Dylan Patel: Jensen's exit threatens NVIDIA's supply chain dominance, open source ecosystem, and AI deal pipeline

Speaker 1: Missed him. It's been over a week since we hung out with him later. Is that a And he's not foldable?

Speaker 2: Not a duo. It's a Samsung.

Speaker 1: Oh, Samsung. Living in the future. How long have you had that?

Speaker 6: I've had this for... I've had foldables for three or four years. Wow. Ahead of the curve. Ahead of the curve. Always.

Speaker 1: What is your duo review? Is that going to be enough to pull you over? Were you only in iPhone Air. IPhone Air. Okay.

Speaker 6: IPhone Air. Okay. Foldable Samsung. This is the elite class.

Speaker 1: Oh, two phones.

Speaker 2: You're Priestly class.

Speaker 1: This is screaming a firewall between the investing arm and the research arm here.

Speaker 6: One one for one for work, know.

Speaker 1: One for Yeah. Okay. Okay. Okay.

Speaker 6: One for one for personal.

Speaker 1: Okay. There we go. There we go. Good. Well,

Speaker 6: I'm I'm afraid to say that both Jordy and and and and both of you guys, John and Jordy

Speaker 1: Yep.

Speaker 6: Only have this phone number, not this phone.

Speaker 1: Oh. Wow. Well, I can fix that. Wow.

Speaker 6: To be fair, I only...

Speaker 2: Hey. I'm updating my priors. I'm updating our priors on our on our friendship. I thought I was texting the personal the whole time. Wow. I thought we were like that.

Speaker 1: Like that.

Speaker 2: Look look only this...

Speaker 3: I said this one.

Speaker 1: Okay. Okay. Stay safe out there.

Speaker 2: Do you guys keep a a... Do you guys try to predict black swans? It's effectively it's effectively impossible by definition but I found myself two weeks ago thinking like actually trying to like rack my brain on what is what is the most like unpredictable outlier scenario that could change the game on the field and I think we I think we got it. Unfortunately, I didn't I didn't... I of course...

Speaker 6: What were your what were your guesses?

Speaker 2: I don't know. I think I think a lot of them were much more around individual players in the in the financial web of the entire trade, but...

Speaker 1: Well, big one the big one that everyone's been like waiting for is is like some results from the next training run that shows that there's not another leg up beyond coding. That there is something... That taste is the new mode and for so many white collar jobs, it really does matter that you can sit across the table from someone shake their hand. And so, we're never going to replace the lawyer or the doctor or even augment them to the tune of because you don't even need to do the job displacement thing. It's just the fact that a software engineer can deploy a $100,000 worth of AI in a year without people blinking. That hasn't happened for the marketer, for the salesperson yet. And if that does happen, the revenues do go to a trillion dollars. But if it doesn't...

Speaker 6: I don't if it's a black swan though. That's not...

Speaker 1: No, it's not black swan.

Speaker 2: That's...

Speaker 6: I think that's like something we can all debate,

Speaker 3: right? Exactly.

Speaker 2: No. But another another another thing I would say is like I was very confident that at least for the next year Jensen would not let a company, an AI company valued at north of $10,000,000,000 fail. Like period. Like he was like, I don't, I'm not going to have that headline. I have the ability to give any company a meaningful up round and keep everyone in the game because a lot of people want the headline even though in the grand scheme of things right now, a $20,000,000,000 company could go to zero, wouldn't really have that much impact, But it didn't feel like Jensen would even tolerate that kind of headline just because the bears would sort of sink their teeth into it and and have a nice tasty meal.

Speaker 6: Yeah. Yeah. I mean it's it's... I think I think the black swan is this, right? I think we we've all predicted all sorts of things. Totally. Even with all the knowledge and insight and you know, rumors. I mean, I had even heard about like, you know, rumors which I didn't like Yeah. Put much credit to. But like people in the industry are like, oh, yeah. Jensen does this with someone at... I mean, at Nvidia. I was like...

Speaker 2: No. But but that's another... Yeah. That's another thing we've asking. Right?

Speaker 6: No. You like, you know, you hear... To

Speaker 1: this extreme degree. Like like this is so different than the Bezos story, so different than the Gates story, so different than the Elon story. Like it is so entwined with the actual business and the business dealings and geopolitics and domestic Elon

Speaker 6: Elon has slept with employees.

Speaker 1: But not to this Not

Speaker 6: with a spy.

Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah.

Speaker 2: His get out of jail free card is that he has like 15 baby mamas. So it's you can't like pin that on Yeah. And and and he has a lot more control. Think the question that we've been We're getting way

Speaker 1: more control.

Speaker 2: We've been asking ourselves is like we on 10/10/2025 we talked we specifically named Mega Speed, we specifically named Alice Wong, we talked about how the whole situation was suspect. Like a lot of the details were basically out in the open, and there was even... There was... All these videos were public, you know, and you could read into the videos and be like, alright, this looks like at the very least like a pretty close relationship.

Speaker 6: Mhmm. I mean some of these videos have his wife and his daughter in the same room. Right? That's the thing that's like...

Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Which which kind of meant the like the the basic analysis was like, okay, well, if if the whole family is there, probably nothing's happening. Like, maybe this is purely maybe he's the purely rational economic actor. He's playing it as aggressively as you can to grow the business internationally. We don't like that from a chip export position. If you're a China hawk, you don't like that. But there is the letter of the law and we rarely like CEOs don't get fired for pushing it right up to the letter of the law. And so if you're selling the absolute max like the h 20 which was designed to get around the the chip exports like a lot of China hawks didn't like that but they were like, ah, like that's the letter of the law. You found the loophole. You found the edge. And so it it is it is just a complete black swan in that it's so much further than what anyone...

Speaker 2: Yeah. So so overall total lack of judgment just given that this guy as as for as many friends as he has, he has an equal seemingly an equal amount of enemies that stand to benefit from this. What do you think happens to the the Nvidia AI central bank deal pipeline? I assume if you're a number of these companies you can't lean on, oh yeah, Jensen, you know, wanted to do 2,000,000,000 and now it seems like those investments like when it comes time to actually sign the docs will probably be going to committee.

Speaker 6: Yeah. I think I think like that's the biggest like worry for NVIDIA is that now it's like a committee of people doing stuff. Yeah. And that's just going to make decisions slow. Technically, they could fall behind because of this. Obviously, the other big aspect... There's sort of three main things, right? There's the technical side. NVIDIA is so ingrained in helping make decisions there. There's no one clear technical lead. I mean, maybe Jonah is, but then, like, there's a lot of people who are also directly reporting to Jensen doing technical stuff, so it's hard there to move as fast. Supply chain wise, right, NVIDIA wants to make aggressive things, do aggressive things, lock up supply, convince the supply chain to do things that they've never done before in terms of technology and supply, and locking it up to NVIDIA. And that's probably a lot harder to do given, you know, whoever the CEO is, is probably not as charismatic as Jensen and they're not going to, you know, be like, Yeah, sure, NVIDIA. You can have 60 of my capacity or 70% of my capacity, at a price that's below market rate. Like, that's just probably tough. And then the third leg of it is like, you know, NVIDIA is propping up a lot of things in the supply chain, right? Open source in America would not exist without Jensen. Both Reflection and Thinking Machines are pushing the open source frontier in America, and both of them have massive investments in backing from NVIDIA, as do many other companies across the ecosystem. And all these application companies rely on, you know, open models, right? Whether it's the Harvey's, the Instincts, the Sierras, they all use open models. Mhmm. All the inference providers, which are, you know, multiple of the 10 plus billion dollar companies, all rely on open models from China. And if we're slamming the hammer down now on China way harder because the biggest defender against restrictions was Jensen and his team, what now happens is given their credibility is out the window and they're being investigated and subpoenaed and whatever is going on on that side, then there's going to be a lot more restrictions, in which case Chinese models are, you know, do they continue to progress at this current pace? And if they do continue to progress, do they open source everything? These are these are real questions out there. I think the biggest loser is the open source ecosystem for sure Mhmm. You know, if you're talking about outside of NVIDIA. Mhmm.

Speaker 1: How do you think about the technical role of of the CEO position at NVIDIA? You know, you see Jensen, you hear about the deal making, you see him at events and on podcasts and news hits. I think if there's some deep... Deeply technical work that's happening, that's behind the scenes. How how real is that? Is he involved in the architecture of the next chip? Or is this something where he... Like, his technical role is more recruiting and finding the next generation of great No doubt,

Speaker 6: like inspiring people and bringing them in. He's not designing the architecture. Yeah. But when there's a decision... Know, I think the common thing that everyone sort of, you know, who's following NVIDIA ends up seeing is that you hear real valid things about option a, b, and c. Mhmm. And NVIDIA could be doing all three at once Mhmm. And then at the last second Jensen is pushing all the way behind one.

Speaker 1: Got

Speaker 6: it. Now if there's a b c and d, which which one gets chosen? Is it a committee? Who's who's deciding? Who's now chosen a and getting all the suppliers on b and c to not be pissed off and push behind a.

Speaker 1: Oh, yeah. That's the founder mode thing.

Speaker 6: And if a starts fucking up

Speaker 1: Yeah.

Speaker 6: You switch to

Speaker 1: b That's on a really And

Speaker 6: see things.

Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. I remember in Meta at one point, they had two different operating systems for their virtual reality strategy. They had XR and AR and VR or something. And like, it was just so much extra work being done. And then Zuck had to go in founder mode and be like, look, there's going be some people that are getting reassigned. There's going to be some layoffs. Like, it's going to be aggressive. And that's the benefit of the founder mode company. So who is on the shortlist for potential successors? Can Colette not do it? Are there that does she not want it? How does this develop from here?

Speaker 6: I'm not sure what Colette wants. I think she's awesome. But at the end of the day, she cannot lead technically the company. Sure. I think internally, the two people that I think would be best suited would be Ian Buck and Jonah Alvin. Mhmm. I think that Ian is great. I think Jonah is not so much in the public light, but he's technically like Mhmm. The closest to the leader, and is technically like in charge of most of the technical orgs. And so I think those are the two that are the most important from that perspective. But like, you know, yes, Ian is charismatic, probably, you know, really probably pretty good at wheeling and dealing, not nearly as good as Jensen will ever be. But then is he going to be as good on the technical side? Is he going to be as good on the supply chain side? Or Jonah, is he going to be good on the supply chain side? Or is he going to be good on the wheeling and dealing? And so, you know, I don't know if, you know, someone can be propped up and not... And take over the role of Jensen, like, in that way. And if you do, like, if Jonah is now or Ian is now in charge, do... Is the stuff that they were in charge of fall down to some extent, like, in terms of, like, the focus that they had on it, the relentless effort? So now my favorite picks for CEO would be from an external perspective.

Speaker 1: Yeah.

Speaker 6: It would be Charlie Kwas and Johnny Shoji. These two guys... Charlie is number two at Broadcom and has been for a long time and is fucking awesome. Yeah. And Johnny is the head of hardware at Apple, he's the one who's basically led the chips team and strategy. Those are the only two people, I think, in the world that can, navigate a supply chain, and technical details like like that. I think, there are... You know you know, it'd be better if it was Hak Tan or Lisa Hsu, but I don't think either of them will do this. I think they're just like

Speaker 1: Yeah. What about leaders from Trainium organization, TPU organization? I mean, you're highlighting Apple. There's plenty of people that are leading huge semiconductor efforts, but they're still two rungs down from the true CEO or the true founder.

Speaker 6: Would Andy be Jassy is the one who wanted to buy Annapurna Labs. Well, he's not going to leave Amazon's CEO to be NVIDIA's CEO.

Speaker 2: Yeah.

Speaker 6: You take some steps down. I think there are really great people there. I really love the teams at Amazon. They work and move super fast. I think Google's awesome. But I don't think they have like a single person that could do all of the above. I mean, if anything like, you know, I think, Amin Verad is at Google is like, you know, the lead of all this infra stuff, but I I I don't know if... I've never asked him. I just have a feeling he wouldn't want to do this. Right? I have a feeling that like the leaders of Tantum, I know they very much want to be in the background and, like, you know, of all the Amazon chip stuff, I don't think they want to do this.

Speaker 1: Yeah. What about a wildcard? Sean Maguire was throwing out Natasha Aurora, someone who's, you know, already in the CEO seat but not running a trillion dollar company. Is... Do you have any

Speaker 2: Humble expectation? Just a just a couple 100,000,000,000.

Speaker 1: Yeah. Tiny company.

Speaker 6: Right? I I don't know Nikesh too well. I met him once. I mean, I think he's awesome. But like technically... Like, Palo Alto has shipped hardware. Right? Like, that's definitely a part of their business, but like

Speaker 1: Yeah.

Speaker 6: Is it is it the same thing as NVIDIA leading edge, doing crazy stuff? I mean, like, look at... Blackwell was amazing. Blackwell, if they did not do what they did with Blackwell, they would have lost a lot of market share. They decided at the last second what to do. I mean, shoot, you know, with with Volta, they added... They decided to add the Tensor Core like three months before they taped it out. Who would have said, yeah, let's just push out the current thing. Let's add it into the current thing. They would have been like, oh, let's add it to the next thing. Yep. If they add it to the next thing, how much further behind would they have been in AI? NVIDIA never would have established dominance.

Speaker 1: Right? Yep.

Speaker 6: It's these tactic... And and and it's not like you're fighting like no no no knocks against Palo Alto Networks, but their competitors are like not that amazing versus Nvidia's fighting an Open AI chip team, a Broadcom chip team, a Google chip team, an Anthropic chip team, a Meta You chip know, these guys... Amazon chip team. These guys are fucking good. Like, you know, AMD. They're all really good. And all these startups, right?

Speaker 1: They need to talk

Speaker 6: about. The startups, they're all good. Yeah. It's not like they're incompetent. Know, I think it's it's it's very different, right? You know, as great as Lisa Sue is, she took down intel who's incompetent, right? Like what is what is the person who defined a category and created it and kept all the invaders at bay? It's very different than being second place or, you know, making smart tactical business decisions, innovating on something, you know, that, you know, once there's already a category established, it's just very different.

Speaker 2: Mhmm. How do you think Chinese labs are reacting and and updating their their roadmaps?

Speaker 6: It's it's no, it's an open secret that the Chinese labs are super... Working super closely with NVIDIA. Even if NVIDIA is not selling them chips directly, they have engineers constantly from both The US as well as their Shanghai offices going to these labs, talking to them, helping them optimize, understanding what they're doing and bringing those optimizations over to NVIDIA software stack and open source. I think the Chinese labs have already started updating. Right? Companies like Xipu who are, sanctioned and DeepSeq are heavy users of different types of chips. Xipu supports like seven different Chinese accelerators. They're not as good as NVIDIA's, but like, hey, they work. DeepSeek is super close with, Huawei. There is there is a lot of probably updates on priors. And it's the Chinese labs that relied heavily on Nvidia probably are weaker now than the Chinese labs that relied heavily... That were like already diversifying. You know, I think it's the same applies to Anthropic versus OpenAI. Mean, obviously, OpenAI has their own chip and has been working on it longer, but they're 90 plus percent NVIDIA, whereas Anthropic is like one third or less NVIDIA. And so it's just a completely different level of like impact on them. OpenAI works more closely with NVIDIA than than Anthropic does. Hey, this is a positive for Anthropic versus an OpenAI. Hey, Anthropic pushing back open source and, you know, open source being weaker now. This is great for Anthropic, right? Like these sorts of things flow through not just the Chinese labs, but also American labs. In general, the closest source is winning.

Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. That makes a lot of sense.

Speaker 2: Any predictions on how this will impact the the Macours and and various, like, data companies given that there's gonna be more scrutiny on on basically any type of business relationship with China?

Speaker 6: I I don't know about Macours specifically, but I do know a lot of the data companies sell tons of data to China. Actually, it's a really funny way to distill. Even if the Chinese labs don't directly have the closed source models, some of the biggest customers are all the data companies like the Mercours and so on and so forth. And so they generate data and their pipelines for generating data involve a lot of language models from the frontier labs and extracting and filtering and all that. And if you're making environments or whatever you're making with these frontier models and you sell them to China, that's a some in some way you're kind of distilling the info out of them. It's not like traditional distillation. I imagine selling chips to China is going to be in a lot on lot more scrutiny. Renting chips to China and clouds is going be under a lot more scrutiny. Selling data is something that has not had any scrutiny yet, and it will probably fall into the guise. Right now, will focus on hardware, but it... There's, you know, Jensen and, you know, all the people in NVIDIA that were defending, you know, Lutnick and David Sachs, all these people that were, like, sort of preventing, you know, some of the restrictions on NVIDIA into China Mhmm. Are heavily, you know, especially Lutnick and Jensen are heavily discredited now in any argument to, you know, allow China to have some stuff. I I... You know, we have been pro certain types of restrictions for years. It's been our biggest point of contention with NVIDIA. You know, I think they

Speaker 1: Sure.

Speaker 6: They really dislike that. You know, they they didn't... They they, like, could understand when we were excited about AMD or, you know, Google, and they viewed that as like a... Can out engineer them. But I think like when it came to like China, it was a different aspect. Right? You know, and and now the cover is gone, and and, you know, we... I I kind of hope that, you know, the government is is smart with the restrictions, like, right? Make sure that chips don't get sold of certain kinds. Really, iron packed. Make sure TSMC and and memory companies don't sell to China, make sure equipment of high end is not going to China that makes chips, you know, maybe maybe some restrictions around data. But don't, you know, restrict renting chips. Right? Mhmm. There's sort of a whole waterfall full or renting chips from, let's say, hyperscalers. Maybe restrict random chip companies like Mega Speed from renting chips to China. Yeah. Right? Or re... Diverting, but maybe not the, like, hey, if Google's gonna rent to ByteDance, maybe that makes sense because Google can always pull away the chips when they need to, or if the government tells them to, and Google can always, know, charge way more margin to ByteDance, and so that makes ByteDance less profitable than Meta. You know, these are the sort of things that are, like, you know, relevant for US competition and leadership. And that's what... Hopefully, restrictions are not like... You know, obviously, pendulum will swing and there'll be a lot of brash actions, but hopefully, focus is on how do you make America win.

Speaker 1: Yeah. No. I like it. I remember when you branded yourself not as a China hawk, but as a bald eagle, and I thought that was a good way to put it. How are you reflecting

Speaker 2: The video

Speaker 6: you guys made is so good.

Speaker 1: We got to repost that. Yeah. We got to repost that today. How are you reflecting on the predictions in AI 2027? When I look at the model capabilities, I feel like it's incredibly accurate. We're completely on track. Huge congratulations to the whole forecasting team there. I'm still a little uncertain about two predictions. One is they forecasted that there would be a 100,000 person anti AI protest. The midterms were kind of that, so I don't I think the midterms might kind of stave off a little bit of that. But, the more interesting question is right around this time, AI twenty seven predicts that in around November 2026, China wakes up. And, I've been sort of interrogating that. It's very hard to get accurate data. How do you feel we are progressing along the line of like China waking up? Is this an example of China waking up because they're honey potting our most powerful AI CEO or are they asleep?

Speaker 6: Or the

Speaker 1: other side of that John. Caught.

Speaker 2: You have to... There there there's always a possibility that they believe NVIDIA chips have backdoors in them and...

Speaker 1: Oh they don't want them there. Okay.

Speaker 2: Jensen is Jensen's the asset.

Speaker 1: Yeah. There's a million to fly hot.

Speaker 2: Doesn't it doesn't seem like you're waking up if you're like, hey, there's a bunch of GPUs in Hong Kong, but keep them there. We don't want them in here.

Speaker 1: That's a good point. Yeah.

Speaker 2: How would you be processing That makes you think that there's some group that has much longer timelines.

Speaker 6: Yeah. I would say, as far as AI 2027, I mean, I'm I'm very AI pilled, and I thought AI '27 was was a big stretch, but hey, turns out 70% of the verifiably, like, like things that they predicted so far this year have turned out to be accurate, Which is incredible. Incredible. Right? Like Yeah. I I I'm still skeptical on like, you know, some of the diffusion aspects, but I think RSI is looking more and more true. Yep. China waking up is probably a big big likelihood. Mhmm. That's the other thing, right? If we go too gung ho on the pendulum of like banning stuff in China, does China now swing their pendulum and prevent the supply chain? It's, you know, every Nvidia server has China content.

Speaker 1: Sure.

Speaker 6: Every Google TPU server has China content. Yeah. Like, every every one of these things has China content. China can stop it if they want. Sure. So there's some level of like, actually, like, please, you know, what is the what is the amount of stuff that you can... Minimal amount of stuff you can give China in AI and give them in everywhere else sort of to prevent them from cutting off the supply chain. Yeah. Is a view of the world that could be, you know, construed. As far as like, you know, China waking up, it it it's it's probably possible. Right? I don't... Another one that you mentioned like China, honey potting Jensen. I actually don't think she's a spy in the colloquial sense.

Speaker 1: Yep.

Speaker 6: And I don't think she's a honey pot in the colloquial sense. She's a well connected individual in the Chinese, you know, business world and family. Her family's well connected. And if you're well connected in China... Shit, if you're well connected in America, will talk to intelligence agencies when they tell you to. And you will tell them the shit that they want to hear. I just don't think people are going to be like, you know, no or like, you know, there's just a lot of pressure there.

Speaker 1: Yeah. The CIA was asking me for your personal phone number and I had to tell them to take a hike. It was brutal. I feel like we got to figure out where he got that jacket. But John, can you get us Dylan Patel's personal phone number? And I said, look, I'm kind of second fiddle in his world. Yeah. Just a professional connection. Yeah....

Speaker 6: Work phone up until a few months ago.

Speaker 1: Okay. Okay. I I am a little less hurt. No.

Speaker 6: But anyways, I think Yeah. I think that, you know, just be... You know, they they were getting some info. Yeah. Right? She was clearly like showing everyone on WeChat she is close to Jensen and can get them chips in China. Yeah. Jensen, did he know? Probably. I mean, I don't know. But like probably he knew. Yeah. Just... But like Super Micro didn't have to honeypot Jensen to ship billions of dollars of servers to China. Yeah. Right? Like this is like... Yeah. Know us. I think I think there's a lot

Speaker 1: more They might have been having an affair. We don't know. Let's not jump in. I'm sure. I'm sure. Anyway, what does this mean for the venture capital community? We've seen a lot of VCs sort of rallying around Jensen. Is that purely because of the open source ecosystem? Like, what does it mean for the other mean, you mentioned wrapper companies, but are VCs effectively out of the big lab trade and so that's why they're rallying around Jensen a little bit more than you expect?

Speaker 6: You know, before I answer that question, know, it'd be, you know, Jensen has the, you know, it it depends on how bad this stuff is. Right? Right? There's a lot of info coming out. I don't know. Yeah. But if thinner China stuff is like really gung ho, what if Jensen just like goes to China and starts a

Speaker 1: you know, a 100

Speaker 6: Wild million card. Instead of like... I don't know. Don't know. Like, you know, that's a that's a... I don't I don't

Speaker 1: know what this is. But but Yeah.

Speaker 2: Why would why would he not go to Taiwan that Because

Speaker 6: The US still has interest in Taiwan I guess I would say. I mean I mean it depends on like did he break laws?

Speaker 1: Yeah.

Speaker 6: Right? True. Is he is he going be called in front of Congress for months and months and months and

Speaker 1: Sure.

Speaker 6: Berated and he broke Like I I don't know.

Speaker 1: If he didn't break laws I think he's going to St. Bart's.

Speaker 6: But anyways, far as the venture ecosystem, you're totally right. They're out of the lab trade. The labs are going public. OpenAI probably just did their last round. Yep. It wasn't that great. And then Anthropic is going public. Yep. You know, they they got liquidity.

Speaker 5: Some

Speaker 6: of but them then like everything downstream, right? Like all of these inference clouds, how can they secure compute without credit and without financing and without a backstop? This is a real challenge. Yeah. Who's going to be willing to do that? And then how how does how does, you know, Base ten and Fireworks and whoever go from a billion dollars of revenue to $10,000,000,000 of revenue without access to compute and without Chinese models being, you know, continually updated and sold, externally? Yeah. This is a big challenge and risk. Likewise with all these companies like Instinct and Harvey and Sierra who are making awesome businesses, can they continue to ramp and improve the capabilities of their product or do they have to turn to closed source models? In which case, if they have to use closed source models, their product is a wrapper. But if they can switch to open source models and they own the customer relationship, they're not a wrapper. Yeah. And so I think like this is a big big worry. I think, you know, Jensen is the venture ecosystem's strongest ally and he's propped up a lot of companies. NVIDIA's very active in venture and investing. So, you know, I don't know if they're going be as active now. Mhmm. Mhmm.

Speaker 1: I had one last question. Jordy, do you have anything? I think the... What

Speaker 2: a... Yeah.

Speaker 1: Yeah. Sorry.

Speaker 6: I'll tell you my phone number. 789998212.

Speaker 1: Wait. What is that from? Is that...

Speaker 6: Oh, come on.

Speaker 1: That's a regional commercial from Georgia or something.

Speaker 6: No. No. No. Is that? It's a... Is

Speaker 2: it that song? There's a song about it.

Speaker 1: Right? In LA we only know Dos Vente Dos Vente Dos Accidentes.

Speaker 6: 212.

Speaker 1: Okay. I know 867... Soulja Boy. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Soulja Boy who's now an AI spokesperson. He...

Speaker 6: You know, it's it's Soldier Boy is so cheap to hire.

Speaker 1: Really?

Speaker 6: I went on a boat, some startup for their like series, whatever, launched. They rented a boat, hired Soldier Boy 25

Speaker 1: k. Wow. Maybe at the next time.

Speaker 6: And he performed. He performed like like an hour long. He had his whole entourage, DJ come.

Speaker 1: We need him with semi analysis con 2027.

Speaker 6: Speaking... We're not a venture backed company that loses money.

Speaker 1: GPT-5.5.5. You surprised by the, like, the moderate jump in progress? I saw the 5.2. Was was it Mythos five

Speaker 6: point think it Got

Speaker 1: like 16%. I mean, it speaks to the quality of the benchmark that it wasn't immediately 100%. But take me through a little bit of your reaction to the results there.

Speaker 6: Yeah. So, GDPX and our benchmark, we launched Yeah. We tested Anthropics model and launched it and it took a day or two to run the tests but Yep. More like two days. But anyways, it was was such a big improvement in some areas, software engineering and chip design.

Speaker 1: Okay.

Speaker 6: And and it was... There are areas where it just didn't improve at all. Interesting. Which was like really interesting. I mean it speaks to reinforcement learning environments are the vector for scaling.

Speaker 1: Yep.

Speaker 6: If you do not have unique data in environments in certain spaces, you will not scale quality of model in those places. Yeah. And so chip design drastically improved. Right? Exactly. And I think it speaks to like what is Anthropic's focus? Well, just hired a bunch of chip people and we're making a chip. Yeah. And we're making model way better than a chip. Yep. And in the past Anthropic's view was we're not going to make a chip because it's not AGI pill. By the time we get a chip out, it's too slow. Mhmm. Now, the model can make the chip. So it's like, you know, I think I think they're really accelerating on that, front. Likewise, software engineering continues to gain like mad. Yeah. Anthropic is so much better than everyone else in software engineering and chip design. Mhmm. It's incredible. And then other areas, they just didn't improve. I think I think it speaks to the volume of like how important data is

Speaker 1: Yep.

Speaker 6: In these data companies and these data vendors. But also, you know, the durability of like some of these categories. Right? Some of these categories, they didn't improve on at all and like they're probably not spending a ton of data on. Yeah. Or, you know, maybe the benchmark is just so difficult, like, you know, that like it's it's... It did improve slightly in all domains, but generally scaling size is not going to get you improvement in every benchmark. You really have to scale techniques, algorithms, and data.

Speaker 1: On the data side, how much value is there in, like, the data flywheel, the data that comes through the harness directly just given to the company, to the lab for free versus bought from a data broker specifically? Do you have a balance on how valuable each is?

Speaker 6: Yeah. So we've we've established a relationship with a lot of the chip design data companies Mhmm. And and AI chip design companies. And Drop pick, as far as I understand, buys very little of this. Okay. They've been building it themselves. Yeah. Is is the only answer. Right? How else would they do Yeah.

Speaker 1: That makes sense.

Speaker 6: And but at the same time, like some of the spaces like bio, you know, Drop X started their own wet lab. Yep. And they're collecting data there, also they're buying a lot of data elsewhere. Sure. So I think it's it's it's, you know, I think other folks have different strategies Yeah. You know, in terms of what do I build internally, what do I build externally. But I think the data vendors are really important. And given models are getting so good, a general large scale data vendor where we're connecting you to a bunch of people that are like, okay, data labelers, that's not what's valuable. Right? It's experts. It's experts. And so if you're an expert in material science and you're making data there, you can make a great business. But how scalable is that actually going on?

Speaker 1: Totally. Totally. Yeah. We'll find out next time you're on the show. Thank you so much for coming on. We'll let you get back to work. Have a good one. What a week. Goodbye. Good luck. What a week. One for the history books. Have a great day. Let me tell you about Figma. Agents can meet the can meet the canvas.