Kun C. @KunCao_ - Twitter Profile

Kimi K3 may be an important inflection point for AI. Potentially negative for Anthropic and OpenAI while being net positive for essentially every other company in the world. I mean that very literally. Although the real “Sputnik moment” would be an open-source frontier model that was also token efficient unlike Kimi K3 which is 50-70% more expensive to run than GPT 5.6 per Artificial Analysis. Rationale: A world where there are only 2-3 dominant frontier labs with 90% inference margins is net negative for every other layer while being awesome for those 2-3 labs. Those labs would become monopsonies for power, data centers, semiconductors and hyperscalers and would obviously vertically integrate over time into all those layers while also completely subsuming the application/software layers. Anything that lowers margins and increases competition at the model layer is good for every other AI layer: power, semiconductors, hyperscalers, neoclouds and yes even software. This is why Jensen is so supportive of open-source. An open-source model requires the *exact* same amount of compute to run as a closed frontier model of similar size and architecture. Kimi K3 is roughly the same price as GPT 5.6 Terra on a per token basis, which actually suggests that it is less computationally efficient as I am sure that GPT 5.6 is priced to a higher margin than K3. And given that K3 is a token wastrel, i.e. token inefficient, it is significantly more expensive per task than GPT 5.6 and Grok 4.5, which are much more token efficient. Cost per token and token efficiency (i.e. intelligence density per token) are the drivers of intelligence per unit of cost. The winning AI companies will be those that offer the most intelligence per $ over time. Lower margin % at the model layer = more margin $ at every part of the infrastructure layer and is a godsend for software. This can happen either through open-source models like K3 at the frontier *or* having a vertically integrated model company like Meta, SpaceX or Google at the frontier. Both outcomes result in a lower margin % at the model layer as vertically integrated model companies don’t really care where the margin $ come from. This is why it was so painful for OpenAI and Anthropic when Google was right there with them from a model competitiveness perspective and why Grok 4.5 and Muse 1.1 were just as important as Kimi K3.  The reason Kimi K3 is only *potentially* negative for Anthropic and OpenAI is 1) the @ericvishria point that the Claude and ChatGPT products and harnesses may be more important than their models today and 2) the hypothesis that they have much more advanced model checkpoints internally that are already being used for RSI. In the latter scenario, reaching RSI even a few months ahead of other labs might be enough to cement a permanent lead. Time will tell on both points. And likely fairly quickly. Caveat would be that since Kimi K3 is not token efficient and thereby actually more expensive than ChatGPT 5.6, we may need to see a more token efficient open-source model at the frontier or see Grok 5/Composer 4/Muse 2 at multiple points on the Pareto frontier for this potential risk to Anthropic and OpenAI to play out. And I am sure they will both vertically integrate as quickly as possible while continuing the product/harness strength they have shown over the last 8 months.

GavinSBaker's tweet photo. Kimi K3 may be an important inflection point for AI. Potentially negative for Anthropic and OpenAI while being net positive for essentially every other company in the world. I mean that very literally. Although the real “Sputnik moment” would be an open-source frontier model that was also token efficient unlike Kimi K3 which is 50-70% more expensive to run than GPT 5.6 per Artificial Analysis.

Rationale:

A world where there are only 2-3 dominant frontier labs with 90% inference margins is net negative for every other layer while being awesome for those 2-3 labs. Those labs would become monopsonies for power, data centers, semiconductors and hyperscalers and would obviously vertically integrate over time into all those layers while also completely subsuming the application/software layers.

Anything that lowers margins and increases competition at the model layer is good for every other AI layer: power, semiconductors, hyperscalers, neoclouds and yes even software.

This is why Jensen is so supportive of open-source. An open-source model requires the *exact* same amount of compute to run as a closed frontier model of similar size and architecture. Kimi K3 is roughly the same price as GPT 5.6 Terra on a per token basis, which actually suggests that it is less computationally efficient as I am sure that GPT 5.6 is priced to a higher margin than K3. And given that K3 is a token wastrel, i.e. token inefficient, it is significantly more expensive per task than GPT 5.6 and Grok 4.5, which are much more token efficient. Cost per token and token efficiency (i.e. intelligence density per token) are the drivers of intelligence per unit of cost. The winning AI companies will be those that offer the most intelligence per $ over time.

Lower margin % at the model layer = more margin $ at every part of the infrastructure layer and is a godsend for software. This can happen either through open-source models like K3 at the frontier *or* having a vertically integrated model company like Meta, SpaceX or Google at the frontier. Both outcomes result in a lower margin % at the model layer as vertically integrated model companies don’t really care where the margin $ come from. This is why it was so painful for OpenAI and Anthropic when Google was right there with them from a model competitiveness perspective and why Grok 4.5 and Muse 1.1 were just as important as Kimi K3.
 The reason Kimi K3 is only *potentially* negative for Anthropic and OpenAI is 1) the @ericvishria point that the Claude and ChatGPT products and harnesses may be more important than their models today and 2) the hypothesis that they have much more advanced model checkpoints internally that are already being used for RSI. In the latter scenario, reaching RSI even a few months ahead of other labs might be enough to cement a permanent lead.

Time will tell on both points. And likely fairly quickly.

Caveat would be that since Kimi K3 is not token efficient and thereby actually more expensive than ChatGPT 5.6, we may need to see a more token efficient open-source model at the frontier or see Grok 5/Composer 4/Muse 2 at multiple points on the Pareto frontier for this potential risk to Anthropic and OpenAI to play out. And I am sure they will both vertically integrate as quickly as possible while continuing the product/harness strength they have shown over the last 8 months.

549

8K

1K

5K

2M

Kun C.

@KunCao_

11 days ago

@jxnlco OpenAI had starcraft going for awhile

0

1

0

92

Kun C.

@KunCao_

about 1 month ago

@DanielSmidstrup Space

1

0

14

Kun C.

@KunCao_

about 1 month ago

@rihntv https://t.co/kflyDD0c1d

0

1

0

15

Kun C.

@KunCao_

about 2 months ago

@trikcode I made my first sale on https://t.co/wPbVKfKQSi for 9.99 😂

1

0

1

279

Kun C.

@KunCao_

about 2 months ago

@carbayon_sin @NuriaWolf https://t.co/uMczKfo4RS I've rebuilt it here

0

10

Kun C.

@KunCao_

about 2 months ago

@RedBarSystems @bluewmist https://t.co/uMczKfo4RS I've rebuilt it here

0

3

Kun C.

@KunCao_

3 months ago

@DrProfitCrypto For months now lol

3

0

16

Kun C.

@KunCao_

3 months ago

@DrProfitCrypto You shorted lmao, specifically SP500

8

0

66

Kun C.

@KunCao_

5 months ago

@adcock_brett Super cool, how well does it generalize to other room setups?

0

223

KunCao_ retweeted

Size Chad

@SizeChad

6 months ago

The Epstein files make me believe that Scotty pippen probably did meet Satoshi in ‘93

58

2K

71

39

116K

Kun C.

@KunCao_

6 months ago

@dgt10011 I've never seen this guy be right

0

1

0

9

KunCao_ retweeted

Daniel

@danielisdizzy

6 months ago

Stanley Druckenmiller said what many think about Jerome Powell but won’t say out loud. “The Fed’s job is to avoid big mistakes — like the massive inflation we just had. Powell is obsessed with engineering a soft landing and protecting his legacy. But the only reason we even need a landing is because they let inflation run from 2% to 9%. This Fed shows again and again that they think changing their mind means losing credibility.” Powell didn’t save the economy. He helped create the mess.