LrnByTeach

to me, just that these lines from DeepSeek founder/CEO Liang Wenfeng gives a clue that China communist party involvement in DeepSeek-R1 is minimal or nothing. If CCP is involved in a big way, we won't see these words from CEO.

> "For many years, Chinese companies are used to others doing technological innovation, while we focused on application monetization..."

> “But in fact, this is something that has been created through the tireless efforts of generations of Western-led tech communities. It’s just because we weren’t previously involved in this process that we’ve ignored its existence.”

Such a relief/contrast to the period between 2010 and 2020, when the top five Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon, and Microsoft monopolized their own regions and refused to compete with any other player in new fields.

Google : Search

Facebook : social

Apple : phones

Amazon : shopping

Microsoft : enterprise ..

> Even still, this monthly progress across all companies is exciting to watch. Its very gratifying to see useful technology advance at this pace, it makes me excited to be alive.

yes, staggered software update is the way to go. there was reply in this thread why Crowdstrike did not do it -- don't want extra cost of Engineering for that

having 1/3 of Airlines computers Windows, RHEL, Ubuntu .. all unlikely to hit same problems at same time.

what many people of not taking is that why we are here:

one simple reason: all eggs in one Microsoft PC basket

why in one Microsoft PC basket?

- most corporate desktop apps are developed for Windows ONLY

Why most corporate desktop apps are developed for Windows ONLY?

- it is cheaper to develop and distribute since, 90% of corporations use Windows PCs ( Chicken and Egg problem)

- alternate Mac Laptops are 3x more expensive, so corporations can't afford

- there are no robust industrial grade Linux laptops from PC vendors (lack of support, fear of Microsoft may penalize for promoting Linux laptops etc.)

1/ Most large corporations (Airlines, Hospitals etc..) can AFFORD & DEMAND their Software vendors to provide their ' business desktop applications' both in Windows and Linux versions and install mix of both Operating systems.

2/ majority of corporate desktop applications can be Web applications (Browser based) removing the single vendor Microsoft Windows PC/Laptops

-

Wow !! good to know real reason for non-staggered release of the software ...

> Crowdstrike bit my company with a false positive that severely broke the entire production fleet because they pushed the change everywhere all at once instead of staggering it out. We pushed them hard in the RCA to implement staggered deployments of their changes. They sent back a 50 page document explaining why they couldn't which basically came down to "that would slow down blocks of true positives" - which is technically true but from followup conversations quite clear that is was not the real reason. The real reason is that they weren't ready to invest the engineering effort into doing this.

my own analysis

Losers & Winners from Llama-3-400B Matching 'Claude 3 Opus' etc..

Losers:

- Nvidia Stock : lid on GPU growth in the coming year or two as "Nation states" use Llama-3/Llama-4 instead spending $$$ on GPU for own models, same goes with big corporations.

- OpenAI & Sam: hard to raise speculated $100 Billion, Given GPT-4/GPT-5 advances are visible now.

- Google : diminished AI superiority posture

Winners:

- AMD, intel: these companies can focus on Chips for AI Inference instead of falling behind Nvidia Training Superior GPUs

- Universities & rest of the world : can work on top of Llama-3

This might have been a reasonable and workable solution for all parties involved.

Context:

---------

1.1/ ILya Sukhar and Board do not agree with Sam Altman vision of a) too fast commercialization of Open AI AND/OR b) too fast progression to GPT-5 level

1.2/ Sam Altman thinks fast iteration and Commercialization is needed in-order to make Open AI financially viable as it is burning too much cash and stay ahead of competition.

1.3/ Microsoft, after investing $10+ Billions do not want this fight enable slow progress of AI Commercialization and fall behind Google AI etc..

a workable solution:

--------------------

2.1/ @sama @gdb form a new AI company, let us call it e/acc Inc.

2.2/ e/acc Inc. raises $3 Billions as SAFE instrument from VCs who believed in Sam Altman's vision.

2.3/ Open AI and e/acc Inc. reach an agreement such that:

a) GPT-4 IP transferred to e/acc Inc., this IP transfer is valued as $8 Billion SAFE instrument investment from Open AI into e/acc Inc.

b) existing Microsoft's 49% share in Open AI is transferred to e/acc Inc., such that Microsoft owns 49% of e/acc Inc.

c) the resulted "Lean and pure non-profit Open AI" with Ilya Sukhar and Board can steer AI progress as they wish, their stake in e/acc Inc. will act as funding source to cover their future Research Costs.

d) employees can join from Open AI to e/acc Inc. as they wish with no antipoaching lawsuits from OpenAI

This may be a fair workable solution to all the parties involved.

Context:

---------

1.1/ ILya Sukhar and Board do not agree with Sam Altman vision of a) too fast commercialization of Open AI AND/OR b) too fast progression to GPT-5 level

1.2/ Sam Altman thinks fast iteration and Commercialization is needed in-order to make Open AI financially viable as it is burning too much cash and stay ahead of competition.

1.3/ Microsoft, after investing $10+ Billions do not want this fight enable slow progress of AI Commercialization and fall behind Google AI etc..

a workable solution:

--------------------

2.1/ @sama @gdb form a new AI company, let us call it e/acc Inc.

2.2/ e/acc Inc. raises $3 Billions as SAFE instrument from VCs who believed in Sam Altman's vision.

2.3/ Open AI and e/acc Inc. reach an agreement such that:

a) GPT-4 IP transferred to e/acc Inc., this IP transfer is valued as $8 Billion SAFE instrument investment from Open AI into e/acc Inc.

b) existing Microsoft's 49% share in Open AI is transferred to e/acc Inc., such that Microsoft owns 49% of e/acc Inc.

c) the resulted "Lean and pure non-profit Open AI" with Ilya Sukhar and Board can steer AI progress as they wish, their stake in e/acc Inc. will act as funding source to cover their future Research Costs.

d) employees can join from Open AI to e/acc Inc. as they wish with no antipoaching lawsuits from OpenAI

To account for the changing times, I believe a Personal LLM should be running on your phone (with a cloud data backup) with background AGENTS looking for shopping deals, working with your calendar and making appointments for all life chores such as your car oil change appointment bookings, recommending preventive maintenance repairs, answering on your demand questions on your your kids math/english report cards grade progress for last few semesters, and so on.

good to know what these "Company OS" stands for

> Salesforce comes in at the sales side of things,

> SAP invades as a finance app, and

> ServiceNow begins their encroachment as an IT ticketing system,

but they all wanna be THE only cloud platform your company needs.

> This is at least the biggest release since 1.18 with generics, possibly bigger.

> the changes demonstrate a transition from the traditional go philosophy of almost fanatical minimalism, to a more utilitarian approach.

This change demonstrate that "to stay as a mainstream" programming language, you can't preach minimalism , has to adopt utilitarian approach.