『Slow Takes Ep. 7: Who Pays for All of This?』のカバーアート

Slow Takes Ep. 7: Who Pays for All of This?

Slow Takes Ep. 7: Who Pays for All of This?

無料で聴く

ポッドキャストの詳細を見る
Every story this week came back to the same question. Not whether AI is getting more powerful, but who is paying for it. Anthropic locked away its most capable model and gave it to defence contractors. OpenAI proposed robot taxes to cushion the disruption its own products are causing. Meta committed $135 billion in a single year. Anthropic signed a deal measured in gigawatts without once mentioning the word consumption. And OpenAI walked away from the UK because the electricity was too expensive.Five stories. One thread. The bill is arriving. The question is who picks it up.Every Monday at 12:45 BST, Leor Gayr from Exploring ChatGPT and I go through the week’s AI news without hype. Here is what we covered.Slow Takes is also available on the YouTube channel: Exploring ChatGPT.1. Claude Mythos: the model you cannot useAnthropic revealed Claude Mythos Preview, its most powerful model to date, on 7 April. It will not be publicly released. Access is restricted to a handful of partners including Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, and CrowdStrike under Project Glasswing, a defensive cybersecurity initiative. During internal testing, the model found zero-day vulnerabilities in every major operating system and every major web browser. One was a 17-year-old remote code execution flaw in FreeBSD that Mythos discovered and exploited entirely autonomously.What we said on the live:Leor has a source who has used Mythos and confirms the capabilities are real. The model is extraordinarily powerful. But there is a cost problem nobody is talking about: token spend on Mythos runs 5 to 20 times higher than Opus 4.6. Even if Anthropic wanted to release it publicly, the economics do not work. Someone on the $200/month plan burning through Mythos tokens on emails and pizza questions would cost the company a fortune. This feeds directly into Anthropic’s enterprise model: over a thousand businesses paying more than a million dollars a year. They do not need a consumer release. They need trusted partners with deep pockets.What did not come up:The framing. Anthropic positioned this as a security story: we found the vulnerabilities so the bad actors cannot. That is true. It is also a story about governance by corporate discretion. The company that builds the most capable AI system in the world is the company that decides who gets access to it. The people affected by the technology it secures have no say. The model is extraordinary. The question is who gets to use extraordinary things and who decides.2. OpenAI proposes robot taxes for the disruption it createsOpenAI published a 13-page policy paper titled ‘Industrial Policy for the Intelligence Age’. The proposals include a public wealth fund seeded by AI companies and modelled on Alaska’s oil dividend, robot taxes to shift the burden from labour to capital, government-backed trials of a four-day work week at full pay, and automatic safety nets that activate when AI job displacement crosses defined thresholds.What we said on the live:Leor pushed back on the assumption that all jobs will disappear. The farming analogy is instructive: 80-90% of the workforce used to be farmers, machines replaced most of those roles, and people found other work. Jobs disappeared but work did not. The more interesting point is the timing. This paper arrived weeks before a reported IPO, at exactly the moment OpenAI was attracting heat for Pentagon contracts and political alignment. Sam Altman, who said OpenAI would always be a non-profit and would never run ads, is now proposing a policy framework that reads like a socialist manifesto. The ideas themselves are not new. Bill Gates proposed robot taxes years ago. The question is why this company is proposing them now.What did not come up:The automatic safety nets require measurements of job displacement that do not yet exist. Who measures? Who decides when the threshold is crossed? The company causing the displacement? If the answer is yes, that is a company writing the rules for its own disruption before anyone else does. The proposals sound progressive. The timing, weeks before a reported IPO, sounds strategic.3. Meta is spending $135 billion on AI this yearMeta announced AI capital expenditure of $115-135 billion for 2026. That is roughly double last year and treble 2024. Most of the spending goes to Meta Superintelligence Labs, led by Alexandr Wang, hired for $14.3 billion when Meta acquired Scale AI. Meta also launched Muse Spark, its first model under the new division. It is competitive but still behind Google, Anthropic, and OpenAI on key benchmarks.What we said on the live:Leor made a fair point: Meta is funding this from advertising revenue, not from layoffs. Their core business saw a 24% revenue increase. Hats off for spending the money they are making rather than firing people to raise it. The bigger question is why Meta needs its own model at all. Apple decided to partner with Google rather than build a competing AI. Meta could do the same. ...
adbl_web_anon_alc_button_suppression_t1
まだレビューはありません