史上最大杠杆收购、SPAC 2.0、开源AI模型、各州AI监管热潮

好了，各位。欢迎回到全球排名第一的播客节目。没错，就是All In播客。我是你们的主持人Jason Kallikanis。再次与我同台的，还有你们的独裁主席Shmoopalaihapatthiya，以及科学巨匠David Freeburg。

Alright, everybody. Welcome back to the number one podcast in the world. Of course, that's the All In podcast. I'm your host, Jason Kallikanis. With me again, your chairman dictator, Shmoopalaihapatthiya, and the sultan of science, David Freeburg.

David Sachs会从skift连线加入。他正在为美利坚合众国进行一些深度谈判。从skift。Skift。注意结尾没有t

David Sachs will be calling in from the skift. He's in some deep negotiations for The United States Of America. From the skift. Skift. It's not there's no t at

结尾。

the end.

就是skift？没有t。哦，skift我的爱。好吧。

It's just skift? No t. Oh, skift to my love. Okay.

他在一艘skift上，用黑莓手机和一群将军们处理事务。没人知道Sachs的生活发生了什么，但他随时会从skiff上突然加入。不过我们先开始

He's in a skift doing something with his BlackBerry and a bunch of generals. Nobody knows what's going on in Sax's life, but he'll he'll he'll crack in from the skiff any moment now. But we'll start

我看到Pete Heggs宣布要对将军们进行体能测试。你能想象如果Sacks也得通过体能测试

with I see that Pete Heggs have announced a PT and a fitness test for the generals. Could you imagine if Sacks had to pass a PT and

和教练考核吗？天啊。这规定真该适用于整个行政部门。Sacks，我们要求你做一个俯卧撑，就一个。

a coach? God. They should totally make it for the administration. Sacks, we need you to do a one push up, Sacks.

如果你没通过会怎样？他们会把你从你的位置上撤下来，你可能会有个

What do they do if you don't pass? They remove you from your you probably get a

观察期。

cure period.

我们应该来个俯卧撑比赛。那会很有意思。赢家通吃。你一次能做多少个俯卧撑？

We should do a push up contest. That would be great. Winner take all. How many push ups can you do free burn?

你得根据人们的身高调整标准。我是我们中最高的。我的四肢系统要长得多。

You have to adjust for people's heights. I'm I'm the tallest of all of you. I have a much longer limb system.

那是什么意思？

What does that mean?

对我来说做20个比对你来说难多了，Jason。

20 for me is much harder than 20 for you, Jason.

我是说，20个对我来说现在是小菜一碟。

I mean, 20 is easy for me at this point.

是啊，你就像比尔博·巴金斯。你大概八秒钟就能搞定。

Yeah. You're like Bilbo Baggins. It'll take you, like, eight seconds to put up.

我可是个坦克，老兄。比尔博·巴金斯。索尔怎么样？我不是索尔。因为我要进入我的丹尼尔·克雷格时代了。

I'm a tank, man. Bilbo Baggins. How about Thor? I'm not Thor. Because I'm going to my Daniel Craig era.

JKL有个手肘

JKL has a elbow

我要进入我的丹尼尔·克雷格时代了。

I'm going to my Daniel Craig era.

体重比上优势明显。

To weight ratio that's highly advantaged.

好了，我们开始吧。别闹了。EA是你的手臂

Alright. Let's get started. Enough shenanigans. EA is What is your arm

长度吗，Jakel？你手臂长度够长吗？

length, Jakel? Do have a good arm length?

我的臂展？理论上我的臂展足够单手绑在背后也能揍你一顿。这说法确实挺荒谬的。好吧，EA正以史上最大规模的私有化交易被收购。

My wingspan? My wingspan technically is enough to kick your ass with one hand tied behind my back. That's actually ridiculous. Okay. EA is being taken private in the largest take private deal in history.

550亿美元。伙计，这金额堪比——让我想想——2007年2月的德州电力公司（330亿美元）和HCA医疗集团。这是笔巨额交易。参与私有化的投资者包括沙特PIF基金、银湖资本，以及我们节目的老朋友贾里德·库什纳的Affinity Partners公司。每股210美元，较股价溢价25%。

$55,000,000,000. Man, that just stacks up to, let's see, Texas Power Company in 02/2007, HCA Healthcare at 33,000,000,000. This is a large deal. Investors in the take private include Saudi's PIF Silver Lake and friend of the pod, Jared Kushner's Affinity Partners. $210 a share, 25 premium on the stock.

如你所知，库什纳在Affinity的最大有限合伙人同样是沙特PIF。PIF已投资超过9000亿美元，涉及多个领域：Lucid Motors、LIV高尔夫、软银愿景基金、早年的优步、英超纽卡斯尔联队。电子艺界显然属于电子游戏行业，1982年创立于红杉资本位于圣马特奥的办公室。

Kushner's largest LP and Affinity, as you know, Saudi PIF as well. The PIF has invested over $900,000,000,000. When you know many of the things, Lucid Motors, LIV Golf, the SoftBank Vision Fund, Uber back in the day, Newcastle, the Premier League. Electronic Arts, obviously, is in the video game business. They were founded at Sequoia's office in 1982 in San Mateo.

向我们参加过All In峰会的伙伴鲁洛夫·博塔致敬。EA总部仍在红木城，旗下有《麦登橄榄球》《模拟人生》——啊所以你本周用了《模拟人生》的背景——《极品飞车》。这交易太疯狂了，查马斯，这创下了私募股权领域的新高。

Shout out to our guy, Rulof Botha, who joined us for the All In Summit. Their headquarters is still in Redwood City. Madden NFL, The Sims. Oh, that's why you have the background in The Sims this week, Need for Speed. Pretty insane deal here, Chamath, and this is a high watermark for private equity.

无论如何，PIF显然痴迷游戏。他们是任天堂、Savvy Games、Scopely的最大股东，简直在疯狂收购游戏公司。你对当前这笔交易怎么看？

Anyway, you look at it, and the PIF loves games. They are the biggest shareholder in Nintendo, Savvy Games, Scopely. I mean, they just keep buying games. What are your thoughts here on this deal happening right now?

我非常看好。我先说利好因素，再分析看空方的观点。关键要记住，电子游戏是整个互联网使用量的支柱产业。上周扑克牌局上，Unity的CEO马特·布朗伯格和COO亚历克斯·布卢姆共进晚餐时透露，全球日活跃游戏玩家约30亿——这数字精确得令人震撼。

I really like it. Let me give you the bull case, and then let me give you what the bear case would have to believe. The thing to remember is that video games is the anchor pillar of usage across the entire Internet. Last week at our poker game, we had Matt Bromberg join in just for dinner who's the CEO of Unity and Alex Blum, who's the COO of Unity. And one of the stats that they shared with us at dinner was it's about 3,000,000,000 DAO play games, which is just an exactly.

这个数据惊人到难以置信。从很多方面看，游戏产业规模远超社交媒体，或至少与之相当。EA在其中如同800磅重的大猩猩。但问题在于他们始终扮演守门人角色，而我认为这些守门人正面临被侵蚀的风险——特别是指微软和Xbox这类企业。

It's an incredible, incredible stat. So in many ways, it's much bigger than social networking and social media or as big. And in that, EA is sort of this 800 pound gorilla. But I think the problem is is that they've always been these gatekeepers, and I think that there's a risk and a chance that these gatekeepers get eroded away. Specifically, I'm talking about are folks like Microsoft and Xbox.

在这家公司私有化的节点上，正发生着一些非常有趣的事情。比如Xbox，在EA交易宣布的次日，就决定将其订阅服务价格上调50%。随后几天发生的情况是，大量用户试图取消订阅导致网站崩溃。你看到的现象是什么？分销渠道的守门人试图提价并抢占份额，而原创IP所有者却缺乏充足资金在这个本质上与社交媒体同等重要、甚至更重要的领域进行反击。

And at the point that this company is going private, there's some really interesting things that are happening. So Xbox, I think the day after the EA deal got announced, decided to hike prices 50% to their subscription service. And what happened over the subsequent few days is that so many people tried to cancel that the site went down. So what are you seeing happening? You have distribution gatekeepers trying to raise prices and take share, and then you have the original IP owners who have not had a a well funded way of fighting back in a category that is basically as important and, frankly, more important than social media.

因此我认为，将这样的资产私有化后，你可以从容优化运营支出模式，理清职责分工，充分利用次世代工具的优势，并找到Xbox和PlayStation平台之外的发行渠道以获取更大份额。若能实现这些，这将是个价值数百亿美元的资产。在我看来，这可能成为一场巨大的胜利。所以这是个非常明智的决策。那么看跌的观点是什么？

So I think if you take an asset like this private, it allows you to take your time to clean up the OpEx model, right, figure out who does what, be able to use the best of all these next gen tools, and then be able to find ways of finding distribution outside the scope of Xbox and PlayStation so that you can take more of your share. If you do those things, this is a multi $100,000,000,000 asset. And in that, I think it could be just an enormous win. So I think it's very smart. What's the bear case?

我认为看跌观点延伸了我多次提及的一个主题——专利价值，进而延伸至IP和版权价值将会消失。这将形成一种光谱效应：某些内容IP持有者会受损，而另一些将受益。老实说，我认为游戏行业属于受益方，而传统内容工作室如迪士尼、Hulu、网飞则属于受损方。但看跌论点认为，这些工具链将使游戏产量增长两到四个数量级，并通过社交媒体等新渠道分发。不过我认为这种可能性相当低。

I think the bear case is extending a theme that I've talked about here a few times, which is I think the value of patents and, by extension, IP and copyrights are going to go away. And in that, there's going to be a spectrum where certain content IP holders lose and other ones win. I think gaming is on the winning side, to be honest, And I think content studios in general, like traditional content, the Disney's, the Hulu's, the Netflix's, are on the losing side. But the bear case would be that these tool chains allow the number of games to be built to increase by two, three, four orders of magnitude and that they are distributed by other places like the social media sites. I just think that that's a pretty low probability.

总体而言，我认为贾里德和埃贡完成了一笔惊人的交易。我非常看好。

So on balance, I think that Jared and Egon did a killer deal. I really like it.

对于不了解的人说明下，Unity是制作游戏的三维软件开发公司。这家市值160亿美元的上市公司早年曾获Ruloff和红杉资本投资，是家了不起的企业。弗莱伯格，你对游戏行业相比社交媒体和传统媒体有何看法？我们看到巨额资金正涌入这些领域，但现在是关键时刻。

And for people who don't know, Unity makes the three d software that people build games in. It's public a company, 16,000,000,000, also backed by Ruloff and Sequoia back in the day. Incredible company. Freiberg, what are your thoughts on the gaming industry versus, say, social media versus traditional media? We're seeing massive amounts of money being put into each of these, but this is time.

对于千禧一代及更年轻的下一代，我们看到明显的混合趋势。他们显然不再使用有线电视（该业务正在暴跌），但他们玩游戏、喜欢YouTube和TikTok等平台，并且热爱社交媒体。你认为未来会如何发展？

And for this next generation, let's say millennials and younger, we're seeing a big mix. Obviously, they don't have cable TV, so that's been plummeting. But they do play games. They do like the YouTube, the TikTok, etcetera, and they do love social social media. What what's the future here as you see it?

回答这个问题可以从时间分配角度思考：人们在社交媒体、传统媒体和游戏上分别花费多少分钟？趋势如何？但更重要的是，哪类活动将因AI获得更多收益，从而吸引更多使用时长？AI会创造更多社交媒体参与度吗？

One way to answer that question is to think about how people spend their time. Do you spend more minutes on social media or on traditional media or playing games? And how is that trending? But importantly, which of those will accrue more benefit and as a result drive more hours spent from AI? Is AI gonna create more social media engagement?

AI会创造更多传统媒体参与度，还是更多电子游戏参与度？我认为理解这一论点的关键在于，AI最终将更多地服务于电子游戏娱乐，而非社交媒体或传统媒体。

Is AI gonna create more traditional media engagement or is AI gonna create more video game engagement? And I think that one way to kinda think about this thesis is that AI is gonna ultimately accrue to video game entertainment far more than social media entertainment or traditional media.

为什么这么说？解释一下。

Why is that? Why? Explain to me.

因为我认为AI能创造更具动态性、更吸引人的互动体验，这种双向互动关系是传统内容或社交媒体难以企及的。如今许多游戏系统中（这在十二年前是不存在的）嵌入了AI驱动的玩家角色，其行为模式与真实人类互动极为相似——这是传统游戏编程方法难以模拟的。比如在《堡垒之夜》中（不知道你们是否玩过），新手玩家虽然名义上是与其他玩家对战，但实际上主要在与AI对抗。开发者通过调整AI难度让玩家逐步提升技能，因为早期版本存在高流失率问题——新手常被匹配到高水平玩家导致屡战屡败，最终沮丧弃游。

Because I think you can create dynamic, more engaging experiences that will benefit from kind of a back and forth sort of relationship than you can with traditional content or with social media. And what we see now in a lot of gaming systems that didn't exist, call it twelve years ago, is AI driven players embedded in the games that act and feel a lot more like real human engagement that is very hard to kind of mimic from traditional programming methods that were used in gaming. And so that makes a a big difference. Like, for example, if you're playing Fortnite I don't know if you guys play Fortnite or have played Fortnite, but if you're a noob in Fortnite, like, you're early player in Fortnite, you're mostly playing even though you go online and play against what are supposed to be kind of other players, you're mostly playing against AI because what they do is they tune the AI to be easier to beat so that you can slowly develop your skills. Because what was happening early was they were seeing a high degree of churn in Fortnite because kids would go on and play for the first time, and they'd get paired up with kids that were better than them and so they would never win and they would get frustrated and they would quit the game and stop.

因此AI显著提升了《堡垒之夜》的用户参与度和留存率，这种现象如今正出现在众多游戏平台。AI能最大化提升游戏时间、参与度、满足感和快乐值——沙特人显然意识到了这点。当他们试图摆脱对石油资产的依赖时，将目光投向了娱乐产业（特别是人们如何消磨闲暇时间），这其实是个值得所有人关注的宏观投资方向。

So the churn rate was high. So AI unlocked higher engagement and higher retention on the Fortnite platform and I think we're seeing that in a lot of different gaming platforms now. So AI can be used, for example, to maximally increase time, engagement, satisfaction, happiness. I think the the Saudis saw this. And if they're trying to diversify away from their oil holdings, entertainment, and how people spend their free time, which by the way, I think is a general macro bet that everyone should consider making.

如果你相信AI及其带来的生产力提升，那么工业化国家的人们将普遍拥有更多自由时间，并受益于AI长期带来的通缩效应。随着人们闲暇时间增加，娱乐市场总体规模必然扩大。而在这个增长的娱乐市场中，游戏代表着未来，AI则代表着游戏的未来。沙特人在此笔交易前已持有该公司10%股份，他们通过旗下Savvy Games投资部门在游戏领域布局极其激进。

Because if you believe in AI and you believe in the improvements in productivity, generally speaking, people in the industrialized world will generally have more free time on their hands and be able to support themselves with the deflationary effects of AI over time. So if there's more time on people's hands, the general market for entertainment is growing. And if the general market for entertainment is growing, gaming is the future of entertainment and the future of gaming is AI. Now the the Saudis own 10% of this prior this company prior to the deal, and I don't know if you guys have tracked the investments they've made, but they've been extremely aggressive with gaming. So they have this, like, investment division called Savvy Games.

Savvy Games于2023年以49亿美元收购Scopely，今年初又斥资35亿美元收购《宝可梦GO》开发商Niantic。他们还持有任天堂4%股份，Take Two公司6%股份，以及动视暴雪相当比例的股权。

And within Savvy Games, they bought Scopely for 4,900,000,000.0 in 2023. And then earlier this year, they spent 3,500,000,000.0 to buy Niantic, the company that makes Pokemon GO. And then they also own 4% of Nintendo. They own 6% of Take Two. They own a sizable percent of Activision Blizzard.

可见沙特已在多个游戏平台投入重金，既拥有独立游戏平台也进行分散投资，这明确体现了他们将游戏视为未来娱乐产业核心的战略布局。交易完成后Jared的Affinity基金将持有约5%股份，而沙特人将成为控股股东。

So they've put quite a bit of capital in small investments in other gaming platforms. They own a few gaming platforms. So this is clearly, like, a big thesis and a big investment that they see as the future of entertainment over time. Jared's firm Affinity is gonna own about 5% of the company post transaction. The Saudis are gonna be the majority owners.

因此我认为这最终将成为他们下一个重大的平台战略，使他们能够进行重要的长期投资，推动向人工智能的转型，而无需担忧季度业绩，真正做出一项十年期的豪赌。他们确实频繁提及这个2030愿景。如果你仔细审视

So I think that this is gonna end up being the next big platform play for them, and and it allows them to make the important long term investment in furthering the transition to AI and not have to worry about quarter to quarter earnings, but really making a ten year bet. And they do talk a lot about this 2030 vision. So if you look at

在我们讨论的这三个类别中，电子游戏使用率——约60%的美国成年人每周都会玩；社交媒体——约75%的美国人每周使用；而流媒体传统媒体（如Netflix、Disney+等）仍高达83%。这就是人们时间分配的三大板块。至于书籍和电影院，显然已成为最大的输家。

across those three categories we've been discussing here, video game usage, about 60% of US adults do it every week. Social media, about 75% of Americans use it every week. And streaming traditional media, the Netflixes, Disney Pluses of the world, that's still 83%. So these are the three buckets of of people's time, books, and going to the movies. Those are obviously the big losers.

这是个混合体。市场此前完全误判了形势，因为这笔交易的TikTok部分极其有趣。当他们寻求债务融资时，股权部分约360亿美元，债务200亿美元。他们联系了杰米·戴蒙，结果杰米当天就直接包揽了这200亿——我想是因为他也能迅速完成风险评估。说实话，某些最大规模的交易往往显而易见，需要的只是将其整合的勇气，然后所有人都会恍然大悟。

And it's mix. The market was totally getting this wrong because the TikTok of the deal is super interesting. When they were looking for the debt financing, it was about 36,000,000,000 of equity, 20,000,000,000 of debt. They called Jamie Diamond, and Jamie basically ripped the 20,000,000,000 in on the same day just because I think I think he also could underwrite this pretty fast. I mean, some of the biggest deals are frankly so obvious that it just takes the courage to put it together, and then everybody's like, oh, this just makes so much sense.

现任CEO安德鲁·威尔逊将继续留任。他是个了不起的人，极具个人魅力。

And then Andrew Wilson, who's the CEO, is gonna stay on. He's a great guy. Super, super compelling.

值得探讨一下私募股权的影响——如果你在该地区待过就会明白。我十一月份将在沙特和迪拜筹建大学，过去三年我每年都会去两次。无论在多哈、阿布扎比还是利雅得，当地人会明确告诉你他们重点关注的六七个行业：科技位居榜首，私募股权同样名列前茅。

Worth talking a little bit about the impact, I think, of private equity if, you spend any time in the region. I'm gonna be in Saudi and Dubai in the November doing my founding university, and I've I've been out there twice a year, maybe for the last three years. They will tell you whether you're in Doha, Abu Dhabi, or Riyadh, we've got six or seven industries we really care about. Technology's at the top of the list. Private equity's at the top of the list.

现场娱乐与体育产业高居首位。实际上，酒店业也处于前列，还有房地产——为人们建造新去处。看看私募股权数据，调出我刚才展示的图表，这个行业的膨胀速度令人震惊。目前规模已达5万亿美元，而且还在持续增长。

Live entertainment and sports at the top of the list. And then, actually, hospitality also at the top of the list, real estate, building new places for people to go. And if you look at private equity, pull up that chart I had there, this is just stunning how big this industry is getting. You know, $5,000,000,000,000 is what we're up to here, and it just keeps growing.

我认为私募股权彻底完蛋了。Silver Lake、Affinity或这笔交易未必如此，但整体而言这个行业已经溃不成军。

I I think private equity's totally screwed. I I don't think Silver Lake or Affinity or this deal are screwed, but I think private equity in general is totally oozed.

好吧。自2015年以来，私募股权规模急剧膨胀，增长了三倍。那么我想请问在座的先生和观众们，为什么私募股权变得如此庞大？如果人们无法将EA（电子艺界）或Stripe（支付公司）纳入退休账户，当我们将所有优质公司私有化——比如SpaceX宣称永不上市——这对民众的退休账户会产生什么影响？

Alright. Well, it's it's gotten huge just since 2015 and tripling in size. So why is this, I guess, my question for the gentleman here and for the audience, why is private equity becoming so large, and what impact does that have on society if people can't put EA into their retirement account? They can't put Stripe into their retirement account. If we take all the great companies and we start to privatize them, SpaceX would say it never goes public, what impact does that have on people's retirement accounts?

好的。我认为这段历史背景很重要。长期以来人们相信，获取最佳风险调整后收益——这是什么意思呢？

Okay. Look. I think I think the history of this is important. There was a long standing belief that the best way to generate the best risk adjusted return. What does that mean?

这意味着要安然度过股市下跌和波动时期。传统做法是采用60/40配置：60%债券和40%股票。多年来，特别是奥巴马时期人为将利率压制在零水平，许多人开始偏离这种配置，逐渐向风险曲线远端转移。最大受益者就是风险投资、私募股权和对冲基金。由于零利率环境，私募基金拥有近乎无限的借贷能力，风险极低，因此比风投和对冲基金能更快制造回报。

That means to manage through periods where the stock markets go down and to manage through periods of volatility. The best way to do that was to have what's called a sixty forty allocation, 60% to bonds and 40% to equities. Over many years, especially when we artificially suppressed rates at zero through Obama, a lot of people started to move their allocations away from sixty forty, and they started to make more and more investments further out on the risk curve. The biggest beneficiaries of that were venture capital, private equity, and hedge funds. The thing with private equity is that because rates were zero, they had an infinite amount of borrowing capacity, had very little downside to them, and so they were able to manufacture returns much faster than venture capital and hedge funds could.

于是最初定义这个资产类别的人赚得盆满钵满，随后大批跟风者涌入，想着'他们能做到，我也行'。起初一切顺利。但最终总会出现滞后者的大量涌入——正是这些滞后者导致回报率骤降，因为他们开始溢价收购资产，对所持资产管理不善或疏于管理。目前私募股权已成为改善60/40投资组合的稳定渠道。

So as a result, you had an initial group of people that were defining the asset class, making a ton of money, and then you had all these fast followers that said, well, if they're doing it, I can do it too. So far, so good. But then always what happens is then you have this flood of laggards that just flood the zone, and it's these laggards that make it very difficult to generate returns because they start overpaying for assets. They start mismanaging and undermanaging the assets that they do own. And so where we are is that private equity has seen a very consistent way of returning money to help improve that sixty forty portfolio.

这导致资金大量涌入，但也引发激烈竞争。杰森，这就是你看到曲棍球杆式增长曲线的原因。无论哪种资产类别，只要出现这种曲线，回报率终将归零。

As a result, they got a lot of money, but then that created a lot of competition. And so that's why you see this hockey stick graph, Jason. And when you see that kind of graph Yeah. It doesn't matter what asset class it is. The returns go to zero.

我们在风投领域见证过，在对冲基金行业目睹过，现在私募股权也将重蹈覆辙。

And so we've seen this in venture capital. We've seen this in hedge funds, and we're now gonna see this in private equity.

沙马尔，按你的说法，资金过度涌入意味着...

Too much money going in, to be clear what you're saying, Shamal, means you kind of

问题就在这里，对吧？没有回报可言。所以，我再次强调，在任何另类资产类别中，只有一个关键问题你必须始终询问：你们的资金分配情况如何？

Well, there's just it. Right? No there's no returns. And so, again, I've said in any of these alternative asset classes, there is only one thing you should always ask if you had to have one critical question. What are your distributions?

别给我看内部收益率（IRR）。我要看的是实收资本分配率（DPI）。如果答案是零，那么这个资产类别就存在严重问题。私募股权领域过去四五年间，资金分配确实寥寥无几。

Don't show me your IRR. What is your DPI? The distributions on your paid in capital. And if the answer is zero, then it is a very challenged asset class. And what I will tell you in private equity is that over the last four or five years, distributions have been few and far between.

我认为资金将会撤离私募股权领域，集中流向少数真正专业的公司。比如银湖资本，过去十五到二十年间他们实现了数百亿美元的资金分配，堪称运营典范。他们成功运作过多个大型收购案。私募股权需要经历这样的洗牌——资金最终会流向何处？

So I think what's gonna happen is that the money is gonna come out of private equity, and it's gonna get concentrated into the few companies that know what they're doing, of which Silver Lake has generated over, you know, the last fifteen, twenty years tens and tens of billions of dollars of distributions. They are just an exceptionally well run organization. They've done these huge buyout deals successfully before. So we need to go through that in PE. Where does the money go?

资金已经悄然流入私募信贷领域，这正是下一个正在形成的大泡沫，就像你刚才展示的图表那样。

The money's already leaked into private credit, which is the next big bubble that's building. It looks like this chart that you just showed.

就是向企业发放贷款。这非常有意思，因为你指出了一个关键现象。私募股权领域现在盛行延续基金，这种模式正在向风投领域蔓延。最近我不断收到延续基金的推介，基本套路是...

Which is loaning businesses money. You know, it's super interesting because you make such a good point. What we're seeing in private equity is these continuation funds. Now continuation funds are coming to moth to venture. So I've been getting pitched on these continuation funds where, like, hey.

把所有资产打包卖给新投资者，重新设定时钟，这样就永远不需要退出。好消息是去年我们看到了更多私募公司股权的交易活动，二级市场比如Freeburg正在强势回归。但我确实担忧这些延续基金，本质上只是把资产从左口袋挪到右口袋。我们需要一个健康的IPO市场——现在的IPO市场状况如何评价？

Take all your assets, sell it to a new group of people, and then reset the clock, and then there's never an exit. The good news is, I will say the last year, we've seen a lot more activity for shares of our companies that are still private, so the secondary market, Freeburg, is coming back in a major way. But I do get worried about these continuation funds because now you're just moving an asset from one class to the other, and we need to have a functioning IPO market. How functioning is the IPO market today would we say?

完全失灵了。

It's completely dysfunctional.

IPO市场有多不健康？让我换个说法。我们是否需要纠正这个问题？如果这涉及到你们的新SPAC。

How dysfunctional is the IPO market? Let me say it another way. And and Well, we have to do we correct that? And if this leads into your new SPAC.

听着。上市有三种途径。传统IPO、直接上市，以及反向并购或SPAC。直到2018年我推出IPO A之前，我想第一种方式几乎是唯一选择。

Look. There are three ways to go public. There's the traditional way IPO. There's the direct listing, and then there's the reverse merger or the SPAC. Up until I floated IPO A in 2018, I think it was, the first way was really the only way.

我参与过Slack和Coinbase两次直接上市。从中我了解到，这种方式与传统IPO有着同样的不确定性。传统IPO中，你找投行承销，他们充当看门人角色，收取6%到8%的费用。

I was involved in two direct listings, Slack and Coinbase. And in both of those, what I learned is that you know, it has the same vagaries as the traditional IPO. So in the traditional IPO, you go to a bank. They underwrite you. They act as a gatekeeper, and they take six, seven, 8% fees as a result.

然后他们将本质上被低估的股票配售给优质客户。接着你会看到首日暴涨，可能持续两三天。这些客户往往会抛售，股价随后逐渐下跌。所以IPO成本高昂且通常定价失准。直接上市则呈现不同态势——首笔交易总是最高价，之后直线下跌。

And then they allocate what is essentially underpriced stock to their best customers. Then you see a one day pop, maybe a two or three day pop. All of those customers tend to unload, and then the stock tends to drift down. So the IPO is expensive, and it typically is mispriced. The direct listing, you have a different dynamic, which is the first trade is always the highest trade, and then it just goes straight down.

Slack和Coinbase都出现了这种情况。

That happened with Slack, and it happened with Coinbase.

Slack应该也属于这个情况。是的。

With Slack would be in that group as well. Yeah.

没错。记得Slack那次，我持仓浮亏十亿美元，当时就想绝不能再犯。所以Coinbase上市时，我首日就抛售了。还发信息给Brian说：这并非对公司前景的判断。

Yeah. With Slack, I remember, like, I I was, like, off side a billion dollars, and I was like, well, I'm never letting this happen again. And so when I had the Coinbase thing, I sold it the first day. And I texted Brian. I said, this is not a directional indication of your company.

这是直接上市的动态机制，因为我吃过苦头才明白，最佳抛售时机就是上市首日。那么SPAC（特殊目的收购公司）在其中扮演什么角色？特别是在我现在打磨推行的2.0版本中，我认为它正在打造一个极具竞争力的工具——能让巨额资金涌入这些私营企业，以极低的资本成本助其上市。这种模式应该相当具有吸引力。

It's the dynamics of the direct listing because I learned it the hard way that the time to sell is on day one. So where does the SPAC come in? You know, especially now in version two, version two being the the thing that I have been tinkering and refining with and am trying to push in in this new version, I think that it's creating an incredibly competitive vehicle where you can have a ton of money go into these private companies, take them public at a very, very low cost of capital. And I think that that should be very enticing.

你们已完成融资。能否分享一下路演募资时的见闻？投资者反馈如何？

So you closed your financing. Can you just tell us what the capital raise was like as you went out and met with folks? What'd you hear?

尼克，你或许能找到那张猛禽发动机的示意图？

Yeah. So, you know, Nick, maybe you can find it. You know that image of the Raptor engines?

是的。从极度复杂到极致简约的典范。

Yes. Super complex to being elegantly simple.

尼克，能否把那张图调出来？我想说的是，作为SPAC 1.0时代的先行者，我们经历过不少失败案例，过程很复杂。但它确实成功了——虽然有哑弹，但也有漂亮的试射成功。

Yeah. Nick, can you can you maybe just throw that up? What I would say is, like, SPAC one point o, of which I was, you know, right in the front of the parade, had a bunch of misfires, and it was complicated. But it worked. There were some hot fires that worked, but then there were some clear misfires.

这一切都是为了证明能打造出与传统IPO抗衡的新模式。说实话，最让我自豪的是，我几乎单枪匹马地让这种融资工具成为主流——至今已为美国企业募集超过152.1万亿美元。这对美国资本市场意义重大，我们在践行'美国卓越精神'方面创造的成就，就是猛禽2.0引擎。

And the whole point was to prove that you could create a competitive alternative to the IPO. The thing that I'm the most proud of, quite honestly, is for all intents and purposes, I started a normalization of this vehicle that's now raised more than a $152,100,000,000,000 dollars for American companies. I am very proud of them. That's an important thing for the American capital markets. I think what we did in American exceptionalism is raptor two.

虽然尚未完美，但确实改进了初代猛禽的缺陷，特别是薪酬激励体系。投资者看到方案后非常兴奋——他们渴望一个能让更多美国企业上市、实现全民持股的竞争性IPO市场，喜欢这种透明机制，更欣赏'只有真正成功才能获得报酬'的新激励模式。

It's not yet perfect, but I do think it tries to improve on the things that I noticed was not working in raptor one. And in that is a lot of the compensation and incentives. And so when I showed that to investors, they were quite excited. I think that they want a competitive IPO market that brings many, many American businesses to the public market so that they can be owned by everybody, the transparency they like, and the fact that the incentives are such now where there's absolutely no compensation unless this thing really works.

历史上，他们通常以每股11.50美元的行权价获得公司认股权证，这比股票发行价高出15%。

And historically, they received warrants in the company typically with a strike price of $11.50, so 15% above the issue price of the stock.

还有创始人股份

And founder shares

基本上就是创始人股份。但你们有没有收到他们的反馈说，嘿，我们也想要些认股权证，需要点额外激励？好像他们对此有所期待？

that were basically And there was founder shares. But, like, did you have a reaction from them saying, hey. We want some warrants. We we need a little extra kicker here. Like, there's some sort of desire for that?

没有，事实恰恰相反。我认为这些机构投资者——本次融资中98.7%的资金都来自他们——都是顶尖中的顶尖。你知道他们的分量。每家都是蓝筹级A+机构投资者，他们真正想要的是优质企业。

No. In fact, was the opposite. I think that the institutional investors and, you know, my investors in this, 98.7 of the capital was allocated to these guys, are the best of the best. You you know who they are. So they're every single blue chip a plus institutional investor, and what they wanted was great companies.

他们希望优秀企业上市。原因就像弗里德里希之前提到的：好公司上市后，通过公开市场募资的规模及后续增长空间，远非私有化时期可比。所以他们追求的是让优质企业以最简单、最经济的方式上市。

They want great companies to be public. And the reason is the thing that Friedrich, I think you mentioned this before. When a good company gets public, the amount of money that they can raise in the publics and then the amount of growth that they have in the publics far outclasses what they'll ever do as a private company. And so they want the simplest and cheapest way of great businesses to get out.

贾马尔，你认为在找到合并伙伴时，传统SPAC会同步宣布合并与PIPE融资——新投资者通过PIPE为交易估值背书，表明他们认可这个价格才注资。历史上PIPE都是普通股形式，相当于对价格的认可。第一，你预计这次交易还会同步进行PIPE融资吗？第二，你认为会采用普通股PIPE形式吗？因为SPAC热潮退去后，为了促成交易，PIPE开始采用可转换优先证券。

Jamal, do you think that the transaction when you find a merger partner, the traditional SPAC has been announced as a merger concurrent with a pipe being done where new investors are underwriting the valuation of the deal and saying, we like this company at this price because we are now gonna write money in in the form of a pipe. And historically, the pipe was for common shares, so it kind of was like, this is a good price and everyone felt good about it. Number one, do you anticipate that there'll still be a pipe being done and concurrent with the merger in this transaction? And then number two is do you think it'll look like a common pipe? Because after the SPAC frenzy died down, in order to get deals done, the pipe started to get done with convertible preferred securities.

这些证券优先级高于普通股，几乎像债务。你认为会如何发展？毕竟很久没有出现过SPAC宣布合并后仅通过普通股PIPE融资的纯粹案例了。

So they were senior to common and they almost were like debt. How do you think this is gonna play out? Because a clean deal has not happened in quite some time where a SPAC has announced a merger and simply raised money via common in the form of a pipe?

这是个很好的问题。我认为关键在于底层资产，但有些优秀的私有企业一旦上市，将能够吸引常规管道资本。未来或许只是预测和猜测。在这个组合中，'猛禽三号'会是什么样子？我想它会是这样一种模式：像我这样的发起人将所有资产整合成一个整体，从一开始就预先配置好，我将直接对接10亿、20亿、30亿等灵活资本，它们可以作为常规资本进入，从而形成一个完全预制、定价公允的IPO。

It's a great question. I think it comes down to the underlying asset, but there are some incredible companies that are private that if they go public will be able to demand common pipe capital. I think that the future may be just prognosticating and guessing. What does raptor three look like in this pack? I think the raptor three will look like where somebody, a sponsor like me, rolls everything up into one thing so that it's already prewired from the beginning, where I'll just speak to a billion, 2,000,000,000, 3,000,000,000, whatever it is, flexible capital that can come in as common so that it's a totally prebaked IPO at a very fair price.

我认为这就是SPAC的'猛禽三号'版本应有的形态。

I think that I think that that's what the raptor three version of a SPAC will look like.

所以需要更多资本，然后他们完全信任并依赖发起人来运作交易。

So more capital, and then they they put their full trust and faith in the sponsor to run the deal.

不，不是这样。这意味着不存在转换风险，所有资金从一开始就直接到位。

Well, no. Then meaning then there's no conversion risk, that all the money comes over right from data.

直接到位。对。

Comes over. Right.

所以

And so

那么你必须全身心投入其中。

then you have to fully commit in.

是的。你将薪酬设定得有点像埃隆那样，作为赞助方，根据股票价格达到某些里程碑时获取报酬，如果我理解正确的话，查马斯。

Yeah. You set your compensation to be a a bit Elon like in terms of your compensation as the sponsor comes, if I read it correctly, Chamath, when it hits certain milestones in terms of share price.

没错。除非股价上涨50%，否则一分钱也拿不到。是的。然后在50%时有一档，当股价上涨75%时，还有另一档。

Yeah. Nothing can be earned unless the stock is up 50%. Yeah. And then there's a tranche at 50. Then when the stock is up 75%, there's another tranche.

而当股票是 而且没有

And when the stock is And there's no

交易中有创始人认股权证吗，还是没有创始人认股权证？

founder warrants in the deal, or there are founder there's no founder warrants?

没有。我认为这很棒。你知道，我被问及，

Nothing. I think this is great. You know, I I was asked, by

顺便说一下，我们的。

the way, of ours.

之所以这很重要，是因为你们提到的所有这些都会增加创始人、私人公司董事会和员工的资本成本。这些都是不必要的稀释。所以现在我们把这些都去掉了。

The reason the reason why this is important is all of those things that you guys mentioned increases the cost of capital to the founder and to the private company board and to the employees. All that's unnecessary dilution. So now we take it all off the table.

是的，聪明。当时我的观察，不仅针对你收集的1.0时代的SPACs，而是普遍适用于所有这类公司。我试图向我们的联合成员、投资者以及CEO们解释这一点，因为我的许多CEO都在问：我们应该做SPAC吗？其中一家公司Desktop Metal确实这么做了。这感觉就像风险投资。

Yeah. Smart. The thing I you know, the observation I had at the time, not just for your collection of SPACs in the one point o era, but just all of them in general, and I tried to explain this to our syndicate members and investors as well as the CEOs because a lot of my CEOs were like, should we do a SPAC? And one of them, Desktop Metal, did. This felt like venture investing.

而且，你看看Opendoor、Virgin Galactic、Joby（我认为这不是你的）、SoFi、MP Materials这些公司，你必须这样看待：如果这是风险型投资，80%的收益来自20%的项目，剩下的80%则要为此买单。人们当时看待这些公司就像看待Netflix一样，却没有考虑到它们所处的阶段。

And, you know, if you look at Opendoor, Virgin Galactic, Joby, which I don't think was one of yours, SoFi, MP Materials, all of these companies, you you have to look at it. If it is a venture type investment, 80% of venture goes to 20% pays up for the other. 80%. I think people were looking at this like it was Netflix, and they were not thinking of these companies and the stages they were

说到这个——我能插一句吗？好的。

at. Well Can I just say something? Yeah.

不如这样，然后我会抛出一个问题。因为SoFi和MP Materials表现非常出色。在你将要筛选的这类公司中，会是同样早期阶段的，还是你更倾向于收入更稳健、更可预测的，我们可以称之为韧性收入，或者更抗压的收入？

Why don't and then I'll I'll drop it to a question. Because SoFi and MP Materials, they did extraordinary. So in this class of companies you're gonna be taking out, is it gonna be the same early stage, or are you thinking more robust, more predictable revenue, let's call it resilient revenue, maybe, rugged revenue?

我认为是后者，但同样重要的是要注意，这次我尽量减少了零售投资者的参与。我认为目前零售投资者并不适合接触这些。我真诚的建议是，也许不是所有SPACs，但绝对要避开我的SPAC。我认为机构方有足够的流动性让我们进行有趣的交易，但这符合我们的投资组合和构建方式，这是一个完全不同的风险模型。

I think it's the latter, but I think it's also important to note that this time around, I've tried to really minimize retail exposure to this. I don't think that retail is well suited right now to have these things. And what my my honest advice is avoid maybe not all SPACs, but definitely my SPAC. Just avoid it. I think that there is more than enough liquidity on the institutional side for us to do an interesting deal, but it fits in our portfolio and our construction, which is a very different risk model.

所以我非常不希望看到人们在不真正理解风险的情况下冒险，因为Jason，你无法预测市场。你不知道这些公司会走向何方。

And so I would hate that, you know, people are out on the risk curve without really understanding the risks because, Jason, you can't predict the market. You don't know where these things are gonna go.

是的。我是说，Desktop Metal和3D打印，这是非常前沿的新兴技术。这些公司本应该再保持私有状态几年，或者投资者需要明白：你现在扮演的是风险投资家的角色，这意味着回报模式和投资组合管理方式与投资Netflix、Nvidia或其他上市公司截然不同。

Yeah. I mean, desktop metal and three d printing, this is like a very cutting edge nascent technology. Companies should have stayed private a couple more years or people investing it need to understand. You're you're now acting like a venture capitalist, which means the return profile and how the portfolio management works is distinctly different than doing Netflix and Nvidia and whatever other publicly traded companies.

我只想说别投资这些东西。至少不要，你懂的，就是别碰

I would just say do do not invest in these things. Don't at at least, you know, just

我认为你们这些聪明人自会判断。我知道你本意并非如此，但当你劝退别人时，我

I think you're just as smart people to do it. I know that's not your intent, but when you when you say don't do it, I

觉得你在犯蠢。我我我实话实说。别干这事。不行。绝对不行。

think you're stupid. I I I'm being very honest. Don't do it. No. No.

我明白。除非SPACs占比低于你投资组合的1%，否则别买。这是我的建议。

I know. Don't buy SPACs unless it's, like, less than 1% of your portfolio. Would be my advice.

在继续之前，我能插句话吗？我想让你们了解下私募股权的情况，因为Chamath提到私募规模很大。但要注意EA私有化这个案例——我们讨论过AI赋能EA转型的主题。而Jared的兄弟Josh在Thrive正通过收购CPA会计师事务所进行整合，并运用AI重塑业务模式。

Before we move on, can I just make one comment? And I'd like your guys to know about the private equity stuff because Chamath made a comment that private equity is big. But I think one of the things to take note of in this take private of EA, and we talked about it as the theme of AI empowering EA to kind of transform the business. And Jared's brother, Josh, has at Thrive been executing a roll up of CPA accounting firms that he's been applying AI to to reinvent that business.

哦，真的吗？那我得联系他，我们投资了一家叫taxgpt.com的公司，专门为会计师提供AI协作者，表现非常出色。

Oh, is he really? Yeah. Oh, I should talk to him because we have an investment in a company called taxgpt.com that is basically like copilots with AI for accountants that's doing spectacular.

他的做法是以EBITDA的倍数收购传统会计所，然后用AI改造业务创造新机遇。我认为这是历史上少数能真正跑赢市场的机会——如果你能精选那些受益于AI战略的上市公司。在这些竞争激烈、商品化严重的成熟市场里，企业很难在产品服务或单位经济上做出差异化。但AI具有颠覆性力量，几乎能重塑每个行业的潜力。作为公开市场投资者，若能识别这类机会，选择具备合适管理团队来执行战略的公司，就能赚到大钱。

So what he's done is he's bought these kind of traditional accounting firms at some multiple of EBITDA, and then he can transform the business with AI and really create a new opportunity. And and I've said, like, I think this is one of those few moments in history where there really is an opportunity to beat the market and make money in the public markets if you can be thoughtful and selective about the companies that stand to benefit from an AI execution strategy. Because in all of these traditional kind of markets where you have competition, everything's commoditized and the market is mature, it's very hard for any of these players to differentiate product, service, and obviously, you know, unit economics. But with AI, it's completely transformative and has transformed its potential in nearly every industry. So as a public market investor, if you can identify those opportunities, select them where the management team has the right leadership in place to execute against this, you could make real money.

问题在于，这些公司大多由不懂人工智能或软件优先理念的人领导。因此我认为存在更多收购机会，但规模不会达到550亿美元那么庞大。

The problem is most of these companies are not led by folks that understand AI or a software first. And so I think there's an opportunity for more buyouts. They're not gonna be of the $55,000,000,000 scale.

实际情况比这更糟。

It's worse than that.

具体指什么？

In what sense?

我们8090资本与所有大型私募股权公司都打过交道。流程总是如出一辙：合伙人很热衷，因为他们盯着最低限度的分红，这些公司在多数情况下属于良好但非顶尖，他们希望通过提升EBITDA和业绩来转售或升级。

So we, at 8090, have done the dance with all the big major private equity firms. And here's how it goes. It always goes the same way. The partners love it because they're looking at minimal distributions, companies that are like good but not great in many cases, and they wanna see improvements to EBITDA and performance so that they can either sell them or move them up.

所以你的意思是...你们已经全面考察过他们的投资组合了？全部？对，全部。包括他们现有的投资组合公司。

And you're sorry. You're saying you've looked at this you've looked at this with their portfolio All of them. Yeah. All of them. With their existing portfolio companies.

明白了。嗯。

Okay. Yep.

普通合伙人会觉得这主意绝妙，应该实施。然后他们会扔给你几家公司去洽谈。实话告诉你，私募投资组合里最常见的就是二流公司配三流管理者。

The GPs are like, this is genius. We should do it. Then they're like, here's a handful of companies to go talk to. And I'll be really honest with you. What you find in most private equity portfolios are b and c companies run by c and d folks.

是的。因此他们去接受这一点的能力几乎为零。所以如果我看看我的客户分布和集中度，在八十、九十，好吧，年收入已经达到九位数，正在处理一笔34亿美元的交易，好吧，没有一分钱来自私募股权公司。尽管我们最初花了很多时间试图向他们推销，试图推销我们的软件工厂，试图向他们推销业务。这真的很难。

Yes. And so the ability for them to go and embrace this is basically next to none. So if I look at my customer distribution and concentration at eighty, ninety, okay, run rating into nine figures already, working on a $3,400,000,000 deal, okay, not a single dollar comes from a private equity firm. Although we spent initially a lot of time trying to sell it, trying to sell our software factory, and trying to sell work into them. It's really hard.

正如你之前说的，弗里德伯格，这些企业中的人员激励与AI成果是错位的。对吧。而且你不能解雇这些人。我也不认为正确的做法是解雇他们。所以我不知道正确的答案是什么。

And it's what you said before, Friedberg, which is the people incentives at these businesses are misaligned to the AI outcome. Right. And you can't fire these people. And I don't think the right answer is to fire them. So I don't know what the right answer is.

这就是为什么我认为私募股权非常具有挑战性。

This is why I think private equity is very challenging.

你必须找到

You have to find

你是否

Do you

认为存在一种权力流失的情况，也许公开市场中的少数投资者和私募市场中的少数投资者能够识别并安排合适的人员来执行这些策略，就像乔希正在尝试做的那样

think there's a power loss situation where perhaps a handful of investors in the public markets and perhaps a handful of investors in the private markets can identify and then put the right people in place and execute against these strategies like Josh is trying to do with

他的 嗯，我认为乔希很聪明，所以我觉得不管怎样乔希都能解决。我想说的是，如果我能向你展示二三十个客户、大量收入、所有这些显示上升空间的白皮书，却仍然无法在其中一家公司内部实现目标，我认为问题不在我们，而在他们。

his Well, think Josh is smart, so I think Josh will figure it out no matter what. What I'm saying is if I can show you twenty, thirty customers a ton of revenue, all these white papers that show upside, and I still can't get it done inside one of these companies, I think it's not us. It's them.

没错。所以传统私募股权本身也不必然这么做，这或许引出一个问题：是否存在一种新型私募股权能实现这一点？也许这是个机会。就像乔希展示的那样。对吧？

Right. So it's not inherent in traditional private equity to do this either, which maybe begs the question, is there a new kind of private equity that can execute this? Maybe that's an opportunity. Like like Josh is showing. Right?

就像，他作为风险投资者正在执行私募股权策略，或许这就是未来的玩法。

Like, he's he's a venture investor that's executing a private equity strategy, and maybe that becomes the play.

我认为如果运作顺利，我们最大的两个客户是拥有企业的百亿级个人富豪，他们会说'你们正在做这个'。

I think if this works well, two of our biggest customers are individual deca billionaires who own businesses, and they're like, you're doing this.

嗯。

Mhmm.

所以如果乔希更接近那种情况——即完全拥有企业所有权并决定'你要这么做'，那么我认为就能成功。

So to the extent that Josh looks more like that, which is an owner of a 100% of the business where it's like, you're gonna do it, then I think it can work. I

我觉得这类似于沙特模式。我认为

think That's like Saudis. I think

业主经营模式是真正实现AI转型的唯一途径。而另一个极端，是公开市场的CEO们意识到必须采取实质行动，否则就会失业或被颠覆。目前我觉得只有这两类人处于主动状态，其他所有人都在逃避现实。

the owner operated model is the only way the AI transformation really works. And then the the other end of the spectrum, it's the public's market CEO who realizes that they have to do something real because they'll otherwise lose their job or they'll be disrupted. Those are the two cohorts that I feel today are on their forward foot. Everybody else is, like, sticking their head in the sand.

就在EA方面，我忘了问你。德米斯爵士，我的希腊兄弟，他不是展示过这个

Just on the EA front, I I forgot to ask you. Sir Demis, my Greek brother, didn't he show a this

这就是全部

is all the

总是希腊人把这些事情搞定。

always the Greeks who get these things done.

是啊。

Yeah.

他不是展示过那种能创造无限游戏的三维引擎吗？

Didn't he show, like, the three d engine that would make, like, infinite games?

对。其实那不是传统三维引擎。这是一类AI模型，能渲染出类似三维世界的体验效果，但它没有传统的物体渲染引擎底层架构，也没有传统三维物理引擎。所以这是一种体验虚拟世界交互系统的新方式，目前有几家初创公司在做。

Yeah. So it's not actually a three d engine. It's a class of these AI models that can render what it's what the experience is looks like and feels like a three d world, but it doesn't have an underlying kind of traditional object rendering engine. It doesn't have a traditional three d physics engine. So it's a new way of experiencing these kind of world interaction systems, And there's several startups.

我记得那位斯坦福AI教授叫Fei Fei。

I think Fei Fei is her name, the Stanford AI professor.

一。是的。

One. Yeah.

她拥有一家这样的公司。那是一家虚拟世界公司，具备

And she has one of these. That's a virtual worlds company that has

相同的原则。我向布罗姆伯格和亚历克斯详细询问过这个问题

the same principle. I asked Bromberg and Alex about exactly this

在晚餐时。他们怎么看？

at dinner. What was their take?

是的。他说要让这些东西真正成为像Unity那样规模的合法引擎，并达到所需游戏质量的标准，实在是极其困难。

Yeah. He said it's just really, really hard to get these things to actually be legitimate engines at the scale of what Unity offers for the quality of game that needs to be made for it to work.

过渡阶段将是其中的资产由AI创建。我看到很多初创公司都在这么做。比如你想创造一个角色，你投放的角色都是实时生成的。

The interim step is gonna be the assets in it are created by AI. That's what I've seen a lot of startups doing. So you wanna make a character, you know, you're dropping characters That's exactly done in real time.

我认为你说得完全正确。整个体系是UniFi和Unity作为渲染引擎，AI位于其上，AI基本上能渲染物体、概念、结构，以及你作为工程师通常需要提供给Unity或UniFi三维引擎的指导方向。这将不仅解锁视频游戏领域，还包括电影行业。你百分之百正确

I think I think you're exactly right. The the whole thing is UniFi and Unity as rendering engine and the AI sits on top and the AI basically can render objects, can render concepts, can render structure, can render the direction that you as an engineer would typically provide to the to the Unity or UniFi three d engine. And that's gonna unlock not just in video games, but also in film You're 100%

没错。我能举个例子吗？昨天，在我们群聊里，一群人分享了Sora The Slop应用。对，我昨天就下载了想玩玩看。

right. Can I tell you an example? Yesterday, there was you know, in our group chat, a bunch of people sent around the Sora The Slop app. Yeah. And I downloaded it just to play with Sora yesterday.

第一个跳出来的视频正是这个。像是ATP网球比赛，对。画面里有个男人的脸，想象成你，然后在对战费德勒。我当时就想，如果他是和朋友对战，那不就是真正的电子游戏了吗？正如你所说，这样就能绕过所有IP授权审查的障碍，更快产出优质游戏和内容。

And the first video that came up was exactly this. It was like a ATP tennis match Yeah. Where it was a guy's face, the guy, like, imagine you, and then playing against like a Federer. And then I thought, well, what if he was playing against his friend and that was the actual video game? To your point, you you get away from all this IP licensing gatekeeping stuff, and you can just get to good games faster, good content faster.

这个思路很对。根据对手水平动态调整难度，让你不会遇到完全碾压你的对手。每次对战进步5%，它就会让你进步4%，始终保持恰到好处的挑战性。这样你不会放弃，还能持续学习。

Think that's right. Adaptive in terms of the competition, so you're not playing somebody who's gonna just dominate you. Just get 5% better every time you play it. You'll get 4% better, and it'll just make it perfectly challenging. So you don't quit, and you'll learn as you go.

这确实会变得非常有趣

This is really gonna be an interesting

新世界。同样的情况也会出现在内容创作领域，J.Cal。比如你制作短视频和电影，那些互动量高的作品会让AI提示系统不断优化，最终生成出更优质的

new world. The same will exist in, like, content, J. Cal. Like, you'll make shorts and films and then the ones that have the most engagement, the AI prompting system will get better and better and ultimately will yield, like, you know, bits of content that

内容片段。你可以在《星球

people You can see that happen with Star

大战》或漫威宇宙里看到这种趋势——如果突然银影侠让你感兴趣，或者阿索卡·塔诺吸引了你，系统就会扩展那个世界线或深化角色背景故事。这种体验会非常

Wars or Marvel if all of a sudden Silver Surfer is an interesting character to you or Ashoka Tano is interesting to you, it'll sort of make that world or enhance that character and tell you more of their backstory. And that can be really interesting as a

你怎么能坐在座位上嘲笑我，叫我书呆子，却连这个星球大战角色的名字都知道。我甚至不知道你们在说谁。

How you can sit in your seat and, like, make fun of me, call me a nerd, and you actually know the name of this Star Wars character. I don't even know who's talking about.

重要角色。阿索卡是安纳金·天行者的学徒。她是个非常重要的角色。如果你看过克隆人战争，就会知道。那部贯穿剧情的动画系列——

Important character. Ashoka is Anakin Skywalker's padawan. She's a very important character. If you watch the clone wars, you would know this. The animated series that threads through the

你刚才是先对你说的吗？哦。

you said first to you? Oh.

其实你应该看看克隆人战争。这才是最佳选择。哦，看看谁来了。大卫·萨克斯在这儿呢。你是从哪儿冒出来的？刚才是在小船上还是怎么？

Well, actually watch the clone wars. Way you best, actually. Oh, look who dropped in. Oh, David Saxe is here. Did you get out of your were you in a skiff or something?

怎么了，沙皇？

What's going on, czar?

我刚开完几个会议，不过其实没有。我只是在买几个域名。

I was in some meetings, but actually, no. I was just buying some domain names.

哦，是吗？你买到mohalo.com了吗？

Oh, you are? Did you get mohalo.com?

比如，嗯，以100万美元的优惠价格买下了Mohalo。

Like, well, got mohalo for the bargain price of $1,000,000.

我是说，它就值这个价。去mohalo.com看看。我标价一百万出售。我是说，它

I mean, that's what it's worth. Go to mohalo.com. I'm selling it for a million. I mean, it's

你是认真的吗？

Are you real?

这个词在字典里。没错。我有些旧资产。应该让别人来用它们。我还有begin.com，我可能会与Mahalo的某个大合作伙伴一起开发这个项目。

It's in the dictionary. Yeah. I have some old assets. Somebody else should use them. I just I have begin.com, and I'm gonna be working on that in partnership probably with one of the largest with Mahalo.

我可以用股权置换跟你交易。我给你

I might give you an equity swap for that. I'll give you a

Mahalo是夏威夷语中仅次于aloha的第二重要词汇。等等，我

Mahalo is the second most important name in the second most important word after aloha in the Hawaiian language. Wait. I'm

确定我是

sure I'm

惊讶贝尼奥夫还没试着向你开口要呢。

surprised Benioff hasn't tried to ask you for Yeah.

知道吗？他向来如此。

You know what? He always do.

刚才正和贝尼奥夫发短信。

Was just texting with Benioff.

就当礼物送他吧，老兄。他人不错，直接给他

Give it to him as a gift, dude. He's a great guy. Just give it

吧。把Mahalo.com给他，只要他每年让我在夏威夷的度假村住四周

to him. Give him the I will give Benioff mahalo dot com, if he gives me four weeks in one of his Hawaii resorts per year

持续二十年。他会答应的。哦，二十年？天啊。

for the next twenty. He would do that. Oh, for the next twenty? Oh my gosh.

想象一下拥有个杰克

Imagine having a jake

外出八十周。天啊。作为一个

out for eighty weeks. Oh my god. As a

房子 J Cal

house J Cal

作为房客待了八十周。他可能

for eighty weeks as a house guest. He could

会在那里。他可能会在那里。这没关系。

be there. He could be there. It doesn't matter.

我会给他的

I'm I'll give him

钱让他买下来。别担心。他会买的。

the money so he buys it. Don't worry. He'll buy it.

确实能减免税基，这样你就可以享受税务减免。

Does knock off the foundation, then you can take a tax write off.

看看大家的反应，当我有点东西要卖的时候，节目里净资产最低的家伙，当我正努力还清我的飞机贷款，你们却都在批评。为什么我就不能分一杯羹？我可是得了飞机中毒症。

Look at everybody's when I have something to sell, the guy with the lowest net worth on the program, when I'm trying to pay off my jet, you guys all have criticism. How come I can't wet my beak? I got jet poisoning.

我要问你个严肃的问题。你在Mahalo有投资人吧？

Gonna ask you a serious question. So you had investors in Mahalo. Right?

是的。

Yes.

我猜你是说他们。这是他们的地盘。

And I assume you go mean. This is their domain.

哦，这是

Oh, it's

去找他们。

go to them.

哦，那会的。哦，好吧。是的。

Oh, so it will. Oh, okay. Yeah.

我们会去找那些投资者。

We'll go to those investors.

你们在清偿优先清算权吗？

You're paying off liquidation preference?

没错。哦，好的。我们就坐在这里等着。

Correct. Oh, okay. We're just sitting there.

所以现在我不是亏损100%，而是亏损99.1%。

So now instead of losing a 100%, I'll lose 99.1%.

差不多是这样。创业就是很难，各位。但我拥有begin.com这个域名，一直在与人交流。要知道，Mahalo最初是个人工搜索引擎，类似维基百科——这个我们稍后会谈到。我的构想是打造像韩国Naver或Daum那样的综合搜索服务，我见过它们的运作模式。

Something like that. It's just startups are hard, folks. But I have the begin.com, and I've been talking to folks. I you know, I Mahalo was originally a human powered search engine like Wikipedia, which we're about to get to. And my concept was to do comprehensive search like naver.com or Daum in Korea had seen those services.

是啊。结果却是

Yeah. And it turned out

和现在的Perplexity一模一样，但当时我们测试了机器学习——那时候我们管这叫人工智能——根本行不通。所以我们试图手工整理搜索结果，再用计算机生成的算法结果作补充，可那时技术不成熟。现在我想用begin.com再做些事情，对这个域名真的充满期待。好了。

to be exactly like Perplexity, but at the time, we we tested machine learning, which is what we called AI back then, and it just didn't work. So we were trying to hand roll search results and then back them up with, you know, computer generated ones, algorithmically generated ones, but the tech wasn't there now. But I wanna do something again with begin.com. I'm really excited about that domain name. Alright.

听着，我们提到了Slop。让我们深入探讨一下。两周内这里出现了两个Slop应用。没有双关的意思。

Listen. We brought up Slop. Let's get into it. Two Slop apps in a fortnight here. No pun intended.

扎克和公牛萨米都发布了《公牛》。公牛。

Zuck and Sammy the bull have both released The bull. The bull.

格拉瓦诺。多么深奥的公牛。公牛萨米·格拉瓦诺。

Gravano. What a deep bull. Sammy the bull Gravano.

好了。来看看Sora。客观来说非常令人印象深刻。这是山姆·奥特曼。人们不知道在他职业生涯早期，当他刚开始OpenAI时，还没有埃隆的资金支持。

There we go. And here's a look at Sora. It's objectively extremely impressive. Here's Sam Altman. People don't know this early in his career when he was starting OpenAI, didn't have the money from Elon.

这是山姆·奥特曼偷了一台h100。这也是山姆·奥特曼。这是他在1月6日冲击国会大厦的时候。这是他在谷歌工作的时候。是的。

And here's Sam Altman stealing an h 100. Here's Sam Altman also. This is when he was storming the capital on January 6. Here he is at when he was working at Google. Yeah.

虽然有很多问题，但它确实很好，他们基本上承担了大量风险并解决了一些知识产权问题。众所周知，知识产权输出是大家认为需要非常谨慎的地方，否则会面临一堆诉讼。在这个应用上，你可以选择加入，让你的角色像山姆那样对所有人开放使用。所以这个让知名人士允许使用他们形象的概念，你可以选择加入，这相当聪明。你可以让你的朋友们基本上能制作你的视频，但其他人不行。

Lots of but it it's really good, and they are basically taking a ton of risk and solving some problems with IP. As we all know, the IP outputs is where people think you're gonna have to be really thoughtful or get a bunch of lawsuits. On this app, you can opt in and make your persona, like Sam did, available to everybody to use. So that whole concept of notable persons allowing their image to be used, you opt into that, And that's pretty clever. So you can let your and you can make it so your friends can, you know, basically make videos of you, but nobody else can.

这是一种深思熟虑的做法。然而，极具争议的是，这个东西包含了所有人的知识产权，如果你不想自己的知识产权被使用，你必须选择退出。这将给他们带来另一堆诉讼，加上《纽约时报》和Ziff Davis的诉讼，显然现在已经有很多和解了。Anthropic以15亿美元和解了他们关于书籍的纠纷。那么，有人用过这些工具了吗？大家怎么看？

It's it's a thoughtful way of doing it. However, very controversially, this thing had everybody's IP in it, and you have to opt out if you don't want your IP used. That's gonna get them another whole collection of lawsuits to go with the New York Times and Ziff Davis ones, and there have obviously been a bunch of settlements now. Anthropic settling their book thing for 1,500,000,000.0. So anybody play with these tools yet, and what do you think, folks?

那这些有什么意义呢？你觉得这是个TikTok的竞品吗，Chamam？

And what's the point of these? Do we think this is, a TikTok competitor, Chamam?

我是说，你觉得这只是回归训练数据的问题吗？你怎么看？最接近的是TikTok竞品，但我用过，觉得还行。不过，每当我第一次试用这些应用时，我牢记的是今天将是它最糟糕的状态。

Mean, do you think it's just way back to training data? What do you think? The closest thing is a TikTok competitor, but I I use it. I thought it was okay. But, again, the thing that I that I keep in mind whenever I try these apps for the first time is today is the worst it'll ever be.

确实。

Sure.

它只会越来越好。所以如果你看起点，不出一年，或许两年，这东西就会真正出色。它需要完善脚本，优化提示词，还要让用户操作更简便些。

It it only gets better from here. And so if you look at the starting point, it won't take but a year where this thing, I think or maybe two years where this thing is legitimately excellent. It has to get the scripting right. It has to get the prompting right. It has to be a little bit easier for you to use.

我用了很多提示词都被拒绝了，因为

There was a bunch of prompts that I used that were rejected by sore by

知识产权问题，对吧？

the IP. Right?

嗯，系统只说‘使用我’，但我无法验证‘我’就是我自己。所以他们

Well, it just said use me, but I couldn't validate that I was me. And so they

不会让你给自己拍照。目前这个应用有点笨拙，但你说得对，每个版本都会变得更好。扎克伯格推出的那个叫Vibes。我在看这些产品时，并不认为它旨在成为下一个伟大的社交媒体应用，更像是为了获取数据训练用户的数据策略。

wouldn't let take a picture of yourself. It's a it's a little clunky, the app right now, but you're right. It's gonna get better in each version. The one by Zuckerberg is called Vibes. I you know, I was looking at these sax, and I don't know that this is intended to be, like, the next great social media app as much as it's a data play to get folks to train data.

当你看到它们时，除了觉得有趣之外，你还有什么其他想法吗？是的。

When you see them, what are you any thoughts on them other than interesting? Yeah.

我还没试用过，所以很难评价。

I haven't played with it yet. So Oh. It's hard for me to say.

弗里德伯格，你有什么看法吗？就是

Friedberg, you got any thoughts on it? Just

不，我没有什么具体想法。我认为现在还处于早期阶段。确实存在一些我们今天都未充分考虑的新型媒体类别。正如我之前提到的，传统媒体是集中生产然后广泛消费的。

No. I I don't have like thoughts. I I think, you know, we're kind of early innings. I do think there's like new categories of media that none of us are really considering today. The traditional media, as I've mentioned in the past, is like centrally produced and then broadly consumed.

我认为将会出现的新型媒体模式，会创造新的商业类别或商业模式，以及全新的媒体类别，这些都将围绕分布式生产而非集中生产、分布式消费展开。这将极大改变现状，或许这会开始打开那扇门。

And I think that there's models of media that are gonna emerge that are gonna create new business categories or new business models and and also new media categories that are all about kind of distributed production and not necessarily, like, central production distributed consumption. So that that kinda changes things quite a bit, and I think maybe this is gonna start to open that door

一点点。其中一个

a bit. One of the

我曾思考过这个问题，过去也提到过，就像每个人都会制作自己的电影、电子游戏和音乐，但存在一种共享文化背景的概念。人们总想讨论诸如‘49人队这周末表现如何’或‘你们看了《青春物语》那部剧吗’这样的话题。我们渴望围绕共同的故事展开对话，这构成了社会互动和模因传播的基础。因此我认为，这些工具只是赋能的开端，真正的变革尚未显现——即如何让一个故事以分布式方式被消费，让每个人获得截然不同的体验？

things I because I thought about this, and I I mentioned this in the past where I'm like, everyone's gonna make their own movie, their own video game, their own music, but there is this notion of, like, shared cultural context. Like, everyone wants to talk about, you know, how did the 49ers do this weekend or did you guys see that show Adolescents? Did you guys like, we wanna have a conversation about some shared stories. That's the the basis of kind of societal interaction in memetics. So I think, like, there are elements of this being the beginning of the enabling tools, but I don't think we've actually seen what's gonna happen, which is how do you take one story and then create a distributed way of consuming that story where everyone experiences and consumes it differently?

所以我觉得这个概念就像——嘿，所有人都在调侃Sam，或者围绕Sam形成某种文化共识

So I do think, like, this notion, it's like, hey. Everyone's making fun of Sam or does some like, maybe there's some cultural context about Sam

Altman那个

Altman that

我们共同认知的对象。然后大家以不同方式与Sam Altman产生互动。明白吗？因此我认为现在还处于非常早期的阶段，最终形态尚不明确，但这确实至关重要

we all share. And then we're all, like, engaging with Sam Altman in different ways. You know? So so I think, like, there's we're very early, and we don't yet know kind of how it's all gonna play out. But I think that's really critical to

关键是要实现那种

It's to bring that there.

所以说

So like

我们确实失去了某些东西。过去大家会讨论最新的塔伦蒂诺电影或《黑道家族》新集，现在这种集体讨论消失了。我...

It is something is lost because we used to all talk about the latest Tarantino movie or the latest, you know, Sopranos episode. We don't do it anymore. And I I

必须分享些东西。我们确实会讨论推文之类的。而且，你知道，我们还会分享其他形式的媒体聊天内容。

had to share stuff. We do talk about tweets and stuff. And, you know, there's other forms of media chats that we share.

但这不像过去那样，三四千万人观看《夺宝奇兵》，它就会成为整个夏天的话题。所以我实际上买了20张保罗·托马斯·安德森新片的票，一场接一场地看，

But it's it's not like it used to be where thirty, forty million people would see Raiders of the Lost Ark, and it would be the discussion of the summer or whatever it is. And so I I literally bought 20 tickets to the new Paul Thomas Anderson, one battle after another,

就为了能

just so I could have a

和20个朋友聊聊这部PTA的新作。人们确实渴望这种共享的体验。保罗·托马斯·安德森，他拍了《大师》。从没听说过

conversation with 20 friends about the new PTA. And so and people really are longing for this shared experience. Paul Thomas Anderson, he did the master. Will be Never heard

他。

of him.

就是《血色将至》。

Just There will be blood.

史上最伟大的电影之一。是啊。沙莫夫。

One of the greatest film ever. Yeah. Chamov.

呵呵，他可是史上排名前五的导演，但我知道你对文化不感兴趣。

He he is top five director of all time, but I know you don't care about culture.

但他是不是像迈克尔·贝那种类型？

But is he like is he like Michael Bay?

谁会说不呢。

Who would no.

其实我对他挺失望的。迈克尔·贝拍的都是爆炸场面，而保罗·托马斯·安德森的作品则是

I'm upset about him, actually. Michael Bay makes things that go boom. Paul Thomas Anderson's that make makes things that

让你感到

make you go

迈克尔·贝超酷，一起玩很有趣，派对也超嗨。

Michael Bay, super cool, fun to hang out with, fun to party with.

好吧。你可真会往自己身上扯。你提到了杰莫瑟斯这个名字，我不认识保罗·托马斯·安德森，但那部电影确实很棒。

Right. Okay. Well, way to bring it back to you. You dropped a name here, Jemotherus. I don't know Paul Tom's Andrew, but it was a heck of a film.

问问萨克斯。萨克斯在电影方面其实很有修养。萨克斯，你看过了吗？

Ask Saks. Saks is actually very cultured when it comes to cinema. Did you see it yet, Saks?

我还没看。没有。

I have not seen it yet. No.

它，它是当下的，

It's it's of the moment,

就像我写下来的那样。

and it's just like I wrote it down.

听说它是反保守派的。所以完全是一种反对立场。

Heard it was anti conservative. So it's an absolute anti take.

不。它有点嘲笑左派和右派。它在某种程度上嘲笑了两个极端。你会喜欢的。我觉得你会非常欣赏它。

No. It kinda mocks the left and the right. It's it's kinda mocking both extremes. You'd love it. I think you're very much appreciated.

是啊。看看吧。

Yeah. Check out.

好的，我会去看看的。

Yeah. I'll check it out.

嘿，我有个主意。我们为什么不找个有趣的话题来聊聊呢？

Hey. I have an idea. Why don't we find a topic that's interesting to talk about?

好啊。行。太棒了。嗯，如果你能按时提交文件或准时出现，我们或许真能那么做。

Yeah. Okay. Great. Yeah. Well, that's well, if you contributed to the docket or showed up on time, maybe we could do that.

难以置信。跟你说，现在团队内部有点小情绪，因为我们中有人连续四周更改播客时间，结果还迟到半小时。我就不点名是谁了，萨克·萨克。不过有个有趣的话题给你，重磅消息——中国的LLM模型DeepSeek刚刚发布了最新版本3.2 EXP。

Unbelievable. Just so you know, the inner workings right now, there's a little resentment in the group because one of us decides to change the time of the pod for four weeks in a row and then show up half an hour late. I wouldn't say which person that is, Sax Sax. But here's an interesting topic, some red meat for you. DeepSeek, the Chinese LLM, just dropped their latest model, 3.2 EXP.

它更快、更便宜，还新增了DSA（深度探索稀疏注意力）功能，能加速大规模任务的训练和推理。关键是API成本可降低多达50%。新模型输入每百万次收费28美分，输出42美分。而开发者广泛使用的Anthropic旗下领先模型Claude收费是3美元和15美元。

It's faster. It's cheaper, and it has a new feature called DSA, deep seek sparse attention, which makes it faster to do training and inference at larger tasks. The key takeaway is it can reduce API costs by up to 50%. The new model charges 28¢ per million inputs, 42¢ per million outputs. Claude, which is a leading model from Anthropic that a lot of developers use, a lot of startups use, is, like, $3 and 15.

贵了10到35倍。显然大家都在快速降价。但是萨克，作为美国加密货币与AI事务负责人，这可是你的专长领域。你对中国政府通过DeepSeek持续发力有什么看法？

So 10 times, 35 times more expensive. Obviously, people are cutting their prices pretty quick. But, Saxe, this is your wheelhouse as our czar of crypto and AI for The United States Of America. What are your thoughts here on the continued execution of the Chinese government with Deep Sea?

其实我更想听弗鲁伯的见解，他一直在关注这事，对吧？

Well, want you to hear Fruber's thoughts on this because he was paying attention to this, weren't you?

是的。我认为目前正在进行一次全面的架构重构，我们在每token成本（以美元和能源计）方面还处于早期阶段。据我了解，美国实验室正在进行大量相关工作，类似的路径将产生相似的结果。或许他们略微领先于趋势，但我们确实应该关注这一趋势。我想知道，如果这些架构变革真的能在未来几个月内将成本降低10倍、100倍、1000倍乃至10000倍，模型在能源需求和每token成本方面会给出怎样的预测。

Yeah. I mean, I think there's a total rearchitecture underway and we're at the earlier stages of cost per token in terms of dollar and energy. My understanding is there's actually a lot of work going on with US labs right now and a similar kind of track that's gonna result in similar results. Maybe they're a little bit ahead of the curve, but we should really pay attention to the curve. I think, you know, what do the models say in terms of energy demand, in terms of cost per token if these architectural changes really do drive down 10 x, a 100 x, a thousand x, 10,000 x over the coming months.

而且这是开源的。为了让大家都明白，它可以在AWS上获取，也可以在GCP上获取。至少3.1版本是这样。我不确定3.2版本现在是否已经上线，但我听到很多初创公司在使用。

And this is open source. So just so everybody understands, it's available on AWS. It's available on GCP. At least 3.1 is. I don't know if 3.2 is available there now, but I'm hearing from a lot of startups.

沙莫夫，我不知道你在实际工作中是否听到这样的反馈，他们正在测试和试用，有些甚至已经在使用它，因为它的成本低得多。你有观察到这种情况吗？

I don't know if you're hearing this in the field, Shamov, that they're testing it and playing with it, in some cases using it because it's so much cheaper. Are you seeing that?

我们是Bedrock的前20大用户之一。让我告诉你实际情况是怎样的。我们将大量工作负载转向了Grok上的Kimi k two，因为它确实性能更强，而且坦白说，比OpenAI和Anthropic便宜得多。问题是当我们使用编码工具时，它们会路由到Anthropic，这没问题因为Anthropic很棒，但成本确实很高。面临的困难在于，当所有这些跨越式发展发生时，你不可能突然决定将所有提示传递给不同的LLM，因为它们需要经过微调和工程化才能在一个系统中协同工作。

We are a top 20 consumer of Bedrock. So let me tell you what it looks like on the ground. We redirected a ton of our workloads to Kimi k two on Grok because it was really way more performant and, frankly, just a ton cheaper than OpenAI and Anthropic. The problem is that when we use our coding tools, they route through Anthropic, which is fine because Anthropic is excellent, but it's really expensive. The difficulty that you have is that when you have all this leapfrogging, it's not easy to all of a sudden just, like, you know, decide to pass all of these prompts to different LLMs because they need to be fine tuned and engineered to kind of work in one system.

因此，我们在Kimi或Anthropic上为完善代码生成或反向传播所做的优化，不能直接热切换到DeepSeek。即使后者突然出现且便宜得多，这个过程也需要几周甚至几个月时间。所以这是个复杂的平衡过程，作为用户我们始终在挣扎。

And so, like, the things that we do to perfect cogen or to perfect backpropagation on Kymi or on Anthropic, you can't just hot swap it to deep speak. All of a sudden, it comes out, it's that much cheaper. It takes some weeks. It takes some months. So it's a it's a complicated dance, and we're always struggling as a consumer.

我们该怎么办？是直接承受转型阵痛进行切换？还是等待其他模型迎头赶上的假设？是的，这就是...

What do we do? Do we just make the change and go through the pain? Do we wait on the assumption that these other models will catch up? So Yeah. It's it's a

非常工具化的现状。

very tools now.

那样的话，顺便说一句，不能直接去我的那里搞定

That and by way, can't just go to my To make it

更容易在它们之间切换。

easier to switch between them.

是啊。不。而且，就像，你知道，这个周末，一家拥有庞大模型的不同公司来找我们，展示了他们下一代模型的预览版。好吧。所以，这简直太不可思议了。

Yeah. No. And, like, you know, this weekend, a a different company with a huge model came to us and gave us the preview of their next gen model. Okay. So and it's incredible.

但到了周一早上，我和团队坐下来讨论时，我就说，好吧。我们该怎么办？我们不知道该怎么办。我们是削减它，还是转移过去说，太好了。

But then when I sit on Monday morning with my team and I'm like, okay. What do we do? We don't know what to do. Do we cut it? Do we move over and say, great.

我们将重构所有这些工作负载，以便在这个新模型上运行。这是一个非常棘手的问题，而且随着我们承担的任务越来越复杂，情况变得更糟。

We'll refactor all these workloads to run on on this new model. It's a it's a really hard problem, and it's getting worse the more complicated tasks that we undertake.

好的。对于那些不了解的人，Kimi是由Moonshot AI开发的。那是另一家中国初创公司在这个领域的作品。Saxe，知道吗？

Okay. And just for people who don't know, Kimi is made by Moonshot AI. That's another Chinese startup in the space. Saxe, knows?

嗯，我认为这实际上是一个非常有趣的话题，关于开源的话题。我是开源软件的忠实粉丝，因为它在一定程度上是对大型科技公司权力的一种制衡。我们从过去和科技历史中看到，这些主要类别最终会被一两家大型科技公司主导，它们拥有所有的权力和控制权。而开源提供了另一条路径，对吧？因为开源开发者社区只是把东西放出来，然后你可以拿过来在自己的硬件上运行，你不依赖任何人，对吧？如果你愿意的话，这是一条通往软件自由的路径。

Well, I think this is actually a really interesting topic, this topic of open source. I'm a big fan of open source software because it's a it's a check on the power of big tech in a way. What we've seen in the past and the history of technology is that these major categories end up getting dominated by one or two big tech companies and they have all the power and control. And open source provides an alternate path, right, because the community of open source developers just puts things out there and then you can take it and run it on your own hardware and you're not dependent, right? It's a path to sort of software freedom if you will.

目前一切进展顺利。我认为现在棘手的问题是，所有领先的开源模型都来自中国。中国在开源领域确实下了很大功夫。显然，深度求索（DeepSeek）就是中国的开源模型，这是第一个重要的例子。

So so far so good. I think the thing that is now tricky about this is that all the leading open source models are from China these days. China has made a really big push on open source. So obviously DeepSeek is an open source Chinese model. That was the first big one.

Kimi是一个例子，还有阿里巴巴的通义千问。所以我认为，如果你希望美国赢得AI竞赛，我们对此都有些矛盾。一方面，有开源替代闭源专有模型是好事；另一方面，它们都来自中国。

Kimi is one. Quen from Alibaba. And so I think that if you want The US to win the AI race, then we're all kind of of two minds about this. On the one hand, it's good that there are open source alternatives to the closed source proprietary models. On the other hand, they're all coming from China.

美国也有一些重要努力。比如Meta在LAMA上投入了数十亿美元。但LAMA四的发布，我认为很多人觉得令人失望。现在Meta有声明表示可能会放弃开源转向专有。OpenAI发布了一个开源模型，但远不及他们的前沿水平。

Now there were some American efforts that have been important. So Meta, notably, has invested billions and billions of dollars in LAMA. But the release of LAMA four, I think, was considered disappointing by a lot of people. And now there's statements by Meta that they might be backing away from open source and just going proprietary. OpenAI released an open source model, but it's nowhere near their frontier.

还有一些初创公司在尝试。比如一个叫Reflection的看起来很有前景，正在开发美国的开源模型。但目前为止，这可能是AI领域美国落后于中国的唯一方面——开源模型。我认为堆栈的其他部分，闭源模型、芯片设计、芯片制造、半导体制造设备，甚至数据中心，我们都处于领先。

And there are some startups that are trying. So there's one called Reflection that looks promising. It's developing an open source American model. But so far, this is maybe the one area in AI where The US is behind China is this sort of open source models. I'd say every other part of the stack, closed models, chip design, chip manufacturing, semiconductor manufacturing equipment, every other part of the stack, even data centers, I would say we're we're ahead.

但开源这个领域有点令人担忧。

But this one area of open source is a little bit concerning.

有趣的是，Sax，值得注意的是OpenAI原本应该做开源，这有点讽刺。其次是苹果，它是所有人中最落后的，但他们有一个非常有趣的开源模型。所以当你落后时，像苹果或曾经的中国那样，你会开源；当你领先时，像OpenAI通过ChatGPT那样，你就会封闭起来。

Interestingly, Sax, the two things of note is OpenAI, who the open was originally that they were supposed to do open source, so that's kind of hilarious. But the second is that Apple, which is the furthest furthest behind of everybody, they have a really interesting open source model. So when you're behind, like Apple is or the Chinese were, you're open. You're you do open source, and when you're ahead, like OpenAI became with ChatGPT, you close it down.

那个，我能——我能告诉你Open会——

By the can I can I tell you Open what's gonna

Elm Open ELM？是的。苹果公司的高效语言模型。这个值得关注。

Elm Open ELM? Yeah. Efficient language models from Apple. Keep an eye on that one.

知道什么会让这场开源闭源之争更糟吗？因为这本质上是中美对抗。美国走闭源路线而中国选择开源——至少在可用的规模化模型领域如此。

Can I tell you what's gonna make this open source, closed source battle even worse? Because effectively what this is is The US versus China. The US is closed and China is open, at least at the scaled models that work.

但情况不必如此，对吧？我们也可以发布开源模型。

But that doesn't have to be the case. Right? Because we could release open models too.

不，不，你说得对。我只是说当前局势：闭源高性能模型在美国，开源高性能模型在中国。

No. No. You're right. I'm just saying today, if you look at the conditions on the field, the closed source highly performant models are American. The open source highly performant models are Chinese.

接下来会引发什么连锁反应？就是弗里德伯格提到的能源与生成这些输出标记的成本问题。昨天我咨询了一位能源巨头负责人，实话说情况不妙——你们应该看到本周印第安纳波利斯市民成功抵制了谷歌在当地投资十亿美元的数据中心项目，主因就是担忧电价上涨。

And you would say, okay. Well, what is the next downstream thing? It's what Friedberg mentioned, which is the energy and the cost of generating these output tokens. And I talked to somebody yesterday who runs a huge energy business, And I have to tell you, it's not in a good place. Meaning, you saw, I think, this week where the residents of Indianapolis were able to reject or get their city to reject a billion dollar data center that Google was going to build near Indianapolis largely because of concerns of price inflation around electricity.

那位能源CEO告诉我：未来五年已成定局。如果我们找不到突破性解决方案（稍后我会说明两个构想），电价将在五年内翻番。试想届时消费者对AI应用的看法，再想想像我们这样的公司如何选择最廉价方案来最小化下游成本——因为这终将演变成能源危机，局面非常复杂。

And what this energy CEO told me is, look. The next five years are baked. And if we don't find some compelling solves and I'll tell you what the two ideas were. But if we don't find some compelling solves, electricity rates will double in the next five years. Now if you think about how then consumers will view the use of AI, and then if you think about companies like us and others trying to use the cheapest version so that we are minimally impacting the downstream cost of these things because it will become an energy problem, this is a very complicated thing.

现在他的构想面临重大公关危机。本已形象不佳的科技巨头若被指责'过去五年电费翻倍都怪你们'，处境会更糟。他们急需找到脱身之道，这种舆论风向太不利了。

Now his idea and it's a huge PR crisis. Because if you wanna take big tech, which is already viewed negatively, and make their perception even worse, if you start to finger point to them and say, guys are the reason my electricity costs have doubled in the last five years, that is no bueno for them. And they need to find an off ramp ASAP. It's a bad look.

因为你说你的能源需求翻倍，这可能会抢走你们的工作。对吧？就像是的，这很糟糕。无论你是否相信这是事实，这就是公众的普遍看法。

Because you're saying your energy's doubling and this could take your jobs. Right? Like Yeah. It's terrible. Whether you believe that's true or not, that is the perception

他提出了两个值得考虑的解决方案。第一个方案叫做交叉补贴，本质上是让数据中心按远高于当地其他用户的费率支付电费，这些科技巨头如Meta、谷歌、苹果、亚马逊坐拥数千亿自由现金流，完全能承受这部分成本。而普通家庭的电费则保持稳定甚至下降。

of the public. There are two off ramps that he suggested, which I think are worth considering. Off ramp number one is what's called a cross subsidy, which is essentially to say that they pay a rate card, which they can absorb with all their free cash flow, materially higher than what other rate payers would pay in that geographic area. So the homeowner, his or her electricity costs stay flat to down. The data center costs are higher, and it's the Metas, the Googles, the Apples, the Amazons who have hundreds of billions of free cash.

第二个方案是建立机制，在数据中心周边的每户家庭安装电池等设备，使这些家庭能更好地消化电价上涨压力，而无需直接承担额外费用。

They absorb it. That's that was idea number one. And idea number two is to start to set up some mechanism so that they can install things like batteries at every single home in and around these data centers to allow those homes to have a better chance of actually absorbing some of this inflation without having to pay it.

这真是个好主意。弗吉尼亚州正面临严峻考验，那里是数据中心走廊所在地，全州40%的电力都供应给数据中心。情况已经非常紧迫。Zar，你对这个问题怎么看？

That's a really good idea. And this is playing out sacks in Virginia in a major way because that's where data center alley is, and 40% of the energy in Virginia now is going to data centers. This is becoming acute. So what what are your thoughts here, Zar?

Chris Wright在峰会上对此阐述得很清楚。毫无疑问，AI将在未来五到十年引发巨大的电力需求。从五到十年的周期来看，核能可能是解决方案的重要组成部分——虽然核电站建设至少需要五年。而未来五年内，天然气恐怕是主要选择。

Well, Chris Wright spoke to this pretty well at the summit in terms of what we have to do. I mean, there's no question that AI is gonna create a huge need for power over the next five or ten years. I think on a five to ten year time frame, the answer is probably nuclear or at least that's a big part of it. But nuclear takes at least five years. Within the next five years, it's probably gas, you know, natural gas.

但问题是燃气轮机（即将天然气转化为电力的引擎）存在两到三年的交付积压。所以关键在于未来几年怎么办？Chris Wright和其他能源高管都提到，我们需要提高电网利用率。如果每年仅将40小时的峰值负荷转移给备用柴油发电机等设备，就能额外释放80吉瓦的电网容量。

But the issue there is there's a huge backlog for gas turbines, like basically the engines that burn the gas to create power. And there's like a two to three year backlog for those to spin those up. So the question is what do do in the next few years? And I think Chris Wright talked to this and I've heard this from other energy executives, which is we just need to squeeze more out of the grid. If we were to shed just forty hours a year of peak to say backup generators, diesels, things like that, you could get an extra 80 gigawatts out of the grid.

有位能源高管这样向我解释：电网建设标准基于极端峰值需求设定，就像教堂按复活节人流量设计，平时使用率只有50%。如果能通过备用设备转移全年中最关键的40小时负荷，就能在不扩建电网的情况下多榨出80吉瓦电力。

This is what one energy executive told me. The reason is because they build the grid and they have regulations on it based on the peak, right, which is basically the coldest day in winter or the hottest day in summer. And the same way that you, you know, you build your church for Easter Sunday, the rest of year it runs at 50%. Same thing with the grid. And so if they could just reduce the the peak forty hours, if they could shed that load to backup, to generators, to diesel, things like that, then they could run the grid to squeeze an extra 80 gigawatts out of it.

我认为这是未来几年我们需要跨越的桥梁，届时我们将获得更多天然气供应，最终也会有一些核能。但除非你想继续讨论电力问题，我认为开源领域还有其他值得探讨的话题，实际上这是个相当有趣的主题。我们能否回到

And I think that's the bridge over the next few years that we need to then get a lot more gas and then eventually some nuclear as well. But unless you wanna keep talking about electricity, I think there's some other things to talk about on the open source because I think it's a pretty interesting topic, actually. And if can we just go back

那个话题？继续深入说说。对，对。我刚才试图论证我的开源经济模型更优越，因为我无法承受每个输出令牌3美元的成本，同时还要支付所有这些

to that? Go go there. Yeah. Yeah. I was I was just trying to paint the case that my economic model for going to open source is better because I can't pay $3 an output token and then also pay for all this

确实。

Yeah.

实际上，贾马尔，我想请教你。当你运营像Kimi这类项目时，我认为有必要向观众解释其运作机制，因为很多人对开源模型的含义存在误解。不少人以为中国公司发布这类模型后仍保留某种所有权。不。现实情况是，一旦发布，它就不再属于他们。

Actually, I wanna Jamal, I wanna ask you. When you're running like Kimi or something like that, so I think it would be good just to explain to the audience how this works because I think there's a lot of confusion about what it means to be an open source model. A lot of people think that when a Chinese company publishes one of these models, it's still somehow theirs. No. But the reality is once it's published, it's no longer theirs.

这些代码属于任何想要使用的人。你并不是在中国的云服务上运行它，数据也不会传回中国。不。你是将模型部署在自己的基础设施上运行。

It belongs to anyone who wants to take that code. And you're not running that on a Chinese cloud or something like that. The data is not going back to China. No. You're taking that model, and you're running it on your own infrastructure.

完全正确。

100%.

你能详细解释下这一点吗？

Can you just explain this?

是的。当我最初启动8090项目时，唯一的解决方案是Bedrock，这是亚马逊提供的一项服务，本质上让你能按需获取推理能力。明白吗？我们在开发产品时需要推理功能和推理令牌，Bedrock就负责处理这一切。它相当于AWS，但专门针对AI这个垂直领域。

Yeah. So when I first started 8090, my only solution was, Bedrock, which is a service that Amazon provides that allows you to essentially get inference as a service. Right? So as we are building our product and we need inference and we need inference tokens, Bedrock basically handles everything. So it's it's what AWS is but for this vertical of AI.

对吧？他们拥有服务器，这些服务器位于美国的数据中心，由美国人管理。他们会精选一些模型，确保能支持这些模型的使用需求。

Right? So they have the servers. These are in American data centers. They're managed by Americans. And what they do is they take a handful of models, and they make sure that they can support usage of those models.

我们就是这样起步的。但和所有事情一样，我们必须控制成本和运营模式。所以我们一直在寻找：除了亚马逊，是否还有其他模型和平台能满足需求？平心而论，亚马逊的服务非常昂贵。比如我协助创立的另一家公司Grok（带q的那个），他们就有自己的云服务。

That was how we started. But as with everything, we have to manage our costs and our operating profile. And so we're always looking for, are there other models and other places other than Amazon that can service our needs? Because in fairness, Amazon is very expensive. So a different company that I help get off the ground, Grok with a q, they have a cloud.

他们最初与LAMA合作，后来与OpenAI合作引入开源模型，同时还上线了几款中国模型。正如你所说，Sax，他们的做法就是获取源代码，然后进行本地化实现。

And what they've been doing is they've been working with initially LAMA, then they work with OpenAI to bring their open source model, but they also brought online a couple of these Chinese models. And what they do exactly as you said, Sax, is they take the source code. They basically implement that.

他们进行了分叉。

They fork it.

他们进行了分叉。

They fork it.

没错。现在这些模型已由美国人在本土数据中心完成部署。可以说中国提供了方法路线图，好比建筑设计图，而像Grok这样的美国公司负责建造房屋并推向市场。因此我们8090基于成本考量，决定转向这个开源模型——因为它确实便宜得多。

Yeah. And and now it's implemented domestically on American soil by Americans inside of an American data center. So there's China gave us kind of the the way, the road map, if you will, the architectural plans, but we, as in, you know, the American company, in this case, Grok, built the house and then launched it. And so now we, 8090, basically made a cost decision to move to this open source model because it was just materially cheaper.

没错。而带有q的Grok会为你提供的是应用公司89。

Right. And what Grok with a q will give you you're the application company eighty nine

对我们来说，它们就像亚马逊。

They're like Amazon for us.

他们会给你一个API。正是如此。同样的道理，如果你想使用像OpenAI或ChatGPT这样的封闭模型，他们会给你一个API。你提交提示，他们给你答案，基本上是输入令牌，输出令牌。

They'll give you an API. Exactly. So the same way, if you wanna use a closed model like OpenAI or, you know, ChatGPT, they'll give you an API. You submit prompts. They give you answers, basically tokens in, tokens out.

正确。Grok的做法是，他们会拿这个开源模型，在自己的基础设施上运行，然后给你API，这样你就可以通过他们的API获取输入和输出的令牌。

Correct. What Grok does is they will take this open source model, run it on its own infrastructure, and then give you the API so that you can then get tokens and tokens out through their API.

那么对我来说，作为一个消费者，这让我们简化成了一个纯粹的经济决策。哪里更便宜？而且，你知道，这和上一代互联网没什么不同。你会在AWS上运行，但然后你会把它与GCP竞价，还会引入Azure。

Well So for me, as a consumer, it reduces us to a pure economic decision. Where is it cheaper? And, you know, it's not dissimilar to the last generation of the Internet. You'd run on AWS, but then you'd bid it against GCP. You'd bring in Azure.

你会问谁更便宜。因为，归根结底，你是在运行一个数据库。你知道吗？你在运行，我不知道，随便选一个服务比如Snowflake。

You'd say who is cheaper. Because, ultimately, you're running a database. You know? You're running, I don't know, pick pick your service Snowflake.

对。

Right.

具体在哪里其实并不重要。你只是在努力寻找最便宜的供应商。

It didn't really matter where it was. You were just really trying to find the cheapest vendor.

没错。现在，这里的关键在于：首先，正如你所说，如果你知道怎么做，在自己的基础设施上运行成本更低。此外，企业喜欢它因为更具可定制性。而且这些开源模型会针对特定应用进行大量微调。

Right. Now here here's here's what's compelling about it. So first of all, like you said, it's cheaper to just run it on your own infrastructure if you know what you're doing. Also, enterprises like it because it's more customizable. And there's gonna be a lot of fine tuning of these open source models for specific applications.

完全同意。

100%.

企业经常希望在自己的数据中心本地运行这些模型，因为他们希望将数据保留在自己的基础设施上。但现在的问题是，这些模型已不再属于中国。它们被分叉了——虽然是美国公司，但起源于中国。

And enterprises frequently want to run these models on prem in their own data centers because they want to keep their own data on their own infrastructure. But now the challenge is you've got these models that they're no longer Chinese. They've been forked. It's an American company, but they originated in China.

确实如此。

That's right.

如果它们运行在关键基础设施上，这确实会引发问题。我想知道Brock采取了哪些措施来测试这些模型的安全性？是否存在后门？他们是如何考虑这些风险的？

And they could be running on some critical infrastructure and that, you know, that that does raise issues. I mean, do what what is Brock doing, I guess, to, like, test whether these models are safe, whether they can be backdoored? I mean, how do they think about that?

他们有一整套完整的检测流程。具体细节我不完全清楚，因为我没有详细询问过他们执行的检测内容。不过确实如此。

They they have an entire pipeline of stuff that they do. The details of which I I don't exactly know because I've not asked exactly what they run through. But Yeah.

他们在这方面有很大的摩擦。

They're big rub in this.

他们经历了极其严格的

They go through an incredibly rigorous

他们基本上会进行安全测试以确保万无一失。绝对是这样。我的意思是，很多人认为如果你运行一个中国模型，数据肯定会传回中国，但如果是在你自己的基础设施上运行就不会。我认为问题更多是理论上的，比如，中国模型是否可能以某种方式被植入后门或漏洞？

They basically do, like, safety testing to make sure. Absolutely. So I mean, because a lot of people think that if you run a Chinese model, the data must be going back to China, but it's not if it's being run on your own infrastructure. I think the issue is more theoretical that, like, could a Chinese model somehow be backdoored with an exploit or vulnerability somehow?

嗯，如果你用的是编译版本，那确实有可能。但如果你直接用开源代码自己构建，就不会。

Well, if you take a compiled version, sure. But if you just take the open source and you do it yourself, no.

没错。这就是关键。我是说，如果有人真的发现了漏洞，它会在社区里迅速广泛传播，然后我会

Right. Well, that's the thing. So I mean and if someone did discover a vulnerability, it would get widely shared in the community very, very quickly, and then I'd