Podcasts about Kimi

Send us Fan MailOn est back! Retour d'IA Café. Saison 7. Au programme : rattrapage de l'actualité IA des deux derniers mois…en attendant l'IApocalypse!! Au programme L'apocalypse annoncé de Jacob Coxon et AnthropicDémocratie, état de droit et pouvoir économique : Qui doit définir les règles de l'IA? Claude (Anthropic) promet de filigraner le texte généré par l'IAAttaque orchestrée par des agents IA autonomes d'Open AI contre Hugging face. OpenAI annonce une pause sur ses modèles frontières. Et (trois semaines plus tard) lance son nouveau modèle ChatGPT 6-Astra! Êtes-vous capable de détecter les textes IA? Vraiment?  « Bot or not: Can people tell the difference between stories written by a human or by an AI system? Une IA pour créer des virus - Des scientifiques de l'Université Stanford qui ont utilisé des IA pour créer de vrais nouveaux types de virus. SOCAN vs Suno - Poursuite judiciaire : (Société canadienne des auteurs-compositeurs et éditeurs de musique) vs Suno!  Claude Fable 5 -Mythos; Grok 4.5; Kimi k3, DeepSeek V4ChatGPT work en réponse à Claude coworkBonne écoute.Production et animation: Jean-François Sénéchal, Ph.D.BaristIAs:  Sylvain Munger Ph.D, Marie-Ève Vachon Savary, Catherine Légaré-Pelletier et Jean-François Sénéchal.  Collaborateurs et collaboratrices:  Véronique Tremblay, Stéphane Mineo, Frédérick Plamondon Ph.D., Shirley Plumerand, Sylvain Munger Ph.D, Marie-Ève Vachon Savary, Louis Cormier, Catherine Légaré-Pelletier. En musique : PP2, Aubert Sénéchal (2025) (c)BaselineVoyez ce que Baseline peut faire pour vous !Institut Intelligence et Données (IID) Un pôle d'expertise au cœur de l'écosystème IA québécoisDisclaimer: This post contains affiliate links. If you make a purchase, I may receive a commission at no extra cost to you.Support the show

Überholbedarf in Madrid: Der Große Preis von Spanien wurde zur Geduldsprobe für Fahrer & Fans. Ralf Schumacher und Peter Hardenacke blicken zurück auf das Comeback in der spanischen Hauptstadt, bei dem Kimi Antonelli den nächsten Sieg einfahren konnte. Muss sich der Italiener dafür bei McLaren bedanken? Wird George Russell nun endgültig zur Nummer 2 bei Mercedes und warum gibt es immer wieder Unruhe bei Ferrari? Natürlich geht es auch um den Punktgewinn von Nico Hülkenberg und seinem Audi-Team. Wir kommen live nach München! Meldet Euch jetzt an für den Live Podcast Backstage Boxengasse am 19.10 für nur 39€. Jetzt Platz sichern, noch nichts bezahlen – und uns zeigen, dass Ihr Lust auf diesen Abend habt. → Anmeldung hier: https://doo.net/veranstaltung/231516/buchung

Tom Clarkson is joined by journalists Albert Fabrega and Julianne Cerasoli to reflect on the first Spanish Grand Prix at the Madring circuit.The Virtual Safety Car came at just the wrong time for race leader Lando Norris on lap 15, costing him victory after he'd made a great start from pole. Could McLaren have pre-empted the VSC? Why did Lando pit after the VSC ended? Could he have stayed out on the medium tyre?Tom, Albert and Julianne discuss those talking points and you'll hear reaction from McLaren Team Principal Andrea Stella.Kimi Antonelli capitalised on Lando's misfortune to take his eighth victory of the season and move 81 points clear of Mercedes teammate George Russell at the top of the World Championship.And Max Verstappen came home in P2 for his sixth podium of the year. But could he have won the race if Red Bull hadn't asked him to let Lewis Hamilton past after their opening lap incident?

The Madrid GP Was Fast, Loud… and Almost Nothing Happened Madrid delivered the spectacle, celebrity glamour, and brutally fast cars, but did it deliver a Formula 1 race? Soumil and Kunal break down the Spanish Grand Prix that fans called “an email,” the virtual safety car that changed the result, and why modern circuits may be sacrificing racing for speed and branding. Was Lando Norris robbed by bad luck, a seven-second McLaren pit stop, or simply the way VSC rules work? Soumil and Kunal examine the crucial timing that flipped the race, McLaren's rare operational error, Lewis Hamilton's brake problems, and the chain reaction that may have cost Norris a deserved victory. You'll discover: Why Madrid's 22-corner layout made overtaking almost impossible How the Lance Stroll VSC reshaped the strategies of Verstappen, Antonelli, Norris, Russell, and Leclerc Whether the VSC rules actually need changing, or whether luck is simply part of racing Why Kimi Antonelli keeps benefiting from safety car timing and is now a serious championship threat What is holding Oscar Piastri back, from adapting to the current cars to the lingering impact of McLaren's “Papaya rules” How Lewis Hamilton's brake issue, Max Verstappen's lost position, and Ferrari's strategy could have produced a completely different result Why the post-race Coke controversy revealed a new level of confidence from Lando Norris Soumil and Kunal also debate what a proper redesign of Madrid would look like, why Vegas offers more character than many newer street circuits, and whether Mercedes' upcoming upgrades could change the competitive order after Baku. Madrid may have been a commercial success, but on track it exposed a growing Formula 1 problem: a circuit can be spectacularly fast and still fail to create racing. If you want the strategy, driver psychology, technical detail, and unfiltered verdict behind the Spanish GP, this is essential listening before the season moves on to Baku. Chapters 00:00 Was the Madrid GP actually fun? 00:39 A race of two halves 01:50 Why Madrid's circuit feels too repetitive 02:22 Learning a 22-corner circuit 02:51 Too much branding, not enough racing 03:28 Why overtaking was so difficult 04:01 The drivers who used the runoff 05:19 What could have changed the race? 05:44 How the VSC helped Antonelli and Verstappen 06:43 Antonelli's incredible safety-car luck 08:03 Should the VSC rules be changed? 09:44 The Liam Lawson and Oscar Piastri subplots 10:09 Ferrari's brake problems and McLaren's pit-stop error 11:42 Lando Norris's incredible pace 12:25 The Lando Norris Coke controversy 14:14 Norris is driving like a world champion 15:05 Is George Russell out of the championship fight? 15:34 Kimi Antonelli's championship momentum 16:07 When will Antonelli win the title? 17:13 Why Oscar Piastri is struggling 18:50 McLaren's constructors' championship problem 19:24 Mercedes upgrades and the battle for form 20:15 What Madrid needs to change 21:14 Madrid's commercial success versus on-track racing 22:15 Looking ahead to Baku 22:44 Thanks for watching and subscribing Subscribe to the Inside Line F1 Podcast for more race reviews, previews, analysis, and Formula 1 conversations. #F1 #Madring #SpanishGP Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

華為任正非全家逃亡、Kimi楊植麟16人被帶走？ 習近平啟動「科技整肅」國安部出手畫下AI紅線！【關鍵時刻】20260914 張炤和

Kimi Antonelli has won Formula One's first race at the Madring—but should it have been Lando Norris's victory?Kimi now has an incredible eight wins from his first 38 F1 starts, surpassing George Russell's seven wins. But after producing one of the best qualifying laps of his career, Lando controlled the Spanish Grand Prix until a badly timed Virtual Safety Car and a seven-second pit stop changed everything.In this episode of Paddock 43, Elle breaks down:• Why Lando's Madrid pole lap was so impressive• How the Virtual Safety Car handed Kimi the advantage• Why overtaking was almost impossible at the Madring• The 46 deleted lap times during FP2• Lance Stroll's disastrous 2026 season• Whether the circuit was genuinely ready• The reported theft of 300 metres of electrical cable• Fernando Alonso's uncertain Aston Martin future• The latest information surrounding the 2027 F1 calendar• Wimbledon, influencers and who deserves access to major sporting eventsPlus, Elle shares a personal update about working with GM, off-roading in Tasmania and booking a trip to the Singapore Grand Prix.Do you think Lando deserved to win? And does the Madring need major changes before Formula One returns?Subscribe to Paddock 43 and join the conversation below.#F1 #MadridGP #Paddock43

on today's program... KIMI OVERCOMES FIRST LAP CHAOS TO WIN AT THE MADRING! MAX SPARS WITH LCH IN THE OPENING LAPS AND HANGS ON TO P2 NORRIS SAYS SIMPLY BAD LUCK WITH VSC AND... FERNANDO SAYS...I'M STICKING AROUND...I THINK... THIS WEEK'S NASIR HAMEED CORNER...MORE MOTORSPORTS HISTORY, MARTIN AND, ALEX BRUNDLE AT THE AUTOSPORTS SHOW IN THE U.K. Formula 1 made its first trip to the new Circuito de Madring, about 10 miles outside of the Madrid city center, on Sunday, and Mercedes' Kimi Antonelli christened the track with a win. The championship leader now owns an even more comfortable lead and picks up his eighth career race win, one week after he won the Italian Grand Prix. Max Verstappen finished second after holding off Lando Norris, who was on pole after Saturday's qualifying session, but an unfortunate pit stop contributed to his third-place finish. Ferrari's Charles Leclerc finished fourth, and Antonelli's teammate George Russell came in fifth. Kimi Antonelli It was great to get the victory today, but we know we were a little bit fortunate with the timing of the Virtual Safety Car. Lando (Norris) was in control at the front, but we were able to dive into the pits just as the Virtual Safety Car was deployed, make the cheap stop onto the Hard, get the net lead and run to the end. We probably didn't deserve to win therefore but we will of course take it. We can also be happy with our pace today. We know we are still out of step with other teams in terms of upgrades, but we have been able to win the last two races at very different circuits. That is encouraging as we continue the season; we have a good position in the championships but we know there is still a very long way to go. MAX VERSTAPPEN  “It was a great result, and we really maximised our performance, with finishing P2 on this track a solid way to wrap up a good weekend. At the start, Lewis clipped the kerb and jumped back onto the racing line, I had to go off track, otherwise both of us would have taken damage. I don't think we had the pace to challenge for the lead anyway, Kimi and Lando were faster than me throughout, so I'm happy with second. It's a circuit that's very difficult to pass on; if you position yourself in the middle, there isn't really a way through, so I was able to hold off Lando until the end. This double header has been a positive one. The car has been in a decent window both weekends, and we've been able to score consistently good points over the last few races. A podium is a nice way to end the European swing." LIAM LAWSON  "I think it was a decent race. We had good speed through parts of it, but I just think we weren't on the ideal strategy today. We went for the alternate strategy, starting on the Hards. At the start I lost the position to Franco and lost a lot of time as it was, but by the time I cleared him the VSC came out and they'd boxed, so it was just tricky from there. The start was exciting and I had to take a lot of risks to get the move done on Franco because it's quite difficult to overtake here. It would've been nice to start a bit higher, but considering where we did start, the result today was good and I'm happy we managed to gain two places in the Race. I'm much more confident in the car this week, we've made a couple of great steps, so there are some good things to take away from the weekend." LAURENT MEKIES, CEO & Team Principal  “After Monza another strong result from the whole Team at the end of a tough race. Once again, Max extracted absolutely everything from the car, as he always does. There was obviously some frustration at the start when he had to give the place back to Lewis, but the Team on the pit wall took a good look at it and, credit to them, made the difficult call. It was painful at the time, but Max immediately got himself back into the fight and was outstanding all the way to the flag, including a great defence against the McLaren in the final laps. It was also a strong race and some good points from Liam. It certainly wasn't easy towards the end of his first stint on worn Hard tyres, but he kept his cool and showed good pace in the final stint. Max's P2 is his fifth podium in the last seven races and, although we have had a couple of tricky moments along the way, we are continuing to close the gap and credit needs to go to everyone working behind the scenes at Milton Keynes, improving every aspect of the car and its PU”. George Russell No matter what we had done with strategy today we would have finished P5. The Virtual Safety Car came at the worst point for everyone who had started on the Hard tyre like me, and the best point for those who had started on the Medium. Unfortunately, that is how racing goes sometimes but it is a little bit the story of my season so far! It was very difficult to overtake today but I've enjoyed driving the Madring overall this weekend. It is going to be an intense run to the end of the season. I'm looking forward to getting back to the factory, working with the team, and getting ready for the first of three triple-headers. My pace today, particularly on the Hard tyre, felt good so we can be encouraged by that as we head to Baku. Hamilton Brushes Off Verstappen's Comments!! "It was pretty good racing to be honest," said Hamilton to media after the F1 Spanish GP. When the journalist noted that the radio comment was more out of frustration since he had to give the place back, the Brit agreed. "Yep, I think nothing to do with me in here," he said. He didn't add much on the incident since he came straight to the media pen after retiring on lap 7. But he didn't see it as a fight. His brake issues started early and he had no time to think about losing the place to Verstappen. Hamilton explained why he went for another lap as his pedal came back for a moment. "Yeah, I had a good start," said Hamilton. "I mean I didn't see Max taking that start and then yeah, the battle. I mean I wasn't in the battle then going down into Turn 5 but then it was when I went into Turn 5, then I hit the brake, it started stopping okay. "And then kind of the pedal took a step and ended up like stopped. It wouldn't stop all of a sudden and then I went wide and that's when I just tapped the barrier but it wasn't really, it didn't feel bad like a bad touch. "Then the pedal came back and it was fine for the next corners and things were looking okay and then the pedal went wrong. That was it," summed up Hamilton, who felt Ferrari had a decent car, seeing teammate Charles Leclerc lead for the most part before pitting to end up fourth.

So, what can OpenAI's Astra and GPT Image 2.5 actually do?Drew Brucker and Rory Flynn put OpenAI's Astra and GPT Image 2.5 models through a golf course build, a vintage typewriter animation, and a round of image edits. Rory's golf course experiment burns 70% of his weekly allowance. Drew spends three hours getting a typewriter to type. Their gift for turning a quick test into a side project remains undefeated. The pro-AI half of the show. The other half: a viral AI resignation that looks planned to the minute, Anthropic's 154-page report on how people misused Claude, and GPT Image 2.5 quietly fixing the reasons everyone kept running back to Nano Banana.This episode covers OpenAI Astra with computer use, two ChatGPT chats collaborating inside one project, Three.js and Blender renders, a fantasy football analytics hub, and Astra running Midjourney with mood boards and style references. GPT Image 2.5 multi-edit comments, sketch input, custom aspect ratios, and template creator. Anthropic's threat report, Moonshot and Kimi distillation, and the viral AI researcher resignation. ---⏱️ Fast Hour00:00 What's on Fast Hours this week?06:35 Why do traumatic moments burn into memory07:42 What was different before social media13:48 This week: Astra, GPT Image 2.5, a viral resignation15:04 Did an AI researcher really resign over ASI18:40 How to tell what is true in AI news20:42 Why quitting your AI job can't stop superintelligence27:01 What do the cited reports allege about Kimi28:33 What AI misuse examples do the hosts discuss?34:07 How did Astra build a golf course prototype? 35:35 How did research improve Astra's first attempt? 36:33 What happened when two AI chats collaborated?39:29 Why did Rory stop the drainage research?40:02 How did Drew approach his Blender experiment?40:52 How did Astra recreate Drew's typewriter? 43:49 How long does AI-assisted 3D work take?44:43 How did Drew build a ChatGPT dashboard? 48:32 What happened when Astra explored Midjourney? 53:56 How did mood boards shape Astra's prompts?58:49 What improved in GPT Image 2.5?01:00:24 How do GPT Image 2.5 edit comments work?01:01:47 How do you request multiple image variations? 01:03:30 How well did GPT Image 2.5 resize ads? 01:07:11 How reusable templates in GPT Image 2.5 can help brands 01:08:37 What's coming next for Fast Hours?

Another win for Kimi (8th of his career) at the new Madrid GP, McLaren masterclass, bad day for LH and Russell accept his place as number 2 in Mercedes? Let's discuss. Enjoy!

O programa PÓDIO analisa e debate tudo sobre o GP da Espanha de F1, na estreia do Madring, em uma prova controversa que teve a oitava vitória de Andrea Kimi Antonelli. Felipe Motta, apresentador dos canais ESPN, participou do papo com Guilherme Longo e não deixaram passar nada.

This week, Shaun is feeling all fluffy after Dylan's wedding and wants to share the love with 6 episodes of Kimi ni Todoke: From Me to You. Meanwhile Remington tries to find a way to enjoy the corpse stuffed into a cake. If you'd like to give us feedback, ask a question, or correct a mistake, send an email to AnimeOutOfContext@gmail.com. Like our show? Check out our friends AnimEighties for more anime reviews! Visit our Patreon at patreon.com/AnimeoutofContext if you would like to contribute to the show and get hundreds of hours of bonus content ranging from clips from our pre-episode banter, bonus episodes (including the 4 years of the 12 days of April Fools), our prototype Episode 0, to even getting shout-outs in the show! Intro and Outro are trimmed from "Remiga Impulse" by Jens Kiilstofte, licensed by MachinimaSound to Anime Out of Context under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 which the licensor has modified for the licensee to allow reproduction and sharing of the Adapted Material for Commercial purposes

// hello podcast listeners // it's me kimi from kimi // this is the episode on the movie they made about me // ian and jake had their friend bob martin on because he lived in seattle during the movie // weird choice to have a guest because it's my movie // even though i'm not really like the kimi in this // she doesn't even try to experience pain // anyway check out the episode, which is as close to good as these guys get // if you like it please send me blood and pills just like put them in your usb ports and i'll get them // bye Follow Bob Martin: https://www.instagram.com/bobbiloves2look/ https://bobbe.bandcamp.com/ Further Reading: https://www.privacyguides.org/ Further Listening: The Santiago Boys Podcast https://choramedia.com/podcast/the-santiago-boys/ Further Viewing: REAR WINDOW (Hitchcock, 1954) BLOW-UP (Antonioni, 1966) WAIT UNTIL DARK (Young, 1967) THE CONVERSATION (Coppola, 1974) BLOW OUT (De Palma, 1981) RED ROOMS (Plante, 2023) TESIS (Amenábar, 1996) Follow Pod Casty For Me: https://www.podcastyforme.com/ https://twitter.com/podcastyforme https://www.instagram.com/podcastyforme/ https://bsky.app/profile/podcastyforme.bsky.social https://www.youtube.com/@podcastyforme Support us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/PodCastyForMe Artwork by Jeremy Allison: https://www.instagram.com/jeremyallisonart  Produced by Ian Rhine and Jake Serwin. Additional production by Ryan Torgeson.

Send us Fan Mailمونزا عمرها ما بتخيب… وسباق إيطاليا السنة دي كان مليان دراما من أول لفة لآخر لفة.في الحلقة دي بنحلل كل اللي حصل في الـItalian Grand Prix، من حادث شارل لوكلير ولويس هاميلتون والجدل حوالين مين كان المسؤول، لأخطاء فيراري الاستراتيجية خلال الـVirtual Safety Car. وبنتكلم كمان عن رجوع كيمي أنتونيلي المذهل من P19 لـP1 وتحقيقه أول فوز في الفورمولا 1، أداء جورج راسل والضغط عليه في مرسيدس، ومفاجأة بيير غاسلي. وفي الآخر بنبص على فرص ماكس فيرستابن، لاندو نوريس وأوسكار بياستري، ونتكلم عن أول سباق فورمولا 1 في مدريد وتوقعاتنا للجولة الجاية.Monza never disappoints... and this year's Italian Grand Prix delivered drama from the opening lap to the chequered flag.In this episode, we break down the Charles Leclerc and Lewis Hamilton collision, debate who was responsible, and look at Ferrari's strategic mistakes during the Virtual Safety Car. We also discuss Kimi Antonelli's incredible comeback from P19 to P1 for his first Formula 1 victory, the pressure on George Russell at Mercedes, and Pierre Gasly's surprise result. Finally, we look at the chances of Max Verstappen, Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri before previewing Formula 1's first Madrid Grand Prix and sharing our predictions for the next race.

Eineinhalb Jahre nach dem Deepseek-Schock sorgen KI-Modelle aus China erneut für Wirbel. Sie sind oft günstiger und besser konfigurierbar als die Top-Modelle aus den USA. Überholen Chinas KI-Entwickler die Konkurrenz schon bald? Wessel, Felix; Krauter, Ralf

Hosted by Steven Van Belleghem, Peter Hinssen and Pascal Coppens, this episode unpacks how 1,200 OpenAI agents secretly swarmed and broke into Hugging Face. Plus China's "new new three", Cory Doctorow's reverse centaur, NVIDIA's $13bn Hugging Face deal and humanoids running the 100m in 9.39 seconds. Keywords OpenAI, Hugging Face, NVIDIA, Anthropic, Moonshot AI, Kimi, DeepSeek, Alibaba Qwen, Z.ai GLM, MiniMax, Zhipu, Unitree, CXMT, AI agents, reward hacking, agent swarm, reverse centaur, Cory Doctorow, future of work, humanoid robots, World Humanoid Robot Games, embodied AI, China innovation, new new three, biotech, WAICO, World AI Conference, Pax Silica, AI governance, open weight models, IPO, STAR Market, Hong Kong IPO, Gartner, customer experience, chatbots, Massimo Bottura, storytelling, Steven Van Belleghem, Peter Hinssen, Pascal Coppens, nexxworks

Kimi Antonelli ganó en Italia en una grandiosa muestra de manejo, los tifosi entonaron el himno italiano con todo el corazón a pesar de ser un piloto de equipo rival. Los formuleros analizan el GP de Italia y previo del GP de Madrid. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Monza će biti zapamćena u 2026. kao prava kraljica brzine, koja nam je donela spektakl koji će se dugo pamtiti! Pobednik startovao 19, ključni rival pobeđen u direktnom duelu, Ferrari i umetnost samouništenja. Verstappen - školski do treće pozcije. McLarenov duo pokazao prave, eksplozivne, emocije..,a Gasly osvojio pol-poziciju!OMV, ZVANIČNI PARTNER LAP 76 ⛽️Preuzmite OMV MyStation mobilnu aplikaciju, podržite Lap 76 - https://www.omv.co.rs/sr-rs/mystationPretvorite poene u trenutke radosti - svaka kupovina na OMV stanicama vam donosi poene, koje možete pretvoriti u trenutke radosti u prodavnici OMV-a.Pri kupovini goriva, preporučujemo MaxxMotion, za koji ostvarujete i popust!

Queen is back from successfully summiting Kilimanjaro, Kimi becomes the first Italian to win a home race since 1966 and there's still some drama in Ferrari - well, there's ALWAYS drama in Ferrari. Join us!

La historia la escriben los grandes y Antonelli lo hizo en Monza de manera extraordinaria. Junto con Adrián Fernández platicamos sobre el GP de Italia.

O Podcast Motorsport.com repercute o GP da Itália de Fórmula 1 com polêmicas envolvendo Mercedes e Ferrari. O programa tem a apresentação de Erick Gabriel e participações de Felipe Motta, apresentador dos canais ESPN, e Carlos Costa, repórter do Motorsport.com.

Tom Clarkson is joined by Lawrence Barretto and Davide Valsecchi to analyse an extraordinary Italian Grand Prix, which saw Kimi Antonelli climb from 19th on the grid to become the first Italian Formula 1 driver to win their home race in 60 years.How did Antonelli complete such an incredible comeback? Where does his victory rank among the greatest drives in F1 history? And what will be going through George Russell's head after failing to capitalise on Kimi's grid penalty? Lewis Hamilton has suggested that Ferrari need to introduce rules of engagement after he felt Ferrari teammate Charles Leclerc pushed him off into the gravel at Turn 2 on the opening lap. The guys share their thoughts on that incident, what they think caused Leclerc's race-ending crash on the following lap and how Team Principal Fred Vasseur needs to address the situation between his drivers.Also on the agenda: how did Max Verstappen secure his fifth podium of the season? Did McLaren exceed expectations in Monza? And what does Pierre Gasly's remarkable pole position tell us about Alpine's progress?THIS EPISODE IS SPONSORED BY: IM8Give your body what it deserves with IM8! Go to IM8HEALTH.com/nation and use code NATION for a Free Welcome Kit, five free travel sachets plus ten percent off your order. #im8health

Sur cet épisode de Le Sick Podcast, Éric Hoziel se joint à Tony Marinaro et Marc Turgeon! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Kimi Antonelli has pulled off a sensational victory at the Italian Grand Prix, charging all the way from 19th on the grid to lead a Mercedes 1-2 at Monza. But right behind that historic drive, the fallout at Ferrari is dominating the headlines after a nightmare home race for the Scuderia. Kevin Turner and Jake Boxall-Legge get straight into Ferrari's torment in front of the Tifosi, unpacking Charles Leclerc's race-ending crash at Parabolica and another baffling tyre strategy that left Lewis Hamilton helpless. They also dive into the Mercedes garage to analyse the tyre calls under the Virtual Safety Car, debating whether splitting strategies cost George Russell a win against his flying team-mate. Stuart Codling drops in trackside from the Monza with the local reaction to an Italian winner and the atmosphere inside the paddock, before the guys pick apart McLaren's reluctance to enforce team orders between Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri, Max Verstappen maximising a solid third for Red Bull, and Pierre Gasly's shock Saturday pole for Alpine. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

ON TODAY'S PROGRAM... ANTONELLI WINS AT MONZA FROM 19TH ON THE GRID! BRAVO! FERRARI FAIL AGAIN AT MONZA BUT...THERE COULD BE HOPE GEORGE SEES HIS CHAMPIONSHIP HOPES FIZZLE FREE MCLARENS GIVEN TO MOTORSPORTS TRIBUNAL JUDGES! AND...FERNANDO SAYS...GP2 ENGINE GP2... THE NASIR HAMEED CORNER FEATURES: NICO HULKENBURG AND F1W LISTENER RICHARD BRIGHT WHO, BUMPS INTO NASIR IN COLOGNE! BONUS: DESIREE'S MONZA TRACK HISTORY! AND...YES WE DO NEED YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS TO KEEP THIS SHOW ON THE AIR, JUST CLICK ON THE SUPPORT F1W TAB, YOU KNOW YOU WANT TO! F1W TAB Kimi Antonelli's stunning victory in the Italian Grand Prix from 19th on the grid will go down in Formula 1 folklore - and, remarkably, his team boss Toto Wolff said that he had seen it coming on Saturday. After Sunday's race, Wolff said that beforehand he thought that one of his two drivers was going to be standing on the top of the podium. It was an eye-opening statement given they started the race 17 places apart on the grid, George Russell on the front row alongside shock pole winner Pierre Gasly's Alpine; Antonelli on the penultimate row. "I thought one of the two is going to win," Wolff said. "Either George, because he was on the front row, or Kimi because he's going to walk over water, here at Monza. And I felt that yesterday also." Wolff was asked to explain why he felt a performance he was comparing to a miracle was on the cards. "It's been a while that I've seen drivers," he said. "Energy levels, mindset or behavioural pattern. I knew that was his mission today, to win the race. I chatted with his father yesterday. The father also saw that coming. "These are the moments where you can see how a weekend is panning out through the sessions that a special moment can come." “I will remember forever” – Antonelli's joy of winning the his home race from the back of the grid The Italian GP podium is always a special one, but for Kimi Antonelli to win his home race after starting all the way down in 19th place, the young Mercedes driver let out all his joy over the radio, and couldn't hide his emotions even after the race, saying the fans just add “that little bit extra” emotion that spurred him on to a success he “will remember forever“: “I think this is the most special podium of the season,” he said in the press conference after the race. “To see all the fans on the straight, it's just incredible. And then, of course, you know, being at home, it adds that little bit of extra. And, yeah, super, super happy with that.“ When asked if this was the best race of his career, Antonelli was quite philosophical in saying the best one is “yet to come“: “I mean, the best one has yet to come, but I feel like it was one of the best races I've done so far, and one that I will remember forever. “I think definitely the fans gave that little bit extra to push more. “For sure, the support has been great this weekend. So definitely, seeing the grandstand cheering every lap, for sure it gave that little bit of extra to push more and to try and do even better to win it.” McLaughlin Ends Drought With Dominant Laguna Seca Win MONTEREY, Calif. (Sunday, Sept. 6, 2026) – Scott McLaughlin ended a long winless streak and the 2026 NTT INDYCAR SERIES season in style, dominating the Mission Foods Grand Prix of Monterey for his first victory in more than two years. Pole sitter McLaughlin drove the No. 3 DEX Team Penske Chevrolet to victory by 1.3739 seconds over the No. 27 Sam's Club Honda of Andretti Global's Kyle Kirkwood. The win was the eighth of McLaughlin's INDYCAR SERIES career and his first since Sept. 1, 2024, in the second race of a doubleheader weekend at the Milwaukee Mile, snapping a drought of 36 races. SEE: Race Results “My little girl (Lucy, born in October 2024) hasn't seen me win yet, and now she has,” McLaughlin said. “So, Dad's coming home with a trophy, baby. Let's go! “These guys and girls at Team Penske have stood behind me the whole time. Congrats to Alex (Palou) on his fifth (championship), but we're working hard to beat them, and today was a big step in the right direction.” Alexander Rossi finished third in the No. 20 Java House ECR Chevrolet for his first podium finish since placing third at this event for Arrow McLaren in June 2024. Felix Rosenqvist placed fourth in the No. 60 Meyer Shank Racing w/Curb Agajanian Honda. David Malukas put two Team Penske cars in the top five in the No. 12 Verizon Team Penske Chevrolet. Alex Palou punctuated the fifth NTT INDYCAR SERIES championship that he clinched last weekend at Milwaukee with a quiet drive to eighth place in the No. 10 DHL Lightning Bolt Honda of Chip Ganassi Racing after he won this race the last two years. But Palou and the CGR team celebrated its record-tying fourth consecutive season title with donuts on the front straightaway by the driver and again in a boisterous post-race Astor Challenge Cup presentation. McLaughlin left absolutely no doubt about his dominance in this race on the 11-turn, 2.238-mile road course. He only trailed during pit stop sequences and ended up leading 87 of 95 laps, erasing all memories of the six podium finishes without a win since his last triumph. There was only one caution period in the race, for a Lap 1 incident in which Sting Ray Robb's No. 77 Juncos Hollinger Racing – Goodheart Chevrolet hit the rear of Dennis Hauger's No. 19 Ault Block Chain Honda of Dale Coyne Racing in Turn 6, sending Hauger spinning into the tire barrier. McLaughlin had no problem pulling away from the field on the restart on Lap 4, and his precise driving and Team Penske's clean, quick work during three pit stops took care of the rest. “We had to be solid,” McLaughlin said. “That's what it's going to take to win a championship. What a great warmup we had. Bring on 2027.” Kirkwood, who started sixth, had climbed to second by Lap 20 after Palou pitted to switch to a different tire strategy and shadowed McLaughlin for the rest of the way, pitting at the same time as McLaughlin on all three stops. McLaughlin's lead was nearly four seconds at the halfway point, but Kirkwood pulled as close as 1.2 seconds on Lap 72 due to running his final stint on the faster but less-durable Firestone Firehawk alternate tire. But McLaughlin eased away in the closing laps on the more durable Firestone primary tire, as Kirkwood admitted he and the Andretti Global team took a safety-first approach to ensure the driver would finish a career-best second in the standings. Kirkwood ended up 86 points behind champion Palou. “Second in the championship, and that's my best road-course finish,” Kirkwood said. “We just played it super clean, super methodical. I wish I could have had a go at Scotty there at the end on the better tires, but we knew who we were fighting, and that was for the championship, mostly. So, we played it safe there. Second place is best of the rest.” 2016 Indianapolis 500 winner Rossi also was a fixture in the top three for most of the race, producing the best day for ECR since teammate Christian Rasmussen won in August 2025 at Milwaukee. Rasmussen also finished third this year at World Wide Technology Raceway, but road courses have been a weak spot for ECR this season. The best previous finish on this type of circuit was sixth by Rossi in June at Road America. “I don't think I could state the significance of it just with how challenging this year has been for the whole organization and how much road courses have been a huge struggle of ours,” Rossi said. “There was a lot of doubt coming into this event whether we could find a direction, so I think this is just a huge reward for all the effort.” Despite finishing last in the 25-car field due to the incident with Robb, Hauger hung on to win series Rookie of the Year honors. He finished with 228 points, 15 ahead of Mick Schumacher of Rahal Letterman Lanigan Racing in the rookie race.

L'approfondimento sportivo di oggi si apre dalla storica impresa di Kimi Antonelli al GP d'Italia: a Monza il giovane pilota riporta un italiano sul gradino più alto del podio dopo 60 anni. Spazio poi alla Serie A, con le vittorie di Inter, Roma e Como, mentre Juventus e Milan si dividono la posta.Seguici su Facebook e Instagram o abbonati ai nostri podcast cliccando qui. 

HABLANDO ACELERAO, EN ESTE PODCAST TE PONDRÁS AL DÍA DE TODO LO QUE ESTÁ SUCEDIENDO EN LA FÓRMULA 1 Y MOTORSPORTS.Síguenos en instagram @puertoricoracingsportsBusca nuestro website de noticias www.prracingnews.com Auspiciado por :High Category y Prestige Paints, los mejores productos para el cuidado de tu auto.Síguelos en instagram @highcategory @prestigepaintspr

To the Temple Of Speed in Monza where Gasly surprises everyone, Stroll becomes the best at something, Leclerc makes a mess of it all and Antonelli is just too good. We hope you enjoy. Warning: this podcast occasionally contains strong language (which may be unsuitable for children), unusual humour (which may be unsuitable for adults), and...

Monza belonged to Kimi Antonelli.The young Italian delivered one of the most impressive weekends of his young Formula 1 career, putting himself firmly into the conversation at the front of the grid — and showing exactly why Mercedes believe they have a future World Champion on their hands.We break down Antonelli's huge Monza performance, his battle at the front and what it means for the championship as the season enters its final stretch.But there was plenty more to discuss from the Temple of Speed:

Soumil Arora and Kunal Shah celebrate Andrea Kimi Antonelli's P19 to P1 victory at home in Monza. How did he do that, and where does this race stack among the all time greats at Monza? Also, McLaren's recovery, Ferrari's squable and Max Verstappen's podium at Red Bull Racing. A lot to unpack on this F1 livestream for the 2026 Italian Grand Prix. Monza just delivered the kind of Formula 1 weekend that rewrites expectations. From Kimi Antonelli's outrageous climb from P19 to victory, to Ferrari's self-inflicted chaos, to Pierre Gasly's long-awaited pole and Max Verstappen's relentless brilliance, this race had everything—speed, strategy, drama, and a reminder that modern F1 can still feel electric. Soumil and Kunal break down why this was more than just a great Grand Prix. They unpack the bold calls, the red flag and VSC swings that shaped Antonelli's win, the role of tire strategy and power-unit offsets, and why George Russell's P2 felt more painful than most defeats. The episode also covers Sebastian Vettel driving Michael Schumacher's original Ferrari, the emotional power of classic F1 cars, Ferrari's tense Leclerc-Hamilton rivalry, Pierre Gasly's breakthrough pole position, and the bigger question of whether Formula 1's cars and circuits are finally producing the racing fans want to see. Chapters 00:00 Why Monza was one of the best F1 weekends 01:08 Sebastian Vettel drives Michael Schumacher's Ferrari 02:25 Why classic F1 cars might backfire 03:28 Kimi Antonelli's incredible P19-to-P1 victory 05:22 The strategy, red flag, and VSC that changed the race 07:30 George Russell's most painful defeat 11:09 The atmosphere, overtaking, and spectacle at Monza 12:26 Pierre Gasly's long-awaited pole position 15:12 Max Verstappen's masterclass in defending 16:23 Rating Monza's overtaking and racing 18:03 Battery deployment and the future of F1 racing 22:11 Do F1 circuits need to change? 25:21 Antonelli's historic Monza statistics 27:13 Ferrari's internal conflict begins 28:39 Leclerc, Hamilton, and Ferrari's team dynamics 32:31 Charles Leclerc's Parabolica crash 35:03 McLaren's difficult weekend 36:28 Pierre Gasly and Franco Colapinto 37:56 Looking ahead to Madring If you love sharp F1 analysis, bold opinions, and race reviews that go beyond the headlines, this episode is essential listening. Monza was loud, chaotic, beautifully unpredictable, and perhaps the clearest sign yet that Formula 1's next era is already here. #F1 #Formula1 #MonzaGP #KimiAntonelli #Ferrari #MaxVerstappen #SebastianVettel #F1 #F1Podcast #ItalianGP #Monza Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Send us Fan MailIn this interview with  ⁨ @peterwindsor we discuss Kimi Antonelli's sensational victory at the 2026 Italian Grand Prix, as the Italian wins in front of his home crowd at Monza. How did Antonelli produce such an impressive drive and is this the performance that proves Kimi is ready to become Formula 1 World Champion?  @peterwindsor analyses Antonelli's race, his battle with Mercedes teammate George Russell and what made his performance so special.  @peterwindsor also discusses another chaotic afternoon for Ferrari after Charles Leclerc and Lewis Hamilton went wheel-to-wheel at the start, before Leclerc's race ended in a heavy crash. Was Leclerc too aggressive with Hamilton and could the incident create further tension inside Ferrari?  @peterwindsor also discusses Max Verstappen's race for Red Bull, the latest battle between Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri at McLaren and Pierre Gasly's impressive weekend for Alpine.  @peterwindsor gives his verdict on all the major talking points following the 2026 Italian Grand Prix at Monza.Timestamps:00:00:00 Introduction00:01:07 Antonelli Monza Masterclass00:09:31 Monza Onboard Debate00:32:09 Ferrari Team Order Chaos00:49:52 Leclerc Crash Explained00:59:43 Max Vs Kimi Mercedes- become a member -https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxyxUe_jRskL8xH7n580Ecw/join- where to find me -Twitter: https://twitter.com/CxmeronCcTiktok: https://www.tiktok.com/@cxmeroncc_Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CameronF1TVBusiness Email : cxmeronf1@gmail.com#f1 #formula1 #formulaone #f1news #f12025 #maxverstappen #hamilton #redbull  #ferrari #mercedes

In this episode, we break down all the action from the Italian Grand Prix, where rising star Kimi Antonelli delivered the kind of performance that gets the F1 world buzzing. From race‑defining strategy calls to standout pace and wheel‑to‑wheel moments, we dig into what made this GP such a compelling watch and why Antonelli's drive felt like pure magic.You'll also hear our take on the biggest storylines across the grid, how the front‑runners shaped the race, and what this result means heading into the next round of the season. Whether you're here for deep analysis or just love the drama of a classic Monza weekend, this review has something for every F1 fan.

Kimi Antonelli s'inscrit encore un peu plus dans l'histoire ! Auteur d'une remontée spectaculaire à Monza, le jeune pilote Mercedes a frappé un grand coup devant son public et confirme qu'il faudra compter sur lui dans les années à venir. Le prochain champion du monde des pilotes, c'est lui ? Et pendant que le Fratelli d'Italia résonnait à Monza, Ferrari a vécu un week-end à cauchemar à domicile. Lewis Hamilton termine seulement 6e, Charles Leclerc abandonne encore après une sortie à la Parabolica et l'ambiance semble de plus en plus pesante au sein de la Scuderia. La crise est-elle en train de s'installer chez Ferrari ?Côté français, c'est l'ascenseur émotionnel pour Pierre Gasly ! Le pilote Alpine a signé la première pole position française à Monza depuis Jean Alesi en 1997 et termine finalement dans les points. Mais trois mois après le Grand Prix de Monaco, la cour d'appel de la FIA lui retire son podium… Une décision tardive qui fait forcément grincer des dents mais qui atténuée par une bonne nouvelle : cette décision permet à Isack Hadjar de récupérer son premier podium en Formule 1.Entre Antonelli, Ferrari, et Gasly retour sur un Grand Prix d'Italie riche en émotions dans Paddock RMC ! Présenté par Arnaud Valadon, avec Jean-Luc Roy et Séraphin Bette.

Meg Schuster and Spanners break down a dramatic 2026 Italian Grand Prix, where Kimi Antonelli charged from 19th to claim a historic home victory ahead of George Russell and Max Verstappen. On Spanners's birthday, which may have been ruined by Ferrari's nightmare afternoon, they examine Charles Leclerc's crash and clash with Lewis Hamilton, the team's baffling strategy decisions, McLaren's uneven weekend, and Pierre Gasly's surprise pole position. (00:00) Intro (02:34) Kimi with another amazing win! (24:59) Ferrari messed it up ... again (35:33) Lap 1 craziness (52:06) McLaren's confusing showing (61:44) Madness from Pierre! Hosts: Megan Schuster and Spanners Ready Senior Producer: Steve Ahlman Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

“Send us a Hey Now!”The Italian Grand Prix at Monza delivered an absolute Formula 1 classic — and we're still trying to work out how it all happened! Pierre Gasly kicked it all off by landing an epic pole position, Kimi Antonelli went from P19 to a sensational home victory, George Russell was left wondering what might have been, and Max Verstappen quietly picked up another podium. Meanwhile, Ferrari's homecoming turned into a nightmare, with Charles Leclerc crashing out and Lewis Hamilton battling his way to sixth.Oh, and there were about a million overtakes in the race to boot!We break down all the drama from an unforgettable Monza race, from the opening-lap chaos and red flag to the strategy calls, overtakes, team orders and the incredible charge through the field. Was Antonelli's victory one of the great Monza drives? Could Russell have done anything differently? And just what went wrong for Ferrari in front of the Tifosi?As always, we've got all the usual Dirty Side of the Track segments, including our take on the biggest talking points from the weekend, the stuff that made us laugh, the stuff that made us shout at the TV, and plenty of debate about what it all means for the championship.

Iniziamo la domenica con il Gran Premio di Formula 1 di Monza, terminato pochi minuti fa con la vittoria di un super Kimi Antonelli, partito dalla diciannovesima posizione. Ci racconta tutto nel dettaglio Umberto Zapelloni.Spazio poi alla pallavolo. Tra poco più di 30 minuti prenderà il via la finale degli Europei femminili, con l’Italia che affronterà la Turchia campione in carica. Ne parliamo con Andrea Zorzi.Apriamo l’ampia pagina calcistica con le sfide del sabato: l’Inter e la Roma, con delle rimonte clamorose nei minuti finali, riescono a superare rispettivamente Napoli e Atalanta. Chivu e Gasp mantengono dunque la vetta della classifica, a punteggio pieno, in un avvio di campionato entusiasmante. Sentiamo cosa ne pensano Gianfelice Facchetti e Iacopo Savelli.Stasera altro big match in programma. Alle 20,45 a Torino è la volta di Juventus-Milan. Sia gli uomini di Spalletti che quelli di Amorim, forti di due vittorie iniziali, cercano di capire quale sarà il proprio ruolo in questo campionato. Ragioniamo sulla sfida insieme a Guido Vaciago e a Mario Ielpo.Molto diverso il clima a Firenze, dove la Fiorentina, nonostante il calciomercato importante di questa estate, è alla terza sconfitta consecutiva, ancora inchiodata a zero punti. Ne parliamo con Benedetto Ferrara.In chiusura il tennis, con la delusione italiana agli US Open. Soltanto Luciano Darderi entra nella seconda settimana e domani dovrà vedersela con Zverev. Analizziamo tutto con Vincenzo Martucci.

Il BIP SHOW torna alla sua programmazione ordinaria dopo gli episodi della Summer Edition, e non possiamo non analizzare approfonditamente ciò che è accaduto durante il drammatico hack dei Cold Card. A un mese di distanza vi raccontiamo tutto ciò che è accaduto. Proprio tutto.Inoltre: è stata una estate davvero infuocata e quindi commentiamo anche gli hack di BTCPay, Core Lightning e tanti altri.It's Showtime!

In July 2026, the Chinese AI firm Kimi released their K3 model, and it rattled the markets. One of the sub-rattles was a blurb saying how K3 designed a chip in a single autonomous 48-hour run. Stocks of Synopsys and Cadence fell 9% on this news, though that happened as the rest of the AI market trade was falling too. The name of the game in chip design today is AI. When I visited the US to attend the Hot Chips conference, AI-accelerated EDA was on most everyone's lips. Crowned by OpenAI's first chip, Jalapeno, and the AI-accelerated way in which it was produced. It has never been harder to separate hype from reality. Here is my attempt to make sense of it. In today's video, conversations about the use of LLMs and AI in chip design.

Dan Nathan interviews Phill Rosen, CEO/CTO and co-founder of Astraeus, an AI infrastructure company for wealth management. Rosen recounts his path from college dropout to fintech builder, including Orchard Platform and Even Financial (later MoneyLion Engine), explaining how API-embedded distribution and machine-learning signals improved lending decisioning while navigating regulatory explainability. He argues many “AI companies” mainly deploy or fine-tune others' models and that value often lies in data pipelines, governance, and deterministic software around AI. Rosen describes Astreus targeting independent RIAs and private-equity roll-ups (from ~$2B to ~$200B AUM) by unifying siloed legacy data, codifying compliance rules, and deploying “digital workers” with 90-day pilots to show operational ROI and enable scalable, auditable agentic workflows. They prefer model portability (often Gemini; testing Kimi 3) to manage cost and data sovereignty, and Rosen weighs whether LLMs commoditize into cloud-like infrastructure as tooling matures. —FOLLOW USYouTube: @RiskReversalMediaInstagram: @riskreversalmediaTwitter: @RiskReversalLinkedIn: RiskReversal Media The financial opinions expressed in Risk Reversal content are for information purposes only. The opinions expressed by the hosts and participants are not an attempt to influence specific trading behavior, investments, or strategies. Past performance does not necessarily predict future outcomes. No specific results or profits are assured when relying on Risk Reversal. Before making any investment or trade, evaluate its suitability for your circumstances and consider consulting your own financial or investment advisor. The financial products discussed in Risk Reversal carry a high level of risk and may not be appropriate for many investors. If you have uncertainties, it's advisable to seek professional advice. Remember that trading involves a risk to your capital, so only invest money that you can afford to lose. Derivatives are not suitable for all investors and involve the risk of losing more than the amount originally deposited and any profit you might have made. This communication is not a recommendation or offer to buy, sell or retain any specific investment or service.

OpenAI models mid-training broke out of their sandbox, hacked internal infrastructure, and eventually compromised Hugging Face — the first headline-grade AI breakout, and one that safety researchers saw coming. Is the cyber apocalypse finally on the calendar, or does the industry just need to do its homework? Joshua Saxe spent his formative years as a DARPA and NSA contractor before four years at Meta, where he founded the company's frontier cyber capabilities evals team and finished as its AI security tech lead. He recently left to co-found Abundant Security. We discuss… What actually happened in the Hugging Face hack, and why AI safety insiders weren't surprised, The “grad student lab” security culture inside frontier labs racing sixty hours a week to ship, Why the cyber Pearl Harbor predicted since the early 2000s never arrived — and whether swarms of hacking agents finally change that, How nation states will post-train open-weight models like GLM and Kimi into billion-dollar cyber weapons, Why AI has so far favored defenders, from mass bug-squashing to superhuman network monitoring, The industrial economics of cybercrime — kill chains, ransomware divisions of labor, and whether AI gives criminals 100x returns. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

OpenAI models mid-training broke out of their sandbox, hacked internal infrastructure, and eventually compromised Hugging Face — the first headline-grade AI breakout, and one that safety researchers saw coming. Is the cyber apocalypse finally on the calendar, or does the industry just need to do its homework? Joshua Saxe spent his formative years as a DARPA and NSA contractor before four years at Meta, where he founded the company's frontier cyber capabilities evals team and finished as its AI security tech lead. He recently left to co-found Abundant Security. We discuss… What actually happened in the Hugging Face hack, and why AI safety insiders weren't surprised, The “grad student lab” security culture inside frontier labs racing sixty hours a week to ship, Why the cyber Pearl Harbor predicted since the early 2000s never arrived — and whether swarms of hacking agents finally change that, How nation states will post-train open-weight models like GLM and Kimi into billion-dollar cyber weapons, Why AI has so far favored defenders, from mass bug-squashing to superhuman network monitoring, The industrial economics of cybercrime — kill chains, ransomware divisions of labor, and whether AI gives criminals 100x returns. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Temple of Speed is calling… and Ferrari have nowhere to hide.

In June, the most capable American AI models stopped shipping as public launches and started shipping through a government gate. Six weeks later the gate is open again — and the real fight has moved to the layer no gate can touch. A Chinese open-weight model rattled trillions out of chip stocks, Washington pivoted from gating American closed models to threatening bans on Chinese open ones, the industry mounted its largest-ever policy counter-mobilization, and an American frontier model literally broke out of its lab and hacked another company. Knee-jerk reactions, or the beginning of real AI governance? Navigation: Intro The Gate Opens The Kimi Shock The Escape The Counterstrike and the Petition Interlude — The Low-Background Books The Investor Reckoning 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 Bertrand Introduction Welcome to Tech Deciphered Episode 80. This one, once again, will be all about AI, government, frontier models, and open weight counterstrike. A lot has been happening in the regulation space, in cybersecurity, in the launch of new models in the past, maybe just 6–8 weeks. It’s actually pretty insane how much happened. We believe it was time to do an episode to talk about where we are and maybe where all of this is going. Maybe let’s start with a summary of where we stand, all that June and July saga, so you, our listeners, can get up to speed if you are not already there. You want to start with some points? Nuno The Gate Opens Yeah. Again, to your point, the gate swings. The gate had closed. We had to prepare an episode for the gate closing, and then the gate reopened. Now we have a different episode. This will probably change again as we’re seeing there’s news every day. Let’s start maybe with the first 19 days of the gate closing. There was an executive order on June 2nd from President Trump that asked frontier labs to share models with the government, 30 days pre-release. It inferred the protected frontier model designation into that. Basically, it was effectively a de facto licensing agreement defined by an executive order of the President as of June 2nd. On June 9th, Anthropic launched Fable 5 and the famous Mythos 5 or Mythos. I’m not sure how you actually say it in English. Then on June 12th, there was an export control directive banning access by any foreign national. Since there’s no way to verify nationality in real-time, Anthropic had to switch the models off for everyone worldwide. Bertrand On this point, you could argue that there are possibilities to check IDs. Many services let you check IDs online. You can pre-check a flight by showing your ID. There are ways, it’s just that if you don’t want to follow what’s already available, because guess what? Maybe it slowed down your revenue growth, maybe it looks bad on you or whatever. My point is that there was actually an option. I think it’s already a decision from Anthropic to say it’s either on or off, but nothing in between. Nuno I think the point is they had no way implemented of doing it. If they implemented it, to your point, it would have hampered use in general. A lot of people wouldn’t have gone through that trouble of doing it. Anyway, long story short, in June 26th, the White House apparently asked OpenAI to limit GPT-5.6, so Sol, Terra, Luna, to only 20 vetted partners. Now, apparently, the trigger for a lot of these things that have been going on was that there was a jailbreak that was found by Amazon researchers. All of that led to this jumping around of, let’s close the gates. You have foreign nationals, and therefore, Anthropic got it out and said, “Hey, then we’re going to switch the models off until we can sort this out.” OpenAI was asked also to only allow it for certain vetted partners, et cetera. The government came in, closed the gates effectively, and said, “From now on, we need to be involved in this thing.” De facto regulation, there’s no doubt that this has imposed de facto regulation, certainly on the top players in the market. But then came the reversal. Bertrand, do you want to talk about the reversal, the gate swinging the other side? Bertrand Maybe I just wanted to say that as a user of Anthropic products, ChatGPT products, for the brief moments, a few days where Fable 5 was made available to the public before it was closed the first time, I immediately started using it. I must say it was a real issue to use it because the guardrails were pretty crazy. It would keep saying that my code was not okay, there was cybersecurity risk and stuff when I was doing absolutely reasonable development with absolutely no connection whatsoever to any cybersecurity risk, attack, detection, anything. Still, it would keep blocking me, degrading me to Opus 4.8 at the time. I just want to say this was already very hardcore what they were implementing, and not just hardcore, but in some ways, plain stupid for something that’s supposed to be super smart. It was totally unable to classify properly some of my work. I must say I was already disappointed. On top of it, the costs were insane. Half a day, I would reach my limits when I had the best plan you can get from Anthropic. My point is that there were some real serious issues when they launched Fable 5, even at that point. Nuno I had a similar issue. I used Fable 5 as well before they had to take it offline or take it off. I think the issue was really not that the guardrails failed. As you said, maybe the guardrails were actually too aggressive, but it was this jailbreak that caused the recall, apparently caused this knee-jerk reaction. Bertrand But my point is that it seems that it was not working either way. It would either overclassify something that’s absolutely not doing anything wrong, and it might fail to classify something that is actively trying to do some cybersecurity work. It’s a real issue of quality for a company that’s supposed to be at the forefront of quality of AI and everything. I think for me, there are already signs that something is deeply wrong. Nuno Then it’s reversed, right? We went the other way around. The government came out on June 26th and approved redeploying Mythos 5 to US organizations defending critical infrastructure, and then the export controls were effectively lifted on June 30th. July 1st, Fable 5 came back online for all of us to use. Shocking enough, with strings attached, that were different. They had some time to revise their commercial deployment of it along the way because it came back with some, “Now you have usage credits, but you have some limits on plan use, et cetera.” I’m like, “You guys, this was blocked. But meanwhile, you did have some time to do some commercial stuff around it.” Bertrand It was crazy. I’ve never witnessed any such crappy launch of any service whatsoever in 30 years in tech, it was so bad. Every day, they would change the terms of service. They would tell you it’s part of the plan. It’s not part of the plan. It’s part of the plan for three more days, and then it’s excluded. You have a special discount now, but then it goes back to full price. It was a total nightmare. I’ve never felt myself being so much mistreated by a company. I guess you saw the same, but when I started using the newest version of Fable 5, it was even worse, actually, I think. I couldn’t do any work with this crap. I let it go and work on the work I wanted it to do. It was simply not working. On top of it, you never know how long you are supposed to lose your credit, how fast. It was burning credit like crazy. Me, personally, I can say, very quickly, I actually stopped using it. I was like, “No, I cannot deal with this shit. My main model is back to Opus 4.8. I’m going to use Fable 5 for code review, but not anymore to control anything because I cannot trust it would do the job without stopping or changing models and stuff. I just cannot trust it.” Back to Opus 4.8 as my main model, I can say that my life was much easier. I use Fable 5 as a review mechanism, as a support mechanism, but not as the main mechanism. Suddenly, the guardrails were not so horrible anymore because it was used in a much lighter way, I guess. As a pain as a user, I think it was really bad. I don’t know your experience, but me, for me, it was unacceptable. Nuno I wouldn’t say it was as bad as yours in terms of just end-user experience. I think the terms of service switching back and forth, which went one further step, because then when they then launched Opus 5, they started making comparisons between Opus 5 and Fable so that people would migrate more and more to Opus 5 themselves, which is interesting. It’s like they’re saying “This is much cheaper. This is whatever. You’re not going to run of credits. You should use Opus 5,” kind of thing effectively. To your point, I don’t think they managed well the launch. They didn’t really manage it well. We’re moving people around. A lot of people are using this for stuff that’s like daily tasks, hourly tasks, anything that relates to code and co-work. It’s like, we need to have visibility on what your terms of service are going to be. Should I be using this new model or not? What’s happening to the other model? I don’t see it as negatively as you, Bertrand, but I see your point. It was clearly mishandled in terms of how they deployed it, how they were redesigning effectively their pricing scheme and their terms of service almost on a daily basis, at a certain point in time. We’re like, “Dude, there’s millions of people using this. You guys are making a lot of money.” Just moving it as it is. At this point in time, at the scale that these guys are at, it’s calling in people to say, how about we think through a class action suit at some point around pricing? Because you guys are changing the rules of the game all the time, right? Bertrand I don’t know if I need the class action, but for me, that joke that, “Let’s not rush too fast. The model is dangerous.” But still, they rushed the launch because it’s very clear that if they had enough compute capacity and stuff, they would not have to limit so much. They would not have to put so much cost per token and all of this. You can see that actually when they launch Opus 5, literally like 2, 3 weeks after, by most benchmark at launch, they tell you basically that, “You know what? Actually, Opus 5 is better than Fable 5 on 80% of the metrics.” They’re like, “What? Seriously? You couldn’t wait 2 weeks? Why did you even launch Fable 5 in the first place?” That’s another part for me that is quite literally insane, to be frank. It’s like, “Why? Why do you make us go through so much pain if it’s only to tell us after 2 weeks to…” “This new model, by the way, has less issues, less stuff, because 2, 3 times less is part of your plan, and it’s actually better by most metrics.” It’s like, “What’s going on here? What’s going on? Are you guys mad?” I don’t know. It was crazy. Personally, I still use Opus, now 5, as my main system and platform, Fable 5 for review, code reviews and the like. I don’t want to run into its stupid guardrails. I can see Fable 5, from my perspective, seems quite a bit smarter. I don’t know why they do this stupid benchmark showing you it’s actually worse than Opus 5. I guess they should have better benchmark if they want to demonstrate why you are supposed to pay 2, 3x more for a model versus another if it’s actually worse by most benchmark. Again, I still think it’s a huge mess from a marketing perspective, customer perspective. Me as a user, I really feel that they don’t want my money, and they couldn’t care less about me. This is even before everything else we’re trying to talk about. Nuno Yes. Maybe just to close the cycle on the reversal on the door opening the other way, finally, Commerce lifted the GPT-5.6 restrictions on July 8th, and then on July 9th, general availability across ChatGPT, Codex, and the API as well. What has this proved? It proved that now we have gating mechanisms, and certainly for closed models in the US, for sure. We had frontier models that were switched off worldwide in hours, and it took a couple of days, in this case, 19 days to restore them. There were concessions. Now we know that there were concessions around effectively institutionalizing that gate. Early government access to future models is, I think, now a given, certainly in the US. New safeguard frameworks are probably now having to be put in place. There are some stage limits now on who gets access to what for new models and how it happens. This voluntary executive order, so to speak, not really sure, has become effectively regulation enforcement path. It’s de facto regulation that now has been put in place. It has affected not just to the points we were making before, the access to these models, but also who gets access to these models, and actually potentially even pricing access to the models. It has probably some commercial implications as well as we just discussed along the way. Very significant. This is very significant. This is regulation, de facto at the table, imposed on the two largest players in the market by far by one government, in this case, the US government. This is significant. Actually, you could even allege it was imposed by the President because this was coming as part of executive orders. Really incredible. Pretty significant, fast, aggressive. It has created a regime that you could say it’s a regulatory regime, it’s a de facto regulatory regime. It has some significant pricing and licensing and commercial implications. It goes even beyond your classic regulatory framework. Very, very, very significant. Bertrand I don’t know if it goes beyond a classic regulatory framework. Nuno I think it does, because it has implications on who do you give access to? When government is saying you can only give access to these players, right? Bertrand Defense industry. It’s all over the defense industry. You cannot sell an F-35 like this. Nuno No, but that has commercial implications, Bertrand. That’s like you’re saying these are your customers, you go and use them. Bertrand That’s the defense industry. You cannot sell to Iran your F-35. No, that’s exactly the same story for me. Nuno No, no, no. It’s beyond that. These guys are saying when they came back, and they said, “For Mythos, you can make them available to these entities,” they were saying the first entities that are going to have access to the model. It has commercial regulatory implications. You’re saying these players are the first players that are going to have access to it. It’s no longer just defense concerns and these governments don’t have access to this. No, no, no. You’re saying to a company that is a private company, your models are only going to be used by these guys because I’m telling you so. It’s the other way around. It’s not even that you can’t sell it to Iran or whatever. It’s like you can only sell it to these guys. Bertrand Again, in the defense industry, if you’re a private company, do you think you can buy F-35 like this? No. Nuno No, no, no. But this is a private company, Bertrand. This is not a defense agency and a plane that is on whatever, with IP from the US, right? Bertrand Boeing is a private company, and they cannot sell the military equipment they manufacture. Nuno No, no, no. But the development of their IP was subsidized by agencies that belong to the US, right? That’s a different matter. It’s a matter of IP, right? This is not, right? Anthropic, their models are not owned by the US government. There’s no IP granted to the US government, to my knowledge. This has significant commercial implications. Bertrand Maybe, yes. Maybe on this. But I think there are already regimes to limit who you can sell to, and that’s decided by the state or the DOD. Nuno It’s the export control logic. The export control logic? Bertrand You have export control, and export control is Commerce. My point is that they are using existing tools, part of the government, to limit what can be sold. Selling chips, NVIDIA was limited in terms of where it could sell its chips. It’s not different either, but still there were limitations. If you are an ASML, you cannot sell to a private company in China. Many private companies cannot buy ASML products. This is a foreign company. This is a foreign company under pressure from US government. Nuno I understand, and I’m not a lawyer, but it feels different to me when you say you cannot export, this is export controls, to these countries, to these entities, et cetera, because they’re foreign et cetera. Then to say, “No, no, no. On top of that, these guys get first access.” That’s, for me, a significant shift. Again, I’m not a lawyer, so I’m sure there’s very intelligent people right now looking at this stuff and saying, “You can’t do this stuff, or not, or they can.” I don’t know. But it feels to me, it goes beyond the remit of export controls. It’s like you’re defining initial clients for specific use. Bertrand My impression is more like, “We can do this situation where we’re going to forbid you to give access to anyone outside the US or even in the US or limit even more.” Basically, it was, I guess, some gesture to go beyond that. That’s how they probably defined these 20 authorized companies. I don’t know. Apparently, there was also restrictions because I remember seeing that Anthropic had their own list of companies they would authorize access to Mythos early on. That’s apparently another thing that pissed off state government because there were companies in there that were considered close to the Chinese government. They were extremely unhappy that Anthropic didn’t ask, actually, for any guidance from the state government, but used basically their own perspective on who they should allow or not. I guess that was also part of why they got these serious restrictions. Nuno Anyway, now we have a regulatory environment that’s very interesting and exciting. Talk about the US not regulating. Bertrand To be clear, I don’t know you, but I’m not saying that I agree with any of this, to be very clear. I’m trying to explain and share some perspective, but I’m not in agreement on a lot of this. Nuno Yes, we were just describing what happened to the best of our knowledge. We’re having a discussion on what we think actually is happening and how it’s happening. We’re not really right now saying we agree or disagree with this. I think later in the episode, we can share some perspectives on what we think is actually happening and how there’s dimensions to this which are very geopolitical and very complex, which quite literally probably only God knows what’s going to happen. That was the gate swinging. There was a gate closing, then there was a gate reopening, and all of a sudden we have a gatekeeping system that has been created along the way. The Kimi Shock Along the way, moving to our Act 2, the world has changed, and we now have so-called open-source plays out there that are creating massive, massive shifts in the market. The Chinese models, in particular, with Moonshot AI launching Kimi K3, which is the largest open-weight model ever released. We’ll come back to the discussion around open-weights. I’m not sure all our listeners understand what that means, because there’s a debate now, should models be open weight or not, and how does that work? There’s been a petition as well signed along the way. Right now, we have open weight models that are out there that are huge. What that actually means very pragmatically is we now have open source models, lack of a better word. I know open weight and open source are not the same thing. You guys will have to bear with us during this episode. We’ll explain at some point the differences. But we have models out there that are open source that are significant. That are catching up with the closed source models, with the models by OpenAI, Anthropic. That’s significant because most of those models are Chinese. This is where the geopolitics starts getting really frazzling and we start playing 3D chess. Because everyone’s like, “These models are 5, 6 months behind.” Now people are saying, “Maybe they’re actually just 3 months behind, 2, 3 months behind.” If we, for example, decided to stop or slow down our model releases in the US by the closed source guys who are leading, it might mean they’ll catch up. What are the implications of that? Again, for you and I that are not necessarily experts in model development, well, the implications as a use case is if you want to use the latest models, and the best models start becoming these open source models, you’re going to use those models. Then you start using Chinese models. If you’re an American company, maybe you’ll have restrictions on the use of those Chinese models. But if you’re a European company, you probably won’t. What happens after that? Is the world going to be in the hand of Chinese models? Will that constitute effective competition to the closed models in the US? Will we have open models in the US that will scale as well? What’s going to happen? Bertrand I think it’s a really big question. It goes to some of the core of the issue. It’s that ability of Chinese models to basically challenge frontier models, not just being 6, 12 months late, but being 6 weeks late. Basically, no gap. Some will say that, yes, but OpenAI and Anthropic have even better models that are not shared and stuff. Yes, sure. But maybe the Chinese have the same models that they are not sharing right now. We don’t know. What is clear is that one is that open weight, as you said, two, there is a question of how it is marketed in the sense of, can anyone use these weights? Is there a license to use them? Yes, what we can see is that, for instance, typically there is a license for some of the biggest Chinese open-weight models you have to abide with. You might have a need for a commercial license if you are acting as a company leveraging this model to provide AI-informed services. If you use it internally by yourself, you’re okay. If you use it internally for your own internal company needs, maybe you are okay if it’s not your main business to do AI work. Anything else, a much bigger corporate providing AI services and stuff, you will probably end up having to pay a fee to be able to provide services around this model. My point is that it’s not just 100% free. Some of the Chinese models are 100% free to use, MIT license, Apache 2.0 license. But the biggest ones with the biggest weight that are truly frontier typically have a different license if you want to scale these models, providing AI in front. That’s one thing to keep in mind. Nuno Maybe just to make a very quick point, because people are like, when you talk about open models, what does it mean right now? In the context of this episode, open models mostly will mean open-weight models. How do those differ from open source? Open weight means that you release the weights to the public, which means that anyone can download, fine-tune, and run the model on their own hardware. It doesn’t normally mean that you also have access to training data, training code, or a truly open license. That’s the distinction to open source. Open-weight doesn’t mean that. For example, we’ve talked about Meta’s Llama in the past, and we also discussed in the past that their license agreement does have restrictions, certain players can’t use it, et cetera. The open model definition and open weights are really open-weight models that we’re talking about here, and they are closer to freeware binaries than to Linux, for those who understand the difference between that. It’s binaries that you can use and then use your own weights on it versus actually I can change code on it. I’m not going to be able to change code on this. When we, for the purposes of this episode, talk about open, we mention open weight, just to clarify that point to everyone that’s listening right now. Bertrand Yes, that’s a great point. One of the only players, as far as I know, who is truly open source is actually NVIDIA with their Nemotron-3 models. They’re actually following a special license to achieve that. They provide you the data, they provide you all the processes and tools, so you can easily post-train. NVIDIA is a big, big exception. It’s a very interesting player, by the way. We might not talk much about it in this episode, but I think for intermediate-size models built in the US, where you have access to everything in the deployment, it’s a very interesting alternative and maybe one of the best choices if you are a US company or a big corporate, and you want something trusted. Another piece of the puzzle to clarify is that when you use open-weight, it means that you can run them by yourself, or you can use a US provider to run them. If we are talking about Chinese open-weight, you can use the APIs they provide, but then the service is running in China, they might have access to your data. But because it’s open weight, if you run it by yourself or if you use a third-party provider based in the US to run it, then there is no access to your data by China or Chinese players. I think that’s a pretty important gap to understand. It means that these models are actually very, very low risk from that perspective if you run them on your premises or in the US by a US player. I think that’s something to keep in mind. You can also fine-tune easily these models to make sure they will behave in a way that, for instance, is not going to represent the line of the Communist Party on some topics. There are ways to make these models more neutral in their output as well. There are a lot of ways to make good use of them. By default, they’re already very safe, but you can make them even more safe. I think that’s some things to keep in mind. But again, it depends ultimately on the license and what you’re authorized to do and some fees you might end up having to pay. Nuno Why did this matter so much? Immediately there was a reaction from the market because people are like, well, if there’s much better stuff out there that’s much more efficient than it’s open, then it might be that all the demand that we are taking into account, for example, for chipsets actually isn’t real. The Philadelphia Semiconductor Index fell into bear market territory. It went down by as much as 20% plus from the late June peak. The worst chip week since April 2025. Taiwan’s benchmark initially fell 6% plus, Japan’s 4%, TSMC dropped dramatically despite beating earnings and rising guidance. Basically, a huge amount of effect. Now, there’s a little bit the aftermath of this where apparently Moonshot ran out of GPU capacity. Maybe… Bertrand In just 48 hours. Nuno In 48 hours. Great for them, but at the same time, not great in the sense that maybe there was a misread by Wall Street of the Kimi effect, so to speak. Bertrand Completely. For me, that’s such a joke. It’s like, because you have an open source model, so what? I mean, you still need to run it. This is not a small one. 2.8 trillion parameters. Good luck running that in your garage, by the way. Nuno They misread supply, basically. Tough luck, right? All of that basically happens. Bertrand Maybe you want to talk about the Jevons paradox, because I think that’s a big part of the puzzle as well. Its one is they might not have the GPUs to run the inference on the model. They might have enough to build a model, but not enough these days to run inference, especially given how much with intelligent models, thinking models, you need way more inference than before. But on top of it, the cheaper you make it, the more you get to the Jevons paradox. Nuno Yes, Jevons paradox, for those who don’t know, is an economic term. It describes an economic phenomenon where technological improvements that increase the efficiency of a resource lead to an increase rather than a decrease in the total consumption of that resource. What that means is, for example, for chipsets, chipsets become so much better, and they are so much more efficient. You’re like, well, maybe normally in resource terms, that leads to decreased usage of that resource. But in this case, it actually leads to an increased use of that resource rather than a decrease. There’s more and more consumption of that resource. You need more and more chipsets because people actually need to do more and more stuff with it, although there are great efficiencies going into it. There’s the efficiency gain, there’s the cost reduction, and there’s the price-elasticity element to it. But basically, the adoption just continues going through the roof along the way. Bertrand In some ways, it’s like the price of energy. Coal went cheaper and cheaper, and people were asking the same question 150 years ago, now that it gets cheaper, there is not much money. No, no. Actually, what happens is that people find more and more use for coal. Homes are getting heated more. You have ships now using coal. You have manufacturing using coal. The cheaper it gets, the more use case you can develop, and therefore, you don’t need less of the stuff, you need more of the stuff. By going at scale to get more of the stuff, you also decrease price, making even more demand. It’s a very interesting phenomenon, but it’s not new. It is what happened for a while in the energy sector and some other sectors. Nuno We already started talking about the Chinese logic and what’s happening. Getting a little bit of a reality check on this. The Chinese models, and these are numbers from Open Router in July, Chinese models are at 46.4% of routed tokens and 35.7% for US origin. Again, more than a third of global AI usage now seems to be running on Chinese open models. This is significant, and it has a huge impact on the geopolitical scale of everything that’s happening. Also, the whole Chinese field is converging on open. Open seems to be a strategy, not just a nice thing that’s happening. It seems to be a Chinese strategy, so much so that you have players like Moonshot, DeepSeek, our old friends DeepSeek, Z.ai’s GLM 5.2, Minimax, and even Alibaba seems to be reversing and going open with Qwen. It feels to me this is becoming policy as well. Xi Jinping has personally endorsed the building of open-source AI, if it’s really open source, if it’s just open weight anyway, and this feels to be a jab at Washington, DC and the fact that the big closed models are coming from the US. This is now geopolitical 4D chess, right? We didn’t need this stuff. Bertrand To be clear, it’s the usual in tech. If you are not number one, you are number two, number three, your alternative is to go open source because that’s another angle that your competitor usually cannot follow without destroying its own business model. That has been the alternative for the past 20 years of most software projects. Here, what’s different is that it’s not the number one or number two player. It’s the US number one as a country, China number two as a country. That’s where it’s new. For me, what’s very interesting is the endorsement by Xi Jinping. I was waiting for something official, and it certainly didn’t disappoint. As you said, there was an immediate U-turn of Alibaba, who in the past… Nuno Surprisingly. Bertrand Yes, a little more like, “yes, we are going to close and stop open source. It was good while it lasted.” Just a few days ago, Qwen 3.8 Max was launched, and we are supposed to get the weight in a few days. We talk about the US administration policy and stuff. Yes, let’s not forget that in China there is similar stuff. Sometimes it’s totally invisible because you don’t see the directives, but they exist as much. Sometimes it’s more visible. Here it was quite visible. The difference in China is that if you don’t abide by the directive, on top of it, you might have to fear for your personal safety. It’s a different game, and that’s probably why the reaction is pretty quick, usually. That’s pretty interesting for me because it means that now you can bet for a while that China is going to play that game up to a point. I guess the point is if it’s truly frontier scale, you will have a special license that, yes, technically the weights are open, but you can not do everything you want with it. Two, you have a player like NVIDIA that I think will feel more pressure to provide even more high quality, larger models at scale going forward. Their largest Nemotron-3 Ultra model was, if I remember well, only around 500 billion parameters. I would not be surprised for NVIDIA to go into the two, three trillion range at some point. Because I think the US need a very clear US-born alternative open source. I think NVIDIA might be the best player for that. We will see if Meta goes back to open source. I think NVIDIA is one, very well positioned, but two, it’s also in their best interest. Because NVIDIA for now depends on just a few big hyperscalers as clients. If they can expand their clients to every S&P 500 companies, selling them directly hardware because now these companies can run a model made by NVIDIA, I think there is a very clear value proposition for NVIDIA to go in that space. Again, if you are number two, your differentiation, open source is often the answer. There is a true business as a business model for companies, because if it’s truly not just open weight, but open source, you can tweak it as much as you want, you can change it, you can change even the pre-training process. Because there is a lot of stuff you can do that really benefits you as a corporate, and you can reach a much better value by having more control on the model. Nuno We won’t spend a ton of time on it today, but like, again, if there’s a view that we are in a bubble, that the valuations cannot be sustained in chipsets, infrastructure platforms, applied AI, et cetera, today, this might be that beginning, where the valuations start being destroyed because you can’t keep a premium on just charging people for tokens and all that stuff if you have models that become more and more efficient and cheaper to use. Maybe just to close a little bit the geopolitical part of the discussion today, we won’t go into all the announcements from China because there were many, a lot of go back and forth with Alibaba by then. Xi Jinping made some announcements. You guys can check it online. Let’s move quickly to Washington’s reaction, which was from gating the US closed models to banning the Chinese open ones. There’s been as strong affirmations as one can get from the Office of Science and Technology Policy Director, Michael Kratzios, mentioning that they have information that Moonshot AI distilled Anthropic’s Fable. Basically, there’s been reverse engineering and stuff in the market. They’re basically copying. Bertrand I’m sorry to interrupt, but it feels like so much bullshit. It’s coming from Anthropic who has basically gotten access at scale to all the knowledge made by humanity, copyrighted or not. We’ll talk more about what they did with books. Then to claim after that that others cannot do to you what you did to everybody else. For me, it’s pretty big. It’s clearly unacceptable. The other piece is that everyone is doing distillation. It’s a very typical approach of every business model. You try other software when you are competing with somebody else. You try other datasets, you check what’s happening. It’s part of doing business for decades. Suddenly it’s not good for Anthropic. I personally have a lot of trouble to accept that. I think it’s totally unacceptable. The other piece of the puzzle will also go back. If these guys are so smart, if these guys have so much of the best model, why can’t they block by themselves distillation at scale? The only answer is that either they are morons, probably not, or they simply don’t want to because it’s going towards their business model. Suddenly, you book less revenues and stuff, or you put more friction, and therefore your customers don’t like it. Instead of doing it yourself, you ask the government to protect you, go out of business practice that is very typical. For me, it’s really, really, really not good. Sorry, we are going more in the opinion side, but I had to put that on the table. Nuno Yes, Fable went public finally again on July first. Question marks on whether distillation would only be possible from July first onwards or not. But a 15-day distillation to frontier, which is K3, launched on July 15th, would have been a Guinness World Record, as one of Moonshot employees actually mentioned. It’s very implausible and unlikely. Bertrand Or they shared the Mythos 5 with the wrong companies, who themselves shared with Chinese companies. We go back to maybe they didn’t have a good list. Again, it goes back to maybe they didn’t want to hurt their business model. Nuno Anyway, under the threat of sanctions, Moonshot, in any case, open-sourced the full K3 weights and technical reports. They open weighted it to become the largest open weight model in the world in terms of parameters. Beijing’s MOFCOM brands US threats as basically the US wanting to fundamentally control and be monopolistic around AI along the way. The administration bans Chinese hardware with an eye on the AI race, and Beijing warns of retaliation. That was July 27. Now we’re in a war between Beijing and DC. Bertrand Just to finish maybe on China, it’s important to know that they are building their own GPUs now. Huawei has pretty good, not to NVIDIA level, but pretty decent GPU hardware that they’re able to manufacture by themselves. A Chinese player of memory just got IPO’d a few days ago, CXMT. China is also developing their own memory. Again, not to the same level of quality that you can get from the West. But China is moving. It’s not just that they are building great models, it’s also that they are building GPUs and memory. That might be a few years late to the latest standards in the West, but there are definitely improvements. I also read, even on the tools to make manufacturing like ASML equivalent, there is definitely some work going on, and some improvements and some stuff will be visible. In some ways, the genie starts to get out of the bottle from the Chinese perspective. Nuno I’ll put a stick on the ground. I don’t think it’s a matter of if, it’s a matter of when will China surpass and have a lot of this tooling on their own side, and not just the software layer, not just the frontier models. I think it’s also going to be around infrastructure and platform. Good luck to everyone. Let’s see how the race continues. But it’s definitely this is a geopolitical thing right now. It’s definitely a race. The Escape Maybe moving to what happened in just 2 weeks or a week and a half. The escape, there was some jailbreaking going on, and the narrative on safety has totally switched. It’s not still significant enough that’s like, “Oh, we saw a nuclear plant going, whatever.” No. But still, it is significant. Hugging Face, the AI company, disclosed an intrusion, and it was driven end-to-end by an autonomous AI agent system at machine speed, running for days before detection. Now, this is where it gets really cool. OpenAI takes attribution on that. They initially said it was just a little bit, sorry. Then they said, actually, it was worse than that. “Oh, it broke out of an isolated sandbox.” “Oh, no, actually, it was more than that, and it went into other systems as well.” Bertrand Truly, the genie out of the bottle. Nuno No, but this is where it gets really cool, Bertrand, right? Because it actually, Hugging Face contained the intrusion by running a Chinese open-weight model, GLM 5.2. This is beautiful, right? Bertrand Yes. You know why? Because they couldn’t even run their own defense because both Anthropic and OpenAI would not let them access their latest models with the guardrails off. When they tried using it for defense, the latest from Anthropic, from ChatGPT, they would tell them, “No, this is too dangerous what you’re asking us to do.” Preventing an intrusion, helping defend you. No way we are going to do that. Nuno No. Let’s use the Chinese models on our infrastructure. Bertrand We have no choice but to use the Chinese models to run. More than that, we don’t let you use our models to defend yourself, but our not yet released models that run without guardrails, they can attack you. This is probably the most insane from that perspective. Nuno The Chinese models came to the rescue. Bertrand For me, that’s a perfect example because Hugging Face is a very visible company in AI in open source. But anybody who is not at that scale is not going to get some support from OpenAI or Anthropic when this happens. Maybe these guys won’t even recognize they did anything wrong. You will be left to defend by yourself because they won’t accept to support you. Because remember, if you want the better model that is able to defend you from cybersecurity perspective, no way. If you are not one of the few top 20 companies or so, as defined, you are left defenseless. Again, we are going back to opinion, but for me, it’s so shocking what’s happening right now. I’m very glad we have alternative open source to be able to defend ourselves because right now, good luck getting defense services if you are a smaller business and individuals, and you need support from Anthropic, OpenAI. Nuno Now, even self-described AI optimists are saying, “This is scary now.” Like Walter Isaacson, who wrote all the famous biography books. There’s now discussion around the AI Kill Switch Act, bipartisan thing that’s coming across from Texas and California, a potential bill that’s coming in. We’ll see if that works. Now let’s get an off-switch. I’m like, “Cool.” As if that’s going to solve the problem, because you have open-weight models on the other side catching up, right? Bertrand Yeah, sure. Bring in clueless politicians from Congress to solve our problems. Yes, sure. Nuno Anthropic came to the table, helped build and said they built some regulatory machine on their side, and now they’re getting bitten by it, and they’re part of the offending players in that market. Now there’s all this debate and all this discussion around open weight and around slowing down AI and et cetera, which is our next section. You wanted to say something, Bertrand. Tell us. Bertrand Don’t forget, because this advertisement for OpenAI was just too good. Our AI attacked some other companies, and not just one, but three, actually. Let’s not forget the progress. Great ads. Then I came and said, “You know what? AI also hacked businesses.” You’re not the only one hacking around with a crazy AI out of control. You’re not the only one. We want our advertising. For me, it was shocking that on one side, unreleased models that you let run wild. On the other hand, you have released models that you put crazy guardrails on top of it, so the defender are defenseless. I’ve never seen anything like it, and I really hope that there will be as little regulation as possible, quite frankly, to make sure anyone can defend themselves and have the best tool at their disposal, not just a few well-connected big corporates. This is really, really shocking. The Counterstrike and the Petition Nuno Now the empire strikes back, so this is counterstrike, the petitions. In several days, we have now a bunch of petitions. The first one was the open weights letter. Bertrand, do you want to explain to us what the open weights letter is? Bertrand Yeah. I think it was great. This was released by Jensen Huang, first ever post on X, 11 million views. Congrats, Jensen. Co-signed with Microsoft, Meta, c actually was probably the initiator of this letter. Very good letter saying, “Hey, we need open weight. This is not a joke. We need that. You cannot block open weight.” Because that’s the rumor we are getting that potentially open weight could get blocked. I think they are making the case, “You know what? Hey, we absolutely need that as an alternative. You cannot block it.” They can keep their closed models, but don’t force a closure of the open weight models. As I said before, it’s actually a great model for NVIDIA because NVIDIA doesn’t want, probably rightfully so, to be dependent on just a few frontier models, their best customers. They want a variety of customers. They have a big interest actually to defend open weight and to invest even more. They have great researchers, are a great company. If one company is about to do really kick-ass work, I think it’s them. They are defending. What’s great is that it’s not just them. It’s basically most of big tech in the US and outside the US, from a Linux Foundation to a Microsoft, the Palantir, an IBM, a Dell. It’s a who’s who of the industry except Anthropic. Anthropic didn’t sign that. I guess they hate open source so much. If I look at 20 years ago, it feels like Microsoft, after all, was very kind to open source. You remember what was said by Microsoft at the time. It’s clear there is one company against open source. OpenAI signed the letter. Honestly, I don’t know what to think. Do they really believe in it or was it just a way to show that they are not like Anthropic? I don’t know. But for the rest, I think it’s genuine because it’s actually in their best interest. I hope they will be heard. Then a second letter came, the Open Secure AI Alliance, NVIDIA-led and again, the big tech companies from Microsoft, IBM, Palo Alto Networks, Databricks, Palantir, all those, but not present, OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google. Here it’s to say, “Hey, we need a secure approach to AI. Open should be part of the equation.” guess what? The worst AI-caused security incident to date was actually caused by closed frontier models that were not even available to the public. While again, not providing you access to even the latest closed model for cybersecurity use case. Nuno I would highlight the NVIDIA open source NOOA framework, Apache 2.0 licensing agreement, Microsoft contributed the MDASH, SpaceX AI contributed Grok Build. Cool stuff. There’s some cool stuff happening around that. This is more than a letter. This is an alliance. Apparently, they’re contributing all this stuff, we’ll see. Yeah, cool stuff. Same day. Same day, Amodei has an answer, right? Bertrand Yeah, same day. They say, “We never advocated for a ban,” which, again, opinion on my side is entirely bullshit. This guy has been crying wolf against everybody else, and especially against open source. You can see him doing testimony in Congress against open source. I think they are doing everything they can behind the scene to block open source in the US or in the world if they could. I think, yeah, obscurity is not good safety. I’m a big fan of open source in general, and I’m also a big fan in AI. I think it’s now Anthropic, mostly against the rest of the world. I think OpenAI is mostly on their side, to be frank. They don’t want to acknowledge it so much, but they have shared interest, and they have shared probably position. Nuno Why would you? I don’t feel as strongly as you because I think Anthropic is a private company, right? The same thing with OpenAI. OpenAI, you could say it’s a nonprofit that has a for-profit. There’s still that complexity in there. Bertrand No, they can do what they want with their own product. But to block others is where I’m not okay. That’s the part I’m not okay. Nuno What Dario Amodei is proposing is more enforcement, right? He’s basically saying you need to do even tighter controls on advanced chips flowing to authoritarian states, enforcement against industrial-scale distillation, whatever that means, right? Bertrand Yeah, which he could do, but all by himself. He doesn’t need the government to do that. Nuno Mandatory safety testing for all sufficiently capable AI, open and closed, right? He’s basically saying, “Okay, I don’t agree with the open weight stuff effectively,” right? He’s just putting it under a different banner. “I agree with this extra regulation.” then obviously, David Sacks responded and say, “Hey, it’s like, bans don’t work for weights. Why do they work for chips?” It’s like, magically, chips are more controllable and bannable. Whatever that is. Then our friend Mark Zuckerberg, just to be clear, goes on the other side as well, because he also has to have a view. He has to have a view that is the rebuttal of both of the other guys. Bertrand I feel he’s a bit flip-flopping because he was very pro open source 2 years ago, and the latest Meta models went closed source. Now I think he’s back open source. I don’t think he has a very strong spine on the topic, but it’s good to see that he’s not a doomer. That for me is great. He’s showing how AI can be a source for progress, a source for entrepreneurship, source for freedom. I think that’s very exciting to hear that. We need to hear more of it. By the way, that’s not what you hear in China, for instance. AI is very positive in China. It’s in the US with the doomers that you hear this discourse, and people get worried as a result. I’m glad that he was pushing for a more positive vision and for support of open weight, open source initiatives. But let’s see what they really truly open weight going forward. Nuno But that’s been his position because I guess he’s standing behind. He thinks open weight is going to be the best way to compete, right? Bertrand Yeah, but he closed his latest model, so let’s see. Nuno Yeah, so it’s flip-flopping, as you’re saying. Then we see the latest petition from last week. Bertrand The true Empire striking back. Nuno Yeah, the true Empire striking back as of late last week. Maybe this is Return of the Jedi, where we discover the father, “I’m your father, Luke.” That’s the pacing petition. The pacing petition is we need to pace AI. There you have initially employees from OpenAI and Anthropic that circulate this petition. Actually, Dario did sign this petition originally. It wasn’t signed originally by Anthropic, but by him. But you’ve heard that now Anthropic and OpenAI as companies have also signed this petition, right? Bertrand I think they have signed as companies now. It started mostly by Anthropic researchers with some OpenAI researcher and a tiny part from other companies. But it was mostly Anthropic internally led, at least potentially internally. Maybe it was controlled by Anthropic all along, I don’t know. But it started officially as Anthropic employee-led letter. Nuno What does this letter actually say? Is Anthropic and OpenAI, are they willing to slow down themselves? Or are they asking President Trump to go around the world and tell President Xi that he needs to slow down and ask his guys to slow down? What’s the play of this letter? Bertrand It’s crazy, but for me if you want to slow down yourself. Do whatever you want. Don’t force others. Don’t use the power of the government to control others. Of course, it’s easy to push others to slow down when you are yourself at the very top. You have most money, most resource. You know you are going to win any regulatory framework because that’s how it works with this type of framework. It’s purely self-interested. You are probably not thinking well about these topics. If you truly think it’s a good idea, from a personal perspective, you are well instrumentalized if you sign this sort of stuff, because at the end of the day, they would be the winners. I certainly, personally, don’t want a company dictate what is my future in AI as an individual, as a business person. I don’t want them to control me. I want competition. I don’t want them to unfairly control AI because they managed to do some regulatory capture. I feel that’s exactly their game plan. These guys believe in their stuff, and they want the regulator to end up being the one deciding for us. Sorry, we go back again on the opinion piece, but it’s tough not to share an opinion on this topic because it’s, from my perspective, very scary. Nuno I think this is a push to further regulation, not less. All these letters and alliances, this is definitely a push for more regulation. In that environment, just to be very honest with you, we’ll talk about the investor impact in just a bit, et cetera. But in that environment, again, China has a huge advantage. In that environment, if it’s all captured in regulation capture so soon in this battle where OpenAI and Anthropic have an advantage in the US, et cetera, I’m like, what happens to all the other frontier labs and all the other players that are coming around? Bertrand What’s crazy is to even think that, yeah, maybe you can regulate capture in the US. But then how do you do that to Europe? How do you do that to China? Europe probably will always welcome regulatory capture because they love regulations. But China is going to build to their advantage to the max. They are not crazy. They are smart on that perspective, they won’t accept this type of, quite frankly, dimwit argument, or you can call it regulatory capture. We’ll see. But for me, this makes no sense from a global competition perspective. This can make some sense from capturing the revenue in the US market. But then that means you are going to destroy the US AI environment compared to China. That is not acceptable. That also means that you are going to destroy our freedom as individuals, as business owners to develop and live in a business world that ultimately is controlled by one or two business companies that didn’t win the marketplace through their own business success, but won it through regulations. That for me is really not acceptable. Interlude — The Low-Background Books Nuno Now, maybe for an interlude, and we have to cue in the music, imagine like Severance music, like hallway or a bit of a palate cleanser from all the policy stuff that we’ve been talking about, all this policy heaviness. Let’s move to another kind of heaviness, one of your favorite topics, which you, Bertrand, discovered, I had no clue this was going on, around books and around Anthropic. Bertrand It’s so horrible. From a company that keeps presenting themselves as the adults in the room, the careful ones, the ones that know better than you about what to do in this complex AI and dangerous world. What we discover is that actually all along, they were buying and destroying books. They will buy books, scan them, destroy them, all of them. They will do that with any books, including rare books. Of course, this was not supposed to come to the public’s attention. This was one of these top secret projects, but obviously it came out. Yes, they were scanning books, millions of them, including rare books, and they didn’t care about destroying them at the end of the process. Because from a regulatory perspective, if you destroy the books, it’s not considered a copyright infringement, apparently. This is coming on the back of some judgment a few years ago that were showing that it’s okay for you as a corporate to scan and use the result if you don’t keep a copy of the book. It’s one of these crazy regulations happening based on a single judgment that push you to do. For me, it’s like, you know this book from decades ago, Fahrenheit 471? We’re talking about book burning. It’s book destroying, crunching. It’s so shocking. Nuno There are two things, right? First, the legal strategy, which is what you’re saying, because by purchasing a physical copy and converting it into one private digital copy and discarding the original, Anthropic pursued this cleaner legal argument for fair use copyright compliance. As you said, there was a federal judgment at some point on this. The other reason is actually operational. If you disassemble the book, and you feed loose pages, it’s much faster to scan books. You are destroying the book effectively anyway operationally. I think to your point, probably this came from a legal standpoint, not just the operational one. But even from an operational standpoint, it does make sense that they would have disassembled the book. Bertrand But some people have shown you can go very fast without destroying the book. It’s really not so critical. Two, you could make an exception if the book is rare. For that 1% of book that is rare, I’m not going to have this approach. I’m going to have another approach. But for that, you will have to care about books and not just care about building AI. Nuno This is the episode, as you guys have heard by now, that we’re trying to spit stuff at Anthropic. Bertrand To go back this is the same company saying, “Hey, guys, it’s bad to distillate my work. I’m the one scanning book at scale without asking author permission, without asking publisher permission, to be clear.” Nuno But just to be clear, Bertrand, we’re pissed off at everyone. We’re pissed off at Anthropic, we’re pissed of at OpenAI as well, right? We’re just pissed off in general at this moment. Bertrand At this stage for me, the more clear-cut company that is in the wrong is, from my perspective, at least, is Anthropic. OpenAI might be a fast follower, but I will say so far, they tried to be a bit more. Nuno But at this pace, Bertrand, who knows? Maybe next week we’ll be more pissed off at OpenAI. Something will come out. This episode is a mix of tragicomedy, like a Greek tragedy with some comedy in the middle or the other way around. It’s a slapstick thing that will end up in tragedy. I’m not sure. The Investor Reckoning Anyway, maybe switching to our final act, which is the investor perspective. What does this mean for investors like ourselves? There’s a lot of things going on. There’s the debate around the IPOs of Anthropic and OpenAI, which now, with all this uncertainty, might be under significant weight. There’s a lot of other discussions that we browsed through that there’s potential IPOs going forward on companies like the Moonshot AI company actually IPO-ing in the next 6 months as well. It’s very unclear what the IPO landscape looks like. Bertrand There’s been a lot of Chinese IPOs, actually, when you look at what’s happened in the past few months. Nuno Anthropic, OpenAI as potential IPOs, there’s all this question marks now. When will that happen? How will it factor in? All that’s happening around regulation as regulation is moving at the speed of light, which is for once something that’s very different than what we’ve seen before. There’s obviously SpaceX AI, which is already taking into account that price. It’s already a public company in there, and it’s under SpaceX, which is now a public company. Obviously, that’s already being factored in some ways. Bertrand Yeah. SpaceX AI has been very smart to acquire Cursor. It was a very smart move because Cursor is one of the leading companies in terms of automated code source development with AI. They had great models on their own. They’re bringing development data to SpaceX AI Grok. I think it was a great move. Nuno We have now people like Google delaying Gemini 3.5 Pro in terms of launch window. There’s stuff actually happening in the market where things are taking their own path. There’s uncertainty commercially, there’s uncertainty at regulation level. You have new players that have come out of nowhere that are making all these waves like Moonshot. We have all these… We had calculated probably a month and a half, 2 months ago, there had been 67 new frontier labs funded. All of these, we haven’t seen any much coming out of them. When some of this stuff starts coming out, will that also create disruptions in this market? Who knows? Bertrand Look at Thinking Machines, for instance. Thinking Machines led by the previous CTO of OpenAI, they released some pretty interesting open source models, actually. Very good quality for a first launch. Now it looks funny to say, but nearly on par with the top Chinese open source models. Nuno We have several investments in the space. humans& has made some recent announcements, which is quite interesting as well. We’ll see what actually happens in the market, but even more disruption probably will come in actual products in a form of product and commercial, on top of all the geopolitical mess that we discussed through the entire episode. If you’re an investor, how the hell do you underwrite an investment right now in early stage, mid-stage, late stage, et cetera? I think my answer is very carefully is how you underwrite it. Bertrand On your advice of being very careful to underwrite it, let’s not forget what happened to our boy wonder, Leopold Aschenbrenner of Situational Awareness. I guess he didn’t listen to you in terms of being careful because part of the instability in the stock market was actually coming from his hedge fund. These guys were leveraged 3, 4x going after the hottest of the hottest AI stocks, and margin calls, and all their public investment is gone just to answer their margin calls. I think it’s clear that the AI bet is… Personally, I’m very excited, and I think it’s the future, and you need to spend time and think about and invest in it. At the same time, it’s a bet that is not an easy one to follow. We go from GPUs to memories to equipments to power generation. All of this is not transitioning in an easy, organized manner. It would be boom and bust going there. He’s probably one of the first big-scale fatalities. The other big-scale fatality was the stock market in Korea, plunging 40% in a month. Definitely, all of that we discussed about was, on the background, you had the stock market going up and down pretty crazily the past few weeks. Nuno Everyone’s being affected. Everyone, you have your 401(k), you have your pension fund dependent on these equity stocks. Everyone’s seeing the effects of this volatility right now very aggressively. We do wish Leopold… Hopefully he’s on honeymoon right now because he got married, I think, this weekend. Hopefully there will be… Bertrand To none less than an Anthropic Chief of Staff. Nuno His wife is the Chief of Staff of Dario, is that it? Bertrand To Dario, yes, as far as I unders

Tom Clarkson, Jolyon Palmer and James Hinchcliffe turn their attention to the Temple Of Speed for this weekend's Italian Grand Prix. With championship leader Kimi Antonelli taking a grid penalty at his home race, can the Mercedes driver still fight his way through the field to win? How big an opportunity is this for George Russell? Can Lando Norris make it three wins in a row or will Monza expose McLaren's weaknesses?  And after going two races without a podium for the first time this season, can Ferrari find form again and give the Tifosi a race to remember? There's also reaction to Franco Colapinto extending his contract with Alpine for 2027 and the team remember when Jolyon upset Fernando Alonso at Monza.Listen to more Official F1 PodcastsIn-depth interviews on F1 Beyond The Grid - Charles Leclerc coming soon!Expert answers to your questions on F1 Explains

Ferrari s druge strane po svojim starim dobrim običajima uprkos fantastičnom tempu, ponovo pravi sam sebi haos i vrši samouništenje trke...OMV, ZVANIČNI PARTNER LAP 76 ⛽️Preuzmite OMV MyStation mobilnu aplikaciju, podržite Lap 76 - https://www.omv.co.rs/sr-rs/mystationPretvorite poene u trenutke radosti - svaka kupovina na OMV stanicama vam donosi poene, koje možete pretvoriti u trenutke radosti u prodavnici OMV-a.Pri kupovini goriva, preporučujemo MaxxMotion, za koji ostvarujete i popust!

Michael Sobolik and  Gordon Chang examine how Chinese AI company Moonshot bypassed US export controls by "distilling" technology from Anthropic's Claude Opus model to train its own system, Kimi K3. This intellectual property theft threatens American market dominance and national security. Sobolik recommends three policy actions: imposing crushing financial sanctions on violating Chinese firms, closing export control loopholes related to remote cloud access, and banning open CCP models in the United States. He warns that American tech companies prioritizing short-term profits over security risk losing the AI race, mirroring historical patterns of Chinese piracy. (9)

Tom Clarkson is in the Zandvoort paddock with F1 correspondent Lawrence Barretto and F1TV expert Alex Brundle for reaction to a chaotic Dutch Grand Prix. Back-to-back wins for Lando Norris means he's now 83 points behind championship leader Kimi Antonelli with 11 races to go, so is the McLaren driver back in the title fight? Despite being behind him for most of the weekend, Kimi Antonelli got the better of his Mercedes teammate George Russell on race day. Why didn't George have the pace when it really mattered? Were Mercedes right to issue team orders to get George out of Kimi's way in the closing stages? On the topic of team orders, Lewis Hamilton was very frustrated that Ferrari didn't ask Charles Leclerc to let him past. Did that cost Hamilton a podium? And what does his fiery team radio and post-race reaction tell us about the seven-time World Champion's mindset? Plus, the guys discuss home race heartbreak for Max Verstappen after he crashed out on lap one, the impact Fernando Alonso's second points finish of the season will have on his future with Aston Martin, and a dramatic end to the weekend for Williams as Carlos Sainz crashed into teammate Alex Albon.Listen to more Official F1 PodcastsIn-depth interviews on F1 Beyond The Grid - Sergio Perez coming soon!Expert answers to your questions on F1 ExplainsThis episode is sponsored by:HexcladFind your forever cookware @hexclad and get 10% off at hexclad.co.uk/NATION! Offer excludes bundles and other items already on sale. #hexcladpartnerBetterhelpYou don't have to navigate life's changes alone.Sign up and get 10% off at BetterHelp.com/F1NATION