment standpoint will be needed for a significant amount of time. That is something you can’t just delegate into machines, into algorithms, et cetera. The second part is, ultimately, there needs to be contextualization, and that contextualization, I think, comes from two forms. One from actual data, where the machine, I think, at some point will catch up, or the machines will catch up. The algorithms, at some point, on the data analysis will get better and better and have probably the closest to the truth that you can get, minus all the biases that are in the data, just to be clear, because data has a ton of biases. We’ve looked at this in the past and discussed it at prior episodes. But maybe on that, I think the machine has a chance to catch up, or the machines have a chance to catch up, so there’s less of distinctiveness from the human standpoint. But then, on just the attributes, the ability when you’re judging some situation, you’re in the middle of the situation. You’re judging the person and how it’s acting, in some ways, a lot of the things that end up happening, end up happening because there’s human interaction. There’s someone on the other side. I see how they’re delivering the message, how they’re implicating. We’ll talk about it later in the context of the organization and what changes in companies. I don’t think it’s just judgment. I think there’s a little bit more than that. One of the reasons I went to the dark side of management early on in my career from being an engineer was Peter Drucker and this notion of the knowledge worker, which he later on reemphasized with the publishing of his book, which for me was seminal and defined a lot of my career in life, the post-capitalist society, which is this notion that information rich and information poor is going to be the key distinctiveness that will happen in the world. The two big camps, information rich, information poor, which links back to this invention of the term knowledge worker, that knowledge is going to be key in some ways. I think that’s what we’ve seen for the last decades. Again, I think judgment is not going anywhere, but I think it’s beyond judgment. There’s elements of humanity and involvement that won’t go away anytime soon, where human-in-the-loop are particularly critical. We’ll discuss later some scenarios, but for me, that’s my stick in the ground. I think human-in-the-loop is going to be critical for many decades to come.Bertrand Schmitt While we are talking about all of this, and we share some possible scenarios, there is always that question. This is moving so fast right now. If you think about AI 10 years ago, AI 5 years ago, AI with the launch of ChatGPT 3, and then AI the past 2 years, now we have agents that are running at scale. Things are moving very fast. I can tell you, me in 6 months, the change has been pretty dramatic in terms of what I can use AI for. There is always that question that whatever we are thinking about cannot just be connected to what we were able to do 6 months ago or even today, we have to think and project ourselves at least in the next 6–12 months. Of course, we can go beyond that, and we will do that with some future scenarios, but it’s a very fast-moving, and it’s not clear yet where are the limits.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro I think that’s a very fair point. Let me try to analyze things that I don’t think will change anytime soon for the next few years. Agreed with you that many things will change, and we’ll have a lot better tools, platforms out there. That will be difficult to predict what exactly won’t change. I think there’s elements of humanity, and some of them do relate to judgment, like having good or bad taste, having a view on it, on whether something looks good or bad. Obviously, all of this sometimes is subjective, but some of it may not be as subjective as people think it is. The elements of contextualization. I think a little bit going back to what we did at Chamaeleon ourselves, where we built this platform, Mantis, and the objective of building Mantis was not really to replace us, was that it was a core augmentation layer in some ways that we would use investment or investor judgment as humans in the loop to systematize pattern recognition and a variety of other things, but that Mantis would really elevate all that judgment, not just in terms of timing, us being more productive, but also in terms of the quality of the decisions we’re making. Think of it as a little bit like having our human judgment in the context of operating Chamaeleon at a higher altitude, where we are more aware of the things that are happening and how they actually happen. The ability to really get to the data pieces and then make decisions on top of that that generate the needed alpha in our case for investors. What I mean by this is I think there’s always going to be core elements of humanity that I do think are going to be difficult for the machines to replace. For example, the taste piece people are like, “I can figure out what’s the taste in the market.” Yeah, but that’s mainstream. That doesn’t identify what’s the next big thing, which normally doesn’t start from mainstream. It starts from something else. It could start from opinion leaders and influencers. It could start by someone having a different way of addressing a problem and having a solution that hasn’t been thought through. For example, elements of creativity, I think, in human judgment and in human operations is something that I feel the machine will still have difficulty to replace.Bertrand Schmitt Let’s not forget how today current algorithms are working by feeding them enormous quantity of data, actually as much data as we can find. Finding more data is becoming a limitation these days. What it means is that it’s very hard for AI to think beyond its training data. There is some level of logic that’s being added, but at the same time, take the launch of the iPhone. What was the opinion before launch? Is that no, it doesn’t make sense. Not enough battery life, no keyboard, no this, no that. If you just base your analysis on what’s written out there, what’s being sold out there, you would just say, “It’s going to fail.” AI might really follow that more generic advice and perspective because that’s what in the training data and that’s what they’re in volume. It’s, of course, raising a lot of questions of, how do you improve the quality of the training data? How do you separate the weed from the chaff? There are a lot of questions there, and obviously, it will get better over time. But it’s still a critical part of how it’s working today. It won’t be that easy to change. I really like your point regarding Mantis, and I will say in general, platforms that you build with AI or leveraging AI capacity. Because when we say knowledge production is going to disappear, but we’ll keep judgment, it will be a different type of judgment because the quantity and quality of knowledge we will have in front of us to build our judgment will be very different. If suddenly we have for free the work of 10 interns or 5 junior analysts or whatever, and you can run that on nearly anything you do in life or at work, it’s completely dramatic. Your judgment was not used to be exercised so often because often you were missing quality data to have a judgment. Before it was a lot of finger in the wind and trying to smell something, but you didn’t have enough to make a serious analysis. Except if you are working as a strategy consultant, as you used to do, Nuno. That part is actually quite interesting. That the judgment itself will be exercised much more often and hopefully on the base of much more in-depth analysis for a lot of things. We will work very differently.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro We will go in-depth, faster and more fact-based, more data-based along the way. The question some of you might have right now is, is there some judgment that’s going to go away? Is there some judgment? We seem to be defining that there’s this organization, we’ll talk about it later, that goes from doers more into deciders. I think there’s some nuances to that, so I’ll just hit pause on that. In terms of judgment, obviously, there’s judgment that has been hidden over the years under the pretense of being wisdom, but it’s actually not wisdom. It’s just repetitive tasking, and it’s rules-based for the most. There’s a lot of judgment done, in particular in the white-collar space, that you could say it’s just reps. People have been doing it all along like that, and so therefore to say, “I’ve done it before like this, so I’ll do it the same way.” There’s actually no best in class, no analysis, no nothing. It’s just, “I’ve done it like that before.” I think that type of judgment will disappear because, again, algorithms will be as good, if not much better at that. They’ll be better at figuring out, actually, this would be the better way to do this. That’s how you play it forward. Then the question is, if there are fundamental, wise people in the organization, people that can really take that more complex elements of judgment, how do you go from the world we have today, which is a world of apprenticeship, where people come out of college, they go and work, and they learn their way, and therefore, hopefully over time, some of them, not all of them, we know that, but some of them will develop that wisdom to be great decision makers 15, 20 years down the road? How do we do that in a world that now is saying, “I don’t need people out of college because I can do it myself, and I can do individual contributor, and I can have agents doing the work that would require some manifestation of management in the middle.” Basically, “I don’t need this stuff. I don’t need you.” It’s a little bit the story we’re in. How do you create then this apprenticeship? How do we create then wisdom? My two cents on that is that wisdom, because of what we were just discussing and what, for example, myself and Bertrand was just saying, because of more often interactions with more data-stressed information and insights, what will happen is people will get better through their own reps in whatever form they’re doing, in day-to-day life, in internships, et cetera. In some ways, that will create the accelerated growth. It’s a little bit the interactions with agents and the interactions with our beloved AI algorithms that will create that growth over time and maybe not as much with other people. That still leaves the question around social interactions, but that’s probably the way this gets sorted. Apprenticeship gets sorted through the machine and the human having more interactions in effect.Bertrand Schmitt I agree with you because when we talk about apprenticeship, in some ways a lot of time was wasted on stuff that were not that important. But in a way, that was the price you had to pay in order to be there when people make the big decision to try to get some wisdom from that one hour of interactions that’s really useful and make a difference out of your full week. But the rest of your full week was just basic stuff that you had to do like a machine in a way. Why not let a machine do that? That, for me, is a big question. You could argue there is a transition period where it could be hard. For instance, if you can work hand in hand with AI smartly while you are doing your 4, 5 years of universities, you could graduate with a very different knowledge, perspective, judgment, skill set than anyone who graduated 5 years ago. I think that part will require a question around, “How do you change education?” You see what I mean? If you keep education the same way, expecting that the output is someone that should go now into 5 years of apprenticeship, that’s not going to work because companies will be, “No apprenticeship anymore.” On the contrary, you have to come much more knowledgeable and ready to use the tools. The tools are so efficient that the bar pretty high. You need to come already very well-grounded. If the education is not doing their job, that will be trouble. That part for me, I think is often forgotten. In some ways, the new-found importance of universities as a place to, and not just universities, the trade to really deliver people who are ready for the workforce. If on the business side, the expectation can change, of course, you have to change the education on the other side. My worry probably right now is that it doesn’t look like universities are in touch with what businesses are looking for, businesses are working on. Of course, that’s very worrisome because the cost of university has increased very significantly. It’s not clear quality of education has improved at all. If anything, it could be the opposite. It’s pretty scary. Of course, it’s going to raise a lot of questions. How much is education worth in that type of situation? Maybe another point because we talk a lot about apprenticeship, how this stuff was useful, but at the same time, if we go back in time, not long ago in the ’50s, if you wanted to be a developer, for instance, ’50s, ’60s, the job was very different. There was barely any programmation language out there. You had to use punch cards. Your time truly spent doing the coding was very limited. Once you had your stuff working, then, the debugging was a total nightmare. My point is that no one is looking back to that time saying, “You know what? It was great. It was a great way to learn and to do an apprenticeship for 5 years. To do that crappy job of punching cards for the boss.” There was little value in this. Guess what? Everyone is happy it’s not being done anymore by anyone. I think we also have to see what AI is bringing in a similar way is that everyone’s job is going to become quite different. There are a lot of big parts of the job who are not going to look back with fondness. Just looking back as, “Wow, that was very machine-like type of job. I’m glad I’m done with it.” People will want to jump directly to the next step. You don’t need to go to the punch card phase to be able to be a good developer for the past 40 years. I guess it will be the same with AI.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro I think so. The difficulty we have as humans is to also visualize dramatically different scenarios and landscapes, professionally. It’s difficult for us to anticipate what are the jobs of the future. Jobs have changed a lot in the last few decades, not even the last century. What people do, the migration initially from the agricultural society to then the industrial society to then the services society, and in some ways, the shift within the services industry, and now we’re seeing another shift, so we can’t really anticipate what those jobs look like. Back to your point on education, because I think that’s a very important point. If you’re right now an undergraduate student or a postgraduate student, for that matter, and you’re not figuring out your own mechanisms of learning outside of your syllabus, outside of what your professors are telling you, et cetera, you’re going to face very difficult times. If you’re not right now using all these AI tools proficiently, all these cycles of vibe coding, co-working, et cetera, with agents in the mix, you’re going to have a really tough time. If you’re not at this point in time as proficient as someone like myself or Bertrand, and given that we’re nerds, we’re relatively proficient with a lot of these tools that are out there. On top of it, some of us have our own platforms in-house. If you’re not as proficient as we are with those tools, you’re going to have a very difficult time because then people like us won’t need you. I think that’s the sad truth. It’s like at some point, if you’re not needed, you’re not needed. Then again, you may find something else that’s more interesting for you to do. Start your own company, go join a new exciting job doing whatever it is that you need to do next, et cetera. But again, I think the bar is very high. If you’re in college right now, again, undergrad, postgraduate, this is the time of transition. This is the worst time. It’s not the best time, it’s the worst time. Because education and all these institutions haven’t adapted to it yet. You need to adapt. You need to adapt. You need to adapt. If you don’t, you’re going to pay for it, not just in the loans you need to repay, but also in terms of actually having difficulty finding your career path in those first few critical years.Bertrand Schmitt You need to be especially proactive when you’re facing this type of period where businesses are adapting as fast as they can because they all know it’s going to be survival of the fittest very quickly. Universities typically are working on a very different pace, and it’s pretty guaranteed they are not going to have adapted as fast as businesses. In time of big dramatic change, it will be trouble. It will be trouble. Yes, you will have not fun. Not saying it was part of the deal when you sign up for that loan and decided to go for university. But that’s life. There has been issues before. It’s not the first time. You have to do something about it. You talk about your perspective about, “Hey, why do we need you if you are not already fluent and very efficient with these tools and stuff?” The truth, in some ways, it’s even worse than that. Each time we spend with someone who is not efficient with all of this is less time we spend with the tools that are already providing magic for us.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Exactly.Bertrand Schmitt It’s a very big choice of, “Hey, do I spend more time training this person?” Do I just… there is an opportunity cost. Or, do I spend more time staying at light speed? Why do I slow down to do something else in the hope that maybe I will get to return versus the light speed I’m already on? It’s a lot of tension. Again, it’s certainly new. But if we want to look back, I think you talk about the switch from agriculture and society, industrial society, and now the service industry. The reality is that, yes, we have made dramatic changes in the past before. 140 years ago, we were 90% agricultural society in Europe, in the US, 90% of us. Today, it’s what? 2%. So my point is that that’s a normal evolution. There is no progress without change. Sometimes the rate of change is soft, and sometimes you have a step function. Now it’s a step function, and it’s also a pretty fast step function. Before, it could take decades to get new stuff being put in place, to have electricity come up, this or that. Now we see that the rate of investment in AI is insane, way beyond anything we have seen before. Two, in a way, a lot of the architecture behind the scene was already there to support an even faster transition. What’s new might be the pace of the transition, how unnatural it might look. But at the same time, if you put yourself in the shoes of someone who lived 150 years ago, I mean, this was also a dramatic change for them. From horses to cars to planes to rockets, pretty big change, maybe even bigger change.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Maybe the silver lining, just to bookend this section, is one, there will be new roles. There are a lot of things we can’t anticipate. There will be new roles, there will be new jobs being created, and new things that we can’t really quite grasp yet. The second part is that the rules are changing, and they’re changing, I would say, in general, for the better. If you are a decision-maker or an organization, and you still have your job, you’re probably making more important decisions with more data, with more tooling around you, with less red tape, hopefully over time. I know that will not hold true for all the big corporations out there that are listening to us, but it is starting to happen. Things are making an impact on how decision-making is made. There’s less and less red tape along the way in certain organizations. There are more and more fact-based discussions happening as we move along. The silver lining is better jobs, more jobs, different jobs in the future, hopefully as well. Secondly, the second part of the silver line is that the jobs that exist today, hopefully, will be more interesting, certainly on the knowledge space and on this judgment space that we’re now introducing as part of this episode. The AI-Native Company: Org, Hiring, Culture Switching gears, maybe to how does that shift? How does the company of the future look like? How does an AI native company look like? I feel there are a lot of discussions on, “Oh, you only need one person to run everything.” Let’s not go to that level. We’ve had a couple of episodes where we focused on AI as your co-founder and a couple of other elements that you guys can go back to. Let’s focus on a more evolutionary view of what’s happening to organizations, and maybe start with the org structure. In general, we should see more flat organizations where mid-level managers have to justify their pay in some ways because middle management are routers. They are normally routing tasks. It’s sometimes aggregating it, synthesizing it, and pulling it back up. Guess what? AI and agents in general are very good at that. The synthesis piece, et cetera, is not as well needed. One could say there are several elements of middle management that are valuable, like the coaching of people, the creation of apprentices, and the accountability that comes with some of middle management. But lo and behold, most of middle management is seen as a little bit of a thin line that doesn’t need to necessarily exist. I feel we’re moving into a world of smaller teams, more senior teams, where there’s more judgment at the top, where you’ll have people that both do a mix of what we used to call management in its new form, but also a lot of individual contribution. If you’re not used to that, if you’re not used anymore to be an individual in the future, again, and if you’re a very senior in an organization, maybe this is the right time to either reinvent yourself, find some other job that doesn’t require as much of that, which we’ll have plenty of those jobs for the next few decades, or maybe retire. I’ve actually, shockingly enough, seen people who have said, “You know what? This thing is changing too fast, too dramatically. My industry is changing quite aggressively right now. I’m about to retire in a couple of years. I’m just going to retire now.” I’ve literally met two people who have done that. Again, there’s nothing wrong about it. I think we’re, again, going through a step function and a huge shift, but figuring out where you fit in this new model of organizations, more senior at the top, smaller teams, more of a mix of individual contribution with management than ever was done before.Bertrand Schmitt I agree with you. In some ways, I’m not surprised that some people might say, “You know what? It’s now time to retire.” I feel a bit sad, maybe because it means you don’t like to keep reinventing yourself and changing your habits and thinking about new stuff. You were a creature of habits, I would say, if that’s your conclusion. But everyone is entitled to their own opinion, obviously, and a way of life. I guess that’s what happened, again, at regular times in the past in terms of big change. What I can see is that the rise of, you can call it the full-stack individual, someone who will have multiple roles inside the team. Before, you had to really separate the role. Especially in the US, there is such a clear separation between every role you can have in a company. Let’s take a tech company. You will have people doing design, people doing different types of designs, people doing front-end development, back-end development, and operations. You see step-by-step hyper-specialization. I have seen that, and it’s true that the level of complexity you had to deal with at some point requires some level of hyper-specialization because it will take you 6, 12 months in order to be really, really strong on a specific topic, a specific language. God forbid, trying to go deep into something that you had no real experience into. But I feel with AI, it’s a big change, actually. It’s the opportunity to go beyond that. It’s the opportunity to do more, to touch more. You can combine designing and shipping code, product managing and shipping code, being an analyst and deploying. Of course, we have to think how it works because putting a marketer shipping code to production, maybe that will get you into trouble. But I think that there must be some change. We see it changing dramatically, how fast we can get into something, something different from what we are used to. I think it would be crazy not to take that opportunity to dramatically change the scope of many positions and put an end to that hyper-specialization. I think for me, in some ways, hyper-specialization was bad. There is only so much you want to be a specialist in because a lot of things, a lot of opportunities are actually coming from the mixing of many different ideas, many different perspectives, and you lose if you go to hyper-specialization.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro I don’t think the age that is coming is the age of the generalist. I think it’s going to be the age of the multispecialist. We’re going to go into an age of multispecialization, which is a little bit, we’ve mentioned it as well in the past, what Amazon defines as an athlete or T-shaped or pie-shaped people, people that have on top an amazing ability to do general management, strategy, managing teams, et cetera, then have spikes. Spikes into business development, corporate development, product management, whatever it is. With AI and with agents, the development of those spikes, as we’ve been discussing in this episode, will actually be easier. It’s almost like a given. If you want to go deeper and deeper into a certain area, you can go much faster. I think that level of multispecialization is going to be really cool to observe. I’m not sure we’ve had an age of multispecialization over the years. Maybe people would point out, well, the Da Vinci example, people that are great across very different areas. Maybe that’s an example of multispecialization. But honestly, from my perspective, this is going to be an exciting time because of that, because you’ll have people who, instead of being just focused on this area of sales, and I only do that, they can actually and should actually do a lot of other things. So the work, as we were talking before, can be more interesting. More demanding as well, because the judgments you need to make are more complex. The context you need to actually gain needs to be gained much faster. At a level of magnitude, you haven’t been able to do it before. Talk about information overload. But actually, ultimately, the roles can be a lot more interesting, a lot more exciting, because I can jump around. If I’m an investor, in this case, we have two investors on this conversation. But if I’m an investor, one of the things that we start looking at is actually not just looking at a startup as, is this startup doing something in AI or not? Is it AI-enabled or not? Is it an AI platform or not? But actually, more fundamentally, is this an AI native startup? Meaning, organizationally, culturally, is this the company that’s already in the AI age? How is the team working? How are they defining things? It’s not just that they only have two or three people. It’s like, what are those two or three people doing? How are they doing it? What cadence are they doing it on? What tools are they using? How are they making decisions? I feel we’re still actually relatively early on that track. It’s very interesting because we’ve had all these companies raising mega rounds. First round out, we invested in one of them, but there have been many frontier labs out there raising a ton of money. But a lot of them don’t have a fundamentally different way of doing business. Of organizing themselves, of how they do the day-to-day. Although they’re working on cutting-edge stuff, with very notable exceptions, they’re actually not using it themselves. They’re not actually shifting how they do stuff themselves.Bertrand Schmitt For me, that’s very interesting because in the past, I used to be quite conservative on how you manage and run a company in the sense that if you’re already in tech, if you are already on the cutting edge of what technology can deliver, and this and that, don’t waste time trying to invent a new org structure. Just focus on delivering something great, amazing, and be great at technologies. That’s already your huge differentiator. At the time, there was no real reason to innovate on the team organization. I have seen so many teams that tried to innovate, and it was just catastrophic because there was not much to innovate on, because we had decades of optimization that we could leverage. There was no reason to invent. But here it’s very different. There is a dramatic shift in how you can organize differently a company. I don’t think there are any blueprints yet on what’s the best way to do it because it’s too new. But at the same time, I would feel very bad to invest or support a company that first is not focused on AI or AI-enabled, but at the same time is not trying to innovate on the team itself. Because if you don’t do that, you’re going to get killed by someone who is going to innovate better than you on not just the product, but on the org as well.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Indeed. The shifts are pretty substantial. If you look, for example, just at hiring, what do you hire for? Certainly, there’s this element of the multispecialized orchestrator, which normally will be someone with quite a lot of wisdom and expertise. It doesn’t necessarily mean someone who’s old, but someone who has the ability to work with all the AI tooling and platforms out there and be an orchestrator of agents. Why do they make judgments, make decisions, move stuff forward really, really, really quickly? Again, those jobs are going to be the best jobs. The second part, I think that is very interesting, around hiring, is you’re going to skew towards the elements that are potentially either very aligned with the use of AI tooling and platform, AI expertise, or being AI native, or someone who’s used to using AI. That’s one side of the fence. On the other side, you’re going to actually be optimizing to hire people that have the characteristics that will be difficult for AI to replace immediately, like taste and the notion of fundamental accountability and notion of implications, the notion of how you affect change in organizations, how you affect change in individuals, the elements of coaching, and beyond coaching. You’ll be optimizing for those kinds of hires as well. Then, last but not least, for me, I feel that there is a momentum already happening. I think it will happen even more, which is the tendency to under-hire rather than over-hire. The moment of the good old days of blitz scaling, “Oh, let me go and hire 300 people to scale my go-to-market and just land grab market.” Now, that’s not how it’s going to work. People are going to try and first get the efficiencies in-house with top talent and see if there’s, at the end, the need to hire more people or not, rather than the other way around. I think the issue here is a little bit of what we alluded to before in this episode. There is a tax on individuals. If you hire more people, you’ll have to manage people, you’ll have to work with them, et cetera. If I don’t need to, I might as well work with the agents that the tools and platforms that I use give me access to. Because that’s a world that’s much more efficient, right?Bertrand Schmitt I’m in total agreement with you on this. It’s definitely raising way more questions than before because, again, on one side, you have the product, the technology used to build products that are completely different. At the same time, all of this is also enabling new ways to design organizations and to scale differently, especially in a world where, as we have seen in 3, 6, and 12 months, stuff that you thought were impossible are suddenly becoming possible. So you’re, “Hey, I’m going to scale and burn a shitload of money for 6 months before I know if there is any return.” Versus, “You know what? Maybe I just wait 6 months. The AI has improved enough so that we don’t need this new team. We don’t need these people to do stuff.” Because actually, if you just wait 6 months, we will have stuff coming for free from either new AI models or new AI tools or this or that. If you remember, we used to say that in mobile, things were going three times as fast as on the web in terms of pace of innovation and speed of development and stuff. I mean, with AI, it’s 5X mobile.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Maybe even more. Yes, well.Bertrand Schmitt Maybe even more, maybe 10X. Every assumption around blitz scaling or scaling in general was based on past assumptions. It’s not based on how is the industry evolving today. Might make more sense for you to really grow your agents and spend more money on more tokens. I remember, of course, Jensen is selling his business interest, but he was saying, “Hey, for each one of my 450K engineers, he better spend 250K in tokens a year.” I’m not saying it’s the right way to say it, but I think there is some truth in it, and that would be something to think about. Have we maxed out the token usage per employee? I’m not talking in a stupid way because token maxing and wasting money has no value and is as stupid as it gets. But if you are truly getting a return on these tokens, can you use more? Can you generate more? Can you create more loops so that one engineer manages not just 10 agents, but 50 agents, but 200 agents? I think that’s the big question. We’re trying to add more people. More people means more management, more issues, more this, more that. That would be a fair question. Another piece of the puzzle is how do you build in a way your… I don’t know if it’s a digital twin, but more like the digital version of your companies represented by agents. How do you make sure that everything you do as a business is truly captured, is truly leveraged so that your agents are getting better and better? Not just because the model gets better, but because you are putting more data into it, because it has more opportunity to learn, and as a result, gets better at your specific business.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro The next big thing is culture. How does culture change? I think the biggest shift that I see is, why would you do meetings all the time?Bertrand Schmitt Yes.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro At least at Chamaeleon, we have a very small team, just by the way. We have a very small team at Chamaeleon. We’ve reduced by way more than 50% the time we spend on meetings between each other across the board, one-on-ones, partner meetings, et cetera. I think we’re really pushing to be more and more asynchronous. There’s stuff you can process via message. I was just asking one of my colleagues, “Can you just send me that prompt for that so I can just do that on CoWork?” Or “Can I just go on Mantis and do this? Can you tell me the cycle?” Or vice versa. Basically, it’s a little bit like you’re just going to do it. I don’t need to meet. I don’t need to meet all the time. There are some things where we still need to meet and interact, and we need to brainstorm at times, and we need to go to a different level of abstraction on the top end. Then on the lower end, there might be things that are a little bit more specific and governance-related and operational-related that we need to agree on that are more sticky. But otherwise, the culture is going to be biased towards build. “Go and do it,” rather than, “Let’s do a meeting.”Bertrand Schmitt Yes.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Async is the thing. I’m more and more like we have a couple of interns this summer. “Can we async this?” They’re like, “What does that mean?” “Can we make this interaction asynchronous?” Because synchronous interactions for me are very expensive. Can you send me something that I can process, and then I can send it back to you? We don’t waste time on you giving me context and whatever. Then I’m not ready quite yet because I need to process it. Maybe I’m in between two meetings that I’m actually thinking about other things in my mind.” Again, I feel that shifts how stuff is done. One, build rather than meeting. Two, asynchronous versus synchronous. In some way, millennials had it right when they shifted a lot to messaging and stuff like that. Let’s do more asynchronous rather than synchronous, those two elements from just an operating model of the company are significant. Maybe this is a good time for me just to put one parenthesis because there’s this thing that’s bugging me as we’re talking here. Everyone who is listening to us at this point in time might be saying, “Cool, but I work for this large organization. We’re just now…” Everything we’re saying here is contextualized by time. We’re giving you extreme situations. We’re looking into the future. Some companies that we’re talking about might be doing this already as we speak. Some of them might be in the process of doing this and might in the next couple of months be doing it like we are describing it here. Some of them might take years to get there. Then again, some of the companies that might take years might actually be destroyed in between or meanwhile, and be disrupted. Some of them might not because they’re in very legacy businesses, and it’s fine, and it’s okay. Again, don’t take everything that Bertrand and I are saying today as this is gospel, and it’s going to happen tomorrow, and why the hell are we not doing it? We think that aspirationally, this is where you should be moving to as an organization, whatever size you’re at. Speed will matter, as we discussed before, but not everyone, obviously, is going to move as fast as we’re describing it here.Bertrand Schmitt Yes. Me, for instance, take inspiration often with what some of the AI labs, frontier AI labs, are doing, the way they are working, especially in OpenAI and Anthropic. They are clearly at the top of the spear in terms of what is it that you can do because they have access to models we don’t have access to, because they have unlimited tokens they can use for tasks. They hire people who are, of course, 100% on AI. They are the best example of what is achievable if you have the top minds, if you have the latest models, if you have unlimited tokens. From there, you can take that for our needs and for our situation, and others in industries that are not as advanced. Definitely, you have some time. But as you say, things are moving fast, things are changing. Wall Street is going to expect better returns because when we discuss all of this, the conclusion is that you should be able to do more with less. That’s as real as it gets at some point. By the way, that’s what you see. You see better performance, a better business performance right now. So even if you might not get disrupted, you’d better start there. For some, it might take more time, and they might still be fine.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Maybe to bookend this section, clearly what we’re saying is organizations are going to change. Their MOs are going to change, the structures are going to change. There are elements of what we discussed before in terms of judgment that are fundamental to this. The ability that in some ways, one would say a lot of the technique of getting solutions out there, even in brainstorming or problem-solving, is going to get democratized. The algorithms are able to do that. On the other hand, having points of view and having wisdom is not necessarily democratized, necessarily by the machines. It can be facilitated, it can be more productive in achieving that level of wisdom, but wisdom still will matter at the end of the day. We’re not saying that’s out of the question. Actually, that’s going to be the asset. People who have fundamental wisdom that can come to the table and frame things. We see this even today in prompt engineering, on just creating prompts. The better your prompt is, the better the outcome is going to be, the result that you get from the algorithms. That’s not going to change, in my opinion, anytime soon. That UI interaction piece is not going to change anytime soon. Again, if you’re an organization thinking through organizational structure, culture, if you’re thinking through hiring, these are some of the elements that we think will give you an opportunity, but I would actually go one step further. On the positive side, I would say, they give you arbitrage. If you’re able to move faster than your competitors and really adapt your org faster, you’ll reap the benefits faster as well. That’s what many still say and relate to as the word innovation. That’s how innovation gets accelerated. I think there’s a huge opportunity right now for arbitrage. If you move fast, experiment, experiment on new org structures, experiment with talent, you’ll know that some of them will work well, some of them will fail miserably, so you can’t experiment on literally everything. On the other side, I think the doomsday scenario is if you don’t, if you’re on the other side and your competitor is outpacing you on trying these different organizational models, structure, hiring models, and operating models, they’ll potentially just disrupt you. They’ll do stuff that you thought you had the moat on, and lo and behold, you don’t anymore. Sometimes it comes just from org, just from injection of people with a different MRO, different operating model.Bertrand Schmitt The Human Element: Are We Underestimating It? Maybe we can move to our next section about the human elements. Are we underestimating it or are we overestimating it? The three things that are a big part of the human elements, emotion, creativity, and synthesis. Is it just soft skills, replaceable part? On the contrary, is it the durable part now that we have automated intelligence?Nuno Gonçalves Pedro I’ll start with emotion first because I think it’s probably the easiest of all the ones you’ve mentioned. Emotion is key. Many of you listening to us will know this. The way you deliver a certain message, the emotion that you have when you deliver it, just in and of itself, this could be a sentence, it’s something verbal, et cetera. Makes a difference between the person or the people on the other side actually adopting it or actually just resisting it. Emotion is critical. It’s what runs the world. Everyone talks about a bunch of things, but emotion is a currency that is still naturally human. It will be, I feel, difficult for these AI tools and platforms to recreate it fully until there’s some literally very high-definition manifestation of them as avatars or some physical manifestation of them as robots and all that stuff. It will take a while for that emotion to be manifested. Emotion, I think, is still something that we as humans have as a moat, and it’s critical. As you mentioned before, I was a strategy management consultant at McKinsey, and getting people to action is actually 80% about the delivery, communication, the emotion that you surround the project itself, more than sometimes the truth. It’s great to have the truth and to have something that is similar to the truth in terms of analysis, but in some ways, that’s not what really moves change. Change is moved by, I would argue, a significant amount of emotion and alignment on emotions.Bertrand Schmitt You could argue that’s something that most politicians have perfectly understood. If you look at most campaigns these days, everything on emotions, maybe the tagline might be one word. It’s interesting when you see from that perspective that actually it’s very little on facts, very little on all of this, but more about emotion. You could argue it’s the same for businesses in the future? That’s a fair question. I think creativity is another one that’s quite important. At the same time, it’s not so easy because I must say I’m quite amazed when I’m looking for creativity from AI, either to generate the image, to generate video, to generate audio, or to generate text. AI can be pretty creative. I still think you need to control its creativity; you need to understand what’s good, what’s bad, what’s quality, but at the same time, I can see even in creative tasks, AI can be a very strong partner. I’m talking about any creative task, like invent a name for a product, let’s brainstorm the mission for the company. AI can actually be doing a pretty impressive job. That’s the type of job where you will hire experts, where you will use some of the best people in your team to help you for days. We say, “You can do quite a lot.” It’s an interesting one because I think there is some unique human creativity, and at the same time, AI can be pretty strong at creative task as well.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro I agree. In particular, if it represents benchmarking, if it represents repetition, if it represents seeing the world and then coming up with something that presents itself as creative, to be honest, it can actually outpace humans. If it’s like genuine light bulb moments of creativity, angles that haven’t been tried before, certainly not in the same way, I think humans still have the advantage. To your point, I agree. This is not a humans-win situation. On the previous one, on emotion, still, part of it is because, also on emotion, there are exchanges. You and I might be looking at each other, and from the facial expressions and the reactions, where you judge that for AI to get there, it’s going to take a long time. There’s going to be a lot of very complex algorithmic stuff put into that for AI to be able to create synthetic emotional behaviors, but creativity, I agree with you. There are a lot more nuances to it today, where AI does have significant advantages at the end of the day. Synthesis depends. Synthesis, I feel, if we’re talking about holding a bunch of messy assumptions, contextualized inputs with different layers of data adjacent to them and then trying to create and form one coherent, fully accountable point of view that you stake something on, like a decision, a company, a business unit, whatever, I think humans have the advantage. Part of it is the complexity of what we have today with generative, pre-trained transformers, today with GPTs, where the hallucination comes through, where it’s really more statistical analysis. Over time, maybe synthesis will be a forte for AI. Right now, I think we still have that ability to really be the ultimate decision-makers and judge-makers and have that wisdom put at the table to make those decisions. Honestly, models are very good on balancing both sides, so ended up, as we say in Portuguese, neither fish nor meat. It’s to balance both sides’ answers. That’s not helpful in most cases. When you’re in a difficult position where, for example, the future of a company, company is almost dying, what do you do? I’m not sure your AI algorithms that are going to give you a great solution. Because it will give you a median or average solution, which likely will lead you to a median or average outcome, which in this case would be failure. Again, on synthesis, there are some areas of advantage for human beings. If you are looking for clearly synthesized perspectives on certain elements that are maybe less edge-focused, they’re more than the normal part of the normal distribution, then probably AI agents are brilliant at that. All the tools we have today are pretty good at that, and I think they’ll just get better over time. That’s how I see synthesis.Bertrand Schmitt I think a lot of improvements will come with a better fine-tuning of agents to what’s special about your company. Because if you just take a general agent, there is only so much. It can understand your industry, your company, and your way of working. I think that part of making sure your agents are finely trained, finely tuned on your own business, so that they can give you a really well-calibrated feedback, will have a lot of importance.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro I think that’s absolutely spot on. Maybe to end it, what is definitely different about humanity? Definitely, emotion, as we discussed, some pieces of synthesis. Creativity, maybe the light bulb creativity, not the more repeatable creativity, the one that you can put and encapsulate into processes in some ways. There are elements of us being physical, which robots can’t still recreate. That’s definitely an advantage. The embodied, we’re embodied. That’s obviously a huge advantage. With that also comes advantages because we have to interpret each other, and we have to see the complexities in physicality that land to it. Is human and the human element categorical difference? If we’re having a more philosophical discussion around this, I think it is. I think it will be for at least the foreseeable future and maybe decades to come, even in whatever scenarios we’ll discuss, which is our next section, scenarios.Bertrand Schmitt I would say projecting beyond 10 years is always pretty hard on this because, again, some of the improvements we are talking about we can imagine based on how it has evolved, but at the same time, there will be disruptions in AI. Stuff that we take for granted in terms of weakness, especially, might not be there in a few years from now. Either because it has been solved through brute force or because the field will have made significant change and improvements and discoveries, making some of our points moot. If we talk about embodiment, obviously, robots are coming. How fast, how cheap? That will be a big question. Right now, they’re not very smart. They’re usually very specialized. The more we move to a more general form factor, humanoid form factor, the more I think it will change. Also, another piece of the puzzle is that we have the assumption of agents having trouble to convince humans and stuff. At some point, we keep assuming that humans in the loop. If we’re talking about agents convincing another agent, not having embodiment might be even more efficient. That will be another perspective. Going forward, we will have not just agents we control who are doing a job and scanning the job, but agents truly interacting with other agents. You have agents controlled by one person, one team in your company, working either together or maybe not confrontationally, but trying to think and having different perspectives with another agent, controlled by other teams. I don’t think we have seen much of that now. We have seen mostly agents that are controlled by one team doing one job in one direction. Not multiple teams agents working together, or against or in parallel with another team agent. I think we will see some interesting things coming out of that.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Scenarios Switching to scenarios, we love our two-by-twos. We haven’t done one in a while. This time it’s a two by two. We have four scenarios. I think on one axis, we would have potentially the capabilities of AI. One side would be more incremental. The other side would be the extreme full AGI. I’ll define it in a bit so that we can at least have a little bit of a definitional view on what the AGI is. Then the other axis would be how gains are distributed, concentrated versus broad. Obviously, if they’re very concentrated, it’s more unequal. It only goes to a few companies, a few people, a few individuals. If it’s broad, it’s much more dispersed through society, et cetera. AGI, just to try to define it, the formal definition of it is that it’s a hypothetical AI that matches or exceeds human capabilities across virtually all cognitive and practical tasks. In some ways, AGI can learn, reason, and adapt to novel situations across any domain. Then there are several mutations on this, but there’s one notion, or rather, there are three notions that normally are across a lot of these definitions. One is generalization, ability to seamlessly transfer knowledge from one domain to another without needing retraining, which is a very impressive skill that we humans still seemingly have. Autonomy in agency, the capacity to operate independently, set goals, plan and execute complex tasks. I think AI is their issue with agents to a lot of that extent. Then, last but not least, human parity, performing economically valuable work at or above the level of a typical human knowledge worker. If you listen to one of our last episodes, you’ll realize that Bertrand and I have slightly different views on AGI, and if it’s already here or not. I think, definitionally, maybe we have slightly different views on what the definition actually is. For me, maybe AGI is a little bit more what some would call superintelligence and generalized superintelligence. Strict to census, Bertrand is more connecting to AGI as in its prime definition. It behaves as well or better than a human thing. Maybe that’s what’s leading us to differences on whether AGI has arrived or not.Bertrand Schmitt Personally, I will have a different scale where I will put AGI, as you just said, in some ways, relatively similar in performance to your average human being. On top of it, it’s able to touch different domains that most humans are not able to do. Usually, there is some level of specializations where in AI, it can be more generic. I will put ASI, Artificial Superintelligence, as clearly the step beyond. Something that, on any dimension you pick, it’s able to beat a human expert. From my perspective, I think we already discussed that, but we are at AGI already. We have AI that can do way better, not just way better, but at least as well as humans on many topics, sometimes better. Yes, there are some topics that are not for AI yet. Embodiment, for instance, to flock with your humanoid robot in 2026. For me, we are partially there or fully there in AGI. If we take the stricter definition, ASI, we are definitely not there, but my guess is that it’s moving quite fast. We might be there in a few years from now. I don’t think we are talking about multi-decades. It’s 5 years, maybe 10. Of course, there are questions because people will say, for instance, “Hey, how do you become truly super-intelligent when all your training is based on human data?” That’s not an easy one because how do you train on that? To be way better, not just a bit better, but way better. Maybe I’m going on a tangent, but some are looking at AI learning from AI, AI being taught from AI, AI fighting with AI, AI challenging AI. The same way we saw this AlphaGo moment where AI was not trained anymore, like in chess with human moves, but has been trained to play against itself. That’s when it reached superintelligence in Go. It reached superintelligence by playing against itself and basically letting go of that human baggage, if you want, and going to the next level. What I found interesting in that, actually, first, that’s what happened, but two, there was some analysis that the average level of Go players and the top players went up after AlphaGo because AlphaGo, in a way, opened doors that humans didn’t believe were open in front of them, or they didn’t see them. They didn’t see these doors, so they didn’t bother to open them. AI opened new doors, but interestingly enough, humans improved after that, thanks to AI. You see what I mean? It was an interesting, okay, that self-learning from AI was the way to go beyond the current level of human knowledge and human expertise, but at the same time, humans were able to follow up. It was not like suddenly humans are totally useless crap. They improved. Did they still beat AI? Maybe not, but it was definitely also helpful.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Back to our scenarios. We’re going to take the definitional extreme just for argument’s sake for scenarios. We’re going to talk about maybe what you were saying, ASI rather than full AGI, but like ASI. Again, artificial superintelligence as the extreme on the one hand. Let me talk about maybe the first scenario that would come to mind. Maybe we can call it the plateau scenario. All of this was great, but it was all smoke and mirrors. They were great at some cognition stuff. They’re a great tool. At some point, they’re going to hit a wall. Hallucinations are never going to be a thing of the past. We can’t fully trust them on really hardcore stuff. We’ll gain productivity enhancements. We’ll keep gaining those productivity enhancements, but at some point in time, we really won’t reach ASI. We really will be stuck with what we have. It’s a little bit like we get the next big thing, the next big spreadsheet, the next big internet, but it’s not going to change the whole world beyond just productivity, enhancements, and amazing tools that we have available to us that makes us much better. In that scenario, the winners will continue being fast adopters, probably small and medium businesses, because there won’t be a push for maximum speed either, so they’ll catch up at some point. Then AI native companies will be better companies than other companies, but not necessarily overall disruptors across the board. It’s not necessarily a new species of companies. It’s just companies that are a little bit better at doing stuff, which we also saw during the internet phenomenon and that first big push forward and then bubble, where we had some companies that were fundamentally different on how they operated. It took us another couple of decades for companies to be more and more digitally native along the way. Basically interesting, but it’s boring. It’s like, cool, we got tools, we got promised the world. What are the implications? All these companies that are worth trillions and trillions of dollars are not worth trillions and trillions of dollars. Because at some point we’ll face competition, commoditization. It will just be tools and platforms. They will not unlock that next stage. Therefore, this will have been a bubble, and likely it would be a hard landing to that bubble. That’s the implication.Bertrand Schmitt I would just say that, yes, I agree with you, but I would just say overall, even if it stopped today in terms of quality improvement, speed or stuff, or it barely improves, I still think we will have 10 years of madness just to leverage everything that we have today.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Understood, Bertrand. This is a scenario. I understand, but maybe we’re going to hit a wall, and we’re going to hit that wall next year, or we’re going to hit that wall in 2 years or whatever.Bertrand Schmitt Possibly. I’m just saying we still have 10 years of goodness from that big push in AI we experienced the past few years.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Absolutely. Agreed, but it’s boring.Bertrand Schmitt It’s boring. It’s a plateau.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro It’s a plateau. The second one is more of something that we have AI, but humans in the loop are going to be critical along the way. The judgment work that we described earlier in the episode is going to be critical to everything that happens. It’s, I would call it the augmentation scenario. The AI will be a great augmentation tool for humans, but humans will never really quite stop being in the loop. Some of the gains that AI has are broadly distributed in society and in the startup, big corporation and small medium business world. Everyone will have access to them. We humans, are still very important. We have all these augmentation things, and AI is mostly benign. There will be a couple of issues, but honestly, at the end of the day, we’re just better. We’re better, faster, more data-driven, more factually current. We’re doing stuff faster, but humans

Episode summary: The head-spinning ascent of AI is a story of scientific innovation, but it's also, fundamentally, a story about money. Between 2013 and 2024, AI netted about U.S.$1.6 trillion of global corporate and private investment; it's estimated that by the end of this year that number will reach U.S.$2.5 trillion. How this massive investment is transforming — and will transform — the way we live and work is a matter of fierce debate and great uncertainty. One person at the centre of this technological and economic maelstrom is Pillar VC's Leah Morris. She's the executive director of Pillar's Encode: AI for Science fellowship, which provides AI researchers the time, freedom and resources to build meaningful, game-changing solutions. In this bonus episode, she discusses how new technologies are exacerbating economic inequality, the enduring value of human judgment and how the AI investment landscape is too often, in her words, “bullshit in a bull ring.” Featured in this episode: Leah Morris is executive director of the Encode: AI for Science fellowship at Pillar VC. She was previously a senior director at Radical Ventures, where she oversaw the firm's responsible AI strategy and managed research partnerships. Her background includes economic AI research at the University of Toronto and experience in global health and security with the United Nations and through nonprofit work in Jamaica and South Africa. Further reading: The next great divergence: Why AI may widen inequality between countries The man behind AlphaGo thinks AI is taking the wrong path How London became the rest of the world's startup capital Universal basic income, the utopia idea resurging in Silicon Valley How AI is transforming scientific discovery while keeping humans at the centre Solve for X is brought to you by MaRS, North America's largest urban innovation hub and a registered charity. MaRS supports startups and accelerates the adoption of high-impact solutions to some of the world's biggest challenges. For more information, visit marsdd.com.

Giving an AI agent real autonomy means accepting it will fail early and often before it gets good, the same curve organizations hit during any real change.Peter Maddison brings a stuck OAuth problem to the table: an AI agent that kept going in circles and couldn't find its way through. That leads into a conversation from Dave Sharrock's local AI meetup about an AlphaGo-style approach to AI agent autonomy: instead of specifying every step, you define hard constraints and let the model work out its own strategy inside them. Peter and Dave connect this to the Virginia Satir change curve, the same dip in performance that shows up when an organization tries a new way of working, and to the difference between using AI to optimize what you already do versus using it to rethink the business itself. They also get into how experiments like Andon Labs' AI-run cafes and vending machines use small dollar constraints to let a model learn from failure without real financial risk.This week's takeaways:- A well-articulated objective with clear guardrails lets an AI agent find its own path to a solution, even one you didn't expect or fully understand.- Real learning, whether it's an AI agent or an organization adopting a new way of working, comes with an unavoidable dip in performance that can't be planned away.- The bigger opportunity with AI isn't squeezing more efficiency out of an existing process, it's using AI to test entirely different ways a business could operate.Listen to the full episode at definitelymaybeagile.comSubscribe so you never miss an episode.Have a question or topic you'd like us to cover? Reach out at feedback@definitelymaybeagile.com

Yapay zekâ yazılım sektörünü nasıl değiştiriyor? Bill Gates neden teknoloji tarihinin en önemli isimlerinden biri olarak görülüyor? Elon Musk'ın X (Twitter) hamlesinin arkasındaki gerçek strateji ne? Atıf Ünaldı ile Netizen'de yazılımcı ve girişimci İsmail Alpen, teknoloji dünyasının geçmişini, bugününü ve geleceğini değerlendiriyor. Programda Bill Gates, Elon Musk ve Warren Buffett'ın teknolojiye etkileri, Grok ve ChatGPT rekabeti, yapay zekânın yazılım geliştirme süreçlerini nasıl dönüştürdüğü, "Vibe Coding (Tını Kodlama)" yaklaşımı ve AlphaGo'nun efsanevi Move 37 hamlesinin geleceğe etkileri ele alınıyor. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, Ray Cochrane breaks down AI distillation, the teacher-student technique frontier labs now lean on to train smaller, cheaper models. He also covers GPT-5.6’s government-vetted rollout, Claude Sonnet 5 landing on AWS, Maryland’s two-year data center pause, and Microsoft’s climbing carbon numbers. Finally, he wraps with Apple’s $30 billion Broadcom deal, Meta’s tamper-proof recording light, Michigan’s parasite outbreak, and a simulation that erased a super El Niño. – Want to start a podcast? Its easy to get started! Sign-up at Blubrry – Thinking of buying a Starlink? Use my link to support the show. Subscribe to the Newsletter. Email Ray if you want to get in touch! Like and Follow Geek News Central’s Facebook Page. Support my Show Sponsor: Best Godaddy Promo Codes Get 1Password Full Summary Cochrane opens with a quick personal update. Longer days have him outdoors, including a float trip on the Sandy River at Dabney State Park, where he found clearer water, clay-like sand, and easy footing. Next week brings both a move and a trip home, so he is stocking up on Trader Joe’s “Power Berries” and IKEA bags at his mom’s request. Then he turns to the lead story. AI Distillation Explained: How Frontier Models Teach Each Other Cochrane’s featured story comes from Hugging Face engineer Sergio Paniego. Distillation is teacher-student training for AI: a capable model generates the training signal, and a smaller student learns to match it. The classic off-policy version compresses giant models into cheap students, either through soft labels or piles of worked answers. Google’s Gemma models and DeepSeek’s R1-Distill line were built exactly this way. However, the industry is now converging on multi-teacher on-policy distillation, or MOPD. Labs build reinforcement-learning specialists for math, coding, and agentic work, then have them grade a single student, word by word, as the student generates its own answers. DeepSeek-V4, MiMo-V2-Flash, and NVIDIA’s Nemotron 3 Ultra all run versions of the recipe, and the Qwen3 team reported better results at roughly a tenth of the GPU hours of raw reinforcement learning. Finally, self-distillation lets models like Cursor’s Composer 2.5 learn from better-prompted versions of themselves. Sponsor: GoDaddy Economy hosting $6.99/month, WordPress hosting $12.99/month, domains $11.99. Website builder trial available. Use codes at geeknewscentral.com/godaddy to support the show. GPT-5.6 Arrives With a Government-Vetted Rollout OpenAI shipped GPT-5.6 as a three-tier family: Sol, Terra, and Luna. Sol costs five dollars in and thirty dollars out per million tokens, half of Claude Fable 5’s rate. The benchmarks split: Sol Ultra wins Terminal-Bench at 91.9 percent, while Claude Fable 5 still leads SWE-Bench Pro. Notably, the API launched in limited preview to roughly 20 partners vetted by the U.S. government, though the model went live in Microsoft 365 Copilot on day one. Claude Sonnet 5 Lands on AWS, Plus Quick AWS Wins Claude Sonnet 5 arrived on AWS through Bedrock, pitched as top-tier intelligence at Sonnet pricing. Additionally, Amazon WorkSpaces for AI agents reached general availability, enabling agents to drive full desktop applications securely. OpenSearch gained a log-analytics engine claiming four times the price-performance, and SageMaker now scales inference about twice as fast. Cochrane also flags that Kendra and Q Business move to maintenance mode at the end of July. Anthropic Wants You to Reflect on Your Claude Habits Anthropic launched Reflect, a beta feature that analyzes your past Claude conversations and visualizes how you actually use the assistant. It requires Memory, excludes incognito and health-related chats, and keeps its insights inside the tool. Cochrane loves the idea. He reviews his own transcripts to extract prompt patterns and turn them into reusable skills, and he suggests listeners simply ask their AI to do the same. AlphaEvolve Goes GA on Google Cloud Google made AlphaEvolve generally available to Google Cloud customers on the Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform. The agent acts as an evolutionary collaborator: provide a baseline algorithm and your goals, and it searches for better, human-readable code. BASF, JetBrains, and Kinaxis are the named early adopters. Meanwhile, Cochrane renews his standing wish that DeepMind release AlphaGo as a playable teacher. Google Adds “How This Ad Was Made” AI Labels Google is adding a “How this ad was made” section to My Ad Center across Search, YouTube, and Discover. Ads built with Google’s own AI tools automatically get the disclosure, backed by invisible watermarks. However, ads made with outside tools rely on advertiser self-declaration. Cochrane points out the limits of voluntary disclosure in an AI-flooded content economy. Microsoft’s Carbon Emissions Climb 25 Percent Microsoft’s new sustainability report shows emissions up 25% in 2025, driven by a data center construction spree. The gross figure is 34 million metric tons before offsets, while other coverage puts the net figure at around 20 million. Water consumption also jumped thirty-four percent, even as Microsoft claims its first water-positive year. Cochrane argues regulation needs to catch up, since Google and Amazon report similar increases. Prince George’s County Pauses Data Centers for Two Years Prince George’s County adopted a two-year moratorium on new data center development, the longest pause in Maryland so far. The resolution blocks new applications, including hyperscale projects, until the council passes real regulations. Water and energy impacts remain open questions the county intends to study. Cochrane gives kudos to residents for making their voices heard. Apple and Broadcom Ink a $30 Billion U.S. Chip Deal Apple is expanding its partnership with Broadcom with a multiyear agreement expected to exceed $30 billion. The deal covers custom silicon and wireless components, with more than fifteen billion chips to be made on American soil. Broadcom’s Fort Collins, Colorado plant anchors the work with a $1.5 billion equipment expansion. Tim Cook framed the deal as accelerating Apple’s commitment to American manufacturing. MSI and Intel Ship the First Arc G3 Extreme Handheld Intel detailed how it co-engineered the MSI Claw 8 EX AI+, the first handheld on the Arc G3 Extreme processor. Highlights include a heat-spreading board layout and game-tuning loops that Intel says run Cyberpunk 2077 up to thirty-seven percent faster. The device is on sale now in void purple for around $1,500. At that price, Cochrane jokes he would rather buy a computer. Meta’s Glasses Get a Tamper-Proof Recording Light Meta answered the most common privacy questions about its AI glasses. Photos stay private on the device until the wearer imports or shares them, and a white capture LED blinks during any recording with no off switch. Moreover, newer glasses disable the camera if the LED is blocked, tampered with, or destroyed. Cochrane reminds listeners these claims are Meta grading its own homework, but the blink signal is worth recognizing in public. Michigan’s Parasite Outbreak Tops 1,200 Cases Michigan’s cyclosporiasis outbreak reached 1,251 cases since June 22, with roughly forty hospitalizations along the way. Northwest Ohio adds more than five hundred cases. The parasite typically spreads through contaminated fresh produce, and investigators still have not found the source. Cochrane’s advice: wash your produce, and get tested if your symptoms fit. AI Finds the San Andreas Fault’s Silent Slips Researchers paired AI with borehole strainmeters to detect dozens of hidden slow-slip events beneath the San Andreas Fault’s Parkfield section. Each silent slip releases stress within hours and is reliably followed by low-frequency earthquakes. Together, the findings support a continuous spectrum from silent creep to destructive quakes. The study appears in Nature Communications, and Cochrane hopes it will lead to better earthquake prediction. Cloud Brightening Erased a Super El Niño, in a Simulation Finally, a Science Advances study simulated marine cloud brightening in response to the 1997 and 2015 super El Niño events. Seeding clouds over the eastern Pacific erased the events entirely inside the model. Real deployment would take roughly 2,400 ships spraying continuously, and the simulations showed side effects like extra warming over Europe and Asia. Cochrane finds the weather-machine concept fascinating, yet he questions the consequences of altering cycles the planet runs for a reason. The post AI Distillation: How Frontier Models Teach Each Other #1870 appeared first on Geek News Central.

L'Intelligenza Artificiale non è nata con ChatGPT. Molto prima dei chatbot, dei prompt e degli abbonamenti ai modelli AI, c'erano ricercatori che lavoravano sulle reti neurali quando quasi nessuno ci credeva. Tra questi c'è Alessandro Maserati. In questa puntata di Office of Cards, Davide Cervellin ripercorre insieme ad Alessandro tutta l'evoluzione dell'AI: da AlexNet ad AlphaGo, dalla rivoluzionaria architettura Transformer fino all'arrivo di GPT. Ma soprattutto affrontano una domanda molto più importante: Come si usa davvero l'Intelligenza Artificiale senza diventarne dipendenti? Si parla di carriera, apprendimento, prompting, modelli linguistici, futuro del lavoro e degli errori che oggi milioni di persone commettono usando ChatGPT. Perché Alessandro ha scelto matematica pensando al ritorno sull'investimento e non alla passione. Perché oggi una laurea apparentemente "inutile" può diventare un enorme vantaggio competitivo. Il metodo del CV personalizzato che aumenta drasticamente le probabilità di essere assunti. La vera storia dell'Intelligenza Artificiale: AlexNet, AlphaGo, la celebre mossa 37 contro Lee Sedol, Transformer, "Attention Is All You Need", GPT e ChatGPT. Perché le aziende adottano tecnologie con anni di ritardo e come sfruttare questo vantaggio. ChatGPT, Claude o Gemini: quale conviene davvero usare oggi? Perché le vecchie tecniche di prompting ("ragiona passo passo", "immagina di essere un avvocato") oggi funzionano molto meno. Gli errori più comuni quando si usa l'AI sul lavoro. Le due attività che Alessandro sconsiglia di delegare completamente all'Intelligenza Artificiale. I rischi dell'AI nelle relazioni personali e nella formazione delle nuove generazioni. Come usare ChatGPT per ampliare il proprio pensiero invece che limitarsi a fare più velocemente le stesse cose. Questa intervista è pensata per chi vuole capire davvero come evolverà l'Intelligenza Artificiale nei prossimi anni e come prepararsi, sia come professionista sia come imprenditore. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

2025 年，Tesla Optimus Gen 2 能拿鸡蛋，宇树机器人能翻跟头，波士顿动力 Atlas 能 360 度旋转——机器人的运动能力已逼近 90 分。但如果你让机器人扣一颗扣子、给手机充个电，它可能连插头都找不准。具身智能的最后一块拼图——触觉，至今还没装上。触觉到底是通往 AGI 的必经之路，还是一个可有可无的锦上添花？一边是头部公司纷纷自研视触觉传感器，另一边是触觉传感器至今没有大规模量产落地，连像样的开源数据集都几乎不存在。2026 年被称为「触觉元年」——但这一年，真的来了吗？ 本期嘉宾是一目科技创始人兼 CEO 李智强（Eric），他用十年时间把触觉传感器从实验室带到了量产线。我们在一起聊了聊机器人触觉有哪些解决方案；触觉作为一种全新模态，如何整合进机器人的大脑；以及触觉传感器商业化落地的场景在哪里。 本期人物 李智强 Eric，一目科技创始人兼 CEO 丁教 Diane，「声动活泼」联合创始人、「科技早知道」主播 Yaxian，「科技早知道」主播 时间轴 [02:15] 视觉三大死穴：精度、遮挡、缺乏力觉 视觉测距只能到毫米级，灵巧操作需要亚毫米精度 物体的背面完全被遮挡，手到底碰到了没有、力有多大，视觉完全不知道 [05:05] 三张成绩单：运动 90 分、灵巧手 59 分、大脑只有 30 分 运动控制已非常接近完成，硬件本身的自由度甚至超过人类 灵巧手的技术方案有了但还没过质量门槛，高自由度路线还未收敛 大脑最差：没有物理世界的触觉信息，大语言模型「读万卷书」但还没「行万里路」 [09:30] 触觉的技术路线：「视触觉」不是视觉，光触觉才是更好的名字 视触觉本质是触觉：弹性皮肤接触物体后产生形变和光影变化，用光学方式读取并转化为力和纹理 行业里曾有纯视觉路线，但视觉的精度、遮挡、力控缺陷无法绕开，两者是互补而非替代 从第一性原理出发，类人五感的核心是「类人」——人类的指尖有 3000 个点位、12000 个受体神经 [16:51] 触觉元年到了吗？价值共识、技术收敛、成本可行性的三重拐点 做 VLA 和世界模型的公司已撞到模态天花板——视觉和语言都有了，一上手还是落不了地 技术路线从电磁、压阻、电容多条路线收敛到视触觉这一条 成本端：触觉传感器是投资回报率极高的模态——性能提升十万倍但成本只增加百分之几十 [23:41] 触觉模型怎么构建？ 触觉数据有三个特点：离物理真相最近（准）、数据量相对小、高频连续信号 前端用小模型 Encoder 做语义理解，再跟视觉等其他模态对齐 行业正在从 VLA 向 VTLA（加入 Tactile）演进 [30:20] 数据难题：触觉数据的独特困境 真机数据最好但太贵太难获得，仿真数据占大头 一个全新思路：预训练用大量纯视觉数据先「学个样」，再叠加触觉进行 fine-tuning [36:27] 触觉在哪先落地？ 人类工人 30 秒一道工序，机器人起初要 100 秒；四个月后做到 15 秒，比人快一倍 一旦 learning-based 的模型收敛，就像 AlphaGo 一样，人就再也赢不了了 [43:01] 一张芯片、自研材料、十年磨一剑：一目的三重护城河 最底层是自研超表面硅光感光芯片，把传感器厚度压缩到 10 毫米 材料学悖论：既要捕捉微米级纹理，又要百万次按压不变形——从单体分子开始自研自产 十年积累带来量产工程化能力：全行业成本最低，性能最好 点击链接，了解一目科技更多信息！ 幕后制作 监制：Yaxian 后期：迪卡 运营：George 设计：饭团 商业合作 声动活泼商业化小队，点击链接直达声动商务会客厅，也可发送邮件至 business@shengfm.cn 联系我们。 加入声动活泼 声动活泼正在招聘全职商务运营经理、早咖啡内容实习生和社群实习生，如果你也对播客行业的内容制作感兴趣，欢迎点击招聘入口 关于声动活泼 「用声音碰撞世界」，声动活泼致力于为人们提供源源不断的思考养料。 我们还有这些播客：声动早咖啡、声东击西、吃喝玩乐了不起、反潮流俱乐部、泡腾 VC、商业WHY酱、跳进兔子洞 、不止金钱 欢迎在即刻、微博等社交媒体上与我们互动，搜索 声动活泼 即可找到我们。 期待你给我们写邮件，邮箱地址是：ting@sheng.fm 欢迎扫码添加声小音，在节目之外和我们保持联系。Special Guest: 李智强 Eric.

Everybody keeps telling you the same story. Every time a machine showed up, people panicked, and every time there were more jobs on the other side. The plow. The steam engine. The printing press. They line them up like dominoes and say "see, this always works out."They're not lying. The pattern is real. But they're betting your future on the assumption that a true pattern still applies, and this time it might not.In this episode I walk through five lies hiding inside the comfortable AI story:The jobs lie. Every machine before this one was a tool. A plow doesn't decide what field to plant. AI is not a hammer. It's a candidate to replace the hand that holds the hammer.The genius lie. They tell you the machine does the thinking and you bring the ideas. Watch Move 37 in AlphaGo's 2016 match against Lee Sedol. The human commentators called it a mistake. It won the game. That was human creativity dying on camera ten years ago.The access gap. The strongest models are not on a price list. The fence that protected the small operator (you can't be everywhere at once) is coming down. Agents don't sleep, don't quit, don't ask for a raise.The endgame. The darkest version isn't extinction. It's the museum. A remnant kept safe, comfortable, and completely without point.The mind changer. The most powerful thing this technology does is not take your job. It changes what you want, one person at a time, in real time. That's not science fiction. That's the feed in your pocket right now.The one move that's yours, no matter which way this breaks: see the strings. Know the mechanism. Ask the question that breaks the spell. Who pointed this at me, and what do they want?Resources mentioned:Human Compatible by Stuart RussellThe AlphaGo documentary (free)I'm Connor. They're going to tell you to relax. They're going to tell you it's hopeless. Both want you to stop looking. We keep our eyes open every day.AI for everyone. Not just the people at the top.Youtube Channels:Conner with Honor - real estateHome Muscle - fat torchingFrom first responder to real estate expert, Connor with Honor brings honesty and integrity to your Santa Clarita home buying or selling journey. Subscribe to my YouTube channel for valuable tips, local market trends, and a glimpse into the Santa Clarita lifestyle.Dive into Real Estate with Connor with Honor:Santa Clarita's Trusted Realtor & Fitness EnthusiastReal Estate:Buying or selling in Santa Clarita? Connor with Honor, your local expert with over 2 decades of experience, guides you seamlessly through the process. Subscribe to his YouTube channel for insider market updates, expert advice, and a peek into the vibrant Santa Clarita lifestyle.Fitness:Ready to unlock your fitness potential? Join Connor's YouTube journey for inspiring workouts, healthy recipes, and motivational tips. Remember, a strong body fuels a strong mind and a successful life!Podcast:Dig deeper with Connor's podcast! Hear insightful interviews with industry experts, inspiring success stories, and targeted real estate advice specific to Santa Clarita.

In this episode, host Olivier Lafontaine is joined by four industry leaders from the Life Accelerated Summit: Richard Wiedenbeck, Principal Consultant at Avatar Solutions LLC; John Brabazon, CFO at SBLI; Matthew Busbee, Chief Data Officer at Pan-American Life Insurance; and Sheriff Balogun Jr., Head of Insurance and Wealth Technology at MassMutual. Together, they explore the current and future impact of artificial intelligence on the insurance industry. From navigating legacy systems to overcoming regulatory hurdles, the panelists dive deep into AI's role in business transformation. They discuss how AI can drive operational efficiencies, improve customer experience, and shape workforce dynamics. The conversation also highlights how insurance companies are preparing their teams for AI adoption, the challenges of managing AI agents, and the evolving leadership structures needed in the age of AI.   Key Takeaways: AI is not just a tool but a key player in reshaping insurance workforces and operational models. Talent management and knowledge transfer are critical as AI continues to automate processes. Balancing governance, AI responsibility, and data privacy is central to successful AI adoption. Organizational structures need to evolve, with a focus on AI ownership and oversight. Building an AI-enabled culture requires a shift in mindset and deep collaboration across teams. Jump Into the Conversation:(00:00) Intro and context - what this episode covers (02:15) Meet the panelists - Richard Wiedenbeck, John Brabazon, Matthew Busbee, and Sherriff Balogun Jr. (05:33) MassMutual's top technology priorities - talent, AI productivity, and legacy modernization (08:46) Pan-American Life's AI strategy across 20+ countries and regulatory complexity (12:46) SBLI's approach - small company, big transformation, policy admin overhaul (14:41) Ameritas' AI playbook - unit cost reduction, AI workers, and workforce mindset (20:02) The real challenges of technology transformation - legacy systems, buy-in, and change management (25:11) Knowledge management - capturing expertise before your best people retire (32:04) Who owns AI in the C-suite - CIO, COO, or something new entirely (36:08) AI workers in practice - the Herbie and Susie story from Ameritas (40:01) Rethinking the SDLC - why "deploy and learn" beats "test until perfect" (43:30) What happens when human expertise retires and AI is all that's left (46:02) AlphaGo, gamification, and how humans will learn from AI in the future (48:30) Takeaways - be intentional, build governance muscle, don't wait for perfection Resources: Connect with Richard Wiedenbeck: https://www.linkedin.com/in/richard-wiedenbeck-6a752/ Connect with John Brabazon: https://www.linkedin.com/in/john-brabazon-cpa-3a81901b/ Connect with Matthew Busbee: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mbusbee/ Connect with Sherriff Balogun Jr.: https://www.linkedin.com/in/sherriffbalogunjr/  

En este episodio de Mundo Futuro exploramos cómo la inteligencia artificial está entrando en nuevas capas de la vida cotidiana, la creatividad y la ciencia. Primero hablamos de Text to Song, la tendencia viral que convierte conversaciones reales en canciones usando IA. Chats de WhatsApp, peleas familiares, rupturas amorosas y dramas cotidianos se transforman en música, abriendo una nueva pregunta: ¿la creatividad del futuro será más técnica o más emocional? Después entramos a la historia de Demis Hassabis, fundador de DeepMind, protagonista del libro The Infinity Machine y una de las mentes más importantes de la inteligencia artificial moderna. De los videojuegos y Atari, al ajedrez, Go, AlphaGo, AlphaFold y el Premio Nobel, su historia muestra cómo la IA pasó de ganar juegos a resolver problemas científicos reales. También hablamos de Isomorphic Labs, el nuevo proyecto derivado de DeepMind que busca acelerar el desarrollo de medicamentos con inteligencia artificial. Una empresa que acaba de levantar miles de millones de dólares con una ambición enorme: usar IA para transformar la medicina y, eventualmente, curar enfermedades que hoy parecen imposibles. Un episodio sobre música viral, creatividad artificial, ciencia computacional y el tipo de inteligencia que podría cambiar el futuro de la humanidad. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

How did a teenage video game designer from London become a Nobel Prize-winning scientist behind one of the most consequential technology efforts in history? Sebastian Mallaby is a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and author of the new book, The Infinity Machine: Demis Hassabis, DeepMind, and the Quest for Superintelligence which provides an in-depth look into one of the greatest minds behind artificial general intelligence. In this episode, Sebastian and Greg discuss how Hassabis's early immersion in game design and neuroscience shaped his unique approach to artificial intelligence, why groundbreaking science is increasingly happening outside academia, and the tension between scientific discovery and corporate strategy.  *unSILOed Podcast is produced by University FM.* Episode Quotes: Why AI is becoming an ‘infinity machine' 03:01: It struck me that two breakthroughs in AI pointed to more to come. And these were AlphaGo and then AlphaFold. And what these two things had in common was—you had a sort of massive combinatorial space in both cases. So with Go, because it's a nineteen-by-nineteen board, the very first move, there's three hundred and sixty-one choices, then there's three-sixty for the second one. If you multiply that out, you pretty soon get to a search space which is sort of, you know, approaching infinity in terms of the number of possible permutations in the game. And with proteins, the way they can fold is even bigger. And so in both of these challenges, effectively, you have a machine that can make sense of near infinity of data, so an infinity machine. And once you have that, I figured, well, it's niche for the moment, but it may not stay niche forever. The “Third Way” that helped Google overcome the innovator's dilemma 44:06: The third way is you have a skunkworks, like DeepMind in London, which is a separate entity, and you're letting them kind of be the new policy in waiting, like the fightback policy in waiting. And you don't activate it. But when the moment comes when your competitor embraces the new technology, and you're in danger of falling foul of the innovator's dilemma, then you've got the answer because you've been keeping it ready, and you bring it in, and then you fight back fast. How DeepMind helped Google catch up in the AI race 42:54: How did they, in the space of two and a half years, go from the merger announcement to Gemini 3.0, which was better than the ChatGPT rivals? The key to it is that DeepMind had that top-down strike-team methodology, which came from the video game development world, and they imposed that on the Mountain View team, which was much more bottom-up and kind of inchoate in the research process. And that's what generated Gemini 3.0. That's how they got ahead. Show Links: Recommended Resources: Sebastian Mallaby | unSILOed AlphaGo AlphaFold Gödel, Escher, Bach by Douglas Hofstadter Geoffrey Hinton Mustafa Suleyman Guest Profile: Senior Fellow Profile at Council on Foreign Relations Professional Profile on LinkedIn Guest Work: The Infinity Machine: Demis Hassabis, DeepMind, and the Quest for Superintelligence  The Power Law: Venture Capital and the Making of the New Future  More Money Than God: Hedge Funds and the Making of a New Elite  The Man Who Knew: The Life and Times of Alan Greenspan Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Анонсы nFactorial, рекомендации из рассылки nFactorial Weekly, переход Андрея Карпаты в Anthropic, итоги Google I/O разбор возможностей видеомодели Gemini Omni, анализ интервью Джеффа Безоса о капитализме, налогах и бизнес-стратегии, стэнфордское исследование об опасности чрезмерной вежливости ИИ и подстраивании под пользователя, инвестиции Сэма Альтмана в стартапы Y Combinator через токены OpenAI, сборник фундаментальных советов для стартапов от Y Combinator, соревнование по сортировке посылок между человеком и гуманоидным роботом Figure, график инфляции за 25 лет и дефляционная природа технологий на фоне роста цен на услуги, научное исследование влияния 20-секундных объятий на уровень стресса и окситоцина, вирусные видео с главой Nvidia Дженсеном Хуангом, создание персонального ИИ-агента главой МИД Сингапура, разбор устройства AlphaGo в подкасте Дваркеша Пателя, оценка главных бенефициаров потенциального IPO компании SpaceX, смена карьерных приоритетов, почему роль High Impact Individual Contributor стала престижнее руководящих должностей, а также истории успеха из Instagram nFactorial. Рекомендации от nFactorial - Создаем команду Agentic AI-инженеров. Подробнее: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7463104249846034433/ - nFactorial AI Cup: открытый чемпионат Казахстана по вайб-кодингу веб-игр (24 мая, 9:00-18:00, Нархоз Университет, призовой фонд - 1.1 млн тенге + 3 гранта на nFactorial Incubator) - https://www.instagram.com/p/DYE_O6MjW_x/ - nFactorial Reunion - Встреча выпускников nFactorial Incubator разных лет: где они сейчас, что делали тогда, советы - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Csr4j8vAcco - Подписаться на nFactorial Weekly - https://nfactorial-school.kit.com/

Eric Jang walks through how to build AlphaGo from scratch, but with modern AI tools.Sometimes you understand the future better by stepping backward. AlphaGo is still the cleanest worked example of the primitives of intelligence: search, learning from experience, and self-play. You have to go back to 2017 to get insight into how the more general AIs of the future might learn.Once he explained how AlphaGo works, it gave us the context to have a discussion about how RL works in LLMs and how it could work better – naive policy gradient RL has to figure out which of the 100k+ tokens in your trajectory actually got you the right answer, while AlphaGo's MCTS suggests a strictly better action every single move, giving you a training target that sidesteps the credit assignment problem. The way humans learn is surely closer to the second.Eric also kickstarted an Autoresearch loop on his project. And it was very interesting to discuss which parts of AI research LLMs can already automate pretty well (implementing and running experiments, optimizing hyperparameters) and which they still struggle with (choosing the right question to investigate next, escaping research dead ends). Informative to all the recent discussion about when we should expect an intelligence explosion, and what it would look like from the inside.Watch on YouTube. Read the transcript.And check out the flashcards I wrote to retain the insights.Sponsors* Cursor‘s agent SDK let me build a pipeline to generate flashcards for this episode. For each card, I had an agent read the transcript, ingest blackboard screenshots, generate an SVG visual, and run everything through a critic. A durable agent is much better at this kind of work than a chain of LLM calls, and Cursor's SDK made it easy. Check out the cards at flashcards.dwarkesh.com and get started with the SDK at cursor.com/dwarkesh* Jane Street gave me a real deep-dive tour of one of their datacenters. I got to ask a bunch of questions to Ron Minsky, who co-leads Jane Street's tech group, and Dan Pontecorvo, who runs Jane Street's physical engineering team. They were willing to literally pull up the floorboards and take out racks to explain how everything works. Check out the full tour at janestreet.com/dwarkeshTimestamps(00:00:00) – Basics of Go(00:08:17) – Monte Carlo Tree Search(00:32:04) – What the neural network does(01:00:33) – Self-play(01:25:38) – Alternative RL approaches(01:45:47) – Why doesn't MCTS work for LLMs(02:01:09) – Off-policy training(02:12:02) – RL is even more information inefficient than you thought(02:22:16) – Automated AI researchers Get full access to Dwarkesh Podcast at www.dwarkesh.com/subscribe

Send us Fan MailAnd we're back! Back in Nashville that is! Zac and Chad sit down with Kyle Wilshire to talk about why youth ministry has to move past keeping students busy and doing and start forming students who go and live sent. We unpack the Great Commission, what mission trips can and cannot do, and how to build everyday courage for gospel conversations in real life and online. Pickup Kyle's book "GO" hereIn a digital-first generation, the “ends of the earth” are closer than ever. This conversation explores digital discipleship, social media integrity, and practical ways students can start meaningful conversations about faith online and in person. In This Episode:Why the Great Commission means “as you go”How to create a missional culture in youth ministryThe real value of student mission tripsTurning mission trip moments into long-term discipleshipHelping students overcome fear in evangelismDigital discipleship and sharing faith onlinePractical ways students can live on mission every dayDon't Miss... • Ghostbusters memories and why timing matters • A senior speech that shows the power of owning a moment • Youth ministry as belonging and the tension when students drift • Why “go” matters and what “as you go” means • Mission trips as disruption that widens worldview • Turning a trip into lasting formation through reminders and follow-up • Reframing evangelism so students are not carrying the results • Building gospel familiarity so conversations feel natural • Acts 1:8 as a map for where we witness • Modeling faith as leaders in parking lots and daily life • Digital discipleship and using social platforms as witness Whether you're a youth pastor, volunteer leader, parent, or student ministry team member, this episode will encourage you to create a ministry culture that both welcomes students in and sends them back out with purpose.https://www.lifeway.com/en/product/go-teen-bible-study-book-P005852665Support the showJoin the community!

如果你喜歡我的內容，歡迎加入會員支持我，讓我把內容做得更深、做得更好，一起把這個頻道做成我們都想看到的樣子！

Τεχνητή νοημοσύνη που μαθαίνει να επιβιώνει μόνη της, bots που εκβιάζουν CEOs, και μια Κύπρος που πουλιέται κομμάτι-κομμάτι. Από το AlphaGo και τους κινδύνους του AGI, ως τις εκποιήσεις και τα funds που ανάλαβαν τα 'χρέη' μας.

In this episode, we discuss the implications of OpenAI's split from Microsoft. We also shine a light on the $1.1 billion initiative led by AlphaGo's creator.

In this episode, we discuss how OpenAI is carving out a new path beyond its Microsoft partnership. Additionally, we focus on the impressive $1.1 billion funding round led by AlphaGo's creator. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this episode, we consider the implications of OpenAI's break from Microsoft and what the future holds. We'll also discuss AlphaGo's creator's $1.1 billion funding success. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this episode, we discuss OpenAI's decision to move away from collaboration with Microsoft. We also cover the significant $1.1 billion funding achievement by AlphaGo's creator.

In this episode, we explore the liberation of OpenAI from its relations with Microsoft. We also highlight the monumental $1.1 billion funding by the creator of AlphaGo. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this episode, we celebrate OpenAI's break from Microsoft's constraints. We also explore the impressive funding acquired by AlphaGo's lead designer. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this episode, we explore OpenAI's uncharted waters now that it has moved beyond Microsoft. Additionally, we cover the remarkable $1.1 billion raised by AlphaGo's creator.

In this episode, we discuss OpenAI cutting its links with Microsoft and what this means. We'll also highlight AlphaGo's architect securing $1.1 billion in funding. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this episode, Ray Cochrane unpacks Anthropic’s Mythos model and the Treasury’s emergency meetings with Wall Street, then digs into Apple’s vibe-coding crackdown and a gaming-anxiety study that hit way too close to home. Also covered: Verge’s solid-state motorcycle, UBTech humanoid robot sales jumping 23-fold, Japan’s first osmotic power plant, Finland’s permanent nuclear waste vault, Ghostty landing in Ubuntu, Cloudflare’s EmDash CMS, and a Claude Code skill that talks like a caveman. – Want to start a podcast? It’s easy to get started! Sign up at Blubrry – Thinking of buying a Starlink? Use my link to support the show. Subscribe to the Newsletter. Email Ray if you want to get in touch! Like and Follow Geek News Central’s Facebook Page. Support my Show Sponsor: Best Godaddy Promo Codes Get 1Password Full Summary Cochrane opens the show by framing Anthropic’s new Mythos model as the AlphaGo moment for cybersecurity. From there, the episode moves through Apple’s pushback against AI-generated apps, a gaming anxiety study with a deeply personal hook, a series of “first to ship” energy and robotics wins out of Finland, China, and Japan, and several developer-tool stories that show how quickly the economics of software are shifting. Mythos, the Detection Ceiling, and Wall Street’s Emergency Response Anthropic’s Mythos model has Wall Street rattled. Operating autonomously, Mythos found and demonstrated the exploitation of a 27-year-old TCP SACK bug in OpenBSD, an operating system famous for being one of the most security-focused on the planet. Per Anthropic’s red team, over 99% of the vulnerabilities Mythos has identified remain unpatched. The researchers’ conclusion is blunt: “the moat in AI cybersecurity is the system, not the model.” The policy response moved fast. On April 7th, Treasury Secretary Bessent and Fed Chair Jerome Powell pulled the CEOs of Goldman Sachs, Citi, Bank of America, and Morgan Stanley into Treasury headquarters on short notice. All four banks are now testing Mythos internally. Treasury CIO Sam Corcos is also seeking direct access. Anthropic is gating distribution through Project Glasswing, a limited-access program with JPMorgan, Apple, Google, Microsoft, and Nvidia. Cochrane comes down firmly behind Anthropic’s gated approach. Because a 5.1-billion-parameter open model can apparently recover the core analysis chain for the OpenBSD flaw, this capability is not locked behind Frontier Compute. He wants the critical infrastructure hardened before the public gets keys. However, he also notes the bigger lesson is about human wisdom: people offloading all their thinking to AI lose out on the wisdom that makes any of these tools genuinely useful. Apple Bans Vibe Coding Apps from the App Store Apple has been quietly pushing back against what people are calling “vibe coding” apps. Replit, Vibecode, and an app called Anything all run AI models on the phone and produce working software that runs inside the host app. Apple cites Guideline 2.5.2, in effect since 2017, which requires apps to be self-contained. Replit and Vibecode had their App Store updates blocked. Anything was pulled in late March, briefly restored on April 3rd, and then pulled the same day again. The forcing function is volume. App Store submissions jumped 84% in a single quarter as vibe coding tools flooded Apple’s review queue with AI-generated apps. Cochrane thinks Apple is justified, given the security issues swirling around the Vibe coding ecosystem. Even a beautiful diamond gets lost in a sea of sand, and that flood is exactly what Apple is trying to manage. The company behind Anything is now pivoting to iMessage, desktop, and Android. Playing Video Games to Win Is Linked to Higher Anxiety Cochrane gets personal on this one. Through high school and his early 20s, he was deeply addicted to League of Legends. His dad teased him about it constantly. In the last few years of that addiction, his body would go ice cold and shake every ranked match before. His partner identified it as a panic attack. The moment that happened, he quit. Today, he no longer shakes. The new study lines up with his experience. Researchers Kayleigh Watters and Mikael Rubin at Palo Alto University analyzed a publicly available database of 13,464 adult gamers, most of whom primarily played League of Legends. Players who game to win show higher generalized anxiety but actually play fewer hours, since performance pressure pushes them out. Players who game to relax show strong links between social anxiety avoidance and more hours played. The study appeared in the Journal of Affective Disorders. The headline framing of “playing to win makes you anxious” misses the point. The real finding is more interesting: gaming for avoidance and gaming for competition are both warning signs, for different reasons. Cochrane notes that the League of Legends community’s toxicity has been a running joke for years, and this study suggests the game’s structure may have been manufacturing the anxiety that fueled it. Sponsor: GoDaddy Economy hosting is $6.99/month, WordPress hosting is $12.99/month, and domains are $11.99. Both hosting plans include a free domain, professional email, and SSL certificate. Go to geeknewscentral.com/godaddy for the best pricing and to directly support this independent show. Verge Motorcycle: World’s First Production All-Solid-State Battery Cochrane filled his tank for $60 today, which made this story land especially hard. His mom has driven electric for years and patiently manages a 90-mile real-world range. The next-generation answer is already shipping. Verge Motorcycles, a Finnish company, is the first production vehicle of any kind with an all-solid-state battery. Their 2026 bikes ship in Q1 with a pack from Donut Lab, another Finnish outfit spun out of Verge. The numbers are bonkers. The pack delivers an energy density of 400 Wh/kg, roughly double that of current Tesla cells. It sustains 100kW charging, hits full charge in about 5 minutes in the lab and 12 minutes on the actual bike, and the long-range version covers 600 kilometers (about 370 miles) per charge. Toyota, QuantumScape, and Samsung SDI have all been telling us that solid-state is coming in 2027 to 2030. A Finnish motorcycle company shipping in Q1 2026 just embarrassed them all. UBTech Humanoid Robot Sales Jump 23-Fold UBTech dropped its 2025 annual earnings on April 1st. Humanoid robot revenue hit 820 million yuan, roughly $119 million USD, up 2,203% from 35.6 million yuan the year before. Unit sales went from 3 robots in 2024 to 1,079 in 2025. Shares jumped 14% on the announcement. The customer list is a real industrial deployment: BYD, Foxconn, Geely, FAW-Volkswagen, and Audi. The flagship is the Walker S2, with UBTech targeting 5,000 units in 2026 and 10,000 in 2027. Cochrane is honest about what this means. He does not think we are heading for an extinction event, but worker displacement is a real concern. The US has no universal income or universal healthcare. The people affected are not white-collar managers. They are everyday line workers who already make the least on the ladder. Work efficiency reportedly doubles when these robots arrive, which is a company-side win, but the humans they replace are not getting half a year of gardening leave to retrain. He invites the listener to take on this one directly. Japan Switches On Asia’s First Osmotic Power Plant In August 2025, Fukuoka’s Seawater Desalination Center quietly opened Asia’s first osmotic power facility. It generates about 880,000 kilowatt-hours per year, enough for roughly 220 homes. It is only the second operational osmotic plant in the world, after Mariager, Denmark, in 2023. Osmotic generation uses a salinity gradient: fresh water on one side of a membrane, salt water on the other, and the pressure difference spins a turbine. The clever part is what Fukuoka does with desalination brine. Instead of regular seawater, the plant uses concentrated brine left over from the desalination process. This amplifies the salt gradient and squeezes more energy out of the same membrane. The result is a closed-loop partnership: the desalination facility produces drinking water and leaves brine behind, the osmotic plant turns the brine into electricity, and that electricity runs the desalination facility. Every desalination plant on Earth produces brine, so if Fukuoka’s co-located model works, the same pattern could be replicated across hundreds of plants worldwide. Japan’s Luna Ring Solar Moon Proposal Goes Viral Again Shimizu Corporation’s Luna Ring concept is making the rounds again. The pitch: a 6,800-mile belt of solar panels around the Moon’s equator, beaming microwave power back to Earth. Project lead Tetsuji Yoshida has long argued that a full ring could eliminate fossil fuel dependence entirely. The proposal first surfaced in 2013, has no funding, no government endorsement, and no concrete cost estimate. Shimizu has not put any active development behind it. Cochrane finds the concept fun every time it resurfaces. However, this would have to be a worldwide effort in the truest sense, with treaties, a new generation of launch economics, and microwave power transmission at a scale nobody has demonstrated. Beaming the power back to Earth has always been one of the biggest practical holdbacks. The Luna Ring is inspirational, but not shipping. Finland’s Onkalo Nuclear Waste Vault Opens Finland’s Onkalo facility is the world’s first permanent deep geologic repository for spent nuclear fuel. Operated by Posiva, the facility is buried about 430 meters down in 1.9-billion-year-old bedrock. It is designed to hold up to 6,500 tons of spent fuel and operate until the 2120s. The construction costs about €1 billion, with operating and closure adding roughly €4 billion more before the program is done. The catch is that radioactivity remains dangerous for hundreds of thousands of years. Edwin Lyman, director of nuclear power safety at the Union of Concerned Scientists, warned that the copper canisters will eventually corrode, with different scientific opinions on how fast. Geologic disposal remains “fraught with uncertainties,” and we have never validated an engineered system across a 100,000-year time frame. The bet is that the rock and copper outlast the radioactivity. Cochrane sees Onkalo as time-buying rather than a final answer. It is more of a bank holding spent fuel while science catches up. He prefers it to Japan’s ongoing approach of releasing tritium-treated water from Fukushima Daiichi into the Pacific, even though the dilution is well below WHO drinking water guidelines. Burying the waste in an insurmountable containment strikes him as the more honest answer to a problem nobody knows how to truly solve. Ghostty Terminal Lands in the Ubuntu Repos Ghostty 1.3.0 is now available in Ubuntu 26.04 LTS’s universe repository. The install is simply `sudo apt install ghostty`, no PPAs, no Snap, no Nix, no building from source. Ghostty was created by Mitchell Hashimoto, co-founder of HashiCorp. It is GPU-accelerated, uses native Swift on macOS and native GTK4 with libadwaita on Linux, and supports tabs, splits, profiles, ligatures, and the Kitty graphics protocol. Cochrane recently caught Hashimoto on a podcast, where he walked through his agentic coding workflow. Ghostty is being actively built using AI harnesses like Claude Code and Codex. Hashimoto told a story in which Codex fixed a six-month-old bug in 45 minutes, for a total API cost of $4.14. Personally, Cochrane uses WezTerm, but he is excited to see Ghostty become more widely available with a native UI rather than Electron. Borgo: Rethinking Go Using Rust Analytics India Magazine profiled Borgo, a programming language by developer Marco Sampellegrini (GitHub: alpacaaa). Borgo is statically typed with Rust-like syntax, but it compiles to Go and uses the Go runtime and garbage collector. It includes sum types (Option and Result), pattern matching, and full compatibility with existing Go packages. Notably, it removes Rust’s borrow checker and lifetimes entirely. Borgo is not new. It first appeared on Hacker News in 2023, with a RustLab talk in 2024. The 2026 angle is a renewed look at it through the lens of AI coding agents, since type-rich languages like Rust have been showing outsized productivity gains. Cochrane is a fan of Rust and stands by the borrow checker, but he enjoys these exploratory languages for what they reveal about what developers actually want. Caveman: A Claude Code Skill That Cuts 65% of Tokens Developer Julius Brussee built a Claude Code skill called Caveman that forces Claude to respond in stripped-down fragments. No articles, no “just,” no “really,” no pleasantries, no hedging. The tagline is “why use many token when few token do trick.” Across 10 real dev tasks, Caveman mode averaged 294 tokens per response, compared to 1,214 in normal mode. That is a 65% drop in output tokens. The project is MIT licensed with three intensity levels: lite, full, and ultra. Cochrane stumbled across the project online and shared it with a classmate who had been complaining about token costs. The classmate now insists that “the caveman is the only way to live.” Cochrane has not made the switch, but the bigger point lands. If a community plugin can cut 65% of tokens without correctness regressions, the labs are shipping verbose-by-default and charging users for the privilege. He suspects verbose output makes models feel more trustworthy, even when the token math says otherwise. Cloudflare Launches EmDash as a WordPress Successor Cloudflare released EmDash on April 9th, an open-source, MIT-licensed, TypeScript-based CMS pitched as the spiritual successor to WordPress. The big flex is that it was built in 60 days using AI coding agents. EmDash runs on Astro 6.0, either on Cloudflare’s edge platform or on a standard Node.js server. The plugin security model uses sandboxed Dynamic Workers with explicit permissions, addressing the architecture flaw that Cloudflare says causes 96% of WordPress vulnerabilities. Cochrane could not resist pointing out the irony of the name. The em dash has become the trademark giveaway that an AI was involved in writing. He has reservations about whether EmDash will succeed. WordPress is extremely hard to unseat, plenty of “WordPress killers” have come and gone, and the ecosystem is twenty-plus years deep. He is curious to see what comes next but not optimistic. Google Open-Sources the DESIGN.md Format Google Labs open-sourced the DESIGN.md format used by Stitch, their AI UI design tool. DESIGN.md is a declarative file capturing a project’s design system, colors, typography, and spacing in a way AI agents can read and apply. Cochrane has tried Stitch personally and finds it impressive at producing web designs. He has also seen DESIGN.md-style files already start appearing in repositories. He sees this kind of file becoming a new paradigm for agentic design, alongside robots.txt and llms.txt. However, he worries about a side effect. If everyone uses the same standardized format and the same AI tools, the web could become a homogeneous set of sites that all look the same. He is enthusiastic about the standardization but hopes designers continue to push for genuinely unique work. A 13-Liter PC With a Water Loop Built Into the Case Geeky Gadgets covered a build by “Visual Thinker”, a 13-liter mini-ITX case with custom SLA-printed water distribution plates built directly into the chassis. Instead of traditional soft tubing, plates channel coolant between the CPU and GPU blocks and are sealed with TPU and silicone molds. The case supports a full-size GPU and an SFX power supply. No thermal benchmarks, parts list, or pricing have been published. It is a one-off you cannot buy. Cochrane sees this as a sign of where PC building has gone in 2026. Modern mid-grade GPUs run nearly every recent game, so raw performance is no longer the differentiator. He likes seeing builders lean into design and craft rather than just stuffing the most powerful parts into a box. He admits he is the traditional type and built his own machine to maximize parts, but the design-first direction is a healthy evolution for the hobby. To close out the show, Cochrane recommends Pocket Casts as a podcast app. He finds it picks up new episodes very quickly. Big thanks to GoDaddy for over twenty years of keeping this show on the air, and a reminder that every promo code use is like writing a check to the show. The post Mythos: Cybersecurity’s AlphaGo Moment #1862 appeared first on Geek News Central.

Can AI really remove emotion from investing, or does human judgment still matter most when money is on the line? In today's episode, I'm joined by Jack Fu, Founder and CEO of Draco Evolution, a company using AI, quantitative models, and decades of market experience to help investors make smarter and more disciplined decisions. Jack's journey began during the 2008 financial crisis while working as a financial advisor at Union Bank of California, where watching investors lose life-changing amounts of money completely reshaped how he thought about risk, discipline, and long-term wealth creation. That experience led him to focus on one simple principle: avoiding big losses matters just as much as chasing returns. From managing assets for family offices and institutional clients to leading major investment operations across the Asia-Pacific region, Jack built his career around protecting capital first and helping investors stay in the market long enough to benefit from long-term growth. We explore how Draco Evolution is bringing institutional-level investment tools to everyday investors through AI-powered ETFs and a more dynamic approach to portfolio management. Jack explains how ETFs actually work, why they have become such a popular choice for investors, and the important difference between investing in AI companies and using AI itself to manage investment decisions. We also discuss the future of robo-advisors and why the next generation will move far beyond static questionnaires and occasional portfolio rebalancing. Jack shares why he believes the future lies in systems that adapt continuously to market conditions and investor behavior, creating something far more personal and responsive. From algorithmic trading and AlphaGo to today's world of agentic AI, Jack offers a practical perspective on how technology is changing finance without replacing human oversight. He also shares why investors should treat AI as an enhancement tool rather than blindly trusting every recommendation. If you've ever wondered how AI is changing investing, what makes AI-driven ETFs different, or how to stay disciplined in unpredictable markets, this conversation offers plenty of insight. How much would you trust AI to help manage your financial future, and where would you still want a human in the loop?

This is one of my favorite books over recent years. Sebastian Mallaby is the Paul A. Cocker Senior Fellow for International Economics at the Council of Foreign Relations and author of 6 bestselling books. THE INFINITY MACHINE tells the story of AI's progress over the past 15 years largely, but not exclusively, from Demis Hassabis as the protagonist and leader of DeepMind', with its 2010 mission statement to achieve superintelligence by 2030. It's a rich, informative, page turner.What We Discussed:—What is an Infinity Machine?—Influence of Claude Shannon's Information Theory and Douglas Hofstadter's Pulitzer Prize winning book Gödel, Escher, Bach—Origin of DeepMind in 2010. Prescient. Charter, business plan, included use of agents. How Demis Hassabis was made for the mission!—Contrasts with Sam Altman and the other AI leaders, the Oligopoly (cover of The Economist this week). For example, Nature papers vs white papers on company websites. —In March 2016, the same day when DeepMind's AlphaGo beat Lee Sedol, Hassabis says it's time to do protein folding (later known as AlphaFold).—Symbolic AI (historic, deductive, rule-based) vs Deep Learning (Toronto tribe) and Reinforcement Learning (Alberta tribe).—The Big Miss: DeepMind's lack of early recognition of the importance of transformer models (leading to ChatGPT), creating a big opening for OpenAI. And why was this missed? The Comeback Story. Is this happening again with coding (not in the book)?—The AI Arms Race and Hyperscaling—How the complex relationship between Google and DeepMind evolved —The Double Cross —With the dangers anticipated (parallels to Oppenheimer, Manhattan Project, and the atomic bomb), how to promote AI safety?—Is the major build up of data centers justified?Thank you Bob Fleischman, Jeanie, Ruben Max, FelonBroke America, Seitzinator ❌

A team of former Google DeepMind researchers just raised $2B to build America's answer to DeepSeek. In this episode, we sit down with Ioannis Antonoglou (Yannis), co-founder and CTO of Reflection AI, who helped create AlphaGo—the AI that beat the world champion in the game of Go back in 2016. Yannis breaks down what Reflection is building, why they're releasing frontier-level AI models as open-weight, and how mixture-of-experts architecture lets massive models run efficiently. We dig into reinforcement learning, the US vs. China open source gap, sovereign AI, coding agents, and why open science might be the fastest path to the most powerful AI on the planet.Reflection AI: https://www.reflection.aiReflection AI raises $2B at $8B valuation (TechCrunch): https://techcrunch.com/2025/10/09/reflection-raises-2b-to-be-americas-open-frontier-ai-lab-challenging-deepseek/Previous Neuron coverage of DeepSeek: https://www.theneuron.ai/newsletter/deepseek-returns https://www.theneuron.ai/newsletter/10-wild-deepseek-demosSubscribe to The Neuron newsletter: https://theneuron.ai

Demis Hassabis is the Co-Founder & CEO of Google DeepMind - working on AGI, responsible for AI breakthroughs such as AlphaGo, the first program to beat the world champion at the game of Go; and AlphaFold, which cracked the 50-year grand challenge of protein structure prediction and was recognised with the 2024 Nobel Prize in Chemistry. Demis is revolutionising drug discovery at Isomorphic Labs. Ultimately, trying to understand the fundamental nature of reality. AGENDA: 00:04:00 — What Actually Counts as AGI; and Where Are We Today? 00:05:00 — What Are the Biggest Bottlenecks Holding AI Back Today? 00:06:00 — Have We Hit the Limits of Scaling Laws? 00:07:00 — Where Is AI Ahead of Expectations; and What's Still Missing? 00:07:30 — Why Can't AI Systems Learn Continuously Like Humans? 00:08:30 — How Did DeepMind Go from Behind to Leading the Pack? 00:11:00 — Are We Heading Toward Model Commoditization; or Winner-Takes-All? 00:12:00 — What Does the Future of Open Source Really Look Like? 00:13:00 — What Does a Post LLM World Look Like? 00:14:45 — Can AI Really Fix Drug Discovery—and Cut the 10-Year Timeline? 00:17:00 — What Does "Good" AI Regulation Actually Look Like? 00:18:00 — Who Should Be the Ultimate Arbiter of Truth in an AI World? 00:19:30 — If Demis Had One Shot to Fix AI Safety, What Would He Do? 00:21:00 — Is This Time Different for Jobs; or Will History Repeat Itself? 00:22:00 — Is AGI Bigger Than the Industrial Revolution; and Faster? 00:23:00 — Are We Underestimating AI Despite All the Hype? 00:23:30 — Does AI Lead to Massive Inequality; or Universal Prosperity? 00:24:30 — How Do We Solve the Energy Crisis Created by AI? 00:26:00 — Why Stay in the UK Instead of Moving to Silicon Valley? 00:28:00 — Will Europe Ever Build a Trillion-Dollar Tech Giant? 00:29:30 — Meeting Elon Musk for the First Time? 00:31:00 — What Big Questions About AI Is No One Talking About? 00:31:30 — What Does Demis Want His Legacy to Be?    

On today's podacest, Brian and Mandy discuss new trailers and franchise news (including Spider-Man: Brand New Day with a Man-Spider storyline, Punisher ties, Wonder Man, Daredevil's return, Jessica Jones coming back, a live-action Moana, another live-action Scooby-Doo reboot, and a new Lord of the Rings project with Stephen Colbert involved), then dive into artificial intelligence and its impact on creative work and jobs. Brian describes workplace pressure to add AI everywhere, the difficulty of defining ethical boundaries for writers and artists, and concerns about AI being trained on unlicensed work, generating “AI slop,” and improving exponentially. They also cover infrastructure and environmental costs of server farms, rising hardware prices, AI's ubiquity in search and products, chatbot benefits and harms, and fears that AI will replace apprenticeship pipelines and push entertainment toward mass-produced, homogenized content. 00:00 AI Threat or Revolution 00:38 Spider-Man Trailer Breakdown 01:48 Punisher and Marvel Rumors 02:29 Daredevil and Jessica Jones Return 04:29 Moana Live Action Debate 05:22 Reboots and LOTR News 06:03 AI Ethics for Creators 07:13 Tool vs Cheating 09:20 AI Slop and Rapid Progress 10:38 AlphaGo and Move 37 12:20 AI Beats Most People 12:58 Training Data Ethics 13:43 Server Farms Impact 15:27 Costs and Hardware Crunch 16:29 No Ethical AI Debate 17:02 Chatbots and Mental Health 18:18 AI Everywhere Now 20:22 Jobs and Apprenticeships 23:07 Publishing Slush Piles 25:15 AI Content Flood Future 28:36 Human Creativity at Risk 29:04 Episode Wrap Up

La tertulia semanal en la que repasamos las últimas noticias de la actualidad científica. En el episodio de hoy: Cara B: -Compuestos volátiles revelan la composición de los materiales para embalsamamiento en el antiguo Egipto (47:45) -Teorías de la consciencia (1:18:45) -Señales de los oyentes (1:42:15) Este episodio es continuación de la Cara A. Contertulios: María Ribes, Luisa Achaerandio, Alberto Aparici, Juan Carlos Gil, Ignacio Crespo, Francis Villatoro, Héctor Socas. Imagen de portada realizada por Mayra Schwarzschild. Todos los comentarios vertidos durante la tertulia representan únicamente la opinión de quien los hace... y a veces ni eso

La tertulia semanal en la que repasamos las últimas noticias de la actualidad científica. En el episodio de hoy: Cara A: -Acast, nuevo partner de CB:SyR (5:00) -Evento cientófilo para ver el eclipse del 12 de Agosto (6:00) -Entrevista 10 años de DeepMind: Pushmeet Kohli y Thore Graepel (13:00) Este episodio continúa en la Cara B. Contertulios: María Ribes, Alberto Aparici, Juan Carlos Gil, Ignacio Crespo, Francis Villatoro, Héctor Socas. Imagen de portada realizada con Midjourney. Todos los comentarios vertidos durante la tertulia representan únicamente la opinión de quien los hace... y a veces ni eso

Este audio es un suplemento a nuestro episodio 550 de marzo de 2026. Contiene la versión original en inglés de la entrevista a los Drs. Pushmeet Kohli y Thore Graepel, del laboratorio DeepMind de Google, celebrando los 10 años de la legendaria victoria de su sistema AlphaGo sobre el campeón mundial humano de Go, un hito de la IA que ha abierto una línea de trabajo muy prolífica, incluyendo el sistema AlphaFold (Nobel de Química en 2024).

Theme music by UNIVERSFIELD & background music by PodcastACGoogle Deepmind's recent podcast on 10 years of AlphaGoThe All Things Go interview with Peter Doggers, author of The Chess RevolutionThe interview with Andreii Kravets 3p on winning the European Go ChampionshipThe new Japanese film Bushido which is supposed to heavily feature GoThe article breaking down Fan Hui's comments from a few podcast episodes in Chinese and translated to English.Show your support hereEmail: AllThingsGoGame@gmail.comEpisode SponsorsBadukPop - Learn the rules of the ancient Chinese board game Go - also known as Baduk (바둑) or Weiqi (圍棋) - with a fun, interactive tutorial. Sharpen your Go skills with daily random Go problems (Tsumego) at your choice of difficulty level. Play games online or with a variety of AI opponents, each with its own unique playing style and strength.SmartGo One - Your complete app for the game of Go. Learn to play, practice against the computer, study master games, solve problems, and read Go books. Free to download.

This week new research suggests that in recent years the Earth has been warming faster than we predicted. But scientists are undecided on whether this change is going to be permanent. Laura Wilcox, Professor of Aerosol-Climate Interactions at the University of Reading explains. Tom Whipple is joined by Kit Yates, Author and Professor of Mathematical Biology and Public Engagement at the University of Bath. They mark the ten year anniversary of a game of ‘Go' in which a computer programme called AlphaGo beat human Go champion Lee Sodol. Computer scientist at Google DeepMind Thore Graepel was witness to the game and talks about why the event has become a crucial moment in the story of AI. Kit also brings Tom his pick of the science news.To discover more fascinating science content, head to bbc.co.uk, search for BBC Inside Science and follow the links to The Open University. Presenter: Tom Whipple Producers: Clare Salisbury and Alex Mansfield Editor: Martin Smith Production Co-ordinator: Jana Bennett-Holesworth

Vor zehn Jahren schlug AlphaGo Weltmeister Lee Sedol. Die KI spielte Züge, niemand verstand. Doch die Maschine triumphierte am Ende über den Menschen. Das Duell zeigte: Selbstlernende Algorithmen sind kreativ und unberechenbar.

It's the 10th anniversary of the famous and historic showdown between Lee Sedol and AlphaGo. A lot has changed since then, and Go players have already been facing the first wave of the AI revolution for a decade now. What lessons from our experience with AI in Go should we bring forth into the era of ChatGPT and Gemini?Join the Discord⁠Support Star Point⁠The Star Point Store

Začelo se je s plemenito vizijo o tehnologiji za dobrobit človeštva, končalo pa z mastnim zaslužkom največjih tehnoloških velikanov. Tako nekako lahko strnemo osrednjo idejo knjige Prevlada avtorice Parmy Olson o orodjih umetne inteligence, ki so v zadnjih letih obrnila svet na glavo. Prisluhnite intervjuju z njo, v katerem strnemo zgodbo ustanoviteljev podjetij DeepMind in OpenAI Demisa Hassabisa in Sama Altmana, ki stojita za orodji, kot sta Chat GPT in AlphaGo, razmišljamo pa tudi o tem, ali lahko takšna tehnologija sploh kdaj zares uide korporativnim interesom. Gostja: Parmy Olson, novinarka (Bloomberg) in avtorica knjige 'Prevlada: umetna inteligenca, ChatGPT in tekma, ki bo spremenila svet'. Knjiga je v prevodu Sama Kuščerja dostopna tudi v slovenskem jeziku. V Xpertizi (39:31) se predstavlja Anita Bolčevič, raziskovalka na področju turizma, FKBV UM. Avtorstvo fotografije na naslovnici podkasta: Kim Farinha     Poglavja: 00:00:01 Uvod 00:01:53 Parmy Olson in kaj jo je navdušilo za poročanje o tehnologiji 00:05:38 Kdo sta Sam Altman in Demis Hassabis 00:11:24 Na prizorišče stopita Google in Microsoft 00:14:41 Kakšna je bila vloga Elona Muska? 00:16:43 Google in njegov Goljatov paradoks 00:17:45 Kitajska noče zaostajati 00:20:55 Kakšna je dejanska tržna vrednost umetne inteligence 00:24:39 Zakaj je regulacija umetne inteligence tako težavna? 00:30:06 Negotov položaj novopečenih diplomantov ali kdo bo opravljal prakso? 00:33:30 Umetna inteligenca, njena 'empatija' in skriti interesi v ozadju 00:36:27 UI uporabljamo za preverjanje lastnih idej, ne njihovo generiranje 00:39:31 Xpertiza: Anita Bolčevič

How did we go from digital computers to AI seemingly everywhere? Neil deGrasse Tyson, Chuck Nice, & Gary O'Reilly dive into the mechanics of thinking, how AI got its start, and what deep learning really means with cognitive and computer scientist, Nobel Laureate, and one of the architects of AI, Geoffrey Hinton. Subscribe to SiriusXM Podcasts+ to listen to new episodes of StarTalk Radio ad-free and a whole week early.Start a free trial now on Apple Podcasts or by visiting siriusxm.com/podcastsplus. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Andrew Humberman BioSnap a weekly updated Biography.Andrew Huberman, the Stanford neuroscientist and Huberman Lab podcast host, dropped a pair of fresh episodes this week that have fans buzzing. On February 2, he welcomed Dr. Read Montague to unpack how dopamine and serotonin drive decisions, motivation, and learning, diving into real-time brain scans and AI parallels like AlphaGo in a chat laced with personal anecdotes from their 15-year reconnection, as detailed on the Huberman Lab site and Singju Post transcript. Just days later on February 5, Huberman released an Essentials episode with movement guru Ido Portal, breaking down nervous system tricks for better motion, panoramic vision drills, and playful exploration to rewire habits, straight from hubermanlab.com.Business-wise, Mens Journal spotlighted Hubermans five core health pillars sleep, sunlight, movement, nutrition, and relationships on February 3, pulling from his podcast wisdom to pitch them as no-nonsense basics over trendy biohacks. A viral YouTube short from Iain Barton Shorts that same day clipped Huberman on neuroplasticity focus exercises, racking up views with his tips for daily visual drills to sharpen concentration.Hes also in the medias crosshairs amid the Epstein files fallout. Plant Based News flagged him January 31 as a wellness bro tied to Peter Attia, whose 1700-plus Epstein mentions including flirty emails surfaced recently, though Huberman himself faces no direct links there. Katie Couric Media critiqued on January 28 his CBS News contributor gig alongside Attia and Mark Hyman, slamming their supplement-pushing protocols as overhyped with conflicts, yet CBS kept them post-scandal. Willamette Week noted on February 3 his 2023 podcast collab with Epstein-linked psychiatrist Paul Conti, stirring guilt-by-association whispers. No public appearances or direct social mentions popped in the last few days, but his feeds hum with blueprint emails to over a million subs. Speculation swirls on long-term bio rep hits from the influencer scrutiny, but Hubermans output stays relentless.Get the best deals https://amzn.to/3ODvOtaThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

In this episode of ACM ByteCast, Rashmi Mohan hosts 2024 ACM A.M. Turing Andrew laureates Andrew Barto and Richard Sutton. They received the Turing Award for developing the conceptual and algorithmic foundations of reinforcement learning, a computational framework that underpins modern AI systems such as AlphaGo and ChatGPT. Barto is Professor Emeritus in the Department of Information and Computer Sciences at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. His honors include the UMass Neurosciences Lifetime Achievement Award, the IJCAI Award for Research Excellence, and the IEEE Neural Network Society Pioneer Award. He is a Fellow of IEEE and AAAS. Sutton is a Professor in Computing Science at the University of Alberta, a Research Scientist at Keen Technologies (an artificial general intelligence company) and Chief Scientific Advisor of the Alberta Machine Intelligence Institute (Amii). In the past he was a Distinguished Research Scientist at Deep Mind and served as a Principal Technical Staff Member in the AI Department at the AT&T Shannon Laboratory. His honors include the IJCAI Research Excellence Award, a Lifetime Achievement Award from the Canadian Artificial Intelligence Association, and an Outstanding Achievement in Research Award from the University of Massachusetts at Amherst. Sutton is a Fellow of the Royal Society of London, AAAI, and the Royal Society of Canada. In the interview, Andrew and Richard reflect on their long collaboration together and the personal and intellectual paths that led both researchers into CS and reinforcement learning (RL), a field that was once largely neglected. They touch on interdisciplinary explorations across psychology (animal learning), control theory, operations research, cybernetics, and how these inspired their computational models. They also explain some of their key contributions to RL, such as temporal difference (TD) learning and how their ideas were validated biologically with observations of dopamine neurons. Barto and Sutton trace their early research to later systems such as TD-Gammon, Q-learning, and AlphaGo and consider the broader relationship between humans and reinforcement learning-based AI, and how theoretical explorations have evolved into impactful applications in games, robotics, and beyond.

 Welcome to episode 337 of The Cloud Pod, where the forecast is always cloudy! Justin, Matt, and Ryan have hit the recording studio to bring you all the latest in cloud and AI news, from acquisitions and price hikes to new tools that Ryan somehow loves but also hates? We don't understand either… but let's get started!  Titles we almost went with this week Prompt Engineering Our Way Into Trouble The Demo Worked Yesterday, We Swear It Scales Horizontally, Trust Us Responsible AI But Terrible Copy (Marketing Edition) General News  00:58 Watch ‘The Thinking Game' documentary for free on YouTube Google DeepMind is releasing the “The Thinking Game” documentary for free on YouTube starting November 25, marking the fifth anniversary of AlphaFold.  The feature-length film provides behind-the-scenes access to the AI lab and documents the team’s work toward artificial general intelligence over five years. The documentary captures the moment when the AlphaFold team learned they had solved the 50-year protein folding problem in biology, a scientific achievement that recently earned Demis Hassabis and John Jumper the Nobel Prize in Chemistry.  This represents one of the most significant practical applications of deep learning to fundamental scientific research. The film was produced by the same award-winning team that created the AlphaGo documentary, which chronicled DeepMind’s earlier achievement in mastering the game of Go. For cloud and AI practitioners, this offers insight into how Google DeepMind approaches complex AI research problems and the development process behind their models. While this is primarily a documentary release rather than a technical product announcement, it provides context for understanding Google’s broader AI strategy and the research foundation underlying its cloud AI services. The AlphaFold model itself is available through Google Cloud for protein structure prediction workloads. 01:54 Justin – “If you're not into technology, don't care about any of that, and don't care about AI and how they built all the AI models that are now powering the world of LLMs we have, you will not like this documentary.”  04:22 ServiceNow to buy Armis in $7.7 billion security deal • The Register ServiceNow is acquiring Armis for $7.75 billion to integrate real-time security intelligence with its Configuration Management Database, allowing customers to identify vulnerabilities across IT, OT, and medical devices and remediate them through automated workflows. 

In this episode, Stewart Alsop sits down with Joe Wilkinson of Artisan Growth Strategies to talk through how vibe coding is changing who gets to build software, why functional programming and immutability may be better suited for AI-written code, and how tools like LLMs are reshaping learning, work, and curiosity itself. The conversation ranges from Joe's experience living in China and his perspective on Chinese AI labs like DeepSeek, Kimi, Minimax, and GLM, to mesh networks, Raspberry Pi–powered infrastructure, decentralization, and what sovereignty might mean in a world where intelligence is increasingly distributed. They also explore hallucinations, AlphaGo's Move 37, and why creative “wrongness” may be essential for real breakthroughs, along with the tension between centralized power and open access to advanced technology. You can find more about Joe's work at https://artisangrowthstrategies.com and follow him on X at https://x.com/artisangrowth.Check out this GPT we trained on the conversationTimestamps00:00 – Vibe coding as a new learning unlock, China experience, information overload, and AI-powered ingestion systems05:00 – Learning to code late, Exercism, syntax friction, AI as a real-time coding partner10:00 – Functional programming, Elixir, immutability, and why AI struggles with mutable state15:00 – Coding metaphors, “spooky action at a distance,” and making software AI-readable20:00 – Raspberry Pi, personal servers, mesh networks, and peer-to-peer infrastructure25:00 – Curiosity as activation energy, tech literacy gaps, and AI-enabled problem solving30:00 – Knowledge work superpowers, decentralization, and small groups reshaping systems35:00 – Open source vs open weights, Chinese AI labs, data ingestion, and competitive dynamics40:00 – Power, safety, and why broad access to AI beats centralized control45:00 – Hallucinations, AlphaGo's Move 37, creativity, and logical consistency in AI50:00 – Provenance, epistemology, ontologies, and risks of closed-loop science55:00 – Centralization vs decentralization, sovereign countries, and post-global-order shifts01:00:00 – U.S.–China dynamics, war skepticism, pragmatism, and cautious optimism about the futureKey InsightsVibe coding fundamentally lowers the barrier to entry for technical creation by shifting the focus from syntax mastery to intent, structure, and iteration. Instead of learning code the traditional way and hitting constant friction, AI lets people learn by doing, correcting mistakes in real time, and gradually building mental models of how systems work, which changes who gets to participate in software creation.Functional programming and immutability may be better aligned with AI-written code than object-oriented paradigms because they reduce hidden state and unintended side effects. By making data flows explicit and preventing “spooky action at a distance,” immutable systems are easier for both humans and AI to reason about, debug, and extend, especially as code becomes increasingly machine-authored.AI is compressing the entire learning stack, from software to physical reality, enabling people to move fluidly between abstract knowledge and hands-on problem solving. Whether fixing hardware, setting up servers, or understanding networks, the combination of curiosity and AI assistance turns complex systems into navigable terrain rather than expert-only domains.Decentralized infrastructure like mesh networks and personal servers becomes viable when cognitive overhead drops. What once required extreme dedication or specialist knowledge can now be done by small groups, meaning that relatively few motivated individuals can meaningfully change communication, resilience, and local autonomy without waiting for institutions to act.Chinese AI labs are likely underestimated because they operate with different constraints, incentives, and cultural inputs. Their openness to alternative training methods, massive data ingestion, and open-weight strategies creates competitive pressure that limits monopolistic control by Western labs and gives users real leverage through choice.Hallucinations and “mistakes” are not purely failures but potential sources of creative breakthroughs, similar to AlphaGo's Move 37. If AI systems are overly constrained to consensus truth or authority-approved outputs, they risk losing the capacity for novel insight, suggesting that future progress depends on balancing correctness with exploratory freedom.The next phase of decentralization may begin with sovereign countries before sovereign individuals, as AI enables smaller nations to reason from first principles in areas like medicine, regulation, and science. Rather than a collapse into chaos, this points toward a more pluralistic world where power, knowledge, and decision-making are distributed across many competing systems instead of centralized authorities.

GO oyunu neden “en saf strateji oyunu” olarak görülüyor? Netizen programında Atıf Ünaldı'nın konuğu İstanbul Go Kulübü kurucusu Mehmet Emin Barsbey, Go'nun 4 bin yıllık tarihini, satrançtan farklarını, Sun Tzu'nun savaş anlayışıyla ilişkisini ve yapay zekâ–AlphaGo kırılmasını anlatıyor. Ünaldı ve Barsbey, bu bölümde strateji, dikkat, algoritma ve sezgisel düşünme üzerine derinlikli bir sohbet gerçekleştiriyor. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Is today's AI stuck as a "spiky superintelligence," brilliant at some things but clueless at others? This episode pulls back the curtain on a lunchroom full of AI researchers trading theories, strong opinions, and the next big risks on the path to real AGI. Why "Everyone Dies" Gets AGI All Wrong The Nonprofit Feeding the Entire Internet to AI Companies Google's First AI Ad Avoids the Uncanny Valley by Casting a Turkey Coca-Cola Is Trying Another AI Holiday Ad. Executives Say This Time Is Different Sam Altman shuts down question about how OpenAI can commit to spending $1.4 trillion while earning billions: 'Enough' How OpenAI Uses Complex and Circular Deals to Fuel Its Multibillion-Dollar Rise Perplexity's new AI tool aims to simplify patent research Kids Turn Podcast Comments Into Secret Chat Rooms, Because Of Course They Do Amazon and Perplexity have kicked off the great AI web browser fight Neural network finds an enzyme that can break down polyurethane Dictionary.com names 6-7 as 2025's word of the year Tech companies don't care that students use their AI agents to cheat The Morning After: Musk talks flying Teslas on Joe Rogan's show The Hatred of Podcasting | Brace Belden TikTok announces its first awards show in the US Google wants to build solar-powered data centers — in space Anthropic Projects $70 Billion in Revenue, $17 Billion in Cash Flow in 2028 American Museum of Tort Law Dog Chapel - Dog Mountain Nicvember masterlist Pornhub says UK visitors down 77% since age checks came in Hosts: Leo Laporte, Jeff Jarvis, and Paris Martineau Guest: Jeremy Berman Download or subscribe to Intelligent Machines at https://twit.tv/shows/intelligent-machines. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free shows, a members-only Discord, and behind-the-scenes access. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit Sponsors: threatlocker.com/twit agntcy.org spaceship.com/twit monarch.com with code IM

Is today's AI stuck as a "spiky superintelligence," brilliant at some things but clueless at others? This episode pulls back the curtain on a lunchroom full of AI researchers trading theories, strong opinions, and the next big risks on the path to real AGI. Why "Everyone Dies" Gets AGI All Wrong The Nonprofit Feeding the Entire Internet to AI Companies Google's First AI Ad Avoids the Uncanny Valley by Casting a Turkey Coca-Cola Is Trying Another AI Holiday Ad. Executives Say This Time Is Different Sam Altman shuts down question about how OpenAI can commit to spending $1.4 trillion while earning billions: 'Enough' How OpenAI Uses Complex and Circular Deals to Fuel Its Multibillion-Dollar Rise Perplexity's new AI tool aims to simplify patent research Kids Turn Podcast Comments Into Secret Chat Rooms, Because Of Course They Do Amazon and Perplexity have kicked off the great AI web browser fight Neural network finds an enzyme that can break down polyurethane Dictionary.com names 6-7 as 2025's word of the year Tech companies don't care that students use their AI agents to cheat The Morning After: Musk talks flying Teslas on Joe Rogan's show The Hatred of Podcasting | Brace Belden TikTok announces its first awards show in the US Google wants to build solar-powered data centers — in space Anthropic Projects $70 Billion in Revenue, $17 Billion in Cash Flow in 2028 American Museum of Tort Law Dog Chapel - Dog Mountain Nicvember masterlist Pornhub says UK visitors down 77% since age checks came in Hosts: Leo Laporte, Jeff Jarvis, and Paris Martineau Guest: Jeremy Berman Download or subscribe to Intelligent Machines at https://twit.tv/shows/intelligent-machines. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free shows, a members-only Discord, and behind-the-scenes access. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit Sponsors: threatlocker.com/twit agntcy.org spaceship.com/twit monarch.com with code IM

Albert Cheng has led growth at three of the world's most successful consumer subscription companies: Duolingo, Grammarly, and Chess.com. A former Google product manager (and serious pianist!), Albert developed a unique approach to finding and scaling growth opportunities through rapid experimentation and deep user psychology. His teams run 1,000 experiments a year, discovering counterintuitive insights that have driven tens of millions in revenue.What you'll learn:1. How to use the explore-exploit framework to find new growth opportunities2. How showing premium features to free users doubled Grammarly's upgrades to paid plans3. What good retention looks like for a consumer subscription app4. Why resurrected users drive 80% of mature product growth5. Why “reverse trials” work better than time-based trials6. The three pillars of successful gamification: core loop, metagame, and profile —Brought to you by:Vanta—Automate compliance. Simplify security.Jira Product Discovery—Confidence to build the right thingMiro—A collaborative visual platform where your best work comes to life—Where to find Albert Cheng:• X: https://x.com/albertc248• LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/albertcheng1/• Chess.com: https://www.chess.com/member/Goniners—Where to find Lenny:• Newsletter: https://www.lennysnewsletter.com• X: https://twitter.com/lennysan• LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/lennyrachitsky/—Referenced:• How Duolingo reignited user growth: https://www.lennysnewsletter.com/p/how-duolingo-reignited-user-growth• Inside ChatGPT: The fastest-growing product in history | Nick Turley (Head of ChatGPT at OpenAI): https://www.lennysnewsletter.com/p/inside-chatgpt-nick-turley• Explore vs. Exploit: https://brianbalfour.com/quick-takes/explore-vs-exploit• Grammarly: https://www.grammarly.com/• Reforge: https://www.reforge.com/• Chess.com: https://www.chess.com/• Everyone's an engineer now: Inside v0's mission to create a hundred million builders | Guillermo Rauch (founder & CEO of Vercel, creators of v0 and Next.js): https://www.lennysnewsletter.com/p/everyones-an-engineer-now-guillermo-rauch• Building Lovable: $10M ARR in 60 days with 15 people | Anton Osika (CEO and co-founder): https://www.lennysnewsletter.com/p/building-lovable-anton-osika• Figma: https://www.figma.com/• Cursor: https://cursor.com/• The rise of Cursor: The $300M ARR AI tool that engineers can't stop using | Michael Truell (co-founder and CEO): https://www.lennysnewsletter.com/p/the-rise-of-cursor-michael-truell• Claude Code: https://www.anthropic.com/claude-code• GitHub Copilot: https://github.com/features/copilot• Noam Lovinsky on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/noaml/• The happiness and pain of product management | Noam Lovinsky (Grammarly, Facebook, YouTube, Thumbtack): https://www.lennysnewsletter.com/p/the-happiness-and-pain-of-product• Kyla Siedband on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kylasiedband/• The Duolingo handbook: https://blog.duolingo.com/handbook/• Lenny's post on X about the Duolingo handbook: https://x.com/lennysan/status/1889008405584683091• The rituals of great teams | Shishir Mehrotra of Coda, YouTube, Microsoft: https://www.lennysnewsletter.com/p/the-rituals-of-great-teams-shishir• Duolingo on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@duolingo• Kasparov vs. Deep Blue | The Match That Changed History: https://www.chess.com/article/view/deep-blue-kasparov-chess• Magnus Carlsen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnus_Carlsen• Elo rating system: https://www.chess.com/terms/elo-rating-chess• Stockfish: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockfish_(chess)• AlphaGo on Prime Video: https://www.primevideo.com/detail/AlphaGo/0KNQHKKDAOE8OCYKQS9WSSDYN0• Statsig: https://www.statsig.com/• The State of Product in 2026: Navigating Change, Challenge, and Opportunity: https://www.atlassian.com/blog/announcements/state-of-product-2026• Erik Allebest on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/erikallebest/• Daniel Rensch on X: https://x.com/danielrensch• Chariot: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chariot_(company)• San Francisco 49ers: https://www.49ers.com/• Breville Barista Express: https://www.breville.com/en-us/product/bes870—Recommended books:• Snuggle Puppy!: A Little Love Song: https://www.amazon.com/Snuggle-Puppy-Little-Boynton-Board/dp/1665924985• Ogilvy on Advertising: https://www.amazon.com/Ogilvy-Advertising-David/dp/039472903X• Dark Squares: How Chess Saved My Life: https://www.amazon.com/Dark-Squares-Chess-Saved-Life/dp/1541703286—Production and marketing by https://penname.co/. For inquiries about sponsoring the podcast, email podcast@lennyrachitsky.com.Lenny may be an investor in the companies discussed. To hear more, visit www.lennysnewsletter.com