White House AI Accord, Model Welfare, Ken Griffindor School of Market Wizardry | Ali Golshan, Mike Intrator, Vlad Tenev, Pari Singh, Minna Song, Dev Ittycheria, Daragh Murphy, Noah Friedman

John Coogan (0:00)

You're watching TBPN.

John Coogan (0:02)

Today is Wednesday, September 30th, 2026

We're back in the Ultra Dome, the temple of technology, the fortress of finance, the capital of capital. Let me tell you about ramp.com. Time is money, save both. Easy to use corporate cards, bill pay, accounting and a whole lot more all in one place.

So there was a supper last night at the White Home, the White House, the Golden House, the Golden Home, Gold Home. What are we calling it these days? Well, we renamed artificial intelligence. It's super intelligence now. We were debating, is super intelligence abbreviated SI or just S? Because if you're like super alignment, was that SA?

Jordi Hays (0:53)

One problem there, John, there's no TLD for just S.

John Coogan (0:56)

That's true. That's true. You got to get the new TLDs going. What was the word we?

Dev Ittycheria (1:01)

So super alignment, that was one word. That was one word. Some words you do, you have a hyphen.

John Coogan (1:05)

You have a hyphen.

Pari Singh (1:06)

Yeah.

Dev Ittycheria (1:07)

If you just use a normal prefix for-

John Coogan (1:09)

It's just a normal prefix for something.

Pari Singh (1:11)

So like- Then supernatural.

John Coogan (1:12)

Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious. That's one word, right? So you would think that potentially you would just be using one word here. But anyway, we're using two words, I guess. And so there was a dinner at the White House. David Sacks posted it. He said, it's the Bretton Woods of supper intelligence, super intelligence.

And there's some debate.

Jordi Hays (1:36)

My first reaction to this is Tyler was really snubbed. You know, all those people there are not one chair for Tyler.

John Coogan (1:43)

Yeah. And so there's a bunch of folks here. And people were analyzing who got the best seats, who got the different positions, who got pole position, prime positioning, who was snubbed off in the little kids table at the end, et cetera, et cetera. A bunch to analyze about who's on the ins, who's on the outs. But I had Chet GBT sort of go through and try and categorize each attendee by their stance on open source, open source. So did they sign the Jensen and Nvidia open source letter?

Have they been concerned about the cyber security impacts, obviously, Anthropic on the far end, sort of in the red, a bunch of other folks who are more in the yellow. And I don't know if I agree with all of these classifications, but you can sort of see how Jensen is clearly pro open source. Satya Nadella has talked about that. OpenAI, Greg Brockman, more in the middle, you know, not open sourcing a lot of things. OpenAI did sign the Jensen letter, but of course is concerned about pacing the frontier, which is sort of antithetical. And so this is all as a reference point to that post from our friends over at SemiAnalysis. Let me actually pull up what they said here. Where was it?

It was Max Can, I believe this is SemiAnalysis, yes. Max Can says, majority of people are significantly underestimating the probability of open source models being nerfed or even outright banned in the next 6 to 12 months due to cyber-concerns. And so I believe Anthrobic put out something yesterday talking about the risks of open source and in a cyber context saying that the delay between mythos preview, being able to find zero days, being able to hack into things, that gap has closed now and the open source frontier can very quickly do the same thing. And so expect a lot of cyber-incidents unless something is done.

Can these be controlled some way? Maybe at the inference layer, maybe at the data center level, maybe at the chip level. There's going to be a whole bunch of different proposals. But at least right now in the next 6 to 12 months, certainly not this month because the vast majority of people who are closest to Donald Trump have been evangelizing for open source. I would be surprised to see any pushback against open source happen that quickly. At the same time, open source is amorphous. It is not a business by definition, and so it can't really have a formal seat at the table. George Hots, not at the table, for example. Snubbed. Snubbed, yeah. No. Linus Torvalds, not at the table. The open source.

Jordi Hays (4:35)

I imagine George Hots at the table just sort of like laughing in a sort of insane way at everything being said.

John Coogan (4:43)

Yeah, and so even the companies that are pro open source, they are pro open source insofar that it advances their business, and so there is still a way that the closed source group could find a way for everyone who's at this table to benefit in a closed source world moving forward if open source is deemed to be too dangerous and forcing too many cyber concerns.