## New highlights added January 28, 2025 at 1:39 PM > The payoffs from both model and infrastructure optimization also suggest there are significant gains to be had from exploring alternative approaches to inference in particular. For example, it might be much more plausible to run inference on a standalone AMD GPU, completely sidestepping AMD's inferior chip-to-chip communications capability. > In short, Nvidia isn't going anywhere; the Nvidia stock, however, is suddenly facing a lot more uncertainty that hasn't been priced in. And that, by extension, is going to drag everyone down. > Indeed, you can very much make the case that the primary outcome of the chip ban is today's crash in Nvidia's stock price. > What concerns me is the mindset undergirding something like the chip ban: instead of competing through innovation in the future the U.S. is competing through the denial of innovation in the past. > That paragraph was about OpenAI specifically, and the broader San Francisco AI community generally. For years now we have been subject to hand-wringing about the dangers of AI by the exact same people committed to building it — and controlling it. > So you're not worried about AI doom scenarios? > I definitely understand the concern, and just noted above that we are reaching the stage where AIs are training AIs and learning reasoning on their own. I recognize, though, that there is no stopping this train. More than that, this is exactly why openness is so important: we need more AIs in the world, not an unaccountable board ruling all of us. hmmm > This actually makes sense beyond idealism. If models are commodities — and they are certainly looking that way — then long-term differentiation comes from having a superior cost structure; that is exactly what OpenSeek has delivered, which itself is resonant of how China has come to dominate other industries. > That leaves America, and a choice we have to make. We could, for very logical reasons, double down on defensive measures, like massively expanding the chip ban and imposing a permission-based regulatory regime on chips and semiconductor equipment that mirrors the E.U.s approach to tech; alternatively, we could realize that we have real competition, and actually give ourself permission to compete. Stop wringing our hands, stop campaigning for regulations — indeed, go the other way, and cut out all of the cruft in our companies that have nothing to do with winning. If we choose to compete we can still win, and, if we do, we will have a Chinese company to thank. Hmm..