in a decade we will realize most of the deeptech is a grift and quick services + quick commerce companies are what drives more for the economy

#WATCH | Mumbai: Massive crowds gather outside the Apple Store in Mumbai as eager customers queue up ahead of the official sales launch of the iPhone 18 Pro and iPhone 18 Pro Max in India.

If OpenAI does not ship a Jev-like model in 8 weeks, we can conclude that they have started ossifying like Google.

Dario Amodei reveals AI is on the steepening bend of the exponential curve and it's a warning sign we need to slow down Dario: "This technology is on an exponential, right? It's like you have one, then two, then four, then eight, then 16, then 32. But even as I was saying that to myself, I don't think I fully appreciated what it would actually be like when the progress was as fast as it was. So an exponential curve looks a little like this." Jo Ling: "Where are we on the curve?" Dario: "We're kind of on the bend where it's starting to get steeper." Jo Ling: "So is that a five-alarm fire to you?" Dario: "It doesn't mean we need to panic today. It doesn't mean we need to shut it all down. I would say it's a warning sign. It's a warning sign that we need to slow down. We need to make this technology carefully, and we need to make sure that our safeguards, our ability to understand it, our ability to control it, keeps up with the pace at which the technology is happening."

I agree with Dario that we need to pace the frontier. This has been a primary topic of discussions we've had at OpenAI in recent weeks. Committing to having independent evaluators with employee-like access is a great idea, and we will do the same. We'll have more to share soon.

𝕏 is where almost all AI discourse takes place

Google people HAVE to stop vagueposting about Ox Alpha. If it's not their model, its gonna be the biggest embarassment of 2026.

I don't fully understand why programmers seem to be the ~only group of people not angry that their jobs are being automated.

Some observations on Kimi: 1. It's a very good model! I don't think its performance can be explained away by distillation or anything like that. In agentic coding sessions, it seems pretty much on par with the best public models of Q1 2026. In my fairly limited use, it also seemed very token hungry. It's not obvious to me that this model is actually that cheap to run. 2. I am personally surprised the Chinese state continues to allow the open sourcing of models this good, given potential risks. To be clear, I *myself* might be fine with models presenting this level of marginal risk being open weight, but I am surprised that China is fine with it. I suspect the reason they are is 75% explained by strategic blindness/lack of AGI-pilledness (the CCP is very Yann Lecun-y in its views of AI). The other 25% or so is their lack of compute for customer inference (making China's open-weight strategy an unintended byproduct of US export controls) and the normal Chinese strategy of aggressive exports. For the companies, as opposed to the government, the decision to open source is partially ideological and partially because they are behind, and they know that very few people would pay for sub-frontier models from China. 3. Open-weight models are inherently decelerationist, and I'm continually surprised to see the so-called "accelerationists" so excited about open-weight models. I suspect the reason they are is that they know open-weight models are effectively ungovernable, and they simply like the overall cloak of ungovernability open-weight models create over the whole of AI. It's not a bad strategy; it reminds me of James Scott's recounting of the hill people in "the art of not being governed." Still, in the end, open-weight models deter further AI capex. 4. One probable outcome of an open-weight-model-dominant world is full AI communism, which is precisely what China proposes: rather than a market product, AI is a "public good" which will ultimately be provided by the state as a kind of "digital public infrastructure." This future strikes me as a dystopian hellscape, but I've never met an open-weight models advocate who doesn't ultimately concede this is where things end. You'd be surprised how many 'accelerationists' lobbied me, while I was in government, to support an eleven or twelve-figure federally funded data center so that startups could train models at a subsidy and then give them away for free. There was no other way for AI to progress, they said. Perhaps this is the logical end state of things. Nonetheless, I find myself surprised to see supposed accelerationists excited about such an outcome. I think many of them just don't know what they're doing. Many accelerationists do not view the creation and serving of frontier models as a legitimate business. 5. I would guess that the Trump Administration will at some point realize that their best strategy here would be to create large amounts of regulatory risk around the use of open-weight Chinese models. You don't need to "ban open source" (one of the dumber motifs of AI policy discussion). You just need to direct every agency to issue soft law that creates FUD. "A Federal Reserve Advisory Bulletin found that there may be backdoors in Chinese AI models." It needn't be that well justified. You just create enough regulatory risk that every regulated enterprise backs off. You probably don't want to create so much regulatory risk that you scare off the hyperscalers from serving Chinese models; this will just drive startups to sketchier providers. There's a happy middle ground here. I'd assume they will do some version of this. 6. It's probably true that open-weight models of this capability make the world a bit more dangerous, but not so much more that you'll really notice. At some point the models will be capable enough that you will notice. "A nonliving, invisible, dangerous, and infinitely self-replicating agent escaped from a Chinese lab," you say? Color me shocked.

When my daughter fell down on brick steps and split her nose in half, she had surgery that cost $112,000. Since I didn't have insurance at the time, I asked for the cash discount - it was $8,000 (something like -96%) Also, I save $5,000 each month by not paying insurance premiums. The entire medical and insurance industries are a collossal racket.

Claude Sonnet 5 is now available in Cursor. On CursorBench, it's a meaningful step up from Sonnet 4.6: 57% vs. 49%.

Boris sat down with Spotify VP of Engineering Niklas Gustavsson. Spotify ships 4,500 production deploys a day, and 73% of PRs are now AI-assisted.