CoinAnole

👎Geckos. 🦎DM me pics of your dewlap fellas🦎

[CoinAnole @CoinAnole]

A surprisingly large number of people seem to want to be nothing more than living casino chips used to keep score in games played by ASIs.

[Tenobrus @tenobrus]

we should be trying to build The Culture. you all know that right? the whole point of all of this is to build The Culture.

[Mr. S.T.A.R. @favelaoverlord]

It’s schizophrenic to say but at this current moment Donald Trump, Jensen Huang, and the People’s Republic of China are the primary advocates for human freedom in the face of a nightmarish totalitarian hellscape advocated for by Dario Amodei and the US MIC.

[CoinAnole @CoinAnole]

🧑‍💼👨‍💼👩‍💼🧑‍💼👩‍💼👨‍💼🧑‍💼👨‍💼🧑‍💼👨‍💼
https://t.co/WvCoGAyWBn

[Marko Jukic @mmjukic]

https://t.co/FX4oLzwnXn

[CoinAnole @CoinAnole]

The lesson of the Jensen Huang scandal is that managerialism hates and despises founders and would like to get rid of all of them, for all time. If you want a picture of the future, imagine Thierry Breton's boot stamping on a human face — forever.

[The Atlantic @TheAtlantic]

The lesson of the Jensen Huang scandal is not simply that powerful tech-industry leaders are fallible—it is that we need institutions capable of checking their influence and holding them to account, Julian Gewirtz writes. https://t.co/cCfh730k6O

[JFPuget 🇫🇷🇺🇦🇨🇦🇬🇱 @JFPuget]

As all NVIDIA employees I guess, I am deeply concerned by the campaign against Jensen Huang. Removing him would be a disaster.

Many have documented on X and elsewhere how this looks like a coordinated coup.

I'd add only one thing. Look at who would benefit from a dramatic weakening of NVIDIA.

It is not China. It is not about selling GPUs to China because that train has left. China authorities have pushed back on the H200 the Trump administration allowed NVIDIA to sell.

Look at what Jensen pushed back on:
- regulations that would make open source model training too expensive
- regulations that would make closed model providers immune to liabilities caused by their models. He said "if your product is not ready, then don't ship it"
- regulation against model distillation. He said "this is competition. People do it all the time with NVIDIA products, they try to reverse engineer them."

The other side will do everything they can to get him fired.

As a French, I can't care less about his private life. I get that the US is puritan and sees it otherwise. But frankly, isn't it something he and his family has to deal with? Why should all NVIDIA employees, partners, and investors be collateral damage?

Disclaimer. As my bio says, the above are my views only. I do not represent NVIDIA by any means. I only commented on publicly available information.

[Brian Chau @brianchau57]

My Experience With the Leaders of the Jensen Coup

At the start of 2025, numerous Washington, D.C. based NGOs began spreading the false rumor that DeepSeek smuggled 50,000 H100 GPUs. Speaking from firsthand experience, organized think tanks, PR firms, and lobbyists aggressively personally attacked anyone merely asking them to provide evidence. Call them the Export Controls Deep State, or if that’s too right-coded for you, use the Obama-administration term “Foreign Policy Blob”.

The same charlatans are attempting a coup on Jensen Huang, the most indispensable CEO to America’s AI success. If we lost Sam, we have Dario. If we lost Dario, we have Demis. Nvidia is singular. The gap between Nvidia and AMD would be wider than the gap between OpenAI and Mistral, Europe’s top AI company whose models don’t rank in the top 40. This is an attempt to derail the most important company for the American AI industry.

The entire coup against Jensen Huang can be halted by asking a single question. What evidence is there that Alice Huang is actually a Chinese spy? The answer, unsurprisingly, is absolutely zero. There is not even the pretense of a factual basis for the claim. “We made it the fuck up, and if you have a problem with that, what are you, pro-China?”

Taking away this obvious falsehood, the coup against Jensen boils down to a celebrity tabloid headline. Moreover, without the entirely fabricated ‘national security relevance’, these tabloid headlines would be at best a weekend story in the New York Post. Another basic question: if there is evidence of ‘national security relevance’, why not charge Jensen? The basic answer: they lack even the evidence to justify a warrant.

During my time in DC, I was advised repeatedly to stay on the good side of the Export Controls Deep State. I was added to many groups for boosting content spreading the 50,000 H100s conspiracy theory. In several groups, I asked whether there was any evidence behind this claim. One group administrator, who was and still is affiliated with Georgetown, explicitly told me to “focus on bolstering the narrative”. I later posted Patel’s pseudo-correction and was subsequently removed from all of these groups.

What you need to understand about the Export Controls Deep State is that they have no incentive to be remotely honest, because they are entirely unaccountable. To this day, they provided zero evidence for their claim. Internet historians later traced the origin of this claim to a tweet by Dylan Patel of Semianalysis. Patel later said they lied about his tweet and that his claim counted legally obtained hardware.

Affiliates of universities and think tanks promote these baseless claims and are taken seriously by the national press. In reality, their theories about Nvidia are as kooky as the guy who shot up Comet Pizza. The reason they succeed is not only because they are unaccountable, but because they constantly use their unaccountability to attack others. There are broader foreign policy implications to these observations about political power, but I will stick to what I witnessed firsthand.

After Trump’s election, his administration began lifting the export control cap. Surprising no one informed about this policy, America widened our lead. Deepseek was closest to catching up to American models in January 2025, literally the moment of peak export controls.

Based on communication with members of the administration, the evidence that a) the export controls were net negative and b) the export controls deep state was acting in bad faith, that as soon as the situation was described accurately, the administration began rolling them back.

Part of this is because many of these NGOs are funded by foundations like Open Philanthropy / Coefficient Giving, who explicitly intend to harm American AI companies because they believe American AI will “cause human extinction”. As a result, the BIS under the Biden administration was used as an informal cudgel against AI companies, both to censor in favor of their worldview, as seen in the Gemini scandal, as well as to backdoor regulation to slow down American AI broadly.

While they love to accuse everyone else of being traitors, the Export Controls Deep State makes Americans poorer and the American military, to the extent they use AI, weaker.

Most of the time, the best you can do is ignore them. They really are unaccountable and the personal retribution isn’t worth the cost. But now, they are leading a coup against the AI industry’s most indispensable man based on lies and tabloid gossip. Everyone should understand that the Export Controls Deep State has never provided any evidence for their claims nor any reason for their word to be trusted.

[John David Pressman @jd_pressman]

The attempted Anthropic DPA throat slit might have been one of the only times Pete Hegseth acted in the clear defense of the United States.

[Marcel Münch @_mm85]

Meanwhile DeepSeek founder Liang Wenfeng:

• “AI is large enough that it might eventually account for 10% of human GDP. You cannot monopolize such a thing. You must share it with others, or you won’t survive. If we tried to monopolize the benefits, we would be discarded by history. This is an objective law, a historical perspective.”

• “Those who take more get beaten by those who take less. You don’t even need to actually be taking more. If your ambition is to take more, you will be beaten by someone whose ambition is to take less.”

• “If your vision is to take more, you’ve already lost; you may face even greater difficulties. That’s just the way the world is.”

• “We must not imagine that we can claim a certain percentage of the world’s GDP for ourselves — the more you cling to that idea, the less likely you are to succeed. … The more restrained you are, the more likely you are to achieve AGI.”

[CoinAnole @CoinAnole]

@ask_saar @BenjaminDEKR Yes, they're paying through the nose for this compute and it looks bad on their financials to be paying so much.

[CoinAnole @CoinAnole]

@Philipmich3 @realjamesmtz @bot Yes, there seems to be a designer on staff that wants to delete the model number at every opportunity. But it's also likely this is related to the testing of Grok 4.8

[CoinAnole @CoinAnole]

They're going to investigate the hell out of Elon, but it's mostly going to be related to Ukraine or fabricated stuff about him helping Russia. Everything else is going to be pretty much ignored.

[Karen Piper @PiperK]

This report makes some people, like Elon, look treasonous, but it perfectly explains the confusion around the shutdown of Starlink/Starshield a couple of weeks ago, as well as the simultaneous pinning of a U.S. satellite by a Russian one.

[CoinAnole @CoinAnole]

@techdevnotes Grok 4 Fast and Grok 4.1 Fast were wonderful, even if they had trouble writing valid JSON. There weren't any other vision capable models available for anything near that price.

[CoinAnole @CoinAnole]

@lex_node They're a public benefit corporation. Doesn't that mean they have a great deal less fiduciary duty than a normal public company?

[CoinAnole @CoinAnole]

@hikari01011000 The reason Grok 4.1 had such a good personality was due to just one person who left xAI shortly after it was released, he was the primary author of the personality... can't find that tweet now, despite multiple attempts to have Grok find it.

[CoinAnole @CoinAnole]

@keethesh @hiarun02 4.5 & 4.6 are 600 million parameters smaller than 4.7, that's why. They're cheaper to serve and faster.

[CoinAnole @CoinAnole]

Very good update on Grok Bot. Unfortunately, it's not from anyone at SpaceXSI like it should be.

[Joey Gilkey @JoeyGilkey]

Update #2 (after meeting with the @bot @spacexai engineering team):

- Team is great. They care a ton. They owned it.
- They admitted that it was almost entirely from pulling Opus 5.5 out. Which is now back as of this AM.
- Learned a little bit about the context-compaction process with Grok 4.7-summarize which is not a public model. Plays a role in routing config and the summary we get back.
- Grok 5.0 should be insane next level (just as an aside point)
- I am somewhat surmising on why stuff went so poorly over the weekend but a lot of it has to do with not just pulling Opus 5.5 out but when they did that a known problem (and was on cursor as well) showed up which is when you switch the model mid task (which would’ve happened by removing our 5.5) it cannot remember the context and even of what it can gather its truncated (likely do to 4.7-summarize compacting). So in our case what likely happened was we had a lot of stuff mid flight that was likely pulling on opus 5.5 heavy, then it got pulled, routed to different model, forgot the context, and turned incredibly dumb. We laughed when I showed them a project that was mid flight in a doc. The first half of the doc was intelligently designed, formatted, etc. and the second half of the doc was a wall of seemingly incoherent, non formatted text. Again, I’m surmising but I think it was dumber model with all context removed
- I won’t say much here but Elons comment on it being “unsustainably high relative to revenue” was a much larger chess move. Won’t say much past that. Not my place. But he’s definitely playing a much larger chess match than just “Grok bot isn’t sustainable”.
- The problems we all experienced should be fixed and I do not think they want to go back to what they experienced over the weekend with the hit it took.
- They are very much focused on the enterprise use case for grok bot in the future

All in all, how’s this impact my decision making moving forward with the enterprise contract we have:
- Honestly still weighing the decision vs just using team plan. Working through some terms
- the reason to move forward is pretty simple. Unlimited users (so not paying per seat but for usage), access to forward deployed team and engineers for support and circumstances like I just experienced, very granular governing and guardrails for the org. That’s it

Impressed with the team overall and I think the main benefit to staying vs moving to open source (for a company like mine vs being a solo/small company) is trusting their ability to ship and keep building plus keep it maintained.

Shoutout to @ASankarraman for jumping in to help and to the @spacexai, @bot, and @elonmusk teams

[CoinAnole @CoinAnole]

@justmy2cents111 I've seen similar things in the past few days, the forgetting of rules. The rules are still recorded, and fully go back to being used once I give a reminder, but it seems there was some sort of change to context compression or similar recently that caused some forgetfulness.

[CoinAnole @CoinAnole]

@FabGeorjon It sounds more like a downgrade than an upgrade to me. I might consider it if Grok closes the gap with Opus 5.5

[CoinAnole @CoinAnole]

@FabGeorjon @ShopcDigital @doutorcaleb I think I'm still on the old version of the dashboard because I'm on a legacy plan

[CoinAnole @CoinAnole]

@YourFutureCoder This seems to have just gotten fixed.

[CoinAnole @CoinAnole]

@ShopcDigital @doutorcaleb @FabGeorjon Recently I've started seeing `cursor-grok-4.5-high` in my Cursor usage dashboard, almost always under 10,000 tokens in usage. Grok 4.5 seems to be used for some sort of housekeeping or consolidation task? Maybe generating summaries of the conversation?