Loading summary
Transcript19 lines
- [00:00]
Austin Campbell
Heads up everyone. We've now fully transitioned Bits and bips to its new dedicated channels. So if you're not yet subscribed to the new Bits and Bips channels on X, YouTube, Spotify, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts, go there and subscribe now. For the next few weeks, we'll place segments of the full interviews on Unchained as a reminder, but for now you'll only hear those short segments of bits and pips on Unchained. No more full episodes. You can get links to all of the dedicated channels with the full episodes at Unchained. Crypto.com bitsandbits Bips spelled B I P S. Thanks again.
- [00:38]
Rahm Aliwalia
So I think one interesting point about the AI adoption thing is I wonder how much of this is going to start happening because they will be pulled along by consumers. And I say that specifically rom, because you raised health care. I know tons of people who are now taking things their doctors say to them or like conditions that they have and putting it into AI and trying to get a first cut, not just from the perspective of like hey AI, diagnose me, but before I go to a doctor, I want to understand more of what's going on here and have a vastly more informed conversation with the doctor than I would otherwise have. I think there's also been a lot of testing of doctors claims in ways that maybe were not there in the past. And you know, essentially my doctor thinks this, but let me put it into AI, let me shop for a second doctor if I don't like it or don't think they're right. So I'm wondering, and I don't have an answer to this, if that behavior is already observable in the healthcare space or if we're too early in the AI adoption curve to really see the impact here. But to me there is a possibility industries will be forced to start adopting things because part of what I'm seeing in health care in particular, I'm like, you know, I, I, as you can tell from my hair, was a mathematician by training originally. And so if nobody was paying attention during the World cup, apparently anthropics, Claude Fable 5 solved the Jacobian conjecture, which is for non mathematicians. I'm going to make this real simple. It's a roughly 90 year old problem in algebraic geometry. It was proposed by Keller and it basically was talking about how spaces behave. And what Claude was able to do was provide a counterexample to the conjecture, like it actually came up with a specific, knowable, computable counterexample to the conjecture saying, this cannot possibly be true in general because here I found a specific time where it's not true. And that is a huge result. This is One of the 25 most important problems hanging out there unsolved in mathematics right now. How long until we're seeing that with the quality of these models with regard to, like, health care? Rom, you know, good example, if I got cancer right now, I'm probably going to try to get it sequenced to go slam it into one of these things and be like, okay, what do I do about this? Like, we may already be very close. And so I guess I'm asking the question of what is the pull function to increase the rate of adoption here?
- [03:23]
Chris Perkins
Well, a doctor is using AI now for diagnostics. Doctors can get the skill level of like House now, right? So it has powerful diagnostics capabilities. So I think that that's there, but we still have so much more to go. Like, the promise is still ahead of reality. Even now with the latest models. There's still opportunities for these models to improve. And the Jacobian conjecture, it's a great accomplishment for math, but what real world impact does it have? Real world impact is we found a way to target this cancer. Or here's a way you design a fusion reactor that produces that energy. Or here's a way you keep your telomerase, you know, longer for agent. We still haven't seen that kind of impact, which is actually what matters in the world.
- [04:11]
Rahm Aliwalia
I mean, have we not found some of those impacts? I now I'm shooting from the hip here, but haven't we had various results in like healthcare already found by AI?
- [04:23]
Dario
Like there's some incredible protein folding, you know, great.
- [04:28]
Chris Perkins
What's the consequence? We've had novel stories. The guy with Australia and his dog, there's another guy who diagnosed something with his daughter. Like there's some novel stories that are emerging and they have some nice local impacts, but, you know, we still have
- [04:43]
Dario
more to do, always tons more to do. But I think the acceleration is profound. I mean, across the board, every single discipline is being impacted.
- [04:54]
Rahm Aliwalia
I also wonder how much of that, what is the right way to say this Is adoption based like doctors? I'm not trying to insult you guys. I have a lot of doctors and nurses in my family, but doctors are old. And so I'm wondering how much of this is just an adoption question, because I do think some of these impacts are large to like the alphafold thing, which is what Chris is talking about. Rom, for you, what it does is Allows faster, cheap molecule design, novel proteins and specific like custom therapies for various diseases and mutations. So the impact is real. The problem is we've got to do all the studies or get emergency authorization to use these things. It seems like it's more the bureaucracy holding that up.
- [05:44]
Chris Perkins
I think the adoption is self financing because if you're using AI, you have an unnatural competitive advantage. For example, Eli Lilly is using an AI and they're driving results. I know we're using AI in a lot of what we do. That drives productivity. So if you are using AI, you're going to grow and take market share. And if you're not using AI, you're going to get competed out. So that's going to force adoption.
- [06:11]
Dario
It's also evident on the battlefield. Just ask Dario.
- [06:17]
Rahm Aliwalia
Yeah, and I mean not just there. I as I've been observing this, right, like the battlefield iteration, as we start looking at the nature of warfare, if you look at what's going on with the front lines with Ukraine pushing Russia back, largely using almost entirely a drone based strategy, some of which are human piloted, some of which are probably AI like piloted, even if only over short frames. Right now I think we're seeing more and more of that iteration like today. All right, it's a cartoon, so let's not get overexcited here. But did either of you guys see the Anduril ad that dropped on X today? All right, so we've got self flying like helicopter drones that are now engaging in both target interception and disabling anti air defenses to protect manned US military craft. These things I think are coming pretty, pretty rapidly as people adopt. So I'm going to bring this all the way back to where we started. And Chris, this one's for you to start.
- [07:23]
Dario
Oh God.
- [07:25]
Rahm Aliwalia
If you're looking at what's going on in the frontier model space and you've seen the special pleading from OpenAI and anthropic to like restrict these things and keep them out of people's hands. But then China just drops an open weight model that will do it all. How are you thinking about this from a national security perspective?
- [07:47]
Dario
It's tricky. We're in a national race. Ram said it beautifully earlier. We have to be a leader in this technology full stop. And we also have to build in the controls. And end of the day, your technology reflects your ideals and we need to make sure that it powers our ideals and isn't used to to change our ideals or go in the opposite direction of our ideals. So look, we have to accelerate we have to be able to outperform our adversaries on the battlefield. There's a massive race going on. Talk to anyone in the defense space. And again, it's not only just AI. I think crypto has important national security aspects and there's also an arms race going on in the quantum side. Why? Because AI is accelerating all this stuff, so you got to own it. You know, how do you, how do you defend it? I don't know, like, Ukraine is a big laboratory. Everybody knows that lessons are being learned every day and, and it's, it's a very, very dangerous world. But we have to, we have to really accelerate these technologies to understand them and, and to win.
- [08:57]
Rahm Aliwalia
Rahm, what do you think?
- [08:59]
Chris Perkins
Yeah, no, I agree. I think you just need policies to embrace and advance AI. You know, there's a post by, I think one of the members of the all in podcast who works for the admin is highlighting the regulatory constraints on AI adoption. He's a part of the administration. So, you know, you have to have the right policy in place to, you know, accelerate adoption. China is very serious about this opportunity. Like, you know, we have, the United States has the edge on capabilities, but there's a lot to do and as we discussed earlier, like, the promise is significant, the potential for human impact is significant and positive.
- [09:41]
Dario
In finance, we found that lit, predictable, regulated markets attract a lot more liquidity because there's controls, there's a common set of rules. And that's where we found the most success in finance, in AI. You know, there's a lot of concerns about sharing your information with, with some of these Chinese models. You know, if they, you know, is regulation going to be important? Yes. The right type of principle based regulation will be because if you have models ultimately that you can't trust or hallucinate or, you know, you, you know, you can't trust your data. I do think a thoughtfully regulated principles based industry wins based on my lessons in finance, but it's a different industry. Maybe I'm wrong.
- [10:27]
Rahm Aliwalia
So I'll give a point here on how this is so complicated. Pulling up some quotes from David Sachs right Now on Twitter. 1 Kimmy K3 just fixed 15 critical security bugs that Codex and Fable refused because of, quote, cyber guardrails. There's no reason to limit American models on tasks that Chinese models handle without issue with. We're only making ourselves less competitive. Following tweet. Here's another example. Hugging Face tried to use American frontier models to analyze an AI powered cyber attack. But the guardrails blocked requests containing real exploit payloads, so they switched to GLM 5.2 running locally. The guardrails actually impaired defensive security. And I think this gets to the point that both of you are raising, which is there's no way out of this race it's going. You could choose not to run, but that doesn't mean the race isn't happening. The race is still happening. You just chose not to be involved. If you like this segment, please like subscribe and tune in every Monday at 4:30pm Eastern Time. I'm Austin Campbell, the host of Bips and Bips, along with my friends Rahm Aliwalia and Chris Perkins and our slate of exceptional guests. Every week we're going to discuss macro, crypto and the collision of worlds, covering topics that move markets and shape the financial landscape.
- [11:49]
Austin Campbell
If you hold crypto on your phone, your biggest vulnerability isn't your wallet, it's your carrier. AT&T Verizon and T Mobile have been breached again and again, and SIM swaps are still one of the easiest ways for attackers to drain accounts. That's where Cape comes in. America's privacy first mobile carrier, same premium service, but Kape rotates the identifier on Your Sim every 24 hours, deletes your call and text metadata after a day, and protects against SIM swaps with a 24 word recovery phrase that only you control. You also get two middle to end encrypted secondary numbers for banking and signups, so you stop handing your real number to every app that asks go to Cape Co Unchained and and use code UNCHAINED for 33% off your first six months.