Congratulations on the launch, Emad and team. I've been pondering similar questions for a while... but the biggest conundrum for me is how small countries - without critical-mass venture capital concentration - coordinate together to fund this work / infrastructure and keep decentralised, distributed initiatives like Schelling in the race? Eric Schmidt was quite dismissive in his recent YouTube Q&A (now here: https://x.com/quasa0/status/1823933017217482883) simply saying "the rich get richer, the poor... must do the best they can do..."). I am sceptical that any amount of innovation can hack incentive / reward mechanisms to fend off singleton / duopoly winner-takes-all game dynamics. Instead, to use an evolutionary metaphor: what are the ecological niches in which more nimble, adaptive, "mammalian" open source AI can thrive despite closed-source reptilian "dinosaurs" being dominant in the food chain?
Absolutely agree with the sentiment. However the last 20 years have already told a story of tech that was for the people by the people but that was co-opted by the greedy. It was ever thus. We will need something truly powerful to push against the forces of greed, power and capitalism to ensure this does in fact serve the many not the few.
Came here from Peter Diamandis's newsletter and was not disappointed. This is a good blend of optimism and realism - or as Hans Rosling put it, "possibilism".
Congratulations on the launch, Emad and team. I've been pondering similar questions for a while... but the biggest conundrum for me is how small countries - without critical-mass venture capital concentration - coordinate together to fund this work / infrastructure and keep decentralised, distributed initiatives like Schelling in the race? Eric Schmidt was quite dismissive in his recent YouTube Q&A (now here: https://x.com/quasa0/status/1823933017217482883) simply saying "the rich get richer, the poor... must do the best they can do..."). I am sceptical that any amount of innovation can hack incentive / reward mechanisms to fend off singleton / duopoly winner-takes-all game dynamics. Instead, to use an evolutionary metaphor: what are the ecological niches in which more nimble, adaptive, "mammalian" open source AI can thrive despite closed-source reptilian "dinosaurs" being dominant in the food chain?
Absolutely agree with the sentiment. However the last 20 years have already told a story of tech that was for the people by the people but that was co-opted by the greedy. It was ever thus. We will need something truly powerful to push against the forces of greed, power and capitalism to ensure this does in fact serve the many not the few.
Came here from Peter Diamandis's newsletter and was not disappointed. This is a good blend of optimism and realism - or as Hans Rosling put it, "possibilism".