Keith Rabois

The bitter lesson is you could believe that food is this immutable thing that's made meticulously by hand by these individuals, or you can take this general purpose computer approach, which is what he took, waited for these cost curves to come into play, and now you can scale food to every human on earth.

I just think it's so profoundly important.

Yeah, I just meant that, you know, other than the first versions of FSD, which I think Andre talked about, Andre Karpathy talked about, you know, they're not really so reliant anymore on human labeling per se, right?

So that, yeah, that, that interference.

And then the other crazy thing that he said, subsequent versions of Grok

are not gonna be trained on any traditional data set that exists in the wild.

He said that he's going to have agents creating synthetic data from scratch that then drive all the training, which I just think is, it's crazy.

So here's the Yeah, so the two approaches would be, let's say, like Travis and I were building competing versions of a chess solver.

And Travis's approach would say, I'm just going to define the chessboard.

I'm gonna give the players certain boundaries in which they can move, right?

So the bishop can only move diagonally, and there's a couple of boundary conditions, and I'm gonna create a reward function, and I'm just gonna let the thing self-learn and self-play.

That's his version.

And then what happens is when you map out every single permutation, when you go and play Keith, who's the best chess player in the world,

What you're doing at that point is saying, okay, Keith made this move.

So you search for what Keith's move is, and you have a distribution of the best moves that you could make in response or vice versa.

That was the cutting edge approach.

The different approach, which is more, you know, what people would think is more, quote unquote, elegant and less brute force, would be, Jason, for you and I to sit there and say, okay, if Keith moves here, we should do this.

We should do this specific variation of the Sicilian defense.

And it's too much human knowledge.

And I think what it turned out was there was a psychological need for humans to believe we were part of the answer.