GPT-4o launches, Glue demo, Ohalo breakthrough, Druck's Argentina bet, did Google kill Perplexity?
2024-05-17 spoken.md · speaker-labeled ▶ watch ← E178 all episodes E180 →
Every number here is replayed from score_events — the same ledger the pool ranks on. Decay is what the 127 ideas nobody mentioned gave up this week; it applies only when an episode is processed.
Tier crossings
conviction thresholds crossed by this episode — 65 / 45 / 15 · ideas born here show where they landed. why 65 isn't always green
Who moved the board
each voice's force on conviction this episode — supports and opposes, weighted exactly as the replay applied them · share = % of this episode's movement
What got argued (13 ideas)
ordered by how hard each idea moved · quotes are verbatim from the transcript, timestamps deep-link into the episode
Milei took Argentina from a 4-5% primary deficit to a ~3% surplus by slashing spending, absorbed a quarter of depression-level GDP contraction and did not lose approval. Sacks' mechanism: once fiscal credibility lands with the markets, rates come down, inflation dies and capital returns to the country. Friedberg frames it as the textbook accurate-not-precise macro bet - no other emerging or mature market is running this level of austerity into a global inflationary environment, so it is a no-brainer for anyone with the patience to hold it, and the market eventually gets there. Chamath endorses the mechanism and draws the reverse lesson for the US. The listed expressions are the Argentine ADR complex; Druckenmiller's own basket was described in a played clip, not by a bestie.
I think that the thing with Argentina that's worth taking away is when you've spent decades casting about and misallocating capital and running your economy into the ground, the formula for fixing it is exactly the same. You cut entitlements and you reinvigorate the economy.
From a macro perspective, what Milei is doing is significantly different than what we're seeing in any other emerging market, let alone mature market with respect to fiscal austerity and appropriateness in this sort of global inflationary environment. And he said, you know what, I don't see any other leader doing this. This is a no-brainer bet. Let me make the bet.
Friedberg brings Ohalo out of stealth: applying proteins that switch off the reproductive circuits which split a plant's genes lets both parents pass 100% of their DNA to the offspring, so a single cross produces a polyploid plant carrying every gene from both parents. His receipts are a 40%+ seed increase in Arabidopsis and a boosted potato yielding 682 grams against 33 and 9 grams for its two parents, versus the ~1.5% annual yield gain the corn seed industry buys with $3B a year of conventional breeding. It also creates true potato seed where none has ever existed (saving farmers ~20% of revenue and removing disease risk) and lets staple crops be adapted to drought, heat and sandy soil where they cannot be grown today. If it scales, it is deflationary for food and for crop inputs - Friedberg says fertilizer use per pound produced should fall significantly - and it undercuts the decades-long breeding programs that are legacy seed companies' moat. Ohalo is revenue-generating with >$50M invested and patents now publishing.
Like the yield on some of these plants goes up by 50 to 100% or more. Just to give you a sense, like in the corn seed industry, breeders that are breeding corn are spending $3 billion a year on breeding, and they're getting maybe 1.5% yield gain per year. With our system, we are seeing 50 to 100% jump in the size of these plants.
And I think that we're going to see a major lawsuit here. Those people who are in those boxes are going to look at the answer here and realize maybe they don't get the click through and that this answer was built on that. And now we're going to have to have a new framework. There's going to need to be, Sacks, a new company that clears this content so that Google can do answers like this.
Well, look, this is the same conversation we've had two or three times where we're gonna need the courts to figure out what fair use is. And depending on what they come up with, it may be the case that Google has to cut them in by doing licensing deals.
I think that's why these tools companies or the tools products that Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and a few others are building are actually incredible businesses because so many enterprises and so many vertical application builders are going to be able to leverage them to rewrite their entire business functions.
One of the emails I got, this is crazy, was from a guy that's like, oh, we've 8090 Photoshop. So we have a much, much cheaper version of Photoshop. And the guy was doing a few million bucks of ARR and growing really nicely. But then it turned out that somebody saw that, and then 8090 did it. So then there was an open source version of that thing. And so to your point, Friedberg, none of these big companies stand a chance.
I think their product roadmaps just became obsolete. Now that's not to say there isn't more work for them to do in workflow in terms of integrating the AI with customer support tools and doing that last mile of customizing the model for the vertical specific problems of customer support. But my guess is that hundreds of millions of dollars of R&D just went out the window.
In my talk with Sunny this week, he mentioned that these new models are so much more efficient that you actually can throw the old model in the garbage because it's so inefficient. And these are now becoming about 90% cheaper every year, which means every two years these things are going to be 99% cheaper and better.
So I think where we are is probably within two years of where the basic building blocks are standardized. And then I think the real businesses get built. So I will maintain my perspective here, which is the quote unquote Facebook of AI has yet to be created.
Chachi BT Web Visits, as you can see, have plateaued. This data is similar web. I would agree with you, Chamath. It seems like the use cases and the looky-loos who are just trying this software, because they heard about it, they've gone away, and then we have to find actual use cases.
Episode digest
written during extraction and stored in data/extractions/ep179.json — the auditable source of truth, including everything market-adjacent that did not earn a capture
GPT-4o week: Chamath says OpenAI's consumer growth and premium conversion have stalled and re-ups that 'the Facebook of AI has yet to be created', with the basic building blocks another two years from standardizing; Jason shows plateauing ChatGPT web visits and pegs inference at 90% cheaper per year. Sacks argues B2C subscriptions are OpenAI's least attractive business model and the money is in metering the app layer - which is also his soft counter to Chamath's AI-capex-outruns-monetization thesis, a counter Friedberg now joins by calling the hyperscalers' AI tools businesses 'incredible', a flip from his supporting stance at E167. Friedberg brought Ohalo out of stealth with the episode's only genuinely new thesis: 'boosted breeding' switches off meiosis so both parents pass 100% of their DNA, producing 50-100% yield jumps (a boosted potato at 682g vs 33g and 9g parents) against the 1.5%/yr the corn industry buys for $3B - deflationary for food and crop inputs and corrosive to legacy seed breeders' moat. The biggest conviction move is on Google: all four turn constructive on AI Overviews, with Friedberg arguing revenue per search query can go UP while the internet's long tail of content gets cannibalized, and Sacks - who authored the bearish Gemini-bias thesis at E167 - now saying the fiasco 'doesn't matter' because the monopoly is strong enough to copy Perplexity and get to $5T; that is logged as a reversal. Sacks also discloses he is in the seed round of an unnamed AI content-rights marketplace, and the Argentina segment (bullish reform trade, new idea) came off a played Druckenmiller CNBC clip, not a bestie's own position.