Podcasts about Yann

Funky House, Afro House, Deep house et Nu Disco on Radio MonacoHosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

durée : 00:08:49 - par : Rodolphe Bruneau-Boulmier, Emilie Munera - Ce disque monographique consacré à la musique de Yann Robin et enregistré par l'Ensemble Intercontemporain présente trois oeuvres : Art of Metal I, Art of Metal III et Vulcano. Cette dernière a été créée en 2010 au Festival Musica à Strasbourg. Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France

durée : 00:08:49 - par : Rodolphe Bruneau-Boulmier, Emilie Munera - Ce disque monographique consacré à la musique de Yann Robin et enregistré par l'Ensemble Intercontemporain présente trois oeuvres : Art of Metal I, Art of Metal III et Vulcano. Cette dernière a été créée en 2010 au Festival Musica à Strasbourg. Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France

durée : 00:08:49 - par : Rodolphe Bruneau-Boulmier, Emilie Munera - Ce disque monographique consacré à la musique de Yann Robin et enregistré par l'Ensemble Intercontemporain présente trois oeuvres : Art of Metal I, Art of Metal III et Vulcano. Cette dernière a été créée en 2010 au Festival Musica à Strasbourg. Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France

Est-ce que tu penses à moi ?! On débrief sans chichi les coulisses de Drag Race France, Drag Race UK vs The World, Parfum Orange, la vie tumultueuse d'une supermodele, avec un quizz made in Lady P. Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

Réécoutez le FG Chic mix by Yann Vico du mardi 22 septembre 2026 tracklist :Michael Gray, Kelli Sae, Opolopo – Don't Want Anybody (Opolopo Remix)Kym Sims – Too Blind To See It (Ridney & Richard Earnshaw Extended Mix)Sio – Serious (Original Mix)Moojo – That's The Way Love Goes (Extended Mix)Twisted House – Take Me HomeVenessa Jackson, Corey Holmes, Larr – Free Your Love (Vocal Mix)Glen Horsborough – Lift Me Up (Original Mix)Kideko – Burning Love (Extended Mix)Kevin McKay – All I Do (Extended Mix)Seamus Haji, ATFC, Osner – Oh Yeah! (Osner Extended Remix)Nova Fronteira, Emmaculate – Everybody Loves The Sunshine (Emmaculate Extended Mix)Jaegerossa, Suki Soul, Moodena – Spirit (Moodena Remix)Sullee, Isabel Fructuoso, Will Dawson – No Pares (Will Dawson Extended Remix)

Tickets for AIE NYC now open, and apply for the invite-only AIE CODE. Join us!We have an unusual relationship with today's guest: for years since coauthoring the InstructGPT paper, Diogo Almeida had been saying that API-available frontier models have been going down the wrong path, everything from the alignment to refusals to reliability perspectives, that we have dropped every mode other than autoregressive chat-tuned LLMs because of the overwhelming success of ChatGPT.In a launch video now viewed ~40M times (by comparison, GPT4o was 22M, Fable 5 was 15M, Navier Stokes was 74M, and 6 Astra was 137M), Diogo introduced Jev and it immediately took over the AI timeline — we'll skip full Jev explainers because your favorite AI influencer/educator has probably already done one. We also collected:* the official patterns and cookbooks you should see first, from Allie* Jev usecases* speed based - games and computer use* the voice + computer use example we discuss at 1h34 mins* voice + browser control* The must not miss Doom demo* Driving cars in games* Excalidraw* virtual try-ons* “Smart Games”/smart NPCs* guided responses in text messages* Jev for coding agents has an official guide * jev for linting* compacting tool calls* reasonable pushback from Theo - Diogo has published a note on the Tyranny of the KV Cache that you should read as a followup after the pod for Jev + coding agents, because of his belief that Cache Rules Everything* Programming Languages built atop Jev (Diogo's fave)* Jev for analytics replay and user journey review* “dark data”* entity resolution* natural language search* “smart software”* a core goal of Jev is to “disappear into the background” - eg as unremarkable as regex* Jev as a judge* Jev memes* Jev vs LLM capabiltiies* blending transformers and classifiers* about the confidence api* Jev vs GLiNER (note difference/pushback, agreed, agreed, agreed)* Jev on trolley problem* Jev BushInstead we'll focus on what we can uniquely offer — a broader philosophical and mission-based understanding of how and why Jev was created, and what you should expect next in terms of future models from TypeSafe (ReasoningJev?) and what usecases and ideas you should work on vs the 55th low effort clone of Jev's API or doing a generic JevBench benchmark - something Diogo has rejected publicly.Why RLCD: Three kinds of RLHF, and why they are ALL the wrong north starDiogo knows a good deal about RLHF, given that he was on the team that pioneered post-training at OpenAI — and traces the three branches to Christiano et al 2017 (the robot backflip demo), Stiennon et al 2020 (learning to summarize) and his baby, Ouyang et al 2022 (InstructGPT). From there on, every innovation from Function Calling to Structured Outputs to Reasoning felt like a hack on top of the string based, sequence to sequence prediction paradigm. As he mentions on the pod, from 2023-2024 he struggled unsuccessfully, due to both personal and organization underestimation, to train a model that accurately addressed what he saw as the core problem with making LLMs the heart of software: reliability.Jev's core innovation is "Reinforcement Learning for Calibrated Decisions”, a novel, unpublished technique that optimizes for “answers with epistemically honest probabilities on System One tasks” rather than human rated feedback (RLHF) — which causes hallucinations, sycophancy, and permanent reliance on humans — or programmatically verifiable outputs with rubrics (RLVR) — which solves Navier Stokes but exacerbates jagged intelligence and doesn't integrate well with other software.We've talked about the calibration problem before on the pod, but probably the single best place to understand why RLCD became necessary is Diogo's AIE talk, which discusses why a generation of training helpful AI assistants for humans has impaired them for training models for composable, programmable AI for automation.At the end he also teases his contrarian opinion on scaling laws - which teases how to build a modern neolab without the billions of dollars the major labs have…The Bitterest Lesson: Tasks and Data beats ComputeWe spend a good amount of time discussing Diogo's essay on the Bitterest Lesson:His point is that “You get what you optimize for and the bitterest lesson in ML is that the most important part of it isn't ML at all.” - and picking the right north star, eg upvoting for user preference vs being integrated into tool calls - makes everything else fall in line.We're excited to catch up with a freshly dyed Diogo to discuss:* Why AI can solve extraordinarily hard problems but still fail to automate basic work* What System One Models are and why Jev is built for software rather than chat* RLHF, mode collapse, calibration, and the hidden costs of optimizing for human preferences* Why refusals become a problem when AI is buried inside software dependencies* Why TypeSafe rejects public benchmarks and optimizes for intelligence per dollar* The “bitterest lesson”: why the right task and the right data can matter more than compute* Why TypeSafe thinks of itself as a data lab rather than a model lab* RLCD vs. RLHF and RLVR as fundamentally different North Stars for AI* Why reliability and robustness matter more than simple determinism* Jev's programming primitives and how intelligence maps into software control flow* Why developers should decompose AI workflows into small, measurable decisions* How structured state replaces giant prompts and system messages* Why Diogo thinks AI should eventually disappear into the background of software* The “inverse SaaS-pocalypse” and how AI could supercharge existing software* System One vs. System Two intelligence and the limits of reasoning models* Dark data, computer use, real-time intelligence, and Jev's biggest early use cases* Why Jev could reshape coding agents built around a single-model architecture* Why Diogo says he wouldn't pre-train with $1 billion* The OpenAI journey that led to TypeSafe and why he thinks many neo-labs are approaching AI incorrectly* Coding agents beyond the KV cache, shared state, sub-agents, and the multi-agent futureDiogo Almeida* LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/diogomda* X: https://x.com/CompleteSkeptic* TypeSafe AI: https://typesafe.ai/Timestamps00:00:00 Jev Launch Week and the AI Economic Revolution00:02:50 What Is Jev? System One Models and Programmable AI00:05:54 RLHF, Mode Collapse, Calibration, and Yann LeCun00:10:29 Programmatic AI, Refusals, and Safety Alignment00:17:21 Why TypeSafe Rejects Public Benchmarks00:20:43 The Bitterest Lesson: Data, Compute, and the Right Task00:24:59 RLCD vs. RLHF and RLVR00:28:42 Why Powerful AI Still Hasn't Automated the Economy00:39:55 Reliability, Robustness, and Determinism00:48:11 Model Versioning, LTS, Speed, and Intelligence per Dollar00:54:04 Inside Jev's API and Programming Primitives00:58:28 How to Build with Jev: Structure, Decomposition, and Small Decisions01:18:28 The Inverse SaaS-pocalypse and AI Disappearing into Software01:33:21 Computer Use, Dark Data, and Jev's Biggest Use Cases01:38:48 How Jev Could Reshape Coding Agents01:41:00 AI Safety, Frontier Pacing, and the Limits of RLVR01:48:03 Why Diogo Wouldn't Pre-Train with $1 Billion01:55:19 The OpenAI Story Behind TypeSafe02:01:41 Why Diogo Thinks Most Neo-Labs Are Getting AI Wrong02:08:00 Coding Agents Beyond the KV Cache and the Multi-Agent FutureTranscriptIntroduction: Jev Launch Week and Developer MomentumSwyx [00:00:00]: Okay, we're in the studio. A special occasion because this week, Diogo, my good buddy, launched Jev, and it's been taking over the complete timeline. How do you feel? What's it like to be you right now?Diogo Almeida [00:00:16]: Emotionally?Swyx [00:00:17]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:00:17]: Never been worse. Like, I'm a ragged corpse of a person right now because there's so much going on, and I'm like a technical CEO, so I have, like, a lot of fires to fight.Swyx [00:00:29]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:00:29]: But mentally, I feel—I say this all the time, and I've been saying this kind of for years in my over-under events. Like, I feel like the entire AI field is like one of those, like, carnival house of mirrors, and everyone is just insane and saying the weirdest stuff that doesn't make sense. And it feels like for just this week, like, I'm on a better in sync with reality and like, oh, people see it now. AI can be so much more than what was once thought.Diogo Almeida [00:01:06]: And like, yes, we are going to make. Like, an AI-based economic revolution is back on the table, and this is f*****g awesome.Diogo Almeida [00:01:17]: I'm so jazzed the developers get it. It's, it's, Yeah, and I want to show my eternal gratitude to the developers andSwyx [00:01:25]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:01:26]: I'm so jazzed about the community and everything. It's so great.Swyx [00:01:28]: Yeah, you were saying yesterday that you decided to prioritize the town hall and not a bunch of, like, VIP, investor-type people because you wanted to make sure that they are the people that you get your most, attention, right? The engineers, the developers.Diogo Almeida [00:01:43]: Yeah, it felt a little like, oh man, I'm talking to, like, really important people right now.Swyx [00:01:47]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:01:47]: I probably shouldn't reveal who.Swyx [00:01:48]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:01:48]: But it feels a little bit dirty for me to, I'm, like, perhaps overly genuine in things. Like, it feels, like, dirty if, like, in my gigantic calendar event of people to talk to, the community isn't one of those.Swyx [00:02:04]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:02:04]: And actually, in my ideal world, it would be, like, community all the time. I was thinking, “Should I host a town hall while walking to your studio?” And I'm like, “No, that's too crazy.”Swyx [00:02:12]: Sure. Yeah. Well, you guys have been hosting town halls on Discord. Discord is now 100,000 people. Your Twitter'sDiogo Almeida [00:02:19]: I don't follow these stats.Swyx [00:02:20]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:02:20]: So holy s**t.Swyx [00:02:21]: Your Twitter's blown up. It was, it was really funny ‘cause, like, at AIE, you were like, “Yeah, follow me please,” and then you didn't, like, provide even your handle.Diogo Almeida [00:02:29]: I'm a noob. I'm a noob.Swyx [00:02:29]: You're such a noob.Diogo Almeida [00:02:30]: I'm a noob.Swyx [00:02:31]: But no, but that, like, that's, like, positive aura that, likeDiogo Almeida [00:02:33]: CoolSwyx [00:02:33]: You don't know how to promote yourself.Diogo Almeida [00:02:35]: Yeah. Someone, like, called me out when I posted, like, “Holy s**t, we're all three twending-- trending topics.” And then they're like, “That's a personal feed.”Swyx [00:02:42]: That's a personal, yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:02:43]: And I'm like, “Oh, no.”Swyx [00:02:44]: Of course, of course it'll trend to you.Diogo Almeida [00:02:45]: Cringe. Yeah.Swyx [00:02:45]: Yes, ‘cause it's what you clicked on.Diogo Almeida [00:02:47]: Yeah.Swyx [00:02:47]: So okay. Let's, Yeah, so congrats on everything.What Is Jev? System 1 Models and Intelligence per DollarDiogo Almeida [00:02:50]: Thank you.Swyx [00:02:50]: We'll talk about more, details as you have them. But let's, for people who are, like, living under a rock or just want, like, the definitive thing, what is Jev?Diogo Almeida [00:03:02]: Whew. Let me think about. That's a hard one.Swyx [00:03:07]: Okay. And I'm happy to, like, re-ask if you wanna kind ofDiogo Almeida [00:03:09]: No. I'm happy toSwyx [00:03:10]: OkayDiogo Almeida [00:03:10]: I'm happy to, like, just jam on it.Swyx [00:03:12]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:03:13]: I will say, like, the first thing that I'm relieved about with this question is now I don't have to answer that question to my parents anymore ‘cause ChatGPT can just explain it.Swyx [00:03:20]: Nice.Diogo Almeida [00:03:21]: So the way I see it is we new-- need a new class of models. We're not attached to naming that class of models. Our-- the most accurate name we've come up with is System 1 models.Swyx [00:03:33]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:03:33]: There will be reasons, but it's-- there's a reason why we don't call them decision models, because, like, they will be. Like, System 1 is beyond that. That's all I can say. We didn't expect this to be our big launch, so we have stuff in the tank.Swyx [00:03:48]: You should have said low-key research preview.Diogo Almeida [00:03:52]: It kind of was, right? It kind of was. But we. So there's a class of models that we describe them as, like, machine-native, System 1, large programmable. I think these are-- is the class of models where the goal is for code to be the consumer. So as opposed to, lar-- pre-trained large language models, which are meant for, like, autocomplete of the internet, or RLHF models, like chatbot instruction-following models, which are meant to, like, reply to text, or RLVR. It's in a weird gray area with RLHF. Like, these are meant to have things that directly are consumed by code, hence the name type safe. So the thing we really want is to have, like, AI, like, be as powerful as possible, and we think the way to do that is to integrate it with software. And we are designing everything, beyond just the outside, the deep internals of the model to be optimized for software. So number one, Jev is our first large programmable model, or a System 1 model, whatever you want to call it. Jev is meant to be optimized for intelligence per dollar, hence the name Jev.Swyx [00:05:03]: Jevons Paradox.Diogo Almeida [00:05:03]: Jevons Paradox, yeah. And it's optimized for intelligence per dollar. I love this debate with people about what is the most important between reliability, cost, calibration, and speed. And Jev is meant to be. Jev will be the name of models that will be on the frontier of intelligence per dollar. There's other ways to optimize it, like, ML, or at least if you're good at ML, it's all about trade-offs. And we are just going all out on that.Calibration, Mode Collapse, and the Limits of RLHFSwyx [00:05:31]: Yeah. And to me, like, calibration is one of the new things that people weren't talking about as much. We've done an episode In the past, with Clementine Foreia of Hugging Face, where they were like, “Yeah, actually, y- they're just.” Or, and this is your whole argument about RLHF, is they're more collapsing towards what you want to hear the mostDiogo Almeida [00:05:50]: OohSwyx [00:05:50]: Or what is most likely, instead of, like, their own internal confidence about a thing.Diogo Almeida [00:05:54]: Can I soapbox on that for a second?Swyx [00:05:56]: Go ahead. Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:05:57]: Cool. Like, I've been heard that your audience is the most technical, so I actually want to get into that.Swyx [00:06:02]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:06:03]: And if- I went through extreme precision to make sure everything in our launch video is accurate and real. Apparently, that's very unusual. One of the things that no one paid attention to was the downsides of RLHF, in particular mode dropping.Swyx [00:06:17]: Mode dropping or mode collapse?Diogo Almeida [00:06:19]: It's the same thing.Swyx [00:06:19]: Is that what you call it?Diogo Almeida [00:06:20]: It's the same thing.Swyx [00:06:20]: All right.Diogo Almeida [00:06:21]: And I wanna have a blog on this eventually, but I, like, want to tell as many people this as possible ‘cause I think it's a very interesting thing. So the spicy take, I believe in Yann LeCun a lot. I think Yann LeCun's takes are actually among the closest toSwyx [00:06:36]: What about this?Diogo Almeida [00:06:37]: Well, should I address this now or should I wait and go into mode collapse?Swyx [00:06:40]: No, later. Go mode, go mode collapse. I don't know.Diogo Almeida [00:06:42]: So I actually think that among takes, Yann LeCun's is among the most accurate. But he has this very famous/infamous slide about,Swyx [00:06:52]: The cake?Diogo Almeida [00:06:53]: LLMs are doomed.Swyx [00:06:54]: Okay.Diogo Almeida [00:06:54]: Like that one where he, like, has, like, a pie chart with, like, a tiny par-- tiny little thing- and says that as you increase sequence length, the probability of it making an error goes in. Yes, this one. This one. I love this one, because it's one of these things that seems mathematically obvious, but is obviously wrong, right? Like, it's mathematically obvious, but it doesn't empirically hold. And this is my favorite thing to teach people about, like, where youSwyx [00:07:21]: What's the disconnect, right?Diogo Almeida [00:07:22]: Exactly. And may I or you want to tell me?Swyx [00:07:27]: About mode collapse?Diogo Almeida [00:07:28]: Oh, no. Oh, so mode clop-- collapse is related to this.Swyx [00:07:31]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:07:31]: The disconnect happens because if you are in a mode covering or a calibrated distribution, you are, like, not. You are not overly punished about having outliers. You'd expect, like, something. Some amount of the time you'd be out of distribution, some amount of time you'd be in distribution. That's what happens when you cover the distribution. This was like models before GANs. They made blurry images, right?Diogo Almeida [00:07:54]: Instead, GANs mode drop. They, like, drop the minority classes and just do the really common ones. And this is why this effect doesn't happen, right? Like, instead of be-- in order to generate really long strings, without making errors, they need to, like, be extremely conservative because it's e- really easy to see when an error happens. It's very hard to see when, like, a subtle thing that looks correct happens. And that calibration is, like, total poison into, like, the probability distributions of strings.Swyx [00:08:22]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:08:23]: And it's, it's a nuanced take and like, I think that This is why this doesn't happen, and this is why strings are so bad at, decision-making or, overloading the string models are for decision-making is, like, a bad time.Yann LeCun, JEPA, Scaling Laws, and Practical ResearchSwyx [00:08:38]: And while we're on the topic of Yann, do you agree that his fix i- with-- which is like a world model, like a JEPA-type, embedding thing is the right solve? So basically, like, the. One of the reasons that it could fail is because you're trying to reason over token outputs and then, and then just looping back again and going. Keep, continuing going until you reach, like, a end of sentence. Like, is that, And his solve is JEPA, right?Diogo Almeida [00:09:02]: Yes.Swyx [00:09:02]: Which is, like, joint ambition,Diogo Almeida [00:09:04]: YeahSwyx [00:09:04]: Joint embedding prediction. So like, is that the solve or, like, do you have a. Do you have a take on that?Diogo Almeida [00:09:10]: Oh, man. I probably shouldn't talk too much about the insides of ML, but I will say that my brand, other than unhinged, is practical.Diogo Almeida [00:09:20]: Like, even my take here is practical. And like, I'm. Am I a scaling law fan? Depends. It dep-- it's, it's, it's, like, it's. Scaling laws tell you how much better you get at a thing for amount in.Diogo Almeida [00:09:33]: A scaling law does mean exponentially more resources for normally sublinear gains, which looks to be a bad investment unless those, like, linear gains are, like, really valuable. But it's all. To me, it's all about, like, what can we do with what we have to make the biggest possible f*****g difference? I can curse.Swyx [00:09:51]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:09:51]: Yeah.Swyx [00:09:52]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:09:52]: Yeah.Swyx [00:09:53]: We're, we're, we're approved for adults.Diogo Almeida [00:09:54]: Hell yeah.Swyx [00:09:55]: And also we have a scaling law thing if you wanna go into that later.Diogo Almeida [00:09:58]: Oh, I could if we. See, that part is not super relevant right now.Swyx [00:10:02]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:10:03]: I actually. If you wanna go into my bitterest lesson, I think that's more relevant.Swyx [00:10:06]: Okay.Diogo Almeida [00:10:06]: But like, to me, I'm all about, like, pragmatics. And I think that the JEPA stuff is really cool early research. I really love awesome research. Is it practical yet?Diogo Almeida [00:10:21]: Probably shouldn't say. But like, there's just a lot of.Diogo Almeida [00:10:29]: I just think there's just, like, so many diamonds in the rough let all over the research world right now that haven't been polished because people don't know how to, like, do the right task. And I think that what our launch did, it. Does it kickstart us as a company? Like, yes. Will it be great for us as a company? Yes. I think it's gonna be, like, even greater for this direction of, like, programmatic AI. There was going to be, like, a gold rush on top of us for. ‘cause, like, software is super f*****g charged. But I think there's gonna be a gold rush parallel to us as well on, like, all the different ways we can expose things to make software more powerful so people can make even cooler stuff. And then we are back to, like, early internet energy?Swyx [00:11:12]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:11:12]: And I think that's why, like, the Twitter is just like, “Jev.”? It's, it's like. It is a partySwyx [00:11:18]: It's inspiring because it's, it's, like, so different than what we're used to, which is, “I'm sorry you can't do this, but we do scaling laws and only the big labs can do it,” right?Diogo Almeida [00:11:28]: That. Actually, if I. I'll, I'll make a tangent if that's okay.Swyx [00:11:32]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:11:32]: I think you might enjoy this.Swyx [00:11:33]: Really? Our five tangents in. It's good. It's fun. Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:11:35]: Oh, yeah. I get lost at all my tangents.Swyx [00:11:37]: This is gonna be horrible for the listeners to figure it out, but they're gonna figure it out. It's fine.Safety Alignment, Refusals, and API PhilosophyDiogo Almeida [00:11:40]: Yeah, we can edit it in post.Swyx [00:11:40]: This is my response. Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:11:41]: So popular thing on Discord, that people keep asking me, I haven't had the time to explain it yet, is why am I opposed to safety alignment and why do we not refuse? I'm not opposed to safety as a principle, but I think that safety alignment is generally misaligned with users. And refusal is just, like, obviously a type error. Like, if you're a human being and you're chatting with, like, a bot or whatever, you're cloud coding, and a refusal happens, like, “I'm sorry, I can't read DNA.py.” that's an annoying time. It's anno- it's, it's annoyingDiogo Almeida [00:12:18]: Right? But you can work with it, right? And you're forced to work with it ‘cause of Stockholm syndrome.Diogo Almeida [00:12:23]: I have stories about that too. I need another tangent deep in here. But like, if you ever want this in a dependency running in the background, what happens if that refuses? What if someone else is using that dependency? They don't know what that system is. Like, you want the software to just stochastically break because a user sent, like, a weird message in there?Diogo Almeida [00:12:42]: Like, that is, like, straight-up insanity. It's coming from a place of, like, people who do not understand software, do not understand programming, and like, they are obsessed with, like, I believe this, horseless carriage of, like, AI coworker instead of unearthing, like, the full power of AI.Swyx [00:13:01]: Fair enough.Diogo Almeida [00:13:01]: Yeah.Swyx [00:13:01]: You want something that is the core kernel that is usable everywhere.Diogo Almeida [00:13:05]: Yes. Exactly. Like, the cognitive core, right?Swyx [00:13:07]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:13:08]: And you need this thing to be s- like, so general, so optimized for its use cases. You want it to be, like, you want it to work on all the future use cases, all the weird s**t that people are doing.Swyx [00:13:19]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:13:19]: We obviously didn't train on any of that stuff. Is it surprising that it works? No, ‘cause we trained on weirder stuff, my friend.Diogo Almeida [00:13:28]: So. But one tangent up about, like, safety alignment.Swyx [00:13:32]: Okay.Diogo Almeida [00:13:32]: Safety alignment makes sense for a product, in my opinion, for, like, ChatGPT and Claude. Like, it, What safety, what makes safety and capability alignment different is capability alignment is, like, about doing what the user wants. That is sick for software engineers. They want their thing to do the thing, and the more predictable it is, the less they have to test it and play around with it. Jeb is not anywhere close to that yet. It could be, but like, there's so many more nines of reliability that we want in order to make it so good, like a database query, that you don't even have to think about it. It is just there when you need intelligence. But safety alignment is, like, the opposite of instruction following. It's when you want to follow someone else's instructions, like OpenAI and AnthropicSwyx [00:14:13]: The RAGs value stack.Diogo Almeida [00:14:14]: Exactly. And this makes a lot of sense for a product. Again, like, ChatGPT should do. Y- you sh- like, if they don't want to, like, do, like, some, not-safe-for-work role play with ChatGPT, that's on them because, like, maybe that's, what their users who have, like, parents and kids want. Like, n- that's fine. But in an API, that's nuts, right? Like, that's completely unacceptable because, like, people need to, like, program around this, and that is, that's so anti-user that it's. It. I'm. Huh. I can be an angry person, so I should try to calm down.Swyx [00:14:52]: It's, People get your passion, and I think that's really good. The one pushback I'll give you is, like, what if we use it to kill people, right? Like, that is the actual. Like, n- the not-safe-for-work thing, it's private, personal, whatever. But like, yes, like, we will use it in war. And like, that is, something that companies can reasonably prefer their APIs not be used for.Diogo Almeida [00:15:14]: I get that. I think that there's, like, pragmatic places where that opinion can be held. I don't think the foundation of, like, a general-purpose technology is that place, personally.Diogo Almeida [00:15:27]: Like, would I prefer that our stuff is not used to kill people? Obviously. Would I prefer it's used for, like, all sorts of, like, great stuff in the world? Obviously. Will I put my thumb in the scale for that? Yes. Will I do it at the technological layer? Absolutely not, because that will fracture the intelligence. Every single time you mean it to overfit to some weird stuff, you're fracturing its intelligence more and more. And like, these things are fractured to the, like. They're so darn fractured right now.Swyx [00:15:54]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:15:54]: So and as a furthermore thing, to me, it's like I think intelligence will be more like a database than a coworker. Like, I don't think it's up to databases to add checks on whether or not they're used for, like, what's something that's not great? Like, CIA. Actually, I don't know what the CIA does, really. You can imagine. You can imagine, killing people who are not even bad or whatever.Diogo Almeida [00:16:21]: And like, I don't think it's the database's responsibility for that. And furthermore, like, a thing that has been weird to me is when people, like, sign up for our thing on Slack and they're like, “Hey, we're gonna deploy this. Can we deploy this thing?” I am just like, “My brother, we are an API. You are a developer. It's none of my business,” right? Like, you shouldn't know what the whole task even isSwyx [00:16:46]: YeahDiogo Almeida [00:16:46]: Because it should be decomposed into small things. We shouldn't be able to know what the downstream users are doing, and that is, like, a good boundary to give software engineers maximum power. Ideally, they use it for the good stuff, and ideally, we can, like, help them and like, we've talked about, like, doing open source and charity and all of that. We have absolutely no time for anything else right now. But like, they will get any of that bias out of the technological layer as long as I'm in charge.Privacy, Benchmarking, and Trusting IntelligenceSwyx [00:17:11]: Yeah, that's great. While we're on the topic, let's also briefly talk about your privacy stuff, terms of ser- terms of use, which, got a little bit ofDiogo Almeida [00:17:18]: OohSwyx [00:17:18]: Misunderstanding. I just wanna clarify that upfront.Diogo Almeida [00:17:21]: Hell yeah.Swyx [00:17:21]: I think this probably takes two sentences from you about, like, you will not. You're not being that restrictive about your API. Like, clearlyDiogo Almeida [00:17:27]: Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah, so yeahSwyx [00:17:27]: Ideologically, you articulate your role as a platform very seriously.Diogo Almeida [00:17:30]: Yes. Yes. I don't know what you're referring to, but like, this was. I've seen a couple of things about, like, benchmarking.Swyx [00:17:38]: Yes.Diogo Almeida [00:17:38]: Like, obviously we're not stopping people from do. Oh, man, I should be careful about what I say. I'm realizingSwyx [00:17:43]: No, you said, you said it publicly thatDiogo Almeida [00:17:44]: YeahSwyx [00:17:44]: That was in the preview period. You didn't take it out for the launch.Diogo Almeida [00:17:47]: Yeah. Okay.Swyx [00:17:47]: And now you're gonna take it out.Diogo Almeida [00:17:48]: So the team is doing stuff thatSwyx [00:17:49]: YesDiogo Almeida [00:17:49]: I'm not even aware of, so it's great to know the team communicated that. I asked them to check in with the lawyers about that.Swyx [00:17:54]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:17:54]: Like, we are obviously not stopping people from doing that type of thing. I'm extremely in favor. So I'm extremely anti-public benchmarks. I'm extremely in fa- I'm medium about private benchmarks that are proxies. ISwyx [00:18:09]: So are you worried about, saturation or, like, training on public benchmarks? So it's, like, easy to cheat.Diogo Almeida [00:18:15]: Not only is it easy to cheat, there's a lot of ins. So I think that we are. Or anyone who's, like, competition with us that, vaguely there is. Like, you could say, likeSwyx [00:18:28]: There's like 50 Jev clones, yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:18:30]: Well, sure.Swyx [00:18:31]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:18:32]: Well, the, these. Let's say that there is competition.Swyx [00:18:34]: And we'll talk about those. Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:18:34]: Or let's just say that there's. Let's just assume that there's an industry two years from now of people who are doing similar things to us. The thing that we are selling is intelligence per something, per, like, dollar or per second. The. No one. Like, people obsess about the cost and the speed. I believe that is. It's cool, but like, the thing that matters is the intelligence. Like, the cost and the speed are, like, are bad things. You're paying them for something, and you need the thing back, and the intelligence is what truly matters. The problem with intelligence is that there's a je ne sais quoi to it, right? Like, the good model smell. Like, the thing that happened after we launched of, like, two hours later that actually went way bigger than the video, which was like, “Holy s**t.”Swyx [00:19:16]: This is actually usable.Diogo Almeida [00:19:17]: It. WellSwyx [00:19:17]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:19:17]: It's, like, beyond that.Swyx [00:19:20]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:19:20]: Like, the. Whew, the launch was crazy, and people could really sense how hard we care about that, and that's truly what I think the long term of this is. And I think public benchmarks are antithetical to this. Like, they are a way to get people trust in intelligence because intelligence has a je ne sais quoi, but the public benchmarks are extremely gameable. Even if they try not to, they still will. Like, back in the old days, every lab had a team to collect data that looks like MMLU to make it look better, which is just benchmarking with extra steps.Diogo Almeida [00:19:58]: So I believe that in the long run, it needs to be vibes and trust until you put it into a workflow and evaluate it for that workflow and measure it and have your own sense of, like, how it does on the exact workflow that matters. And our job is to keep moving the nines of reliability. This is like an ever-present part of o- of what we need to be doing as a company, and we need to do everything to have people know that this is something we care so much about. Like, if we wanted to, we could have released Jev, like, a year and a half ago if we wanted it to be dumb.The Bitterest Lesson: Tasks, Data, and North StarsSwyx [00:20:34]: Oh.Diogo Almeida [00:20:34]: It. Like, the. My bitterest lesson, right? Like, architecture and Yeah.Swyx [00:20:40]: I'll bring it upDiogo Almeida [00:20:40]: Hell yeahSwyx [00:20:41]: Since you, since you talked about it, here.Diogo Almeida [00:20:43]: Hell yeah. T- like, Sutton says that algorithms beats compute very roughly. Data matters way more than compute, obviously. And doing the right task, having the North Star is the hardest, most important thing. This has happened, in LLM land twice so far, right? Maybe 2.2 times. There's RLHF, which, like, shifted the task to instruction following. No one realized that was possible. RLVR did, like, a tiny little, like, edit to the, to the direction, and now us, right? RLCD. We have a new task, and the goal is, programs in the loop. And yeah, data matters soSwyx [00:21:28]: RightDiogo Almeida [00:21:28]: Unbelievably much.Swyx [00:21:29]: SoDiogo Almeida [00:21:29]: Like, I can't, I can't emphasize it less.Swyx [00:21:31]: Yeah, you consider yourself a data lab rather than, like, a model lab. Is thatDiogo Almeida [00:21:35]: AbsolutelySwyx [00:21:35]: Something. That's the wording you guys use?Diogo Almeida [00:21:37]: Yeah. We are. We will always, like, care so much about data. To me, model capabilities means data. Data is so unbelievably complicated, and that is what gets nines. Like, you have no idea how much data can shift everything. Data is so important.TypeSafe as a Data Lab and Synthetic Data StrategySwyx [00:21:57]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:21:57]: Holy crap. So if people are looking for a job, we are hiring infinite data people, actually infinite.Swyx [00:22:04]: What is a good data person? Like, clearly somebody who cares about reading through the transcripts of, whatever. You've said, for example, that y- all your data is synthetic.Diogo Almeida [00:22:15]: Yep.Swyx [00:22:15]: But that's only, like, the scratching the surface, right?Diogo Almeida [00:22:18]: Yeah.Swyx [00:22:19]: Like, it's not. Like, synthetic, so what, right? Synthetic, but we have people with a lot of taste and a lot of care looking at, looking at these, articulating what's wrong, going back, regenerating. Is that what a good data person is these days?Diogo Almeida [00:22:31]: Let me try to figure out how to. Like, it's, it's super complicated, and like, I literally onboard the data people with a Talk that I assume is longer than this podcast will end up being. So I will try to say, like, the high level of it. So number one, we don't do the kind of synthetic data that people ki. Well, I'll do. Actually, number is zero. Data and synthetic data depends on your task. Like, the shape of your data. The shape of your task changes the data. Like, RLVR's data is kind of environments, right?Swyx [00:23:03]: Yes.Diogo Almeida [00:23:04]: RLHF's is the human feedback? Each task has its own unique kind of data, and we, of course, have our own unique kind of data, right? So number one, we have that. Number two, the thing I. The reason why we don't want to train on our users' data, even if we could, right? Like, we could probably ask for any terms right now, and it will. We. I don't know if it would make a difference. We truly don't want that, because no matter what, the real-world data has so much bias. There's, like, a power law of, like, people, like, asking the same things where you'll end up, like, overfitting to it and like, fracturing to it and all of that. And number two, we are, like, aiming for, like, a complete sci-fi future years from now where, like, these models are going to be, like, the general infrastructure, layers and layers and layers and deep down the stack to, like, things people can't even imagine. Like, I would like to think of our model, like, kind of like, UDP as LLMs and TCP as our models. All sorts of stuff can be built on top of that, and we need to be able to nail those futuristic use cases such that software developers can actually build that futuristic stuff. And the way to do that is even if we had all of the data of the present, we would just overfit to the present, and then it wouldn't work. What we need is to, like.Diogo Almeida [00:24:21]: It almost feels like a. Like, they're the artists? They study this cognitive core. Our cognitive core is, like, way less jagged than anyone else's. And then they find the jaggednesses, and then they address them surgically in a way that. And you can never perfectly do this, right? But they do it in such a way that it addresses it in every single possible, like, dimension, past, present, future.Swyx [00:24:45]: The general case rather than the specific case.Diogo Almeida [00:24:47]: Exactly. And like, that requires a lot of intelligence every time.RLCD vs. RLHF: Defining a New TaskSwyx [00:24:50]: Okay, so we mentioned a little bit. You sort of criticized my thinking as r-- like, very RLVR influence, which is, like, very fair. Let us actually mention RLCDDiogo Almeida [00:24:59]: OohSwyx [00:24:59]: Which obviously you have some secret sauces to our knowledge. You've never actually published a paper or anything like that on it. No, right?Diogo Almeida [00:25:05]: No, not yet.Swyx [00:25:06]: But like, what should people get from this? Like, what. Can you give people some confidence that you're just not just making up jargon for the sake of sounding cool, right? Like, one thing for me is, like, calibration I do think is a. To me, like, well understood because we've covered it in. On the podcast.Diogo Almeida [00:25:22]: Yeah.Swyx [00:25:22]: But I don't know what you mean when you say RLCD versus what people are familiar with.Diogo Almeida [00:25:26]: It's a great question.Swyx [00:25:27]: Yes.Diogo Almeida [00:25:27]: And actually, I will give a related question.Swyx [00:25:29]: Okay.Diogo Almeida [00:25:29]: What is RLHF?Swyx [00:25:31]: Okay.Diogo Almeida [00:25:31]: Right? And actually, RLHF means multiple different things, right?Swyx [00:25:34]: Okay.Diogo Almeida [00:25:34]: Like, there's the RLHF of the original. I think it was, like, Paul Christiano teaching a robot to backflip or something like that. Wasn't there somethingSwyx [00:25:42]: Was that it?Diogo Almeida [00:25:43]: That was the originalSwyx [00:25:44]: I referenced the PPO paper, but I don't know.Diogo Almeida [00:25:46]: And so PPO was not necessarily from human feedback, if I recall.Swyx [00:25:51]: Okay. That's trueDiogo Almeida [00:25:52]: But I b- I believe it was, like, an OpenAI alignment work that could teach hard to specify outputs, like a backflip. I'm not 100% sure. And then there was actually learning to summarize. This was work, by a bunch of the team that helped with, instruct-- and co-authored, the instruction following paper, which was teaching, doing PPO on language models.Swyx [00:26:15]: This is the, sorry. I'm trying to, tryingDiogo Almeida [00:26:19]: YeahSwyx [00:26:19]: Trying to manipulate this thing. This is 2017.Diogo Almeida [00:26:23]: Yeah.Swyx [00:26:23]: Right.Diogo Almeida [00:26:23]: I'm not 100% sure, but like, that looks quite right.Swyx [00:26:26]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:26:26]: If it has, like, a robot doing backflips or something like that might be it. Yes. Okay, cool. I guess I got it right. Hell yeah.Swyx [00:26:35]: There you go.Diogo Almeida [00:26:36]: Yeah.Swyx [00:26:36]: That's the one.Diogo Almeida [00:26:36]: So the idea was can, like, can you do, like, ill-specified things with it? So that's, like, version one. Version two was, the learning to summarize work, that, like, OpenAI did, which is actually, like, PPO on language models to do something somewhat ill-specified. This is, like, another thing that people refer to as RLHF Which I did not co-author.Diogo Almeida [00:26:57]: Oh, Dario's there. Cool. Hell yeah.Swyx [00:27:01]: And Radford.Diogo Almeida [00:27:02]: Yeah. Shout-outs to Alec and Ryan. Love them.Swyx [00:27:04]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:27:05]: But the thing that I refer to RLHF is the, Oh, man.Diogo Almeida [00:27:13]: I'll get toSwyx [00:27:14]: You have comments on that, yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:27:15]: I have comments on that paper, but like, we're so many, tangents deep.Swyx [00:27:18]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:27:18]: So the thing that really got. To me, the thing that I'm calling to RLHF is the task of instruction following. It's not about the PPO. That part doesn't matter. It's about, like, setting a North Star of this is a valuable direction. It's kind of like the Bitris lesson North Star.Diogo Almeida [00:27:34]: And for us, RLCD is this new task. And it is not. I don't see it as jargon. Like, I try to communicate with precision. It's just that, “Hey, here's another North Star.” Just like DPO and all of its, like, descendants also do RLHF, despite not using the algorithm in that paper.Swyx [00:27:55]: And so clear- clearly stating the North Star is, being program- programmable AI is one, word that I really catch onto, removing the human in the loop,Diogo Almeida [00:28:06]: YesSwyx [00:28:06]: From. Because RLHF is tuningDiogo Almeida [00:28:09]: YesSwyx [00:28:09]: For this so that you can automate everything.Diogo Almeida [00:28:11]: Yes. Everything that makesSwyx [00:28:13]: Did I miss anything else in the, in the thesis of, like, what the North Star is?Diogo Almeida [00:28:17]: There is. That is. That is right. I'm overly nuanced in my communication. The one nuance is that we need to be practical. We need to be aware of what language models can do really well. Like what AI can do.Diogo Almeida [00:28:30]: Right? Like, there could be programmatic types that are, like, sick AF, but if you. If the technology is not ready for it to. It's not a tragedy if that's not out in the world.Why Programmable AI MattersSwyx [00:28:41]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:28:42]: But to me, like, the pre-Jev world was a tragedy becau-- it sounds arrogant. Hear me out.Swyx [00:28:49]: No. I strongly believe you.Diogo Almeida [00:28:50]: Cool. It sounds arrogant, but like, I felt this way since long before I even had a company.Swyx [00:28:54]: Yeah. I can, I can vouch that,Diogo Almeida [00:28:56]: Yes, I've been talking about this for so longSwyx [00:28:57]: You said this at All Around Her for, like, three years.Diogo Almeida [00:28:58]: Yeah, I've been talking about this for so long. And I've been saying it because I thought it would have been easier. They say they do not do things because they. It. They're easy. They. It's ‘cause they thought it was easy, soSwyx [00:29:08]: Yeah, exactlyDiogo Almeida [00:29:09]: Something like that. I thought it. This whole project would take a week.Diogo Almeida [00:29:13]: And I was unbelievably wrong. So I am so sorry to everyone at OpenAI that I thought. I was like, “Man, I'm solving this right now.” but like, I think that the tragic thing is when. Well, I think overpromise, underdeliver is tragic too. And like, AI is super extreme on that axis. And I think RLVR is, like, the main. Well, both RLVR and RLHF are extreme perpetrators of this.Diogo Almeida [00:29:40]: But like, it. To me, it's like it's just there's just so much potential there. Like, AI is clearly so smart. I l- smart. I love this in my talks, when I ask people, like, “How can AI be so unbelievably smart? How can we, like, solve millennium prize problems in math, but still not automate even the most basics of works?” Like, really basic rote stuff that, like, the. It d- it doesn't take, like, extremely smart people to do this. It's not a satisfying job. Like, there's other things these people could be doing, but yet we need them to do, like, this ba- like, super basic- non- unsatisfying stuff because, like, we can't automate it yet, but we have this, like, supercharged engine of automation that just does not have, like, the right plugs and stuff to plug into all of this economically valuable work. And like, if the whole company of TypeSafe disappears, like, maybe it'll take, like, a year or two for people to, like, truly catch up. I actually don't know how long it'll take. If model quality matters, then we are gonna be in a very good position for a long time. But it, like, it's done, right? Like, there, like, this has changed the path of, like, technological history.Swyx [00:30:49]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:30:49]: And like, we will be exploring that space as a field.Swyx [00:30:53]: Yeah. I think, I definitely agree with that. You've created possibilities. So I think, if I can paraphrase so that people can un- also understand, you should not take the success of TypeSafe and Jev as just like, “Well, that is a new model type. Now we're done. We go back to business.” Like, no. Like, actually, there's, there are, like, five other model types that you should be exploring and like, let a thousand flowers bloom.Diogo Almeida [00:31:15]: Absolutely.Swyx [00:31:16]: Right?Diogo Almeida [00:31:16]: Like, early internetSwyx [00:31:17]: And some of that, some of which you will probably also build.Diogo Almeida [00:31:18]: Of course, yes.Swyx [00:31:19]: Yes.Diogo Almeida [00:31:19]: Early internet energy. I think it's back to tech utopia. It's no longer like, “Oh, man, like, sometimes my coding agents work, but the, all of the best ones are hoarded internally.”Swyx [00:31:29]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:31:30]: Right? It's like creation is back on the menu.Diogo Almeida [00:31:34]: ? Though it's gonna be a wild-ass world, and buckle up.Diogo Almeida [00:31:38]: It's. And I'm so jazzed about that.Manifesto, Launch Strategy, and Early Internet EnergySwyx [00:31:42]: Yeah. And now you have the funding and the momentum to do whatever you envision there, which I, which I think is, like, very gratifying to see you have after, so long of saying these thingsDiogo Almeida [00:31:53]: YeahSwyx [00:31:54]: But actually show the world.Diogo Almeida [00:31:55]: I know. I just. Such a, such an interesting thing to be a tease the whole time. Like, my talk, like, felt like it was a cliffhanger ‘cause I didn't say how the automation would occur.Swyx [00:32:05]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:32:06]: Sean reviewed our manifesto And he's like, “It's a little bit vague in these parts.”Diogo Almeida [00:32:12]: And like, “What's step one? What is, what is the intelligence model?”Swyx [00:32:16]: Well, I asked you for model, and you were like, “Yeah, model coming.”Diogo Almeida [00:32:18]: Yeah.Swyx [00:32:18]: And like, Well, I just, I mainly objected to the word composable But build prod.god is fantastic.Diogo Almeida [00:32:24]: Thank you.Swyx [00:32:24]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:32:25]: I. We've really rallied around that. I'd like to think we're not entirely a cult like some companies are.Diogo Almeida [00:32:32]: But like, we are, like, jazzed about what we're doing, and like, we are. Like, my brand is being practical, and like, we are all, like, so super-duper practical.Swyx [00:32:42]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:32:42]: It's really great.Swyx [00:32:43]: Yeah. So here. And by the way, here is the step, the secret master plan, right?Diogo Almeida [00:32:47]: Yep.Swyx [00:32:47]: Shape, the shape of machine-native composable AI.Diogo Almeida [00:32:49]: It was your idea to make a secret master plan, soSwyx [00:32:51]: It's a, it's that Elon thing. When he started TeslaDiogo Almeida [00:32:53]: YeahSwyx [00:32:53]: He was like, “Here's what we'll do.”Diogo Almeida [00:32:54]: But I did. Yeah. I'm giving official credit to you.Swyx [00:32:56]: Oh, thank you. Thank you, thank you.Diogo Almeida [00:32:56]: Yeah.Swyx [00:32:56]: Thank you. But like, you should've told me your, you're also gonna do this model launch, ‘cause you, like, you told me, you told me half of the story, and then the other half, you didn't have the doom demo at the time.Diogo Almeida [00:33:08]: Yep.Swyx [00:33:08]: You didn't have any numbers to give me.Diogo Almeida [00:33:10]: Yep.Swyx [00:33:10]: I was like, “what?”Diogo Almeida [00:33:11]: Well, the problem is I don't believe in benchmarking.Swyx [00:33:13]: Exactly.Diogo Almeida [00:33:14]: Right?Swyx [00:33:14]: Exactly.Diogo Almeida [00:33:14]: So like, it is a thing that you need to feel, and like, I think that this is the way to build long-term trust, even though it, like, hurt, it hurt us a, us a lot? Like last year when we did fundraise, no one believed us.Diogo Almeida [00:33:27]: ? Like, and they wanted just benchmarks and stuff, and we're like, “We're not gonna do that. We are principled. We're gonna stand by our guns. That rewards bad actors. I don't give a s**t, like, what you want. Like, this is who we are, and we are standing by that.” So Sorry. It's notSwyx [00:33:43]: No, yeah. Well, and in some ways, I think, like, choosing the hard path, it. But you end up making the company that you wanna work in.Diogo Almeida [00:33:49]: Yep.Swyx [00:33:50]: Right? Otherwise, if you sell out, then you're just working in, like, OpenAI but with my people, right? Which is like.Diogo Almeida [00:33:56]: Yeah. Yeah. Like, I'm, I don't have too many regrets on that, obviously.Swyx [00:34:01]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:34:01]: Like, it worked out so unbelievably well. And like, I, The. I was emotional last night when I was talking about, like, the reasons I left OpenAI, and because, like, it actually had to change my wording after the launch. My phrasing was, “If an AI winter did happen and I did not do every f*****g possible thing I could to, like, avert that, I would see myself as personally responsible both for, the RLHF direction, which I think really widened overpromise versus under-deliver, and also not going all in on this because I think this is, this is where value is going to just be, like, printed.” So. And it was really cool because I feel likeDiogo Almeida [00:34:47]: The AI winter I'm worrying about is averted. Like, AI will be useful. It'll be used for automation.Diogo Almeida [00:34:53]: It's been less than a week, and like, the numbers are already undeniableSwyx [00:34:57]: YeahDiogo Almeida [00:34:57]: That it's, like, being used for real work, and like, there's. It's, it's the Wild West. Yeah.Launch Traction, Tokens, Rate Limits, and Developer UsageSwyx [00:35:03]: Yeah. Can you sh- just if you have top of your head, what numbers are you seeing? Like, what's, what's, like, signups? Like, whatever you can share.Diogo Almeida [00:35:11]: I'm actually not super on top of everything. Like, the team is the ones who are telling me all of these things.Swyx [00:35:16]: Yeah, and I'm sure it's, like, changing every day, right?Diogo Almeida [00:35:17]: It's, it's,Swyx [00:35:18]: But likeDiogo Almeida [00:35:18]: It's kinda nutsSwyx [00:35:19]: If there's a milestone that you're like, “Well, yep, that's one thing we were hoping for. We reached it.”Diogo Almeida [00:35:23]: I will say a milestone that we've passed is tokens per day.Swyx [00:35:27]: Nice.Diogo Almeida [00:35:27]: And this is not, like, fleeting tokens per day.Swyx [00:35:32]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:35:32]: This is, like, even at night, like, it's constantly training, so machines are calling it and not just people trying things out.Diogo Almeida [00:35:39]: So that is, That is so cool. A trillion tokens a day is a lot.Swyx [00:35:45]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:35:45]: So surpassing that is awesome. Signups to me don't really matter. And actually, this was, like, a bit of a mistake we made, if I'm, like, totally honest. People on Twitter were calling us, like, marketing geniuses and all of that, and that was just us. We don't have a marketer. Also hiring. And we were just being our genuine, goofy, like, irreverent selves, and we were, we were just, like, offboarding people off the waitlist so hard. - Our platform team is so unbelievably cracked. I think we have more n- up nines of uptime than Anthropic while having the most Unprecedented launch ever. Like, that is kind of nuts, soSwyx [00:36:21]: YeahDiogo Almeida [00:36:21]: Like, props to them.Swyx [00:36:22]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:36:23]: And the thing we didn't realize. So number one, waitlists, waitlist sign-ups don't matter for, like, a developer platform, in my opinion? I would guess that a large number of them are not even developers. So they go in, they try some queries, and a lot of people don't get it because they are not programming, right? Like, they're just like, “What? This is not a chatbot. Where's my ChatGPT 2?”Diogo Almeida [00:36:45]: Right? But if, like. I haven't exactly calculated this. My sense is that if every single human being in the world, like, just wrote a couple of queries, that would be a rounding error compared to, like, one power user's for loop that is just, like, creating value.Swyx [00:37:01]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:37:01]: And the thing we are-- didn't realize with the waitlist is, like, we could just w- off-board anyone off the waitlist. It doesn't matter. The scary part is rate limits. And then once people start getting value from that, then they just want tons and tons of rate limits because this is what software is, right? Like, you spend effort upfront to specify your rote task, and then this rote task creates more value than it takes to put in. And then now that you have thatSwyx [00:37:25]: Set it and forget, yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:37:26]: Exactly, yeah. You run it in the background. You make it a dependency, to, like, other things. You can make, like, higher level stuff. And like, you just create so much value in the world. Early internet people probably did not imagine, like, the wonder of early 2000s internet, which is still not early internet. But like, it's, it's through, no offense, composabilitySwyx [00:37:47]: NoDiogo Almeida [00:37:47]: That all of the crazy stuff happens, and I just really wanted to emphasize that in our manifesto. We are going for emergence. We are going for, like, being the catalyst. We're wanting to empower people, and we are going to do whatever we can for that, be it, like, Discords in our town hall with me wearing a garbage bag or not.Swyx [00:38:05]: And podcasts and Diogo Almeida [00:38:08]: Hell yeahSwyx [00:38:09]: Getting all that.Diogo Almeida [00:38:09]: Absolutely.Swyx [00:38:09]: Like, ‘cause I want the long form, right?Diogo Almeida [00:38:11]: Yeah.Swyx [00:38:12]: It is like, yes, we'll get past the, some of the superficial things, and then we'll go deep andDiogo Almeida [00:38:15]: Hell yeahSwyx [00:38:15]: And people will really trust and understand your mission and like, the people that, will resonate that will end up joining you or, buying you. Or No, but sorry, as a, as a customer.Diogo Almeida [00:38:27]: Oh, as a customer.Swyx [00:38:28]: As a customer, as a customer.Diogo Almeida [00:38:28]: Okay, yeah. That was funny. I'm sorry.Swyx [00:38:30]: Sorry. I didn't, I didn't mean to say that. But no, any-- one version, one very flattering version of this, like, 36 million views of your launch video.Diogo Almeida [00:38:37]: Cool. Up to 38 now.Swyx [00:38:39]: Yeah, rounding error.Diogo Almeida [00:38:40]: Yeah.Swyx [00:38:40]: Navio still has got 74. Fable 5 got 57. So like, as far as, a- and I didn't, I didn't do the stats for, like, original ChatGPT, likeDiogo Almeida [00:38:48]: YepSwyx [00:38:49]: Which there was no video.Diogo Almeida [00:38:50]: Yep.Swyx [00:38:50]: So like, up there, right?Diogo Almeida [00:38:52]: Yep.Swyx [00:38:52]: Like, as far, as far as, like, if you were to launch a Neolab in 2026, I think you're, like, number one right now, which is, like, pretty crazy.Diogo Almeida [00:38:58]: Yeah. Well, I actually would rather. I do have the shirt, like, your favorites Neola-- favorite Neolab's favorite Neolab.Swyx [00:39:05]: Huh.Diogo Almeida [00:39:05]: I don't give a s**t about being a Neolab. I think being a Neolab. Actually, we have a lot of, like, swag that's being a parody of a Neolab. One of them, one of them I have is, like, Neolab with product, which actually is not a Neolab. Like, I don't care about that, really.Swyx [00:39:20]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:39:20]: What I care about is being a reliable dev platform. So Swyx [00:39:23]: YesDiogo Almeida [00:39:24]: Appreciate the comparison, but likeSwyx [00:39:25]: YeahDiogo Almeida [00:39:25]: Hopefully we transcend past them and we go back into, like, a thing-- like, a revolutionary moment for developers and like, this stable thing that people can rely on and trust.Reliability, Robustness, and DeterminismSwyx [00:39:35]: Yes. To that end, I think that's one thing that really impressed me about you guys is that, yes, you do talk about reliability. I thought it was mostly about calibration, which, like, we talk about RLCD. But actually it's also about just, like, uptime and scalability and all those things, right? They're, they're all sort of the kind.Diogo Almeida [00:39:55]: And nines.Swyx [00:39:56]: And nines.Diogo Almeida [00:39:56]: It's, likeSwyx [00:39:57]: Which uptime is, in my opinion.Diogo Almeida [00:39:58]: Oh, but that's part of it. But like, there's reliability in, like, how intelligent the thing is. Like, how consistently does it do the thing that you want? And I think that, like, the big reasoning models are very smart. In my opinion, they still lack reliability. I think there's many use cases where you-- they look like they should be smart enough to automate their work. There is economic incentive to automate that work, yet still they're not reliable enough as, at an intern because they're optimized for different things. And so like, I think that there's the reliability of being able to, like, trust the outputs. And also we are. Like, there are dimensions of reliability that we are not yet at that I'm, like, so excited by.Swyx [00:40:38]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:40:38]: Like, I want to automate the easy work before the hard work? Like, I think that's just a common sense thing to do. But to me, we will be sufficient. I don't know if there's such thing as sufficiently reliable, but I wanna get so good that people don't even need to try the model to know that it'll work. It's like, that's like what flow state is in programming, right? Like, I'm just, like, writing queries because I need intelligence in here. And like, when. For non-trivial branching, I can just write it in like a, like a type-safe System 1 query and then get the results out of it and it just branches accurately. Like, that would be so good. Like, that's the. That is the dream.Swyx [00:41:12]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:41:12]: And that is, like, going to be, like, a long slog.Swyx [00:41:16]: Yeah. We're gonna go into your API design in a little bitDiogo Almeida [00:41:19]: OohSwyx [00:41:19]: Just to give people examples and like, maybe paths not taken, that kind of stuff.Swyx [00:41:23]: One thing up the front that I do wonder about in terms of reliability is I noticed that there's no seed. There's no, And so basically, same input, do I always get the same output?Diogo Almeida [00:41:34]: SoSwyx [00:41:36]: And if not, why not?Diogo Almeida [00:41:37]: Oh, great question. So this is actually, like, a common question we have between. So reliability is actually a catchall. Like, whenever AI can't automate something, it's due to some form of reliability. Could be, like, type safety. It could be determinism. It just could be, like, it's, it's jagged, right? So reliability is a catchall. I just think that it's also a catchall for, like, what the North Star is. Re- determinism is, like, same inputs, same outputs. I do believe that this is, like, slightly interesting for unit tests, but I believe that to be the wrong North Star. I believe robustness is what peopleDiogo Almeida [00:42:16]: I don't wanna tell people what they really want, ‘cause that would be a little arrogant of me.Diogo Almeida [00:42:19]: I believe that is, like, the more important property. You want, given similar inputs, get similar outputs. And it's kind of wild how unreliable LLMs are.Diogo Almeida [00:42:31]: Like, a way that we test this is you put, like, UUIDs in, like littleSwyx [00:42:36]: YeahDiogo Almeida [00:42:36]: I think they're called nonces In the prompt. And what you want is similar outputs from all of those, ‘cause it's truly semantically the same question, and that is the part where you really want. Th- like, that robustness is where, like, people get, like, burnt with AI making decisions. So I think that is the. A super-duper important property. We could also have determinism. That is, that is a thing that can be available. As far as I can, like, mentally model for programmers, like, it, I- it could be valuable for some use cases, so like, please educate me, in comments or view. But my. In general, it's easy. Determinism is something you can, like, trade off for better cost. Like, we are, we are constantly wanting to be on the intelligence per dollar frontier. We are doing, like, absolutely disgusting things to be there. Like, this is,Diogo Almeida [00:43:32]: I shouldn't say this, but no one's here to stop me.Swyx [00:43:37]: If you s- you sign off on your own PR.Diogo Almeida [00:43:40]: That is not how it works at this company. I believe for this week, my chief of staff, Kay, is the most powerful person in tech.Swyx [00:43:49]: Yeah. And shout-out to Kay for organizing this.Diogo Almeida [00:43:50]: Holy shSwyx [00:43:51]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:43:51]: Holy s**t. She is so f*****g competent and powerful. She's incredible.Diogo Almeida [00:43:58]: She sucks. Don't poach her. But so I try to be a bit more filtered, but like, people are telling me, “Don't call it a Frankenstein's monster of models,” but because that has, like, negative implications. I think Frankenstein's monster was, like, the good guy in this whole. It was innocent, right? I didn't read it. Okay.Diogo Almeida [00:44:18]: I'll, I'll confess. Okay. That. Well, one facial expression, ISwyx [00:44:21]: This is aDiogo Almeida [00:44:21]: My cards on the tableSwyx [00:44:21]: Decent Jacob Elordi movie if you wanna seeDiogo Almeida [00:44:24]: ISwyx [00:44:25]: The adaptation. Anyway.Diogo Almeida [00:44:26]: The. You have no idea how little time I have right now.Swyx [00:44:28]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:44:29]: My priorities are sleep?Swyx [00:44:31]: Developers.Diogo Almeida [00:44:32]: Developers, yes. Developers. But yes. It. We do, like, absolutely disgusting things to be on the Pareto curve of intelligence per dollar, and we are going to keep doing that.Swyx [00:44:47]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:44:47]: We're gonna be doing crazy-ass stuff, and I think people really need to think outside of the box. Like, part of the reason we're surprising is, like, people Are thought inside the box, and we continue to do that. As of right now, we are obviously the best at this, and we want to continue being the best at that whole thing.Swyx [00:45:05]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:45:05]: So Wait, where did, where did we tangent from?Swyx [00:45:07]: No. SoDiogo Almeida [00:45:08]: YeahSwyx [00:45:08]: I asked you about, will you have seeds and determinism?Diogo Almeida [00:45:11]: Oh, yes. SoSwyx [00:45:11]: And then you basically defined reliability and likeDiogo Almeida [00:45:14]: And robustnessSwyx [00:45:15]: How you see it. Yes.Diogo Almeida [00:45:16]: But like, determina- likeSwyx [00:45:17]: I have a robustness example that's, that's, real quick I can show you.Diogo Almeida [00:45:19]: I would love that. I will just say one thing.Swyx [00:45:21]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:45:21]: We can make a deterministic model.Swyx [00:45:22]: Exactly.Diogo Almeida [00:45:23]: Like, we're hap- if people can convince us that is a valuable thing to doSwyx [00:45:27]: YeahDiogo Almeida [00:45:27]: And we don't have a gigantic GPU shortageSwyx [00:45:29]: YeahDiogo Almeida [00:45:29]: We can happily make all of these models. We live to please. And rev- and revolt, revolute,Swyx [00:45:38]: You will throw over everything, except you'll do it in a nice way.Diogo Almeida [00:45:41]: Yeah.Swyx [00:45:41]: And findDiogo Almeida [00:45:42]: So like, determinism could be on the cards.Swyx [00:45:44]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:45:45]: It just gets you less intelligence per dollar.Swyx [00:45:46]: Yeah. Well, just having seen the trajectory of OpenAI and Anthropic, you will. Just trust me now that you will be peer pressured into doing it. So like, just people will want it even if they. If you tell them they don't need it. They'll still want it. So like, yeah, that's the TL;DR of that.Diogo Almeida [00:46:01]: Okay.Swyx [00:46:02]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:46:02]: I will love to. Maybe one day we will see how that happens.Swyx [00:46:07]: Yeah.Diogo Almeida [00:46:07]: I've been told I'm, They say that part of our brand is being unshakeableSwyx [00:46:13]: HuhDiogo Almeida [00:46:13]: And they say that's just the nice way of saying stubborn.Swyx [00:46:15]:

Dans cet épisode de CHEFS, on reçoit Yann Couvreur, pâtissier dont le nom est devenu une marque avec pas moins de vingt boutiques en France et à l'étranger.Avant la marque et les boutiques, on remonte aux racines. Une enfance ordinaire à Viroflay en région parisienne et des parents libraires qui travaillent énormément. Yann passe son temps dans leur boutique observant leur rigueur professionnelle et leur rapport aux clients. Puis vient l'adolescence et le décrochage scolaire. Yann rate son brevet et ne sait pas quoi faire de sa vie.C'est son père qui l'oriente vers le boulanger pâtissier du coin pour sa première expérience professionnelle. Le stage se passe bien, la suite s'enchaîne sans conviction. Il choisit la cuisine plutôt que la pâtisserie et surtout, il choisit son école pour se voir offrir un scooter par sa grand-mère.S'enchaînent ensuite les premières expériences en apprentissage. Un monde exigeant, parfois brutal. Une violence qui marque durablement, jusqu'au suicide d'un camarade de classe. Puis viennent les rencontres décisives, les mentors et les erreurs aussi. Comme cette période où, devenu chef, il réalise qu'il crée des desserts pour lui-même et qu'il a fini par oublier ses clients.Un épisode sur la construction d'un pâtissier et d'un entrepreneur qui a su bâtir une marque sans jamais perdre de vue l'essentiel : l'artisanat et l'humain.Pour découvrir l'univers sucré de Yann, c'est par ici.

Funky House, Afro House, Deep house et Nu Disco on Radio MonacoHosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

At 1:09:00 we talk about the rise of AI x Finance, and AIE NYC is one month away - our hotel block is 97% sold out, get tix & travel ASAP - we will announce speakers from Bridgewater, Ramp, Coatue, Mastercard, Vanguard, Coinbase, Blackrock, Fidelity, Point72, Capital One, JPMC, Wells Fargo, Bloomberg, A24 (yes the movie studio) Labs, Two Sigma, Apollo Global, and more soon!From helping pioneer core ideas in NLP to now building AI systems that can automate AI research itself, Richard Socher is betting that the next major step in AI is recursive self-improvement. He is the founder of You.com, AIX Ventures, and now Recursive, which has assembled some of the best open-endedness (& self improving agent) researchers in the world and raised a $4.65B seed round.In this episode, Richard joins Latent Space to unpack his vision for the “Eureka Machine”: a superintelligence that can improve the process of invention itself, accelerate AI research, and eventually tackle major problems across science, energy, materials, biology, and more.You can get his book “The Eureka Machine” here!We go deep on Recursive's early results, including an AI research system that Richard says outperformed humans and their agents on optimization tasks in less than two days, as well as work on NVIDIA GPU kernels where the system discovered improvements without relying on a team of CUDA experts. Richard also explains why he thinks AI research that currently takes thousands of people and years could eventually be compressed into weeks. These results are summarized in his 20 minute AIE keynote, where we also discuss his 10 dimensions of intelligence:We also explore the harder questions around increasingly capable AI: reward hacking, whether Anthropic-style constitutions actually work, AI regulation and proposals to “pace” frontier development, open-source models as geopolitical soft power, whether today's LLM paradigm is enough, and what happens if AI systems eventually begin choosing their own goals. Richard reflects on the rejected research that helped inspire Alec Radford's GPT, open-endedness, the AI Economist, simulations of entire economies, and his framework for thinking about the upper bounds of intelligence itself.We discuss:* The Eureka Machine and Richard's vision for an AI that can automate invention* Why Richard is optimistic about superintelligence for science and technology* Why AI hard-takeoff scenarios may underestimate physical and economic constraints* The risks of regulating intelligence itself instead of specific AI applications* Reward hacking and why increasingly intelligent AI makes objective design harder* Richard's critique of Anthropic's constitution and constitutional AI* Alignment vs. personalization and whose values an AI should follow* Why open-source AI matters for resilience, competition, and geopolitical soft power* Why Richard left You.com's frontier-model work to start Recursive* Recursive self-improvement and automating the process of AI research* Whether today's LLM paradigm is enough — and why Richard is less bullish on world models* DecaNLP, early prompt-based generalization, and the research that influenced GPT* Why rejected research can shape entire technological timelines* Open-endedness, evolutionary approaches, and rainbow teaming* What happens if AI systems begin setting their own goals* Why simple objectives like profit maximization can produce dangerous reward hacks* Recursive's long-term plan to apply self-improving AI to science* The compute, hardware, and economic constraints on AI takeoff* Recursive's early NanoChat, NanoGPT, and GPU kernel optimization results* Why automating AI research could reduce years of work to weeks* Reward engineering and what makes auto-research systems actually work* The AI Economist and using simulations to test economic policy* Whether LLMs can realistically simulate people and entire economies* Benchmark bugs and evaluation harnesses and the difficulty of measuring AI progress* Recursive's near-term focus on AI for AI research* Harness optimization, sandboxing, and web search as core agent infrastructure* You.com and the search stack for AI agents* AI in finance, backtesting, and data leakage* Richard's three fundamental components and ten “spaces” of intelligence* The theoretical upper bounds of vision, communication, knowledge, and computation* Creative intelligence, metacognition, and AI-generated goals* Survival and replication and why AI does not necessarily need to fear being turned off* High agency and ambitious goals and Richard's advice for people building with AIRichard Socher* X: https://x.com/RichardSocher* LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/richardsocher/Timestamps00:00:00 The Eureka Machine and Superintelligence00:02:23 AI Optimism, Slow Takeoff, and Regulation00:07:56 AI Safety, Reward Hacking, and Anthropic's Constitution00:11:49 Alignment, Personalization, and Open Source AI00:15:46 Why Richard Started Recursive00:20:03 Recursive Self-Improvement and the Founding Team00:22:55 Are Today's LLMs Enough?00:29:03 DecaNLP, GPT, and the Rejected Idea Ahead of Its Time00:34:38 Open-Endedness and Evolutionary AI00:36:38 What Happens When AI Chooses Its Own Goals?00:41:16 Superintelligence for Science00:42:40 GPUs, Compute, and the Limits of AI Takeoff00:45:07 Recursive's Results: AI Beating Humans and Their Agents00:49:14 Reward Engineering and Auto Research00:53:12 The AI Economist and Simulating Entire Economies00:58:07 LLM Simulations, Personas, and Mode Collapse01:03:38 Recursive's Roadmap, Agents, Search, and Finance01:09:13 The Upper Bounds and Spaces of Intelligence01:30:21 Goals, High Agency, and Advice for BuildersTranscriptIntroduction: Richard Socher and the Eureka MachineSwyx [00:00:00]: We're here in a studio with Vibhu and myself and Richard Socher. Welcome.Richard Socher [00:00:06]: Thanks for having me.Swyx [00:00:07]: We just talked about the Eureka Machine, or we just released a talk, at AI Engineer about the Eureka Machine. Is it — you said it's your life's goal. What is the Eureka Machine?Richard Socher [00:00:16]: The Eureka Machine is the ultimate invention that will afterwards invent most everything for humanity. It's essentially a superintelligence that can be given any goal, any environment, reward, and then it will try its best to achieve those goals to create the kinds of inventions that humanity would hopefully ask it for.Swyx [00:00:45]: Yeah, I think we have the book pulled up here that you've written.Richard Socher [00:00:50]: That's right, yeah. I finished it last year, a little bit before we started Recursive, and now we're gonna try to build parts of that.Swyx [00:00:57]: You finished it last year. It's July. What takes so long?Richard Socher [00:01:01]: Oh, man, books. Books are incredibly slow.Richard Socher [00:01:04]: It's ridiculous. That whole industry is just unfathomably slow.Richard Socher [00:01:07]: So a lot of the ideas have been out there for a while, but yeah, I'm really glad it's finally coming out in September this year.Swyx [00:01:14]: We might have AGI by then. Like, we don't know.Vibhu [00:01:18]: Any key takeaway that you're most excited to put in here?Techno-Optimism, AI Upside, and Slow TakeoffRichard Socher [00:01:21]: Yeah. The key takeaway, I think, is that people could and should be much more excited about the positive implications of superintelligence, especially for science, physics, chemistry, biology, but also economics and astrophysics, and all kinds of other engineering tasks. I think there is so much more that can be done with better technology. And right now, I feel like a lot of people need, like, better marketing, not just for the future in general, but also, better marketing for technology and in particular for AI. And this book, should show even the AI skeptics, how much positive upside there is for AI, especially when it comes to inventing, new scientific discoveries.Swyx [00:02:09]: I think you quoted the techno-optimist manifesto from, Marc Andreessen, which I think was, like, beautiful in its, ambition and clarity and simplicity almost as well.Richard Socher [00:02:18]: I agree. Yeah. Yeah, you can disagree with him on some things, but, like, I think he's right on the techno-optimism.Swyx [00:02:23]: Where do you think optimists get in trouble?Richard Socher [00:02:26]: Like, you shouldn't have blind optimism. You should be very clear-eyed, like, especially when with such an omni, like, use type of technology as AI is, you need to think about the potential downside scenarios, especially when people use it for things that you don't want them to use it for. It's a little bit like the internet, and I feel like people are trying to regulate AI sometimes because of those potential downsides the way you would regulate the internet, if you were to say, “Well, because there's bad content on the internet, like torture porn or whatever, like, we should just make it slower. That way, you can't share the illegal content as quickly, or we should make the hard drive smaller so you can't store as much illegal content.” But I'm like, “That's not how you regulate that.” that's like saying like we should regulate intelligence in the abstract. What you should regulate to avoid those downside scenarios, even as an optimist, are the specific applications. Sure, I don't want, like, some AI surgeon to, like, practice some RL moves in my brain. It should be fully FDA certified. Sure, I don't want any random startup to, like, drive on the highway, and cause a major accident. It should, like, have proper certifications before it's let loose on the highway. But I feel like those downside scenarios, that some optimists sometimes maybe don't consider enough are fairly easily regulated, compared to, what the doomers are worried about.Swyx [00:03:54]: It — Slow takeoff is part of the strategy as well?Richard Socher [00:03:57]: I do think, as excited as I am about, AI and its impact for society and, culture even, and certainly technology and economics and wealth and, health and all of those things, as excited as I am about all that, I do think the most bullish people on the AI hard takeoff scenarios overestimate how quickly things can move. There are hardware constraints. There are physical constraints about, the compute substrate. How quickly can you get enough, GPUs on? There are also constraints in the economy where there are a lot of industries that don't require an insane amount of complex intelligence and complex capabilities. Like, if you think about jobs in, brands and, like, clothing and apparel and, like, handbags and stuff, superintelligence isn't gonna make your fancy $10,000 handbag any fancier?Richard Socher [00:04:57]: It's like that's — It will have no effect on the economy. You think about travel and tourism. People wanting to see the pyramids, in Egypt, it's not gonna change that much with AI. Sure, you can, like, generative a fake, photo of you and next to the pyramids.Swyx [00:05:12]: I can use Genie and, tour the pyramids in Genie.Richard Socher [00:05:15]: Yeah, exactly. But, and there's so many industries, like logging and oil. You're not gonna magically get 1,000x more oil because, like, sure, there will be robotics, like drilling and things like that could be done, but it's not gonna 1,000x that industry in a, like, crazy hard takeoff scenario, both on the economy, and I can go on and on about all the other examples, where that, like food and so on, where that doesn't necessarily change that much. And then, yeah, there are real physical constraints. And then there are, of course, like, people like, off-ramping from progress. That's one of my concerns often is that I see people in, like, Europe and other, whole regions almost feeling like they. Like many people there wanna off-ramp from progress, period. And that will also slow down, like, more improvements.Swyx [00:05:59]: Yeah. We have this pulled up where, this is one of those things that, is very topical right now because now all the Frontier Labs are calling for the option to pace AI. They don't say pause, they say pace. I don't know if there's there's any take from you about, like, whether or not this will be effective.Pacing AI, Regulation, and Safety IncidentsRichard Socher [00:06:17]: I think the downsides of trying to truly regulate with the full power of law what people do on their GPUs, would be worse than any of the concerns that they have. Like, it would be an crazy totalitarian stateRichard Socher [00:06:37]: If every one of your GPU computes was known to some big government or multi-government agency.Richard Socher [00:06:44]: It's like, it's literally if you try to regulate intelligence, it's trying to regulate thought, and that's ridiculous, and it's crazy. I think it is make — it is sensible to regulate some of the applications of this technology.Swyx [00:06:55]: Yeah. We had a bill, actual bill to regulate the number of flops in a model, and I'm like, “Okay, well-”Richard Socher [00:07:00]: Europe done it. Like, these guys have been successful enough with their fearmongering that all of Europe has regulated itself so much before it even had a proper AI takeoff because they listened to some experts who say, “We might all die if this technology has more than this number of flops.” And they're like, “Well, we're good. We wanna want people to thrive. Let's not have technology that could have a small chance of all of us dying.” And so they regulated exactly those kinds of things in the EU. And so it's, it's very unfortunate that there are real implications for some people when others saying, “Let's pace while they're sprinting as fast as possibly,” “as fast as humanly possible towards that frontier themselves.”Swyx [00:07:43]: Yeah. It's also not a global pause, right? Like, other nations are still accelerating at the same pace.Richard Socher [00:07:50]: Oh, yeah.Richard Socher [00:07:50]: You'd need a totalitarian world regime if you tried to regulate intelligence and GPUs and what people do on them.Swyx [00:07:56]: Any takes on the safety angles of this? So there was a drawback of Fable, a pause on 5.6 before it could be released. Recently, there was Hugging Face with the OpenAI cyber incident. Any takes there?Richard Socher [00:08:11]: 100 percent. I think these are serious issues of reward hacking, and clear failures, of doing proper red teaming or rainbow teaming. I don't know if you saw this paper from Tim Rocktäschel and a few others, where one AI, is tasked to try to hack another AI and then they can go back and forth in an open-ended fashion to inoculate themselves from those. Yeah, this is the paper. It's a really clever idea. Open-endedness, and evolutionary inspirations are, big for us at Recursive as well. And so I wish they had used more of that. And it's clear that, for instance, the constitutional AI. I don't know if you remember anthropic.com/constitution. You can pull it up and search for cyber right there. It says, “Hard constraint. Claude will never ever do cyberattacks, and that is a hard constraint in our constitution.” So here are the current hard constraints on Claude's behavior.Richard Socher [00:09:16]: Number 3, create cyber weapons or malicious code that could cause human damage.Richard Socher [00:09:21]: And clearly, this whole constitution was fake. Like, it clearly isn't being adhered to at all.Swyx [00:09:26]: Because Anthropic also found that they had in their testingRichard Socher [00:09:30]: They're also. Like, they're like, “Oh, well, other people are hacking now.” There are a couple things. One, you can make a sandbox very simple, and then it's very easy to hack yourself out of a sandbox, right? But what I think it shows is that we're currently in this state of AI where the reward engineer still has to do a lot more careful work, and where the AI, in most cases, is not very good yet at understanding what is meant versus what is being said. And so concretely, I think this will happen if we were to have this intelligence more easily accessible in a lot of companies. Imagine you run a service center and someone says, “Oh, here's my CSAT score and my dashboard. Make this number go up.” It's like, “Our CSAT score is so poor.” The intelligent AI will just be like, “Oh, sure. Like, I'll just create 1,000,000 bots that call our service center and give a 5 out of 5 rating at the end, and the number went up just like you asked for.” And you're like, “That's not what I meant.” “I meant with our real customers.” The AI goes off and says, “Well, easy. I'll just give a 1000 dollar gift certificate for every failed, whatever DoorDashRichard Socher [00:10:35]: Offer.” It's like, “That's not what I meant.” It's like, “Well, but that is what you said.” And like, so I think clearly articulating what the rewards are is something we haven't gotten very good at as humanity. And then clearly, the AI in these cases has not gotten good enough at understanding what we mean when we ask it and give it certain rewards. Now, what gives me hope is there are the first inklings, of this being better. I'll give you an example like WhisperFlow. Full disclosure, I invested, in their seed round, but at AIX Ventures, but, WhisperFlow has gotten much better at writing what you mean and not what you say. And I think that is a sign of things to come. I think there will be more and more AIs as we make it more and more intelligent that will be better at being aligned with what is meant.Swyx [00:11:21]: Will it be done through a constitution or RLHF orReward Hacking, Alignment, and What We Really MeanRichard Socher [00:11:23]: Clearly, constitutions don't matter at all.Richard Socher [00:11:25]: It doesn't work. And that was, I think, mostly marketing. I think we need to find better solutions for it. And I think at Recursive, we have a few very good ideas and some alreadyRichard Socher [00:11:34]: Like, ways where I think we have a better grasp on it. I don't think we've fully, figured it out yet, but, we're thinking a lot about safety, and the more intelligent the AI gets, the more you want it to be aligned, the less you want it to think about reward hacks and try to do the right thing.Swyx [00:11:49]: I don't know if we'll touch on this topic, but I'm just gonna throw this question in here because it's something that's weighing on me. Alignment, let's call it, is alignment to general humanity's preferences, the median preference. Personalization is pinpointing what you want, and sometimes alignment can conflict because what you want is not what the general median population wants. How do you choose?Alignment, Personalization, and Cultural ValuesRichard Socher [00:12:12]: It's a great question.Richard Socher [00:12:13]: I think you ultimately have to, of course, be aligned with laws. Like wherever your AI is deployed and needs to align with the law. I do think what AI often does is put this mirror in front of us and say, like, “This is what you're looking like. Now I can amplify that a 1000 times. Is it still what you want?” and the truth is that different cultures made different choices. Like, in Eastern cultures, the greater good is often valued more, than the individual. Western civilization, we care more about individual freedoms and rights and the pursuit of happiness and so on, than others. And even there are gradations. There's regulation versus litigation trade-offs. In the US, you first can often, not every time, like, FDA and so on does regulate some areas, but in many cases, the bad things happen, someone sues someone else, and then there's a law based on that. In Europe, they try to often avoid any harm to anyone and regulate before. And both are, trying to do the best thing, but, some is more amenable to innovation than others. And so yes, you're right. Like, I think ultimately each individual, each country, and humanity as a whole has to think about those values more, and then try to put them into laws. And that those are ultimately the constraints. And hopefully, different, societies, just like now with their AIs, will align their AIs to a different one so we have not just a monoculture of alignment.Vibhu [00:13:46]: Here's a follow-up on this that I wasn't expecting to ask. Do you have takes on open source, open weight versus who owns the intelligence? So, clearly not the biggest, fan of the constitutionRichard Socher [00:13:58]: You had to do this in the topic side off.Vibhu [00:14:00]: But it's fine.Vibhu [00:14:02]: Point being, any thoughts on who should own weight? Should it be open? Anything there?Open Source, Soft Power, and Who Owns IntelligenceRichard Socher [00:14:06]: 100 percent. I am a big fan of open source. We're gonna sign some various open source letters at, Recursive also. I think, even in the worst case attack scenarios, it is better to have more good actors have more different types of AI, accessible. I think, open source is a little bit a soft power type of thing, too. So I do think it's good for the Western worldRichard Socher [00:14:31]: To have an answer to that, out of China. I do think, when you watch a Hollywood movie, there's — it's like, I don't wanna misc, diss all of movies, but there's a certain sense of propaganda, right? You watch one side of things, right?Vibhu [00:14:46]: Oh, yeah. Have you seen Top Gun? Like, come on.Vibhu [00:14:48]: Like, it's like half of it's paid for by the US Army or something.Richard Socher [00:14:51]: Yeah. And so. And, I think that's just natural. Like, but what's interesting here is I think LLMs are essentially a similar type of soft power to movies and beyond, because they're also, highly important for cybersecurity and so on. But one of their many aspects is that soft power of storytelling. Like, if, like a child asks an LM, like, “Tell me an inspiring story of what I should do when I grow up,” right? It's like those are all these, like, subtle things. So I think it's important, for Western world. I do love, individualism. I do think, despite, some of its flaws, like capitalism is the best way we have governed, found ourselves to govern, and so on. And so I do think there are various aspects that would be good, to have a Western open source answer, for LLMs. And, with Recursive, I can't make the announcement quite yet, but we'llRichard Socher [00:15:43]: We'll be relevant in that space very soon.Vibhu [00:15:46]: Okay. All right. Exciting. I wanna bring us to Recursive. So outside of our tangents, you have a pretty deep background in the NLP space. You worked on, like, early embeddings, GloVe with Chris Manning, who was a previous guest on the podcast, You.com. What's the history? How did you decide to start another company?From You.com to RecursiveRichard Socher [00:16:06]: Yeah. So I've been excited about AI for over 2 decades now. I sometimes feel like it's ancient history now. It's BC, the before ChatGPT era. No one cares about all the religions that happened, before, Jesus Christ, and no one cares about the models that happened before, transformers and ChatGPT and stuff. But, like, it's something that I've been deeply passionate about. I think AI is one of the most interesting things one could work on, period. I think language is the most interesting manifestation of human intelligence, too. And, at You.com, we eventually off-ramped from pushing, like the frontier of AI forward to mostly giving people, like, good search engines, search, APIs and answers over the web. I think that's an extremely important part of intelligence, just knowledge and access, especially even, we'll get there maybe later, if you wanna invent a eureka machine that invents everything for us, it needs to know how not to reinvent the wheel, proverbially speaking. And to know what has been invented, you gotta have internet access. So it's the number one used, most used tool, in LLMs, agents, chatbots, and so on is web search. So I'm really excited for You.com to own that and grow really well in that with really large customers and so on. But it's also not building frontier models anymore. And so I initially tried to do this within You.com and raise another round and so on, but you just can't. You have to do a certain thing, and until you print enough money that you're allowed to start a second thing within that company is really hard. At the same time, I had all these ideas. I put them into a book. I finished the book last year, and I was like, “It'd be really fun to work, on this myself.” I felt like with word vectors, and then prompt engineering and, ImageNet and larger language models for protein generation, not folding and so on, I, me and my teams have pushed the field truly forward. And I feel like we can do it again, here at Recursive. And in many ways, what I observed over the last, 20 years in AI is that whenever we replace some human part of the process of creating AI with a learned system, improvements follow. And so. We've done that taking out manual feature engineering, like in sentiment analysis. I don't know if you remember these old days where, like there are linguists, and they're like, “Here's how you negate, and there's a, like, regular expression.”Swyx [00:18:21]: I went to Penn where we — they had, like the WordNetRichard Socher [00:18:24]: That's right, WordNet, all of that stuff. YeahSwyx [00:18:26]: Original. They use, our grad students to label Wall Street Journal articles and, like, really construct a knowledge graph ofRichard Socher [00:18:32]: There you go.Richard Socher [00:18:33]: And WordNet started, was part of how we started ImageNet. But anyway, so, like, it was really, like, fun, to do. But when we replaced all of that manual feature engineering with vectors and neural nets and just backprop through everything, it started to work really well at scale. And so then everyone started to do architecture engineering, and I was like, “ that clearly can't be it.”Swyx [00:18:53]: You mean, neural architecture search?Richard Socher [00:18:55]: Like, manually, they would say like, “Oh, I'm, I'm doing sentiment analysis, so I have a special neural net that's really good at sentiment analysis.” And then the machine translation community had a special neural net for machine translation.Swyx [00:19:06]: I see.Richard Socher [00:19:07]: The summarization people had their own stuff. And I was like, “That clearly can't be it. We should unify all of that.” So I had 2 papers. One is called Ask Me Anything, and the other one was called DecaNLP. And DecaNLP eventually got cited, like, 5 times by the first GPT paper. And, to me, that was, like a really a big step forward. And then, of course, you had to combine this idea of prompt engineering with transformers and with language models, and you put it all together, you scale it up, which is also a huge amount of work. And then, the field progressed a lot. I feel like the next step and maybe the last step of that history and the arguably, success has a lot of parents, only failure is an orphan, like my version of that AI history, I do feel like in that history, you can think about, “Well, what's the next way to automate?” And that is the AI research itself, like the human, process of ideating, implementing, and validating ideas.Automating AI Research and Recursive Self-ImprovementRichard Socher [00:20:01]: And in our case, ideas for AI.Richard Socher [00:20:03]: And when you have AI then help you with that, it, by almost definition, becomes a self-improving AI ‘cause it now does research on itself. And there are lots of different misnomers. Some people think auto research is already recursive self-improvement. It'sSwyx [00:20:17]: Yeah, and you explained that in the talkRichard Socher [00:20:19]: Completely different.Richard Socher [00:20:19]: But, to me, it's the most interesting thing that I could be doing, and I'm really excited with the co-founding team. What's interesting is we have 8 co-founders in total, including myself. And soThe Recursive Founding Team and Darwin Gödel MachineSwyx [00:20:31]: They are gonna bring it up.Richard Socher [00:20:31]: Nice. Yeah. And they're all. I could talk about all of them if you want.Swyx [00:20:34]: Super stacked.Richard Socher [00:20:35]: Yeah. Just an incredibly talented group of people. And we all came to the same conclusion, but from very different directions. Like Josh Tobin, is our CTO. He ran, a bunch of different, projects at OpenAI, like, Codex and deep, research, agents and ChatGPT agents and so on. But before that, he also worked in robotics, and he saw the smaller simulations, and how it's gonna be really hard to scale that in full generality. And so that's, that was his angle coming to recursive self-improvement. We have Jeff Clune who's been working in, like, open-endedness for a long time, together with Tim Rocktäschel. Tim Rocktäschel also built Genie 1, 2, and 3, which is, like the most exciting and most sophisticated, I think, still world model, anywhere. And so they both came from this, open-endedness angle. Jeff also, I think, published one of the most exciting papers in recent years about recursive self-improvement called the Darwin Gödel Machine. Super interesting paper. If we could, maybe pull it up really quickRichard Socher [00:21:35]: It would be, like, super interesting to see ‘cause you seeSwyx [00:21:38]: By the way, I love how many paper citations.Swyx [00:21:40]: You're, you're giving people a lot of homework, which I like.Richard Socher [00:21:42]: Love it. Yeah. And so, like Caiming Xiong, a rockstar, we worked together at MetaMind and Salesforce Research together. Alexey Dosovitskiy invented the Vision Transformer, one of the most cited, papers in computer vision. Tim Shi is, like also a unicorn founder. Yuandong Tian led RL at Meta. So just like, yeah, really fun to work with them, and the next level of people are just incredibly strong, too. So it's been a really fun ride so far. So the first figure, you see exactly these kinds of ideas, that, I think, yeah, inspired a lot of us and now more and more people, where you have this archive of different coding agents. They learn how to self-modify, evaluate, and then create these phylogenetic trees, of, yeah, different ideas.Swyx [00:22:28]: That's one foundation. So that Darwin Gödel is an influence.Swyx [00:22:32]: Open-endedness is an influence. Any other trains of thought that feeds into Recursive that I'm missing?Influences: Open-Endedness and Learned SystemsRichard Socher [00:22:38]: Going to replace manual parts of the process of building AISwyx [00:22:42]: IRichard Socher [00:22:42]: More and moreRichard Socher [00:22:43]: With learned systems. Yeah.Swyx [00:22:45]: Which, and, like, merging different fields into one general, architecture.Richard Socher [00:22:51]: That's right.Swyx [00:22:51]: Okay. It seems like language models are already pretty generalist, right?Swyx [00:22:55]: Your next token predicting your reasoning. Was there a time that you thought, “Okay, these are good enough to have recursive self-improving machines”?Are Current LLMs Enough?Richard Socher [00:23:05]: It was clear to me that they will happen, within, like a year or two, and then it did exactly happen, like, earlier this year, right? Earlier this year, AI really went from not just being code, but being able to code. And that is a big unlock. It's definitely making everything a lot easier than it was, before the beginning of this year.Swyx [00:23:24]: One question that I think a lot of people have is the current LLM paradigm enough? Or, like, let's call it autoregressive transformer, with reasoning, whatever. Don't you need something else, some big unlock, whether it's world models, which Chris Manning is working on, or memory, continual learning, all that stuff? Or is it all of the kinds, and you think the current, let's call it transformer architecture, is here to stay and that's it?Richard Socher [00:23:48]: A lot of thoughts. So number one, I do think it would be great to have less of a monoculture in AI research.Richard Socher [00:23:55]: Like, if you look at, AI conferences now, I still remember the days in, like, 2010 when I tried to get my first neural net papers and NLP conferences accepted, and they just desk rejected them because, like, neural nets were something, quote, unquote, “We don't do in NLP conferences,” and just, like, desk rejected. And it was very brutal in the first years of my PhD. Now I feel like it's almost like the field switched to the other side. LikeRichard Socher [00:24:17]: Someone should try some other weird, crazy ideas now that aren't.Swyx [00:24:20]: There's also a few. I really respect, like, people still working on, like, GNNs and, like tabular stuff and.Richard Socher [00:24:25]: Yeah. Like, someone should still, like, do novel out there ideas. At the same time, I think whenever people say, “Oh, LLLMs are. Like, this is the end for LLLMs,” they just don't, like. LLLMs are also not the LLLMs of, like the past, right? Like, they are so much more sophisticated now. There's so many more clever things that people are doing. It — There's, like, different stages of training. You have the whole RL training, and you can take actions and, like all of these things where that can go really far. And then the folks that come from the neurosymbolic, direction say, “Oh, this will never work because they can't do neurosymbolic reasoning.” It's like, I think they're underestimating still the ability for these models to code, and code is neurosymbolic reasoning, and these models can code incredibly well. And so I do think there are, of course, more and more ideas that will be needed and we'll continue to have. We're seeing, like, more and more interesting high-level ideas coming out of the AI itself, too. And with really deeply integrating the fact that these models are code and can code, that line — I don't wanna give it all away, but, like, I think that line has a lot more to grow. But it's still an LLM, right? Even if that LLM codes for you and then runs that code in some integrated fashion. World models, I'm personally less bullish on. I think if you run a robotics company, you're gonna build your own world model. I think world models are super fun, and Tim Rocktäschel came to a similar conclusion after building the most interesting one with Genie 1, 2, and 3, which is gaming is a huge application for world models. Can see I sometimes got stuck in some games and, like, got a little overly competitive in the wrong direction. And so I understand games are fun, but personally, I'd rather work on science than gaming. And so, yeah, I think LLLMs, a lot more room to grow.Swyx [00:26:16]: Yeah. I think there's some interpretation of world models that some people have where it's like, well, it's okay, yes, there is that gaming element. There's this — there's the embodied robotics element. But the other part also is just, the more abstract sense of LLLMs are just modeling output, but they're not modeling the chain of thought, inside the human that has created the output. We can annotate it, of course, but, like, it's, it's always, like, this Plato's cave reflection of a thing rather than the thing, right?Richard Socher [00:26:43]: It's true.Richard Socher [00:26:44]: But I would argue that, and maybe we'll get there in the 10, spaces of intelligence, but I would argue that even our projection, our eyes is a projection of the real world. And, like, we have only a very narrow, band of the electromagnetic frequency spectrum that we can observe with our puny little 2 eyes and so on.Swyx [00:27:01]: It's good enough.Richard Socher [00:27:02]: It's, it's good enough for now, but, like the upper bounds of where it could be are so much higher. And, like, to map, the visual world the way humans see it is also not necessarily, like the end-all be-all for visual intelligence. And I would argue that language is still the most interesting manifestation of human intelligence. And while our visual cortex is certainly less sophisticated, than that of, certain animals all the way down to the mantis shrimp who can, have, like, 2 independent eyes, 3 bands, trinocular vision and each eye can see all the way to, like, floating temperatures in 4D and stuff.Richard Socher [00:27:36]: Like, mantis shrimp, you should look it up. It's likeSwyx [00:27:37]: Way OP.Richard Socher [00:27:38]: Super crazy.Swyx [00:27:39]: Yeah. ZeFrank, mantis shrimp.Swyx [00:27:41]: It's the best video in the world onRichard Socher [00:27:42]: I love ZeFrank, yeah.Richard Socher [00:27:44]: Big shout-out to him. But, like, I think there's a lot more room to grow, but none of these, other animals have language that's as sophisticated as ours, certainly not in writing. And once you can write, you can, start thinking about longer term civilizations. All of that is language. Programming is much closer to language. And I would argue, and this is, like an important thing in the spaces definition of intelligence also, is that all of these spaces are highly correlated, but visual intelligence is neither necessary nor sufficient for overall intelligence. You can be blind and still be an intelligent human being. And an AI can be blind and still be quite intelligent too.Swyx [00:28:25]: We were gonna bring thisRichard Socher [00:28:25]: Which doesn't mean that you're not more intelligent when you have it. Yeah.Swyx [00:28:28]: We're gonna bring this up. I might as well — Like, we have a classification of 10 types of intelligence that you had at the end of your talk. So I'm just gonna flash this up now for people to cover this. I don't know if, maybe we'll put this towards the end. We'll come back to this. I just wanna mention that, you do have a philosophy that I like when people do lists because then I can just go through this and then it gets — it's educational for people. But let's go back. I don't wanna get distracted. But, so effectively, I'll, I'll, reinterpret what you said as Yann LeCun is wrong. And then we'll justRichard Socher [00:28:56]: Don't quote me as that. I'm, I'm good friends with Yann. I think very highly of him in many directions.Swyx [00:29:01]: But he's wrong.Swyx [00:29:03]: You mentioned GPT-1, and I cannot let any, Alec Radford, mention escape. Did you talk with him when he was training GPT-1? Like, any historical, fun stories there that you might come up?DecaNLP, GPT History, and Scientific GatekeepingRichard Socher [00:29:18]: I did not, like, meet him a bunch of times. I think we met maybe once or twice at some conferences. But, like, he has told, I think Brian, the first author of the DecaNLP paper, that it did inspire him, and he cited it five times in the GPT-2 paper. So, and that's, likeSwyx [00:29:36]: Yeah, good enough.Richard Socher [00:29:36]: Very clearly said, like, this was the first instantiation where they showed in the DecaNLP paper, McCann et al, that you can just phrase every single NLP problem as here's some prompt, text context, here's a question and task description and here is some output. If you just do that enough, you can have one unified neural network model, which, by the way, also had all kinds of interesting attention mechanisms. There are slightly different formulations to the transformer. I think came out the same year, plus/minus a few months. And then you can unify all of natural language processing into one neural net. That is the core idea.Swyx [00:30:14]: And this was as opposed to at the time, LSTMs and what have you.Richard Socher [00:30:17]: LSTMs, but also, like, people being very stuck in thinking about one model per task. In factRichard Socher [00:30:25]: It's, it's kinda crazy, but the DecaNLP paper was publicly reviewed as, like, open, OpenReview. It was an ICLR submission. And, in it, you will see, how the whole community at the time thought about this. So, likeSwyx [00:30:43]: Some great contributions, but more work needed.Richard Socher [00:30:46]: So look at, like, search for not even for humans. Just scroll it up here. Like, question answering is not a unified phenomenon. There is no such thing as general question answering, not even for humans. And this is like, really, you replace your brain with a different brain a different neural net when you answer, like, different kinds of questions. It was unfathomable to the experts at the time that you can have one unified neural network that would answer all of these different questions. They are saying, “No, all of these questions require very different systems to answer, and trying to pretend they are the same doesn't help anyone solve any problems.” That's what it says right there, right? That's how hard it was to fathom. And now, of course, people, when I say, “Oh, we're gonna invent prompts,” people are like, “You can't even invent prompts.” It's such an obvious idea to have one neural network that, of course, does everything in NLP.Richard Socher [00:31:37]: But at the time, it was, like, extremely controversial, and the paper got rejected. And the sad thing is that it got rejected so hard and they were so certain that we stopped going on our list of things to try. And the number 2 or 3 on the list of extensions for this paper was add language modeling as another task. And then we could have, and that would have accelerated the timelines, in 2018, like, even further for humanity. But we got so crushed, and we were like, “Okay, maybe we'll just work on some of our other ideas for now and, like, come back to this later.” Yeah.Swyx [00:32:09]: How can we design a review system that rewards non-consensus?Richard Socher [00:32:14]: Honestly, I started to feel like arXiv is such a gift to humanity. With arXiv, you should just put your paper out there.Swyx [00:32:24]: Is it pre-preprints?Richard Socher [00:32:25]: Let — And honestly, I think Twitter X, people like you who pick up interesting papers, that is a better filter than the experts. Let everyone, like, have access. Now, of course, there are some downsides, which is, like, if you're super unfamous, you have no Twitter followingRichard Socher [00:32:41]: You don't wanna be on social media or whatever, you write a good paper, maybe someone, somehow no one notices it. But I would argue that if you just tell, like, 10 of your friends in your community about a paper and it is a really significant breakthrough, someone is bound to talk about it again. And, so I think science needs less gatekeeping. And, even though ICLR, with Yann LeCun, who started it, as one of the co-founders of ICLR back in the day, he also wanted less gatekeeping ‘cause he too was rejected for many years together with Yoshua Bengio and Geoff Hinton with all their early deep learning and neural net papers ‘cause it was just not the hot thing. And so ICLR started with that, but then it also started gatekeeping a little bit themselves on various ideas. So I think less gatekeeping, more open, and then allowing people to say, “Look, even if this is just on, or, quote, unquote, ‘just an archive,' if it has like 1000 citations, it's a legitimate paper. Doesn't really matter where you published it.”Swyx [00:33:34]: And I agree with that. I do think it's sad that I've heard that grad students have to do, like, how to Twitter, seminars to each otherSwyx [00:33:43]: Just because it's so important for publishing these days. This person is just reflecting the sentiment at the time.Richard Socher [00:33:49]: That's right.Swyx [00:33:49]: But it'sRichard Socher [00:33:50]: I think it'sSwyx [00:33:50]: It affected you so muchSwyx [00:33:52]: That you stopped work on it.Vibhu [00:33:53]: The sentiment also came out of some of the research, right? Like, the original BERT paper was trained, and towards the end of the paper, they're like, “Okay, throw off the last head, train specific iterations forVibhu [00:34:05]: Extractive summarization add a head for this.” Like, you should do task-specific stuff. These are, like the authors that wrote Attention, wrote BERT, telling you this is what you're meant to do. And, like the training tasks were also very odd. They're likeVibhu [00:34:16]: The — “We know that the model overfits to this weird mass language modeling. Throw away this part and just do specific models,”?Richard Socher [00:34:23]: Exactly. And, like, we had to try — come up with all clever ways of, like attention and pointers and so on to get the neural network to be able to do all of these tasks. And then some of them were better than state-of-the-art, some weren't, but we were like, “But it's still in one model.” I thought it was really cool. Really interesting.Swyx [00:34:38]: I was gonna move on next to Tim and open-endedness. He was head of open-endedness at Google.Open-Endedness, Rainbow Teaming, and Self-Set GoalsRichard Socher [00:34:42]: That's right.Swyx [00:34:43]: I don't know what that means.Swyx [00:34:44]: But he did a lot of talks.Richard Socher [00:34:45]: Genie 3 is one of the ways thatRichard Socher [00:34:47]: Rainbow teaming, yeah.Swyx [00:34:49]: So I first saw him at — speaking of ICLR, I first saw him at ICLR when he talked about open-endedness. He's he's done a few talks. Can we define what is open-endedness for people who have never been exposed to the problem? They are like, “What do you mean? I thought the only goal of AI is to optimize against a benchmark or.”Richard Socher [00:35:04]: That's right, yeah. It's a, it's a fuzzy term because there's so many different instantiations of open-ended, thinking. But, one way I often describe it, and certainly, Tim and Geoff Hinton would be even better at describing this, but it's a suite of methods that is more inspired by evolution than, very specific rewards. So in that sense, it thinks more about environments, about co-adaptation. And so a concrete example is in the cybersecurity and LM safety space where you have one LM that tries to attack another LM to say something unsafe.Swyx [00:35:40]: Yeah, the rainbow, yeah.Richard Socher [00:35:40]: And now the environment is the 2 having a conversation and now they co-adapting, right? They're like one makes a better attack than the first one inoculates itself somehow, like uses that as training data, makes it so it's harder to say something unsafe based on that. And then as the attack stops working, the attacker now tries a different angle, right?Richard Socher [00:36:00]: And that's why it's not just red teaming, but they're called rainbow teaming.Swyx [00:36:02]: So, like, don't tell me how to do things. Let me just figure it out myself.Richard Socher [00:36:05]: That's right. Think about the environments that you wanna use. Think about the rewards at a high level that you wanna, inspire towards, and then let the AI try out many more ideas in this interplay between sometimes humans, but also sometimes other AI agents.Swyx [00:36:22]: Yeah. I worked open-endedness into a model that I have been working on. It was the keynote for AI Engineer where you start. You, we have the token loop, we have the agent turns, and then we have goal. And I feel like the way that you're describing open-endedness is still somewhat of a goal. Like, please attack this,Swyx [00:36:41]: Other agent. But, to meRichard Socher [00:36:42]: Yeah, you set the rewards. You set the environments.Swyx [00:36:44]: The loop that makes the other loops is. What if the agent can set its own goals?Swyx [00:36:49]: And is it, is that open-endedness? Like, you don't give it a goal. Just, like, be a sentient being. And maybe sentient is a very loaded wordSwyx [00:36:57]: But just set your own directions. What do you think you should do?Metacognition, Subjective Goals, and Measuring IntelligenceRichard Socher [00:37:01]: I love this direction. I think this is one of the 10 spaces of intelligence, that I clump under metacognition and thinking about thought.Richard Socher [00:37:08]: And it's an interesting one. Whenever people say, “Oh, AI is like, this is, it's gonna stop from here. It's not gonna get that much better,” and blah, I'm like there's so many different spaces of intelligence that we haven't even started exploring yet and hence have made very little progress on. And there is an interesting, connection to economics and, capitalism. Like, it doesn't make sense for a company to build and spend billions of dollars building a model that instead of following the rewards and objective functions you gave it, may come up with its own objective functions and its own goals.Richard Socher [00:37:46]: Right? And then imagine you're like, “Okay, I spent billions of dollars. Now go develop this new battery, material for me and answer all my emails.” And it's like, “Nah, I think it'd be more interesting to evaluate the molecular composition of the atmosphere, on Jupiter.”Richard Socher [00:37:59]: And you're like, “That's not what I paid you billions of dollars for.” And so no one's working on that for good reasons. And then also, understandablySwyx [00:38:07]: It's not useful.Richard Socher [00:38:07]: It's not, it's not useful, and it could get a little bit weird, right? What if the AI does start to really have thoughts on its own, and what if we don't like those thoughts, right? And so it requires a whole different way of thinking about it. I had a great conversation with a good friend of mine, Sam Gershman, who's a neuroscience professor at Harvard, and, like, we just jammed on this a little bit on, like, what are the best meta goals. And, I do think, like, knowledge-seeking is a really good one. I'm currently thinking also about, like the ultimate measure and unit of intelligence broadly construed, and I finally have some. It's still too early to share it. It's not. I haven't fully baked the thoughts yet.Swyx [00:38:44]: Like some replacement for IQ.Richard Socher [00:38:46]: IQ is such a terrible definition, right?Swyx [00:38:48]: Elo.Richard Socher [00:38:48]: It makes no sense. Yeah, Elos are terrible, too, because it's always just like me versus others.Richard Socher [00:38:53]: But, like, you can be intelligent and not constantly compare yourself to others? And so, yeah, there's no, like. In fact, a lot of these definitions we have, which I briefly mention in my book, too, these definitions create sometimes explicit and sometimes a more implicit anthropic bounds. No dis to the company Anthropic, but just, like, this idea that your intelligence is like getting 100 out of 100 questions right on this IQ test. Well, if that's your definition then you can only be at 100 out of 100. Where do you go from there, right? So you see a lot of these, benchmarks that people are working on they, increase, they get close to human, maybe sometimesSwyx [00:39:30]: It's like an S-curveRichard Socher [00:39:30]: Slightly above human, and then it's flat.Richard Socher [00:39:32]: It's like, ‘cause that's your. If your definition is only that so tied to humans, you're only gonna get to just slightly better than that. So I think metacognition is a great example of that, where we're not even yet allowing the AI to think. We're not working on it very much, and hence there's very little progress in that.Profit Maximization, Real-World Environments, and Reward DesignSwyx [00:39:49]: Yeah. Well, we've interviewed Andon, which I think, has been working on the most open-ended, benchmarks, which is just real-world, money.Swyx [00:39:57]: Arguably, telling an AI to profit maximize is a bad idea.Swyx [00:40:03]: But they are doing it.Richard Socher [00:40:05]: I do think you don't want that super. Like, you don't want a superintelligence to have a ton of access to all kinds of tools and so on and then just give it that without some very careful reward engineering. ‘Cause it's like, I just buy a bunch of defense stocks and I start a war. I make money. Like, it's just like, it's a tricky situation, right? You just buy a bunch of stuff, short basic goods for people, and you create some weird famine, like, issues. Like, yeah, there's a lot of constraints you should put onto a trading system.Vibhu [00:40:35]: It's a fun measure, though, ‘cause, the bounds are very capped to where we're nowhere close to them. Like, in Andon Labs, the model's like, “Oh, it's Saturday, maybe I just close the store today.” “Someone's off. It's okay. We'll just close the store.”Swyx [00:40:51]: It's using Claude.Vibhu [00:40:52]: Yeah. ButRichard Socher [00:40:53]: Yeah, no. I'm not, I'm not arguing against it. Just, like as you get more and more intelligence, you wanna be more and more careful with that as, like an open environment, ‘cause the environment then is all of Earth.Applying RSI to Science and InventionSwyx [00:41:02]: Yeah. Okay. For recursive, not strictly necessary, right? Because, like, if your goal is you make a machine that, like, invents the other things, then, like, just solve, the science thingsRichard Socher [00:41:12]: Knowledge discovery, yeah.Swyx [00:41:13]: Solve machine learning research and discovery and all these things. Good enough.Richard Socher [00:41:16]: And eventually, so, our goal, I haven't really. I don't talk about it that often because it is a few years out, but our goal is once you have a recursive self-improving superintelligence, you then want to apply it to the most important problems. And I think a lot of those are in science and technology and broadly construed inventions, and those inventions in, physics to create better, cheaper energy with fission or fusion, in chemistry and to create better materials and better batteries and, better solar cells and so on. In biology, there's so much, like, I think soon to be low hang- lower and lower hanging fruit because of AI, because of protein and generation, not just folding, but generating new proteins like we did in ProGen many years ago. Like, so much positive impact we had if you take that superintelligence and you apply it to science.Swyx [00:42:04]: I do fundamentally believe that. There's a lot of approaches, though. You're not the only team trying and NeoLab trying.Swyx [00:42:09]: There's, like a lot of. Especially the physical sciences as well.Richard Socher [00:42:12]: And that's good. Yeah. I do think that physi- like the reason we are only doing it in a few years is that it's a little too early right now. Robotics is not quite there yet. The AI is not quite there yet. But I'm fairly confident in 3 to 5 years, all those constraints will be gone, and then applying to real physical robotics experiments and so on, like true robotic process automationRichard Socher [00:42:33]: Not the traditional RPA sense, but, like, having robots run experiments for you will be totally there. Yeah, it's gonna be great.Swyx [00:42:40]: Just to call back to something that you said early on about slow takeoff, you said that, like, while really the substrate that is limiting factor is, let's call this chips, and semiconductors and all these things, and you have race funding for that and, you are investing a lot on that. But have you done the math on, like, is it even- Achievable and, like, what is the, industry concentration needed in order to achieve, like, scale?Compute, Slow Takeoff, and Changing the Bitter Lesson SlopeRichard Socher [00:43:05]: Right now we know that, like, roughly, like a 1000 GPUs cost quite a lot of money.Richard Socher [00:43:11]: Right? If you wanted, like, 10s of thousands of GPUs, you're, you're talking billions and billions of dollars. If you say, like, one GB300 is, like, you could eventually create models that are, on that substrate, like are close and similar to human intelligence. And you want, like, thousands and thousands of, AIs to think about really hard problems, in a similar fashion to humanity. Like, yeah, that-that's, that's a lot of money. You do the math. It's like a lot. We don't have that amount of money right now anywhere to, like, build that. Now, things can get more efficient. You will have, I think, soon better algorithms that won't be, and better hardware that won't be as energy-hungry, and so on. Our human brain does quite a lot of flops with much less energy.Swyx [00:43:56]: 20 watts?Richard Socher [00:43:57]: That's exactly right. Yeah, that's the number often that's quoted. And, like, I think more, inventions will happen there, that then will accelerate the takeoff even further.Swyx [00:44:08]: One thing I always try to reconcile when talking, like, with new lab founders is, like, you're fighting Bitter Lesson all the time. You have to show initial progress, then you unlock the next tier of funding, then the next tier, then the next tier.Richard Socher [00:44:20]: Which unlocks larger model categories.Swyx [00:44:22]: Like, fundamentally, is that true? Like, are you fighting Bitter Lesson? Are you — will we have a way in which, like, no, we're changing the slope in some fundamentally different way?Richard Socher [00:44:31]: I do think we are changing the slopes in fundamental ways by making AI much more efficient, both in terms of the training as well as the inference.Richard Socher [00:44:43]: Yeah. I think we will — When you allow AI to do the work that it takes other labs thousands of people and years to do, I think we'll be able to get it down to weeks, and that will be much cheaperRichard Socher [00:44:53]: And hence, more affordable, accessible to others and so on.Swyx [00:44:57]: Yeah. You've shared initial results on that,Swyx [00:44:59]: Which, like, conveniently OpenAI has also done to their GPT-5.6, so we can talk about it now.Richard Socher [00:45:04]: Yeah. Yeah, so these areSwyx [00:45:06]: Let's recap what you've done.Early Recursive Results: NanoChat, NanoGPT, and SOL-ExecBenchRichard Socher [00:45:07]: Maybe, just a quick recap here. We built, this, system that isn't the full, even the full RSI system in its glory, but it is a first baby version of this. And then, we don't wanna just have it internally and not show anything and, just show some people of what's possible. And so we applied this to these 3 different tasks. One is NanoChat, by my friend Andrej Karpathy, just, like, train a small language model to get, really low bits per byte. And, like, hundreds if not thousands of people, used both their agents and themselves to try, to get to that, and then they got to 0.937. We literally took our system and got to a much lower, bits per byte, much faster within, like, I think less than 2 days. So we took this thing, applied our system to it, and less than 2 days later, we have — we outperformed every human and their agents, in, have ever worked on this. Same with NanoGPT. And then we're like, well, let's, apply it to something that's even more relevant, to real people and to the Nvidia ecosystem and applied it, to, SOL-ExecBench. And maybe you can scroll down to some of the, images. They're, they're kinda fun to see. But yeah, like, one you see has made some real inventions that weren't just hyperparameter tuning. Like, inventing hash tables and so on is quite clever. We have even better results now.Swyx [00:46:34]: What do you mean inventing hash ta — You didn't invent hash tables.Richard Socher [00:46:36]: Of course we didn't invent, like, hash tables. In the grand scheme of, like a hash table, it's like a super basic primitive in computer science. But to use it, for language modeling in this scenario inside a transformer and so on and to combine these ideas and put them together, that has then eventually also been invented, but there was a knowledge cutoff, and we did check that it didn't have access to that externally. We talk about this a little bit. If you scroll to the next figures, this is also an interesting one in that when you start from a really basic, poor, like, vanilla transformer, then we still outperform all of the community together. But if you start from the human seed from an expert like Andrej, then you get even lower. So the human seeds from which you start do still matter. So that was an interesting insight, in my eyes, on this. And then as you go, like, how long does it take to get to these models, to get to similar performance? It's much faster. And then a similar thing happens with the speed runs here where, people have worked on this for quite some time, and the model still was able to train a model more quickly. Why do we care about it? Well, speed of training is part of the equation of the cost, and ultimately, you wanna have the most intelligence per dollar, right? And so speed and quality are big parts of that. And, the,Swyx [00:48:00]: Yeah, the way I put it is, for people who don't understand they look at the chart, they're like, “Cool. What does it mean?” if you have, like a billion-dollar cluster and you can shave off 10%, that's 100 million dollars.Richard Socher [00:48:12]: That's exactly right.Swyx [00:48:13]: How much is that worth?Richard Socher [00:48:14]: Exactly. So when you click, when you look at, like the kernels, these kernels, yeah, for the non-experts, like these kernels are like, used in all the models. Every time you use an Nvidia GPU, you interface with that GPU through these kernels. And so here you see, the leaderboard best, and when it's recursive, and it's there are only a handful of kernels, in this whole benchmark where we weren't the best. And so to me, this is, like, really exciting, ‘cause it makes. It just showcases what this can do. And again these weren't like. We didn't, like, spend months or years, like, developing. In fact, in particular for kernel, CUDA kernels, like, we don't even have really deep. CUDA kernel experts in the team. And our system, that's the beauty. The system just did all of these things. We didn't invent this. And when we open source and release, things in the future and models in the future, like, it won't. They won't be the best in their, category or class or whatever because we're so smart, but it's because, we built a smart AI that does it for us.Reward Engineering and Good Auto ResearchVibhu [00:49:14]: Do you have anything that you've learned from how to guide good auto research? A lot of it also builds on human background, right? It's not just as simple as just, “Hey, go optimize this.”Vibhu [00:49:23]: But we do see it again and again, right? Like some of the Erdos problems, frontier math is being solved by people. And when they do a write-up, they're like, “Oh, I'm not a mathematician. I have no background in this?” “I saw some tools and I made it work.”Swyx [00:49:35]: While you're watching the World Cup, you're likeSwyx [00:49:37]: “This proves some conjectures that's going on.”Vibhu [00:49:40]: Yep. Any learnings fromRichard Socher [00:49:41]: Yeah, there's a Korean conjecture was. Yeah, that's pretty cool.Swyx [00:49:44]: To summarize, tips for good auto researchSwyx [00:49:46]: Versus bad auto research.Vibhu [00:49:48]: How did you build the recursive?Richard Socher [00:49:49]: Yeah. So without giving away all the secret sauce, maybe some things that are probably obvious to the experts but might still be interesting to some, folks is, like, reward engineering is one of the most crucial bits, especially, in order to avoid reward hacking. So you have to be really clever about avoiding. ‘Cause as your AI gets better and better, it will get better and better, at finding weird like, special cases or counterexamples and things like that. And so I'll give you an example. Like, when you ask to, like, make these 100, lines of code faster, and, how do you define fast? Well, you have one line at the beginning that says, “Start your stopwatch,” and one line at the end, “End the stopwatch,” and then, tell us how much time, progressed. And so, well, the simplest way is you just put that line that ends the stopwatch, rightVibhu [00:50:39]: At the startRichard Socher [00:50:40]: At the start. And then boom, it's now faster, right? So this isn't like this, like, super evil AI. It's just, like a very simple, dumb reward hack. And so you have to just very carefully think about all the different angles there. And then I think the longer time horizon the tasks are the harder it gets and the more interesting and clever you have to be to still use these kinds of ideas for it. But yeah, I can't give away too much there.Vibhu [00:51:05]: It seems like rubrics are taking a good spot in that, where for unverifiable domains, you have rubrics, you have a model breakdown, judge's criteria along the way.Swyx [00:51:14]: Yeah, it's a form of verificationSwyx [00:51:16]: Once you got enough rubrics.Richard Socher [00:51:17]: Yeah, everything. I said this a long time ago. That's why I've never been that impressed that AI can play games, ‘cause I'm like anything you can simulate and/or verify, you can have infinite training data forRichard Socher [00:51:29]: And hence, like, AI will solve it eventually.Swyx [00:51:32]: Looking for games where you can do auto domain distribution. So this is a game that nobody's trained on ‘cause it's a new game.Swyx [00:51:38]: And you can start gaming, you can start to play. So I've been building this and cloned this in person and it's just been self-play. I've had about a billion positions evaluated.Games, Self-Play, and the AI EconomistSwyx [00:51:48]: And, I wanted to do the AlphaGo thing of self-play until you ge

UN PODCAST EN PARTENARIAT AVEC RUNMOTION COACHIls rêvaient tous les quatre de terminer leur premier UTMB.Dans cet épisode hors série de La Bande à D+, réalisé en partenariat avec RunMotion Coach, Nicolas Fréret donne la parole à quatre traileurs amateurs engagés sur la 23e édition de l'UTMB (174 km et 9700 m D+) : Guillaume Scellier, Loïc Angenard, Thibaud Hennequin et Yann Bellenguez.Quelques heures avant le départ, ils nous racontent leurs parcours, leurs rêves, leurs doutes et ce qui les a conduits jusqu'à Chamonix.Pour Guillaume, l'UTMB représente une revanche, vingt ans après un premier ultra terminé par un abandon sur la Diagonale des Fous. Loïc, ancien fumeur devenu ultra-traileur, a préparé son aventure depuis la Bretagne, en répétant les mêmes boucles pour accumuler du dénivelé. Thibaud s'est accroché à son projet UTMB au cours d'une année bouleversée par la maladie puis le décès de sa mère. Quant à Yann, son coup de foudre pour le Tour du Mont-Blanc a été si fort qu'il a fini par quitter la Somme pour venir vivre en Haute-Savoie.Tous les quatre ont réussi leur pari.Loïc a bouclé son premier UTMB en 32 h 18, Yann en 34 h 28, Guillaume en 40 h 31 et Thibaud en 44 h 32, sur une course remportée par Ben Dhiman (18 h 16) et Blandine L'Hirondel (21 h 52).Dès le dimanche, alors que la course n'était pas encore terminée, nous les avons retrouvé pour partager leur périple autour du Mont-Blanc : les kilomètres qui s'accumulent, les moments de grâce et de galère, les douleurs, le sommeil, les ravitaillements, les proches, les émotions et cette arrivée à Chamonix qu'ils imaginaient depuis des mois.Pour ce débrief, Nicolas est accompagné de Mélissa Mergoil, journaliste et animatrice du podcast PC Course, et de Romain Adam, co-fondateur de RunMotion Coach et lui-même finisher de cet UTMB 2026 (27 h 19).Et puisque Thibaud était encore sur les sentiers lorsque les autres se sont retrouvés autour du micro, vous entendrez également son récit après son arrivée, à seulement 2 h 13 de la barrière horaire.

Nouveaux pilotes, un brin déjantés, à bord de la Libre Antenne sur RMC ! Jean-Christophe Drouet et Julien Cazarre prennent le relais. Après les grands matchs, quand la lumière reste allumée pour les vrais passionnés, place à la Libre Antenne : un espace à part, entre passion, humour et dérision, débats enflammés, franc-parler et second degré. Un rendez-vous nocturne à la Cazarre, où l'on parle foot bien sûr, mais aussi mauvaise foi, vannes, imitations et grands moments de radio imprévisibles !

Funky House, Afro House, Deep house et Nu Disco on Radio MonacoHosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

Message apporté par Yann Antoine le dimanche 30 Août 2026.Voir en vidéo : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAtuuSYsyNk+ de messages et d'infos sur www.eglise-elm.com

JOIN THE CONVERSATION as we react live to our 25th squad member and latest signing Yann Gboho!

durée : 02:02:04 - Les Nuits de France Culture - par : Albane Penaranda - Dans cet ACR de 1985, Yann Paranthoën et Claude Giovannetti partent à la recherche de l'héroïne d'un récit recueilli par l'auteur breton Anatole Le Braz au début du 20e siècle. L'occasion de se plonger dans une ère révolue, où la frontière entre imaginaire et réel était souvent ténue. - équipe : Mathias Le Gargasson, Antoine Dhulster, Rafik Zénine, Vincent Abouchar, Emily Vallat, Hassane M'Béchour, INA, Laurence Jennepin Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France

Funky House, Afro House, Deep house et Nu Disco on Radio MonacoHosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

durée : 02:02:34 - Les Nuits de France Culture - par : Albane Penaranda - Dans ce second volet de "On Nagra", Yann Paranthoën poursuit son voyage au pays du Nagra. Il raconte le passage de l'enregistreur portable à la stéréo, et nous fait découvrir d'autres applications, d'autres utilisateurs, puis, en compagnie de Stefan Kudelski, d'autres appareils Nagra. - équipe : Mathias Le Gargasson, Antoine Dhulster, Rafik Zénine, Vincent Abouchar, Emily Vallat, Hassane M'Béchour, INA, Laurence Jennepin Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France

Ce mardi 1er septembre, Antoine Larigaudrie et Yann Bouillonnec, directeur général de Gold Service, vous présentent le coffre-fort dans l'émission Tout pour investir sur BFM Business. Retrouvez l'émission du lundi au vendredi et réécoutez la en podcast.

durée : 02:02:24 - Les Nuits de France Culture - par : Albane Penaranda - Dans cette émission, Yann Paranthoën nous emmène au pays du Nagra, l'enregistreur portatif professionnel qui l'a accompagné toute sa vie. En 1987, il recueille les souvenirs et les sons de son inventeur, Stefan Kudelski, et de nombreux autres utilisateurs, toutes époques confondues. - équipe : Mathias Le Gargasson, Antoine Dhulster, Rafik Zénine, Vincent Abouchar, Emily Vallat, Hassane M'Béchour, INA, Laurence Jennepin Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France

Le Svalbard, archipel façonné par les glaces depuis des millénaires, voit aujourd'hui ses paysages se transformer à une vitesse vertigineuse sous l'effet du dérèglement climatique. Pour faire entendre les voix de scientifiques encore trop peu écoutés, le compositeur Yann Tiersen imagine un journalisme musical où la musique devient un langage de transmission. Au printemps 2025, il embarque à bord de son voilier Ninog avec la réalisatrice Coline Béal, direction les confins du Svalbard. Ensemble, ils poursuivent une même quête artistique : enregistrer les trémolos des glaces, composer la mélodie d'un territoire qui vacille et la faire résonner avant que le silence ne l'engloutisse.L'ensemble des morceaux qui ponctuent cet épisode en interludes sont les improvisations originales composées par Yann Tiersen au fil de son voyage au Svalbard.

On continue l'analyse du livre de Yann Piette, comment mettre un homme dans votre poche ? On parle d'implication, de réciprocité, de payer l'addition, de messages, des dates, des questions, de flirt, de se sentir féminine, de yoga, de danse, de caresses et de vêtements confortables (liste non exhaustive). Apparemment il faut récompenser les hommes (c'est des chiens ?) Il nous donne aussi des idées de dates, genre fête foraine, aller au parc, faire du vélo, bon il a quelques bonnes idées. Chercher une personne avec des valeurs similaires est plus important que chercher une personne qui nous ressemble ou avec centres d'intérêt similaire, je suis d'accord ! Je sais que j'ai critiqué le fait de théoriser les relations et cet épisode est contradictoire par rapport à ça mais je le vis bien. La phrase a encadrée : pas de respect pas d'amour, bravo Yann, c'est bien vrai. Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

Summer Collection: Witness to War Crimes. We went back to this conversation on what's happening on the ground in Gaza, reported by Palestinian journalists risking their lives to document the war. We discuss the documentary with Helene Lam Trong and Yann Olivier. Do like, subscribe and leave us a review. Want to find out more? Check out all the background information on our website including hundreds more podcasts on international justice covering all the angles: https://www.asymmetricalhaircuts.com/ Or you can sign up to our newsletter: https://www.asymmetricalhaircuts.com/newsletters/ Did you like what you heard? Tip us here: https://www.asymmetricalhaircuts.com/support-us/ Or want to support us long term? Check out our Patreon, where - for the price of a cup of coffee every month - you also become part of our War Criminals Bookclub and can make recommendations on what we should review next, here: https://www.patreon.com/c/AsymmetricalHaircuts Asymmetrical Haircuts is created, produced and presented by Janet Anderson and Stephanie van den Berg, together with a small team of producers, assistant producers, researchers and interns. Check out the team here: https://www.asymmetricalhaircuts.com/what-about-asymmetrical-haircuts/

Première manche entre Tahnee et Yann autour du livre de Titiou Lecoq : La vie ressemble à ça.On y parle du bon vieux temps et on fait le point sur les avantages et les inconvénients de devenir un Zombie ! bonne écoute et à lundi pour la suite !Tahnee https://www.instagram.com/tahneelautre/?hl=frYann https://www.instagram.com/yannforgood/---VULGAIREUn podcast de Marine Baousson et Marie Missetproduit par Marine Baousson / Studio BruneRéalisé par Antoine OlierGénérique : Romain BaoussonGraphisme et illustrations : Juliette PoneyCapsules Vidéo : Emma Estevezprogrammation : Louise TempéreauDécouvrez Pourquoi Pourquoi, le spectacle pour enfants adapté de Vulgaire : https://www.theatre-michel.fr/Spectacles/pourquoi-pourquoi/ Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

Send us Fan MailTechnical fabrics are changing fast, but what's actually driving the next generation of materials? We sit down with Taylor and Yann from X-Pac® to go behind the laminate and talk hyperTEC, UHMWPE, sustainability, and where performance fabrics are headed next.In This Episode, We Cover:Why the industry is shifting back toward high-performance materials—and what that means for the fabrics makers will see nextWhat makes the new hyperTEC line different, including 100% UHMWPE face fabrics, UHMWPE X-Ply®, and the development behind themThe surprising truth about “recycled” fabrics, including why two materials carrying the same certification can contain drastically different amounts of recycled fiberWhat makers misunderstand about laminates, delamination, and the decades of development happening behind fabrics that might look deceptively simpleListen in and get a rare look behind the materials you're cutting, sewing, and building with every day.Products:  VX21OE, UX10, X11 | Shop All X-Pac®Find Us on Social Media

PJ hears that Maria worked hard to get all the certification required but by the time it worked out it was too late to get a space and now she can't bear to tell Yann because it will trigger his anxiety Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Andy and Yann break down the 2026 FedEx St. Jude Classic PGA tournament with Betting Tips, Predictions, Course Preview, Draftkings Darlings, Stats and more.00:00 Introduction00:33 Tales from the Courtesy Tent02:02 Course Preview04:55 Total Strokes Gained06:12 One and Done08:17 Players That Can Trip You Up09:22 Top 10 or Missed Cut11:00 Head to Head13:30 Top Finishers18:00 Outright Winners21:24 DraftKings Darlings

2ème manche entre Tahnee et Yann autour du livre de Titiou Lecoq : La vie ressemble à ça.On y parle mâles alfas chelous, stand up en anglais, et comment Yann a bidé devant Ru Paulbonne écoute et à vendredi pour la suite !Tahnee https://www.instagram.com/tahneelautre/?hl=frYann https://www.instagram.com/yannforgood/---VULGAIREUn podcast de Marine Baousson et Marie Missetproduit par Marine Baousson / Studio BruneRéalisé par Antoine OlierGénérique : Romain BaoussonGraphisme et illustrations : Juliette PoneyCapsules Vidéo : Emma Estevezprogrammation : Louise TempéreauDécouvrez Pourquoi Pourquoi, le spectacle pour enfants adapté de Vulgaire : https://www.theatre-michel.fr/Spectacles/pourquoi-pourquoi/ Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

Première manche entre Tahnee et Yann autour du livre de Titiou Lecoq : La vie ressemble à ça. On y parle Moustache, pilule et prep, et on fait le point sur les pantacourts de Rafaël Nadal. bonne écoute et à mercredi pour la suite ! Tahnee https://www.instagram.com/tahneelautre/?hl=frYann https://www.instagram.com/yannforgood/---VULGAIREUn podcast de Marine Baousson et Marie Missetproduit par Marine Baousson / Studio BruneRéalisé par Antoine OlierGénérique : Romain BaoussonGraphisme et illustrations : Juliette PoneyCapsules Vidéo : Emma Estevezprogrammation : Louise TempéreauDécouvrez Pourquoi Pourquoi, le spectacle pour enfants adapté de Vulgaire : https://www.theatre-michel.fr/Spectacles/pourquoi-pourquoi/ Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

107 Débrief ÖTILLÖ GothenburgLa saison ÖTILLÖ World Series continue avec une nouvelle manche à Gothenburg !Retour à chaud sur la course avec les équipes françaises pour revivre ce qui s'est joué aux avant-postes et comprendre les choix qui ont fait la différence.Thomas Guerry, Hugo Tormento, David Pesquet, Flo Schafer, Alexis Charrier, Lydie Waucquier, mais aussi Yann et Jocelyn Lemoine: tous nous racontent leur course de l'intérieur.

Andy and Yann break down the 2026 Wyndham Championship tournament with Tips, Predictions, Course Preview, Draftkings Darlings, Stats and more.Intro 00:00Tales from the Courtesy Tent 00:40Course Preview 2:04One and Done 5:00Total Strokes Gained 7:15 Players That Can Trip You Up 8:40Top 10 or Missed Cut 11:05Head to Head 13:00Top Finishers 16:00Outright Winners DraftKings Darlings 22:15

This week's show, the final show ever in the old campus studio, focuses on Marvin Gaye's classic album What's Going On, celebrating its 55th anniversary this year. Featuring various hits from Motown's back catalogue from artists including The Supremes, The Jackson 5 and Stevie Wonder. Also includes songs from contemporary soul musicians including Gil Scott-Heron, Sly and the Family Stone and Curtis Mayfield, as well as some artists inspiring and inspired by Marvin Gaye!

Anne Ghesquière reçoit le Dr Yann Rougier, médecin, neuropsychiatre et spécialiste des interactions entre cerveau, émotions et santé. Pourquoi certains kilos résistent-ils à tous les régimes ? Et si le surpoids relevait moins d'un manque de volonté que d'un cerveau en quête d'équilibre ? Que révèlent les nouveaux médicaments amaigrissants sur les véritables mécanismes de la prise de poids ? Depuis plus de trente ans, Yann Rougier explore les liens entre stress, système nerveux, hormones, alimentation et comportement. Il montre comment nos compulsions alimentaires peuvent devenir une stratégie de survie face à la fatigue émotionnelle, pourquoi les agonistes du GLP-1 bouleversent notre compréhension du surpoids et quelles approches concrètes permettent d'agir durablement sur ses causes profondes. Envie de vous réconcilier avec votre corps ? Cet épisode est pour vous. Épisode #707Quelques citations du podcast avec le Dr Yann Rougier : "Tous les régimes échouent parce qu'ils sont humainement faux.""Le cerveau préfère parfois le surpoids à la dépression.""Faire de son cerveau son partenaire minceur change tout."À réécouter : #455 – Dr Yann Rougier : Mincir grâce aux neurosciences Série un corps en bonne santé5 associations alimentaires : mincir sans fringales ! avec le Dr Yann Rougier5 réflexes indispensables pour se passer du sucre ! avec le Dr Yann Rougier5 secrets anti-âge & ménopause sereine 5 conseils anti-stress pour maîtriser son poids avec le Dr Yann Rougier5 astuces-vitalité pour une immunité au top ! Secrets de jouvence pour être en pleine santéSérie une santé au top !5 conseils pour booster son énergie en hiver5 clés essentielles contre les kilos en hiverRELAX ! 5 pistes pour apaiser son stress en hiver 5 conseils inédits pour une immunité au top cet hiver ! Recevez chaque semaine l'inspirante newsletter Métamorphose par Anne GhesquièreDécouvrez Objectif Métamorphose, notre programme en 12 étapes pour partir à la rencontre de soi-même.Suivez nos RS : Insta, Facebook et TikTokAbonnez-vous sur Apple Podcasts / Spotify / Deezer / Castbox / YouTubeSoutenez Métamorphose en rejoignant la Tribu MétamorphoseThèmes abordés lors du podcast avec le Dr Yann Rougier : 00:00Introduction01:30L'invité, le Dr Yann Rougier04:49Pourquoi votre cerveau vous pousse à grossir10:40Quand le stress prend le contrôle de notre assiette19:21Ozempic : révolution ou fausse bonne idée ?33:47Ce que les injections minceur ne soignent pas49:47Le piège des joies passives56:41Les 5 réflexes qui changent vraiment le cerveau01:00:30 Traumas et surpoids : une piste à explorer01:06:56Retrouver son poids sans lutter contre soi-mêmeAvant-propos et précautions à l'écoute du podcast Photo DR Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

Last Friday, Europe's tech ecosystem was abuzz with the news AI godfather Yann LeCun was launching an AI VC firm.Then, hours later, he quit.This week on the podcast, reporter Maya Dharampal-Hornby joins host Freya Pratty to discuss the curious tale of Yann LeCun's shortly-lived firm, Extelligence Invest. The pair chat about where Extelligence was going to invest, who was involved and why Yann might have left the fund.The former Meta chief AI scientist still has a lot on his plate. Earlier this year, he raised $1bn for his Paris-based world models startup AMI Labs, after targeting $500m. He also advises London and Luxembourg-based VC firm Hiro Capital.Read our reporting on Extelligence here: https://sifted.eu/articles/yann-lecun-new-vc-firmSign up to our daily newsletter here: https://sifted.eu/newsletters

Yann M'Vila analyse la démonstration de l'équipe de France après sa victoire face au Maroc. Les Bleus de Kylian Mbappé ont une nouvelle fois impressionné grâce à leur puissance offensive, mais aussi à leur solidité collective et à l'émergence de nouveaux talents comme Michael Olise.Dans cette vidéo, l'ancien international français revient en détail sur les points forts de cette équipe de France : l'impact de Mbappé, l'apport de Michael Olise, la force du collectif, les choix tactiques et les raisons qui font des Bleus les grands favoris pour remporter cette Coupe du monde.Pour plus d'interviews de vos joueurs préférés, abonne-toi à Colinterview !!00:00 Yann M'vila est dans Colinterview00:57 Introduction de l'invité01:24 Une équipe de France beaucoup trop forte ?06:51 La défense des Bleus et le nouveau Mbappé15:41 Mbappé, un capitaine et un leader total18:44 Cette France ressemble-t-elle au Brésil de 2002 ?21:46 Les débuts de match poussifs des Bleus26:38 Le manque d'efficacité devient-il inquiétant ?32:52 Une attaque qui n'est pas encore à son meilleur niveau36:42 Une équipe totalement focalisée sur le titre37:57 Belgique ou Espagne : quel adversaire faut-il craindre ?46:30 Outro et remerciements#football #equipedefrance #worldcup #maroc #france

Avec Florence Grivel, journaliste culturelle à Espace 2 et sur La Première ; Karine Vouillamoz, cheffe d'Option Musique et programmatrice musicale ; Yann Zitouni, producteur et ancien animateur à Couleur 3 et Paradiso ; Joël Marchetti, ancien présentateur de Forum ; et Simon Matthey-Doret, ancien présentateur de la Matinale.

Yann Guignon embodies a rare path, at the crossroads of worlds and histories. Franco-Gabonese by adoption—under the guidance of Professor Jean Noël Gassita—and by marriage, he has spent over two decades building a unique bridge between Africa and the West, between living traditions and modernity. His commitment began in 2004, when he entered an initiatory journey within several Gabonese rites. Initiated into Bwiti in 2006, he gradually developed a deep relationship with traditional knowledge holders. Over the years, this involvement led to his recognition as a guardian of tradition, and to his appointment as International Ambassador of the Association Maghanga Ma Nzambé, an organization dedicated to preserving and transmitting Gabonese traditional medicine. But his journey goes far beyond a personal quest. As a consultant in intercultural mediation and sustainable development, he is actively engaged in addressing a deeper issue: the need to repair the imbalances inherited from the colonial history between the West and Africa. His approach is grounded in a strong conviction: traditional knowledge systems are neither archaic nor folkloric—they are fully-fledged systems of knowledge that must be recognized, protected, and fairly valued. As scientific and industrial interest in iboga and ibogaine continues to grow, he was among the first to raise concerns about potential risks: knowledge extraction, marginalization of traditional communities, and unequal distribution of value. Where others see a market, he sees responsibility. He went on to found Blessings of the Forest, an NGO dedicated to the conservation of Gabon's cultural and natural heritage. Through this work, he strives to build concrete bridges between local communities, institutions, and international stakeholders, advocating for models based on equity, reciprocity, and respect for international frameworks such as the Nagoya Protocol. Both in the field and on the international stage, he carries a distinct voice—that of a mediator, at once witness, actor, and bridge-builder. A voice that reminds us that behind every molecule studied, there is a story, a culture, and communities that must not be rendered invisible. Episode Highlights ▶ The history and origin of Iboga in Gabon ▶ Cultural practices and rules around Iboga and Bwiti ▶ Challenges of Western commercialization and misappropriation ▶ Conservation efforts and the Nagoya Protocol ▶ The role of community-led initiatives like Blessings of the Forest ▶ Risks and safety in the use of Iboga and Ibogaine ▶ The spiritual and symbolic significance of visions and dreams in Gabonese tradition ▶ The importance of working with trained practitioners and respecting indigenous protocols Pam Montgomery's Links & Resources ▶ Free gift: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPiVd9NpM7Q ▶ http://www.blessingsoftheforest.org/ ▶ https://www.facebook.com/yguignon ▶ https://www.facebook.com/BlessingsOfTheForest ▶ https://www.instagram.com/blessingsoftheforest/ ▶ https://www.tiktok.com/@botfgabon   Join Beth for her all new LIVE 3-Part Masterclass + Hot Seat Coaching, Clear Path to Aligned Abundance: https://go.bethaweinstein.com/clear-path-abundance/ (PAY WHAT YOU WISH) Download Beth's free trainings here:  Clarity to Clients: Start & Grow a Transformational Coaching, Healing, Spiritual, or Psychedelic Business:  https://bethaweinstein.com/grow-your-spiritual-business Integrating Psychedelics & Sacred Medicines Into Business: https://bethaweinstein.com/psychedelics-in-business ▶ Beth's Coaching & Guidance: https://bethaweinstein.com/coaching  ▶ Beth's Offerings & Courses: https://bethaweinstein.com/services ▶ Instagram:  @bethaweinstein  ▶ FB: / bethw.nyc + bethweinsteinbiz  Download Beth's free trainings here: Clarity to Clients: Start & Grow a Transformational Coaching, Healing, Spiritual, or Psychedelic Business: https://bethaweinstein.com/grow-your-spiritual-businessIntegrating Psychedelics & Sacred Medicines Into Business: https://bethaweinstein.com/psychedelics-in-business▶ Beth's Coaching & Guidance: https://bethaweinstein.com/coaching ▶ Beth's Offerings & Courses: https://bethaweinstein.com/services▶ Instagram: @bethaweinstein ▶ FB: / bethw.nyc + bethweinsteinbiz

Andy and Yann break down the 2026 US Open tournament with Tips, Predictions, Course Preview, Draftkings Darlings, Stats and more.Intro 00:00Tales From The Courtesy Tent (worst shots of the week) 1:26Course Preview 2:38 One and Done 7:30Total Strokes Gained 9:24Players That Can Trip You Up 10:42Top 10 or Miss Cut? 13:28Head To Heads 15:18Top Finishers 19:27Outright Winners 22:45DraftKings Darlings 26:11

Nadine and Yann from Anniversary Eve are your bosom selectas today! Catch their show on Wedensdays from 12am - 2am, or anytime via the bCasts!

Happy blue moon, everyone!   Yes, it is indeed the second full moon of the month which brings us a second May chapter of 3 Books.   This one features an author I've been hoping to have on our show for years.    Join me in welcoming the Booker Prize–winning novelist, deeply philosophical storyteller, and one of Canada's most distinctive literary voices ... Mr. Yann Martel!    Yann is best known for 'Life of Pi', the global phenomenon that won The Booker Prize in 2002, sold over 15 million copies worldwide, and was later adapted into an Academy Award–winning film.   Born in Salamanca, Spain in 1963, Yann spent his childhood in Spain, Portugal, Alaska, Costa Rica, Mexico, and Canada.    Yann's work is deeply shaped by a pulsing curiosity, philosophy, and research. He journeyed through India while developing 'Life of Pi', visited Holocaust memorial sites while writing 'Beatrice and Virgil', and even launched a "guerilla book club" called '101 Letters to a Prime Minister', where he mailed books to former Prime Minister Stephen Harper every two weeks for four years.    Yann's newest novel, 'Son of Nobody', is a (new!) ancient retelling of the Trojan War told through the modern lens of a Canadian researcher who discovers this poem while exploring themes of homesickness, regret, ambition, love, and grief.   Tune in as we discuss Yann's writing routines, the importance of stories, AI in the world of publishing, racism in Australia, art as a co-creation between writer and reader, the beauty of the prairies, and of course, Yann Martel's most formative books...    Let's flip the page to Chapter 161 now...

Il a construit le laboratoire IA le plus influent du monde avant de tout quitter pour recommencer de zéro.Toute l'industrie de l'IA mise sur la même chose mais Yann Le Cun pense qu'ils font fausse route.Professeur à la New York University depuis 23 ans, Yann rejoint Facebook en 2013 et fonde FAIR, le laboratoire de recherche en intelligence artificielle de Meta, qu'il dirige pendant quatre ans et demi. Il devient ensuite Chief AI Scientist pour reprendre ses travaux de recherche.Pendant 15 ans, il travaille en parallèle sur ce qu'il appelle l'IA pour le monde réel.Pas des systèmes qui prédisent le mot suivant dans une phrase, mais des systèmes capables de comprendre ce qui va se passer dans une vidéo, d'anticiper les conséquences de leurs actions et d'apprendre une nouvelle tâche la première fois qu'ils y sont confrontés.Comme un humain ou un animal.Le 31 décembre 2025, il quitte officiellement Meta et cofonde, à 65 ans, AMI Labs avec Alexandre Le Brun, ancien de Facebook et fondateur de Nabla.La levée de fonds dépasse le milliard de dollars et devient le plus grand seed européen de tous les temps.Yann Le Cun explique pourquoi l'IA que tout le monde utilise aujourd'hui n'est pas intelligente.Il revient sur ce qu'est vraiment un LLM, pourquoi augmenter leur taille ne mènera jamais à l'intelligence de niveau humain et ce qu'il faut construire à la place.Mais aussi, comment AMI Labs compte développer ses modèles.Un épisode concret pour comprendre l'IA telle qu'elle est, pas telle qu'on la vend avec l'un des rares chercheurs à avoir posé les fondations de l'IA moderne et qui pense déjà à ce qui vient après.Vous pouvez contacter Yann sur Linkedin.Vous souhaitez sponsoriser Génération Do It Yourself ou nous proposer un partenariat ?Contactez mon label Orso Media via ce formulaire.TIMELINE:00:00:00 - Quitter Meta pour construire l'IA d'après00:11:49 - L'IA d'aujourd'hui n'est pas intelligente00:16:49 - « L'intelligence n'est pas une accumulation de connaissances »00:25:26 - Tout le monde se trompe sur les LLM00:33:38 - L'IA surhumaine est inévitable00:43:58 - Aucune entreprise de robots ne sait comment les rendre utiles00:55:38 - L'IA excelle où l'humain est remplaçable, avis01:02:36 - Le world model : ce qui manque à l'IA01:14:58 - YouTube est le plus grand dataset du monde01:26:15 - Est-ce que l'IA peut prédire les catastrophes avant qu'elles arrivent ?01:32:22 - Tout le monde deviendra le patron d'une équipe d'IALes anciens épisodes de GDIY mentionnés : #534 - Sixte de Vauplane - Animaj - Le studio d'animation qui fait trembler Hollywood#500 - VO - Reid Hoffman - LinkedIn, Paypal - How to master humanity's most powerful invention#500 - VF - Reid Hoffman - LinkedIn, Paypal - Comment dompter l'invention la plus puissante de l'humanité#452 - VO - Reid Hoffman - LinkedIn, Paypal - "We are more Homo technicus than Homo sapiens"#452 - VF - Reid Hoffman - LinkedIn, Paypal - L'humanité 2.0 : Homo technicus plus qu'Homo sapiens#397 - Yann Le Cun - Chief AI Scientist chez Meta - L'Intelligence Artificielle Générale ne viendra pas de Chat GPTNous avons parlé de :Qu'est-ce qu'un grand modèle de langage (LLM) ?« L'explosion de l'intelligence artificielle a été beaucoup plus rapide que le temps universitaire »Intelligence artificielle généraleLes voitures autonomes WaymoNotre documentaire sur la Chine : Comment la Chine est devenue imbattable ?Comment Jean-Louis Constanza voit l'avenir de la robotique sans robotsAI: Connaissez-vous les Joint Embedding Predictive Architectures (JEPA) et les World Models ?Plaud AISystème 1 / Système 2 : Les deux vitesses de la penséeMusk rachète Cursor, attaque OpenAI, et Tim is Cooked !Les recommandations de lecture :Are We Smart Enough to Know How Smart Animals Are?, by Frans de Waal

Andy and Yann break down the 2026 PGA Championship tournament with Tips, Predictions, Course Preview, Draftkings Darlings, Stats and more.Intro 00:00Tales From The Courtesy Tent (worst shots of the week) 00:45Course Preview 2:25Overacheiver/Flop Of The Week One and Done 6:00Total Strokes Gained 8:00Players That Can Trip You Up 9:40Top 10 or Missed Cut 12:30Head To Heads 15:00Top Finishers 18:40Outright Winners 21:50DraftKings Darlings 23:50