ChatGPT’s Three Year Anniversary, OpenAI Partners With Thrive, David Sacks Vs The New York Times | Diet TBPN

Our favorite moments from today's show, in under 30 minutes. TBPN.com is made possible by: Ramp - https://ramp.com Figma - https://figma.com Vanta - https://vanta.com Linear - https://linear.app Eight Sleep - https://eightsleep.com/tbpn Wander - https://wander.com/tbpn Public - https://public.com AdQuick - https://adquick.com Bezel - https://getbezel.com Numeral - https://www.numeralhq.com Polymarket - https://polymarket.com Attio - https://attio.com/tbpn Fin - https://fin.ai/tbpn Graphite - https://graphite.dev Restream - https://restream.io Profound - https://tryprofound.com Julius AI - https://julius.ai turbopuffer - https://turbopuffer.com fal - https://fal.ai Privy - https://privy.io Cognition - https://cognition.ai Gemini - https://gemini.google.com Follow TBPN: https://TBPN.com https://x.com/tbpn https://open.spotify.com/show/2L6WMqY3GUPCGBD0dX6p00?si=674252d53acf4231 https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/technology-brothers/id1772360235 https://www.youtube.com/@TBPNLive

Speaker names marked ? are inferred from speaking time and the show’s known hosts — they are not voice-verified.

• 0:00John Coogan?

  It's been three years since ChatGPT launched. I wanted to reflect a little bit. Everything changed, or maybe nothing changed, or maybe some amount of change in between everything and nothing. You're more on the nothing changed camp. I sort of agree with you. I was sort of reflecting on like, okay, Thanksgiving's happened. It was Thanksgiving over the weekend, you know, how different is my world? Like, there's not a humanoid robot that's cooking for me. And also, even if we had a humanoid robot, I think Thanksgiving would be the day we let the robot sit in the closet because we enjoy. No, no, let us cook. We enjoy cooking.

• 0:33Jordi Hays?

  Let us.

• 0:34John Coogan?

  Thanksgiving is like the track day of cooking. Like, even if you have a robot that does it, you still want to do it on Thanksgiving. You don't want to cook on a random Tuesday. I was reflecting more on the agentic commerce thing. It feels like ChatGPT and OpenAI, they really are pushing to make revenue from agentic commerce, like, in this holiday season. Incredible speed of execution. Like, clearly, it's a big opportunity. If you can figure out how to, you know, run ads, commerce, convert, take a cut of that, that's big. The actual product in ChatGPT is pretty good, but you can see that the walled gardens are already going up. So, uh, one place that I like to go to for reviews of products specifically around the holidays is the Wirecutter. Now, the Wirecutter, their whole twist was they wouldn't rate each product.

• 1:17John Coogan?

  What they would do is they would pick a category, and then they would just tell you what their best product was in that category. Sort of like a Cluster Max of, of vacuums. So they would give you the platinum tier, uh, vacuum, and then a budget pick. They were acquired by the New York Times. The New York Times is currently in a lawsuit with OpenAI. And so if you go to ChatGPT and say, hey.

• 1:37Jordi Hays?

  And I think they're about to be in a lawsuit with David Sacks.

• 1:40John Coogan?

  Maybe. But if you go, so I went to ChatGPT and I was like, hey, okay, pull a deep research report. Just pull everything from the Wirecutter and, uh, and tell me every category and every product that's top ranked. But it couldn't do it. It couldn't do it. It said, hey, we don't, we can't touch the Wirecutter. Like, it's off limits. You gotta head over there yourself. Pop open a Chrome tab, brother. If you want to head over there, like, that's on you. The one thing that did really change on Thanksgiving was the discourse. Like, the AI narrative has fully arrived to just family and friends.

• 2:10Jordi Hays?

  You mean fam- in, in the, in the home?

• 2:11John Coogan?

  Yes, yes. And people that don't work in technology, that don't, their job is not podcasting.

• 2:16Jordi Hays?

  Their favorite trough.

• 2:17John Coogan?

  Not that, more talking about is it a bubble? Where do you think all this stuff goes? The stuff that, you know, we've been talking about for months.

• 2:24Jordi Hays?

  You sure you're not living in a bubble? You think the average family in America is talking about the AI bubble?

• 2:29John Coogan?

  I saw multiple newsletters where the whole conceit of the newsletter going into holidays was how to talk to your family about the AI bubble and how to talk to your family about AI generally. And I think it's real because if you've been watching your 401k over the last year, you've seen a massive spike and then a recent sell off. And if you've turned on any news or opened up any newspaper, you've been hearing about $1 trillion. And you're like, what a trillion dollars? That ChatGPT app, they need a trillion dollars to make that thing work?

• 2:59Jordi Hays?

  Chat?

• 3:00John Coogan?

  Right, chat? I wanted to reflect on like, what has actually changed over the last three years? And specifically in the Mag7. The Mag7 has been on absolute tear. Just over the last three years, the value as a whole has basically tripled. It was a little under $8 trillion. Now it's over $21 trillion. That's a lot of value created in the last three years. Nvidia was second to last in the Mag7 when ChatGPT launched. It was worth just $420 billion, something around there. Today, the stock is up over 10x, basically. It's $4.36 trillion.

• 3:35Jordi Hays?

  And up today.

• 3:36John Coogan?

  And up today.

• 3:37Jordi Hays?

  Despite all the chaos over the weekend.

• 3:38John Coogan?

  Dylan Patel was trying so hard to bring that stock down, but he couldn't do it. I do think that the Nvidia, the 10x that's happened, has really created some crazy zealots and just an entire industrial complex. Because there are so many people who heard AI. They tried the ChatGPT thing and they were like, this is big. How do I get it on this? I can't buy OpenAI. OpenAI is running away with it. Oh, they need Nvidia chips. That's the logical next step. They went into Nvidia and they got a 10x. And they could have gotten a 10x on like a million dollars, $10 million.

• 4:13Jordi Hays?

  Ciki Chen from Runway was saying that back, I think it was 2020, 2021. He said he put an uncomfortable amount of his net worth into Nvidia.

• 4:21John Coogan?

  Yep.

• 4:22Jordi Hays?

  And obviously.

• 4:24John Coogan?

  And near Cyan, same story, right?

• 4:27Jordi Hays?

  Still underappreciated. The Nvidia 10-year fund, all it does is buy Nvidia. Just by investing in it, you can't possibly sell. God's chosen company.

• 4:37John Coogan?

  Yes.

• 4:37Jordi Hays?

  That's what the, I think, title of the fund was.

• 4:39John Coogan?

  Oh, really?

• 4:40Jordi Hays?

  Yeah.

• 4:40John Coogan?

  That's hilarious. Previously, the world's largest company in November of 2022 was Apple. And at the time, they had a sizable lead over Microsoft, Amazon, and Google. Now that gap has closed a bit as the hyperscalers have grown more over the last three years on the back of the AI boom. And it's interesting. I mean, you can sort the MAG7 by market cap. And today, you get the following ranking. Tesla, then Meta, then Amazon, Microsoft, Alphabet, Apple, and then Nvidia at the top. And the big question, I think, that's on everyone's mind and kind of underpins the horse race that we cover every day on the show is, what will that ranking look like in the next three years? Is Nvidia really a monopoly?

• 5:20John Coogan?

  Is it impervious to attacks from the, from, you know, different suppliers?

• 5:26Jordi Hays?

  What does Broadcom have to do to get into the MAG7?

• 5:29John Coogan?

  There's also just like a bit of branding. Like, some of the companies that made it into the MAG7 were, I feel like the MAG7 leaned understandable. Like, not that deep in the supply chain. Even Nvidia was the deepest. Nvidia had the least of like a consumer brand, but still, a lot of people use the gaming graphics cards. Broadcom is really tricky because there's no consumer angle whatsoever. Consumers can buy Tesla, they can use Meta products, they can buy on Amazon, have a Microsoft, you know, operating system. They can use Google, they can have an iPhone, and they can have an Nvidia gaming graphics card.

• 6:04Jordi Hays?

  The top 10 right now, Tesla sitting at 10, TSMC at 9, 8 is Saudi Aramco, 7 Meta, and then 6 is Broadcom.

• 6:12John Coogan?

  I also think you have to be an American company to be in this like MAG7 or whatever the hot ranking is, like Fang. Fang did not include, never included oil companies, never included international companies. Because if you go there, then you could be like, oh, well, let's include like the Chinese tobacco company that's worth a trillion dollars or something like that. Like, there are some crazy, there are some crazy like foreign-owned companies that are, if they were independent, might be worth a trillion dollars because they just have so much of the future's assets. Yeah, exactly. But it doesn't really count because it's just sitting there out in the ether. Gemini app downloads are catching up to ChatGPT, and Gemini users now spend more time in the app than ChatGPT users. People are going back and forth on can Gemini catch up? The model.

• 6:56John Coogan?

  Clearly very good. The big bombshell in the semi-analysis piece over the weekend. This idea that OpenAI has not done a proper pre-train since 4.0. And the 4.5 pre-train kind of got mothballed. There was this question about like, is pre-training dead? Seems like the Google folks said, no, it's not. And then they went and did a pre-train and Gemini 3 outperformed. Anthropic also pre-trained.

• 7:19Jordi Hays?

  Yeah, I mean, yeah.

• 7:20John Coogan?

  Pre-trained pilled.

• 7:21Jordi Hays?

  I mean, we asked Cholto about this and he said, oh yeah, we're still bullish on scaling.

• 7:25John Coogan?

  I feel like there's still, there's still juice in the lemon of pre-training, but it's not scale. Like, we only have one internet. Ilya was correct about that. I think the thing that no one is debating is the fact that the Gemini 3 as a model with Nano Banana Pro, with VO3 is just like, the actual foundational intelligence is plenty good to be dominant in the consumer AI category. The question is, can you actually get people to install the app, use it? Can they enjoy it? Do they not churn and go back to ChatGPT? It's a really, it's a sprint to actually create an app that is as sticky as ChatGPT. Because ChatGPT, the app, is fantastic and very, very, very well-designed.

• 8:07John Coogan?

  I would, I would much more look at like, what are the structural advantages that we know exist? And I mean, with Gemini, one of them is to that point about the wire cutter. You know, you know where the wire cutter shows up? Google search results. You know what, you know what, what company has one bot for scraping everything? Google. So the Google bot is, identifies as one entity. So you can either say, I'm allowing Google or not. And it's a big, it's a tall order to be like, yeah, I don't want to be in Google results.

• 8:36Jordi Hays?

  A funny, a funny Gemini integration that I, that I've used is that you land in a, in a hangout and you just say, who is this person?

• 8:45John Coogan?

  Is this real? You can actually do that?

• 8:47Jordi Hays?

  It is. It pulls up a sidebar. You can just ask like, who, who am I meeting with right now? And it'll give you like a.

• 8:53John Coogan?

  It's clearly, who am I meeting with? What should I say? What should I say to them?

• 8:56Jordi Hays?

  What should I ask them?

• 8:57John Coogan?

  What is my name? What are, what do they want to know about me? What should I tell them about me?

• 9:04John Coogan?

  David Sacks is going to war with the New York Times. He says, inside the NYT's hoax factory, he calls it hoax factory because the New York Times posted a piece about David Sacks, saying that the headline was Silicon Valley's man in the White House is benefiting himself and his friends. He says, "Five months ago, the five New York Times reporters were dispatched to create a story about my supposed conflicts of interest, working as the White House AI and crypto czar. Through a series of fact checks, they revealed their accusations, which we debunked in detail. Not surprisingly, the published article included only bits and pieces of our responses. Their accusations ranged from a fabricated dinner with a leading tech CEO to nonexistent

• 9:47John Coogan?

  promises of access to the president, to baseless claims of influencing defense contracts. Every time we would prove an accusation false, NYT pivoted to the next allegation. This is why the story has dragged on for five months. Today, they evidently just threw up their hands and published this nothing burger." Anyone who reads the story carefully can see that they strung together a bunch of anecdotes that don't support the headline. And of course, that was the whole point. Well, people have been supportive of this broadly in tech. Let's go through some of the reaction. Sam Altman says, "David Sacks really understands AI and cares about the US leading in innovation. I'm grateful we have him."

• 10:25Jordi Hays?

  Here's my takeaway. If you believe that AI and crypto are industries that we should support in the United States, then you want to have a czar focused on those things that generally feels positively about those things. I think that there's actually a debate on both fronts, right? Like, there's people on the left that think AI and crypto are just default bad, and they want less of them. And there's people on the right that believe that, too. I think that ultimately, there's arguments for why the US should lead in stablecoins, which is part of why the Genius Act is important.

• 11:08Jordi Hays?

  And a lot of, you know, the AI Action Plan, there's going to be debates on individual points in that. But in general, I think, you know, creating an environment in the US where we can continue to lead in AI is important. I didn't see any sort of, like, smoking gun in any of this stuff. There were some allegations around the all of it.

• 11:28John Coogan?

  I don't think they smoke very much at all. I think it's mostly tequila drinking.

• 11:31Jordi Hays?

  That's true. All in tequila.

• 11:34John Coogan?

  I didn't see anything very specific. I mean, it's, it's, it's all in. Like, they're, they are super connected. If you partner with them in some ways, like, you would expect to get more of a read on where they're spending time in DC, what they're seeing. That seems like there are clear lines on what you can share, like, what, what turns you into a lobbying firm and what doesn't. I don't know David Sacks, but I want more expertise in government. Experts tend to have made money in their area of expertise, have friends in their area of expertise. If our, if people can't have history or friends in a field before leading it, then our leaders won't know anything. And I thought this was a good distillation of, like, the core debate

• 12:16John Coogan?

  about, like, should you have someone who has never participated in, in, in, in an industry overseeing it?

• 12:23Jordi Hays?

  And I believe there's some readers.

• 12:24John Coogan?

  Yeah.

• 12:25Jordi Hays?

  And probably people at the New York Times that would like somebody that hasn't participated in either industry to be running in a role like that.

• 12:32John Coogan?

  Yeah.

• 12:32Jordi Hays?

  And just blanket against both industries and just sort of, like, hold them back.

• 12:35John Coogan?

  So Alex says, "The construct you're thinking of is called a council. It's been used for a long time to allow the elected with limited knowledge on a domain to get a consensus of options from a range of experts. This minimizes conflicts and prevents kleptocracy." Isn't that what a czar is? I thought, I thought, I thought, I thought Sacks was a council. He's not an elected official. The elected official is Donald Trump, the president. And, like, there's a variety of folks there. And then, and then, Sacks is, like, appointed to this czar role. He doesn't have the ability to just, like, create legislation out of thin air, right?

• 13:07Jordi Hays?

  Yeah. I was trying to look up the history of czars, right?

• 13:10John Coogan?

  It is weird. Is, like, have we always had czars? I know there was a whole thing about the borders are.

• 13:14Jordi Hays?

  The first major czar was Bernard Barak, appointed by President Woodrow Wilson to head the War Industries Board in 1918. The press dubbed him the Industry Czar because he had sweeping powers to coordinate wartime production. During World War II, President Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed several czars to manage the massive wartime economy, including a shipping czar and a synthetic rubber czar. These roles were essential-

• 13:39John Coogan?

  Synthetic rubber czar?

• 13:40Jordi Hays?

  That's one of the most iconic-

• 13:42John Coogan?

  People are stoked for that.

• 13:43Jordi Hays?

  People don't talk about the need for our ongoing need for a synthetic rubber czar.

• 13:48John Coogan?

  No.

• 13:48Jordi Hays?

  These roles were essential because existing government bureaucracies were too slow to handle the urgent demands of total war. During the 1973 oil crisis, Nixon appointed William Simon as the energy czar to manage fuel shortages. Anyways, again, I think unless you're just blanket against these industries, it's hard to argue that you want somebody that doesn't have any expertise in said industries. If you're the average New York Times subscriber-

• 14:17John Coogan?

  Yeah.

• 14:17Jordi Hays?

  This is probably that you were, they were probably like very excited by this story. All In Pod about to be an all-timer after this article. Do you think it's possible that David and Jason coordinated to get this hit piece done to grow All In even further?

• 14:33John Coogan?

  The timeline truly is in turmoil over this. Lots of people are sending me the New York Times story on David Sacks. Outside of the All In sponsorship proposal, which feels oblivious at best, corrupt at worst, I'm not seeing much in there that's new, at least to those who've been following. Dan Primack says, "As an aside, it's true that Sacks slash Kraft still have a ton of AI investments. Thing is, all tech investments at this point are AI investments. It's kind of like internet investments at this point. If you invest in tech startups, you de facto invest in AI startups. If anything, going deep into politics has been a net negative for All In, at least in my opinion. We would be growing faster and wouldn't have lost some percentage of our left-leaning

• 15:18John Coogan?

  audience if we'd stuck to tech, markets, science, VC, etc." That's an interesting take. I, I, I still think that all, politics has made All In so important. It made it so big.

• 15:28Jordi Hays?

  Well, yeah, and it made, it made the content polarizing.

• 15:31John Coogan?

  Yeah.

• 15:32Jordi Hays?

  Which, but I think that polarizing in media is good.

• 15:35John Coogan?

  Yeah.

• 15:36Jordi Hays?

  You actually get more attention. Not necessarily good- From all points of view.

• 15:41John Coogan?

  Yeah.

• 15:41Jordi Hays?

  Good from a pure, just like, reach.

• 15:43John Coogan?

  CNBC is bigger than Bloomberg by like a pretty significant margin. Cause Bloomberg's like extra wonky and CNBC is a little bit, I mean, it's like literally called consumer business news. Like that's what the C stands for, I believe. And then, and then you have Fox, which is even more, it, it, like Fox News is political and it's much bigger ratings than CNBC or Bloomberg. And then ESPN is like by far the biggest.

• 16:05Jordi Hays?

  Yeah.

• 16:06John Coogan?

  Because it's like sports. Everyone loves sports.

• 16:08Jordi Hays?

  When my wife asks what we should eat for dinner, but says no to my first two suggestions.

• 16:13John Coogan?

  We are back to the age of research. I like it. And then when she asks what I want for dinner from Beis Lord. The answer to that question will reveal itself. I think there will be lots of possible answers. Very true. Uh, it's a great, a great new meme template. I like it. When my husband asks how many Amazon packages are still on the way. The answer to that question will reveal itself. I think there will be lots of possible answers, but I think that's actually true. Like if he creates, if he creates some new AI, like there's a bunch of different ways to monetize it. We know this is a, we know this is a fact, but uh, of course Ilya is, is now joining the ranks of Yan LeCun and Rich Sutton and under Kirk Pathy of sort of industry legends that are

• 16:59John Coogan?

  more or less saying that scaling is over and LLMs are dead.

• 17:02Jordi Hays?

  Scaling is over and LLMs are a dead end. Aw, you're sweet. Scaling is over and LLMs are a dead end. Hello, human resources.

• 17:11John Coogan?

  I love this meme template. It's like, yeah, Yan LeCun has been saying the same thing.

• 17:15Jordi Hays?

  He says, Yan says, for the record, my current BMI is 24.

• 17:20John Coogan?

  This guy rocks. And the timeline was in turmoil. Lots of people, uh, very, you know, upset with semi-analysis latest post.

• 17:28Jordi Hays?

  Dare you?

• 17:29John Coogan?

  How dare you take a, they, they took a swing at the king. They said TPUV7, Google takes a swing at the king. King is of course Nvidia. They are asking, is this potentially the end of the coup d'emoat? Anthropics, they're talking about Anthropics, one gigawatt. TPU purchase, the more TPU, Meta, SSI, XAI, OpenAI, Anthropic buy, the more GPU capex you save and they're going into what the, what the battle between TPU and the next generation GPU out of Nvidia will look like. Uh, this, uh, this upset some people. There's a lot of folks who are long Nvidia. Either they have invested in Nvidia, they made a lot of money in Nvidia,

• 18:12John Coogan?

  or their, their whole business is tied to Nvidia or AMD even. In general, the response to this article was very positive, but there were some folks who were very upset by it.

• 18:22Jordi Hays?

  And on accounts that, uh, that put a noun and then capital as their name.

• 18:28John Coogan?

  Yes.

• 18:28Jordi Hays?

  And suddenly they're an expert on everything.

• 18:30John Coogan?

  Yes, yes, yes. Yeah, it was, it was a little odd seeing the credentialism come out from the anon's because like, I don't think we should get in the two can play that game uh, camp. It's a little bit rough. So a lot of people are going back and forth on, you can't semi-analysis be trusted? Because they're writing about, uh, about, you know, Nvidia and, and, uh, Dylan. I think some people didn't understand that he was joking. Zephyr here has a post. Dylan is being tongue in cheek, but he's not wrong. Nvidia was extremely dominant for the last three years as we saw in the stock. It's up 10x over the last three years. New competitors will cause a reduction in market share and margin compression, but TAM is big, so revenue profits won't go down.

• 19:15John Coogan?

  75% of GM is just unsustainable. Hyperscalers will also use the cheap TPUs threat to extract better deals from Jensen. Priority access for Ruben Feynman or discounts on GPUs. Jensen called Altman and initiated the $10 billion deal after he saw the information about, uh, the information article about OpenAI testing TPUs. This is in reaction to that, uh, that, that point about OpenAI hasn't even deployed TPUs yet and they've already saved 50%.

• 19:41Jordi Hays?

  Dylan's speedrunning through all the learnings of sell-side research, industry capture, pissing off IR execs, gatekeeping info based on client tier, difficulty scaling beyond single star analysts, distorted MSN representation of your notes, eventually spending too much time marketing versus researching, amazing biz. Obviously, uh, Dylan would, would push back on.

• 20:01John Coogan?

  He did.

• 20:01Jordi Hays?

  On a lot of this stuff. If you actually read through the entire article.

• 20:06Jordi Hays?

  There's nothing in the article should actually, in this article should be that surprising because so much of the article is just referencing old semi-analysis research. Part of, part of I think the surprise here is just how much, how much faster this conversation has really come to a head than people may have expected. At least like surface level on the timeline, I think people felt like the TPU threat was maybe like a 2026, 2027 conversation versus being like it's a part of these buying discussions right now and negotiations.

• 20:38John Coogan?

  The other buried lead in the article was of course about pre-training. OpenAI's leading researchers have not completed a successful full-scale pre-training run that was broadly for a new frontier model since GPT-4O in May of 2024. Like if this was wrong, you would imagine that there would be a whole bunch of reaction from OpenAI people or like proxies or surrogates, right? People quote trading and be like, that's just not true. Wow, something else is cooked. But the fact that I haven't seen anyone respond to this and say like, oh, this is, this is wrong, like we actually did. Not that, not that like that's the North Star for what the business is, like the business's job is to create profits, right? It's not to, you know, to complete successful, full-scale pre-training runs.

• 21:22John Coogan?

  That's not the goal. That's just something that they might do in service of making a better model, making a better product. But ultimately it's whatever the customers want.

• 21:30Jordi Hays?

  Yeah.

• 21:31John Coogan?

  And if the customers are happy with 4O level base pre-train and a bunch of reasoning on top, that's fine. Also, I mean, really, it does make me happy that we didn't go deeper into ranking people because the, it does feel like when you create a list of tiers and rank a bunch of people, you're just creating a big bucket of enemies down at the bottom of like people who want you dead because you ranked them low. My theory is that Meta deliberately leaked the story to the information about, about acquiring Google's TPUs. For Meta, it's a classic risk-free power play. The moment Jensen Wong reaches wind, catches wind of Meta using Google silicon, Nvidia is likely to rush in with an investment. They might even be negotiating as we speak.

• 22:13John Coogan?

  This allows Meta to secure capital and shift from burning their own cash to potentially getting discounts or effectively buying Nvidia chips with Nvidia's own money. Plus, if they actually do secure Google TPUs, they solve their compute shortage, it covers all bases.

• 22:26Jordi Hays?

  Okay, but the issue, the issue is, is how, how many red flags? Would be waving if Jensen was like, yeah, we're investing $20 billion in Meta. We're very, very excited about Meta and owning a piece of.

• 22:40John Coogan?

  Yeah, it seems very, very odd.

• 22:41Jordi Hays?

  So, so he's in a position where I don't know what kind of leverage Jensen has in those conversations with Meta, because he doesn't want a discount and it's not like OpenAI where he can just announce an investment or an Anthropic, et cetera. So how does any type of like rebate actually happen is the question.

• 23:00John Coogan?

  So Clive Chan says, I keep seeing stuff about TPU. Has anything materially new happened? There's no evidence Google has ever trained Gemini on non-TPU hardware, going back to pre-GPT models like BERT. TPUs predate Nvidia's own tensor cores. Anthropic and Character and SSI and Mid Journey have long used TPUs. I'd be surprised if Meta weren't looking at them. Nvidia's moat has never been deep for the big labs. See OpenAI deciding it could do better than CUDA and investing in Triton instead, regularly edging out C U D N N on benchmarks. There's nothing magical or structural about any of this, just good engineers doing good work. TPUs are not that much more efficient than GPUs and small performance per watt difference are dwarfed by whether Meta

• 23:45John Coogan?

  has the right kernels and systems engineering talent to pull it off. Both Nvidia's and Google's moats are small and we are still at the point where individual good engineers can flip the entire balance. Why was this not priced in? This is all super old public info. I have a feeling that Clive Chan, who I guess is over at, was it Tesla and then OpenAI? Is a little bit of like first time in the public markets, first time realizing that the people who trade this stuff are not necessarily like on the super inside of the labs, actually understanding

• 24:15Jordi Hays?

  Yeah.

• 24:16John Coogan?

  The decisions that are being made inside the labs. Like it's a completely separate ecosystem. And that's why organizations like Semi Analysis exist. Josh Kushner is partnering with OpenAI. We are excited to announce a strategic partnership between OpenAI and Thrive Holdings. Through our partnership, OpenAI will become an equity holder in Holdings. And collectively, we will set out to deliver frontier technology to our customers. For decades, technology has transformed the world's largest industries from the outside in. We believe the AI paradigm will be different in that some of the most profound transformations will now occur from the inside out. We view. The businesses we that we own and operate as the right reward system to build, test,

• 25:01John Coogan?

  and improve industry-specific products and models. The race is on. Is it inside out or outside in transformation? What's gonna happen? These are the new fast takeoff, short timeline, long timeline. Are you an inside out guy or an outside in guy? This is gonna be the defining debate over the next couple of days.

• 25:17Jordi Hays?

  Well said.

• 25:18John Coogan?

  So get ready to lock in. We'll be covering it here. We'll probably have some people on who are digging into this, investing in this, getting, you know, have long takes, short takes, who knows? But I want to get to the bottom of what this outside in versus inside out transformation will look like. You can feel the panic behind the urgency and intensity with which people are defending Nvidia. It feels visceral and quite intense. You can tell how much is riding on this. It makes a lot of sense.

• 25:44Jordi Hays?

  Thought it was notable pager duty has fallen to a $1.1 billion market cap.

• 25:49John Coogan?

  That was a good business.

• 25:50Jordi Hays?

  And they're at 500 million of ARR. So trading, they're not growing anymore. They're trading a 2.1x ARR.

• 25:56John Coogan?

  Oof.

• 25:57Jordi Hays?

  It's profitable, according to Jason Lumpkin over at Saster. So yeah, rough time out there if you're not growing regardless of the revenue scale. Two days ago, we we shared that Enron back November 29th, 2001, Nvidia replaced Enron in the S and P 500. I saw this post go out from our incredible team and I immediately Googled to fact.

• 26:23John Coogan?

  I was like, there's no way. Someone has made a terrible mistake on our team and we are doing fake news unironically now. We used to have some fun, but apparently this is real.

• 26:33Jordi Hays?

  It's real.

• 26:34John Coogan?

  It's real.

• 26:35Jordi Hays?

  Jensen was like, I'll take that spot.

• 26:37John Coogan?

  November 29th. Obviously, that's not how it works. It is, it is much more mathematical than that, I believe. Standard and Poor's picks the largest companies and after certain ebbs and flows of the market, they swap folks in and out.

• 26:52Jordi Hays?

  Yeah.

• 26:53John Coogan?

  But this went pretty viral, 5,000 likes. But what is really interesting is, of course, the Nvidia, Enron, like comparisons are just so silly to me. What is incredible is this. This branded shirt he's wearing. Look at this thing.

• 27:10Jordi Hays?

  Fantastic.

• 27:11John Coogan?

  So awesome. I love it.

• 27:12Jordi Hays?

  Not enough people trying to go snipe vintage Nvidia merch.

• 27:16John Coogan?

  It's a great shirt. It's a great look and I feel like it's got to make a comeback. The button down, this is the pre Silicon Valley, I'm just in a t-shirt era. But it's post suits, you know, it's like, we're not suits. We're working in technology. We're still going to throw on a collar, but we're going to dress it down a little bit. No tie.

• 27:34Jordi Hays?

  Guys, scroll up, scroll up on this for a second.

• 27:37John Coogan?

  Yeah.

• 27:37Jordi Hays?

  Oh, keep going, keep going. Oh, who's not, who's not following? Tyler, you gotta follow the account. No, this is not my account.

• 27:44John Coogan?

  I think this is a, this is more of like a burner account situation.

• 27:47Jordi Hays?

  Oh, it's a scraper that we use to, for the.

• 27:50John Coogan?

  It is, it is.

• 27:51Jordi Hays?

  You gotta, you gotta correct that, Tyler. Come on. Oxford Dictionary didn't get the memo. Apparently Ragebait named Word of the Year. Uh, I think it, I think it, I.

• 28:00John Coogan?

  No, no, no, that's appropriate that it would be the word of the year, but it is so funny that you, you posted this and then, and then Oxford Dictionary.

• 28:09Jordi Hays?

  Yeah. So this is true. Rage, according to the BBC Ragebait named Oxford Word of the Year 2025. It certainly feels that way on the timeline.

• 28:18John Coogan?

  Your post, one million views on this.

• 28:21Jordi Hays?

  And we will see you tomorrow.

• 28:22John Coogan?

  See you tomorrow.

• 28:22Jordi Hays?

  Cheers.

• 28:23John Coogan?

  Bye.