So, Fable just got banned. What are your thoughts on that? >> Yeah, so it might be the start of the permanent underclass. And I didn't really use this term at all until the last 72 hours. Since Fable came out, I started more thinking about are we in the permanent underclass because it's twice the cost of Opus and it's heavily restricted compared to Mythos. You know, the guardrails were pretty crazy. It was rejecting even normal questions. But now after they banned it, the US government told Enthropic they cannot serve it to anybody outside of the US. And since they didn't have any system or infrastructure for this, they just pulled it completely. So nobody can use Fable right now, no matter whether you're US citizen or not, this really might be the permanent underclass because only people working in the government or people directly at Enthropic have access to Mythos and Fable and us the normies, we don't. And even when they add it back, it's not going to be available to people in Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia, most of the world. It's only going to be for US citizens. And yeah, I mean this is highly highly concerning and uh most people probably won't think about the second and third order consequences of this. But if you go into the future where AI is much much better and that's like the number one thing that separates a true AI believer versus people who are in the AI field just for money, just for hype, just because it's trendy, is that do you believe in the technology? Do you believe that AI models will become better and better with each passing year? So far that has been true. So if we go into two years from now, 3 years from now, access to AI will be even more important than access to electricity, to access to a car, to a computer, all of us can imagine how much crippled we would be if someone took away your smartphone, your internet, your electricity, your car. Like you couldn't function in this world and you definitely couldn't compete with others, let alone in business. AI is going to be that times 100. If someone takes away your AI access three years from now when the AI is literally hyper intelligent genius with access to all your softwares they can do anything on the internet they're going to completely [ __ ] you and people need to realize that this is a wakeup call the US government banning Fable is a taste of what the future will look like today I feel severely less productive than in the last 3 days and it's true like Opus and GPD 545 they're not as good as fable and this is just a small taste of what's coming. >> So what was the impact on your workflow from this ban specifically? >> Yeah. So all the coding is taking longer because the models are not as competent. They're also making a lot more sloppy mistakes. It's kind of funny because even a week ago if you asked me I would say like Opus is amazing. Opus is you know the best entropic model. It's very powerful. But today I was working with it heavily because Fable wasn't available and it just made made a lot of stupid mistakes you know you know it changed some links but it removed like the tracking link that was the main link for the video and a lot of like dumb stuff that like even interns wouldn't make and it's weird because it's the jagged intelligence that's the concept of AI where they're hyper intelligent in one domain but very stupid in another domain and they just make a lot of dumb mistakes and hallucinations and GBD 5.5 right now is the best coding model Opus is probably generally better in terms of like daily use, but both of them are significantly worse than Fable. Fable just understood all the context. It pushed through to completion. You didn't have to tell it what to do. It just test like anytime you made a coding change, it tested the changes. Then it deploy it tried to deploy them, right? So if it was missing API key, it tried to log in. It it went and, you know, clicked through browser use. It did a lot of more things without you having to guide it. So it was a lot more intelligent entity, a lot more complete of an agent compared to Opus and GBD 5.5. So yeah, I mean when Fable came out, literally in the first couple hours, I pushed updates to all of our internal softwares and I got so many things done. Now today I just feel like I'm working with like tools, you know, really GPT 5.5 and Opus, they feel like tools. You need to guide them heavily. You need to tell them what to do. Fable felt like something more like like almost like its own entity like it knows it understands on a deeper level what are you what you're doing why you're doing it how good work looks like it's it's completely different >> so you don't think giving a fable to the masses is dangerous >> I mean you you can say like giving fire to the masses is dangerous you know giving cars to the mass is in dangerous anybody who owns a car can just like drive it into a mass of people in theory you know obviously us Europe Europeans, we don't do that, but some other cultures might do it. Anything giving to the masses in is dangerous, you know. So, I I don't think that's a strong enough of an argument to prevent it. Same thing with the internet. Like when the internet was coming out, there was all this fear-mongering. Same thing with Bitcoin. Oh, Bitcoin is used by criminals. So, any technology can be used for good and bad. But I think we can all agree that it shouldn't be centralized in the control of a few. Who are those few? Is that the US government? I mean over the past, you know, 12 months, a lot of shady stuff came around with the top people in US government. Do we want those to be in charge of the world's most powerful AI? Is it the people leading the AI labs? Okay, maybe that's a bit better. At least they understand technology more, but still, do we really trust a handful of people on Enthropic or a handful of people at OpenAI? I mean, Sam Ultman doesn't have the best track record. You know, everybody understands that he's pretty good at, you know, getting his way. So I I would say these are not the best people to be in charge of super intelligence no matter what. The question is who is you know I don't think a full democratic system where average Joe on the street who's zero knowledge of LLMs or how tokens even are generated should have the same opinion as Dario Amod definitely not. But like the people at the US government are are way more clueless than the average YouTube viewer. I mean most people watching this video probably know more about AI than some like US Secretary of State or some top people in the US government. Yeah, these are the ones making the decisions for billions of people across the planet. We are not in the US and we're affected by this massively. AI is people say like okay at least open AI is in the in the lead. You know when CHB came out it was basically all open AI. Now there's Enfropic, there's Gemini, there's Grog but all of these are US companies. Then you have the second wave which is Chinese companies which I have to give massive credit for because they're open sourcing all of their models. So even if the Chinese government was like let's ban it, it doesn't matter. The model weights are downloadable online. You know millions of people already have them. All of you can you know me and you guys you we can download these models on our laptops on our hard drives create backups and just run them. We can fine-tune them. We can post train them. All of that is available and you cannot take it back. So really AI is not distributed. There is not that much competition. It's really US versus China. Unfortunately, here in Europe, we are falling behind heavily. The best European company right now is Mistral and it's very behind the top Chinese models and the top American models. So AI is not really, you know, it's not it's much more centralized than people think. I'm just going to put it that way. It's really US and China and US is uh it's completely different structure. US is more decentralized government and more centralized companies. China is a centralized government and the companies are decentralized. All of the Chinese models are open source and uh it's fascinating how different their approaches are and right now it seems like all it takes is somebody and the US government and they can just shut down all AI models. It's not impossible to imagine like they're going to even remove GBD 5.5 or when GBD 5.6 is ready and OpenAI wants to release it. Maybe the US government shuts that down as well. Like who knows? >> But speaking of Chinese models, why do you think that a lot of these Chinese models are able to be so cheap? Yes, that's a great question. Um, they China is really great at publishing their research and at innovating novel techniques. So, they have like some breakthroughs in terms of inference and also they have a lot of restrictions on chips. So, that forces them to be more efficient to, you know, get more done with less resources. But there's also this theory I saw on Twitter which I think more likely is true. With each passing day, I I'm starting to believe it more and more. And that is that instead of subsidizing which a lot of people think like anthropic and openai are heavily subsidizing their subscriptions you know Dylan Patel posted a research that like the $200 plan at cloth gives you like $8,000 API worth right so if you had to pay API pricing you you would have to pay roughly $8,000 to get the same amount of usage as the cloth max plan gives you but for CHBD was even crazier the chbd pro plan which also cost 200 was like $14,000 worth of API credits, right? So, either they're subsidizing it super heavily, or the second theory, which I think is more likely, is that they have actually disgustingly high profit margins, like over 90% on the API tokens, which allows them to put these subscriptions out at, you know, a discount and maybe they break even on the subscriptions, maybe they lose a bit, maybe they profit a bit, doesn't matter. But the API tokens, that's where Enthropic and OpenAI could be insanely profitable. Like we're talking 80 90 plus percent profit margins, which would make sense why these Chinese models are a lot cheaper because maybe they're closer in terms of how expensive they're to run to inference. Maybe just the closed companies are pricing them massively heavily because they're in the lead and they can afford it and people will pay a premium to get the most highest quality tokens, which I definitely am one of those people. I'm happy to play pay a premium to get the highest level of intelligence. This might be a plausible theory where the cost to run these models is actually similar, but the closed companies just charge a lot a lot more. >> So getting a bit back to Fable, do you think we're going to get it get access to it again? And if we do, what will you do? >> Yeah, so this is highly speculative. Obviously, it's still a developing story. It's like less than 24 hours since this happened. Uh I think the first step will be US government or like US um citizens will get access. So Anthropic will figure out some verification system whether it's a social security number. Upload your passport. I mean most Americans have a passport so maybe that's a bad idea you know upload your ID whatever something like that to verify is this user a US citizen? Is their IP address in America? Stuff like that right? So obviously I'm not a US citizen so we'll have to figure out a way. Um but whether everybody in the world would access maybe like I don't know if someone anthropic you know does a good job explaining it to the US government then maybe they lift this completely and everybody else in the world can can uh access it. Maybe they implement a new set of oversight rules where somebody at the US government can actually look at the at the messages because that was the biggest issue with Fable is that like they had a data retention policy that even people using through API had to send the data to enforc and they allow they were allowed to keep it for 30 days which prevented a lot of companies from using it. We can touch on that a bit later, what that implies for companies and why local models and self-hosting is so important. But the main issue is is like even if they allow it, it's it's it's like I I'm I'm having like some hunch that this is not as simple as it seems. Part of me thinks like Anthropic kind of wants this. If you think about it, this is like the biggest no notoriety for them. This is the biggest like, oh my god, this company is dangerous technology. the biggest promotion from the US government. It like not all of this feels organic to me. You know, anthropic, you know, Dario Amod and the entire leadership, they were the biggest fear-mongerers for years. You know, they were comparing it to nuclear weapons. And you know, again, I saw a tweet where someone was making fun of it, like, oh yeah, compare AI to nuclear weapons 800 times and and you're acting surprised that you get regulated. It's like they they were kind of asking for it. So, I don't know. Like anthropic, it's very conflicting. They they first say like mythos is way too dangerous to release. You know that also at the start of April it's like this we're not going to release this. This is cyber security blah blah blah. Fast forward two months and they release it even more powerful version of it albeit with guard rails and and you know safety layers. But then like few days later they get regulated by US government which is what they were kind of asking for all all the time and now they're ask like saying it's a misunderstanding that they're acting surprised. like all of this feels very weird, you know, it something isn't adding up and I think the official story is not what actually happened. So, I'm going to put it that way. To answer your question, very first thing, if I got access to Fable Now for 1 hour, I'm asking it like all of the questions. First of all, I'm creating long-term plans for everything. Okay? So like long-term road maps and long-term plans for all areas of my life, how to scale my business, all aspects of business, all of the startup ideas I have, all like every task I have like to completion, every single like possible scenario, all geopolitical conflicts where they could lead and the implications of that and you know different paths to technology and the future basically trying to create as many long-term plans as possible so that whichever one is true I can then if fable gets taken away I can use less powerful models and agents on those steps which were orchestrated and created by Fable. When it comes to like personal use, I would just ask it as many look first of all like I would just ask it as many questions as possible. I would just run it in some loop through API to generate data sets basically distillation without you know distillation obviously it's against entropthropic terms of service so I wouldn't do that obviously I'm just hypo you know hypothetically speaking but I would ask it like questions about life you know I think one of the best prompts to LMS is like based on all the knowledge you have what is the one habit that humans could do to succeed in life these types of prompts you know based on all the knowledge you have and all the research What is like one health tip that would make your life better? Or like what's the number one mistake that humans make that ruin their relationships? Stuff like that to just like get the limit the limit testing questions. And I would do that for hundreds if not thousands of different areas of life and business and everything and you know turn that into a data set of sorts to just have all these Fable tokens so that if Fable gets taken away again I can look at them and I can read them and it's like remnants of a intelligent entity that no longer exists. >> So do you think Fable was AGI? >> I mean it's the best claim for AGI that there has ever been. Obviously the definition of AGI has shifted over the years. I remember when CHGBD came out it was uh like I think if you show that to when ShvD came out Fable with all the tools and you know CLI and all the entire harness people would say like yeah this is AGI for sure because you know ask yourself would you prefer talking to Fable or the average human on the street and even say like the average knowledge worker right like someone working in IT or whatever or above average like legit I would prefer talking to Fable over 90% of humans like it's just more intelligent it's more capable it's it has more understanding so do we call that AGI or do we not call that AGI because some tools are missing because it you know struggles to navigate the web because it's heavily restricted some websites don't allow agents and bots to access it doesn't have a phone number like those are all like limitations that could be solved even if the models stopped improving we would get far more powerful AI tools purely by the connectors, the integrations, all of the tooling around it, that alone would still have at least five years of massive growth. Even if you take models from last year and you give them proper tools, you know, proper harness, they can do a lot more. So, nobody really knows how fable how powerful Fable is because ultimately these models were limited by a the humans, you know, what the humans give them and b all of the tools, the harnesses. If the model had the same access as a human in terms of it can do banking, it can make payments, it can use the email, it can use a phone number, I think it would economically outperform most humans. Obviously, it cannot do stuff in the physical world. So, ironically, people like doing construction, they're probably safer than people like us, you know, in terms of their job not being replaced. But on the web, anything on the software, especially like there's like sites where you can like pay humans to do some things. I don't know. like I I'm struggling to find things that it couldn't do. So yes, I think Fable has a really good claim at being AGI. >> So potentially if everybody in the future had access to a model with the power of Fable, but it was open source, no restrictions. Do you think that would be dangerous? >> Again, like the the issue is the dangerous argument is really um really flawed. Like anything is dangerous, you know, like giving a kid a book can be dangerous. He can use that kid to smack another kid on the head. You know, like giving a rock to a homeless man can be dangerous. He can throw that rock at somebody. Like something being dangerous, it doesn't mean it shouldn't be done. Obviously, I think that would be the greatest blessing for humanity if model like Fable got open source and that would also prevent for any government from seizing power over it. Like anthropic, the biggest risk for anthropic is they should be worried of being nationalized, right? Like America is like, "Oh yeah, we're capitalist. We're anti-communist." China bad. China bad. If it's kind of funny if you watch the Bloomberg interview with Dario Ammo, he's like, "Oh yeah, we don't want the bad guys to win." First of all, who are the bad guys? But most importantly, who decides who the bad guys are, right? People have all these criticism of China. So, oh, China this, China bad, China this. China is releasing all their models open source, right? If you forget everything else and look at their actions, they're the biggest good guys in all of AI, in all of technology. China is contributing the most to the world by far. They're open sourcing their re research. They're open sourcing their models. They're not charging crazy prices and API. They have the most costefficient AI plans out there. Like China is doing the rest of the world a huge favor. Imagine being like a developing country. Imagine being like a, you know, random European country where you don't have your own AI startup, your own AI research lab. You can get so far ahead with Chinese models compared to US models. US models are closed. US models are heavily guard rails. you cannot fine US models. I mean I don't know like what what is this notion that the China are the bad guys? If you just use your eyes and look at the actions in the AI space, China are the good guys in the AI space. Okay, we we can you know it's other time we can talk about politics, history, communism, capitalism, whatever. But in terms of AI space, China is doing much more good for the world than America. >> So given all the recent events, what are your plans moving forward? Are you going to change the way you operate with AI, the way you operate in business, your personal life given the current situation with Fable? >> Yeah, I'm definitely moving in the direction of self-hosting, of fine-tuning, of local AI models, a lot more. And you know, again, there's so many more levels before you can pre-train a large AI model. That requires a lot of skill, a lot of capital to get the compute, a lot of time, talent, all that stuff, right? We don't have that. Like we're falling behind here in Europe. It's kind of crazy. 100 years ago Europe was the pinnacle uh continent and now you know because of regulation, two world wars, all this [ __ ] We're falling behind. But you don't have to start by pre-training a new AI model. You can start with fine-tuning. You can start with post- training. You can start by having enough hardware to run these medium-sized and large AI models locally. You can even start by downloading the weights. You know, all of you guys should go to hugging face and download the weights of some AI models. Just put it on a hard drive, you know, whether it's Miniax, whether it's Kimmy, whether it's GLM, whether it's Quen, just download these models just in case. Who knows what's going to happen? And again, let's let's not like say it's only the US government. The EU is even crazier than the US government, right? Right now the the Americans are giving ideas to the European bureaucrats in the EU in Brussels and it's not impossible that like hugging face will get seized right or like open source models will get outlawed. I mean the Biden executive order wanted to do crazy [ __ ] like specific computer I think it was like 10 to the^ of 26 flops or something like that where any model that was trained on more than that will get seized. But this is just math. This is mathematics. This is matrix multiplication. You know, again, people on Twitter were memeing Trump with like a paper just like doing matrix multiplication by hand. Like, come and take it. That's what AI is at the end of the day. You know, if you scale, if you that's the problem. Like people don't really understand what AI is. They think it's like, oh yeah, Claude has feelings, blah blah blah, all this [ __ ] It's next token prediction. Okay? And this at at the inner core is math, matrix multiplication. If you do that enough, turns out you can get some impressive intelligent answers from it. But anybody with enough compute and with the right skills can run that math to create AI models. And again, I would encourage everybody watching this to learn more about local AI models to invest a bit into some hardware. You know, buy more RAM, VRAMm, GPUs, upgrade to a better MacBook, Mac Studio, whatever it is. Whether you prefer Nvidia, whether you prefer AMD, whether you prefer Apple Silicon, download some models locally, have them, learn how they work, get into fine-tuning. We really need to distribute this. It needs to be decentralized just like Bitcoin is decentralized. Central banks are very, very evil. And I'm I'm not going to get into the discussion. That's another two-hour podcast. The same thing is if central AI, like AI is going to be way more important to our lives than banking. Way more. It's not even close. Like again, I'm I'm telling you guys, in two years, in three years, in five years, if someone takes away access to your AI, you're [ __ ] You're going to be beyond crippled. You're going to be useless. Just these agents will be way more intelligent, way more competent with all the tools. They'll be able to do any tasks and you can spin up hundred of them. So, you'll have an army of agents doing all of your work. You're going to be orchestrating them, and then if someone turns the switch and disables them, it's over. So, you better get that urgency right now, not in the future when it's too late. And I I feel like I'm crazy because I'm one of the only people who understands this. I have a lot of friends in AI and when Fable came out, I was like in disbelief because so many of them either didn't try the model or tried the model and like ah it's too expensive, you know, whatever or like used it and were like, oh, this is impressive and didn't really change their trajectory, change their business plans or anything any of their plans. And now when fable is taken away, they don't have the urgency. A lot of them are also Americans, so they're like, "Oh yeah, we're going to get it back. We're Americans, you know, please, please, US citizens." They don't have that urgency. We are Europeans. We are not on this fable access list. So this puts me in a very unique position where I have enough experience with local models, fine-tuning, all that stuff. I'm definitely not an expert yet, but I made enough videos on it, so I understand. And also I understand on a philosophical level the importance of decentralized of libertarian values of not having a central entity controlling access to the most important technology of all time. So that puts me in a unique position where I actually understand the urgency of the moment and I I I can see the second order and third order consequences of this. If nothing changes, we're screwed. We're completely [ __ ] So we cannot let a few people whether it's a government, private entity, whatever, control who has access to super intelligent AI. So obviously for people who are locked in on AI, it makes sense to download their own models. But what should they tell to the people in their lives who aren't really focused on AI? What should they tell them to do? >> I mean, rather than telling them what to do, well, they should first tell them the message I just spoke, right? how important it is to have the greatest technology decentralized, open source, as unrestricted as possible. Second of all, they should like do something rather than telling them, right? they should spend a couple thousand dollars to spin up a home cluster AI cluster at home their you know mini supercomputer whatever you want to call it that you can run inference you can find cute models on and you can serve that as a API for your family for your friends for your neighborhood for your village like you know up to you how much compute you have and you know get into building models like if someone is intelligent competent in AI create AI model for your community I mean I was shocked a couple hours ago that the IT department, municipal IT department at Rio de Janeiro, which is a completely random country in like Rio Janeiro is a city in Brazil. This is a completely random country in the AR race. Nobody even thought Brazil is in the AR race, but turns out they now have some impressive open source models because people at the municipal IT department of Rio de Janeiro city are cooking, fine-tuning. I think it was some quen model or whatever. But that that's crazy, you know, like huge shout outs to that municipal IT department. They are cooking and that's what people need to be doing. People who understand this the gravity of this moment they need to get into fine tuning. They need to take, you know, some of these Chinese models are impressive, post train them. They need to, you know, watch some Andre Karpathy videos and learn about how to build a small model from scratch and start creating these custom models for the communities instead of relying on openic. So my last question is do you think these model or these AI companies are responsible for actually open sourcing these models due to the fact that they basically took all of humanity's knowledge in order to train these models? >> Yeah, I mean definitely you know enthropic and open they're like oh no please don't distill our models it's against term of service. They distilled all of human knowledge. They took away all the novels, all the art. And again, I'm not for like the doomers, you know, I'm definitely not on the side of like all these leftists, but the best argument that these people who are like protesting AI have is that it is stolen data. All of this data was on the internet, usually voluntarily contributed for free by, you know, novelists artists programmers people contributing highquality tokens to humanity. And these companies, whether it's Google, Enthropic, OpenAI, XAI, Meta, they just scraped it. They scraped the web. They they stole that, you know, they took they took the data and built the models on top of them and benefited massively. Like these companies are trillion dollar companies, right? Whether it's Enthropic reaching trillion dollar valuation, OpenAI, Google adding another trillion, I mean Nvidia added multiple trillions, SpaceX is valued at two trillion. All of these companies benefited massively from scraping the web and training AI models, proprietary closed source AI models on top of them. So yes, I think they should be if the government should be doing anything, they should be regulating them so they open source models, not a [ __ ] ban. That's terrible. It shouldn't be a ban. It should be like, yo, Enthropic, you must open source models. That's it. That would be insane. And that would unlock an era of abundance never before seen. Like imagine if Fable got open source, right? And you could fine-tune it. You could run it. I mean, it would be expensive to have the hardware, but you could run it locally, you know, at your office, at your home, and you could post train it. And like, there would be such an explosion of research papers, so many different versions of fables, so many different API. Some people would figure out how to run it inference quickly. Some people would figure out how to quantize it and run it on a MacBook. It would be a renaissance of progress of humanity. Everybody, again, most people don't want to create bioweapons or or anything like that. people who figure out how to solve diseases, how to solve math problems, how to advance technology. That would be insane. That would be incredible. And that's if someone is watching this for the government, that's the type of regulation you should be pushing for. They took all of humanity's knowledge. They distilled it. They scraped it. The model should be open source.