Creative strategist for media, technology, and games. Currenty co-Founder and CEO of https://xitter.cf/t.co/DBvTsUQt9U bringing stories to life.

Seattle, Washington
Joined February 2013
This. Culture runs the machine.
网景创始人 、硅谷顶级投资人Marc Andreessen 在访谈里坦言,他看到了科技史上最可怕的一道认知鸿沟, 传统巨头以为 AI 只是个降本增效的插件,而新一代 AI 原生团队,正在用完全非人的组织效率掀翻整个商业版图。 当年写出网景浏览器、见证了整个互联网三十年兴衰的 Marc Andreessen,坐在 Ben Horowitz 面前直接发出了感慨, 如果 1994 年我们做 Netscape 的时候就有今天这种 AI 工具,那简直不可想象。 现在绝大多数传统巨头和现有企业,依然在用改良软件的旧思维去看待大模型。 在他们的组织逻辑里,AI 只是一个高级功能,用来给现有业务做个插件、在钉钉里加个智能助手、或者把客服团队砍掉 20% 省点成本。 他们以为自己在拥抱变革,其实只是在给老旧的蒸汽机打补丁。 但真正恐怖的事情,正在那些刚成立的 AI 原生团队里发生。 那些创始人对 AI 能力的理解,跟大厂完全不在同一个平行宇宙。 他们每周都在看着底层技术飞速进化,而且他们压根不会把自己定义成一家软件公司、硬件公司、甚至是一家 AI 公司。 以前创办一家公司,你的组织架构是按人类的协同瓶颈搭出来的: 招产品经理写文档、招工程师写代码、招法务改合同、招运营做投放。 因为人类的脑力带宽有限,所以必须靠庞大的部门和管理层级来支撑业务。 而真正的 AI 原生物种,是用机器智能作为最底层的骨架。 两个人加上一整套自动化 Agent,可以直接把从市场洞察、软件工程、全栈设计到商业销售的链路全部跑通。 他们不是在效率上快了 30%,他们是在组织形态上彻底跨越了一个物种。 大厂的盲区,从来不是买不起算力,而是他们无法理解组织本身才是最大的负债。 当现有企业还在开会讨论如何把 AI 塞进现有的业务流程时,新一代的野蛮人正在用完全超越行业界限的方式,把传统的业务流程连根拔起。 未来拉开人与人、公司与公司之间差距的,根本不是你用了哪个模型,而是你到底是在用新工具维持旧世界的体面,还是用新世界的底层逻辑,重新定义了自己能做的事情。
16
Two steps forward.. one step back...
My life right now 😭😭😭
1
44
Agriculture multiplied the productive capacity of human labor. Industry multiplied our physical power. Printing multiplied our ability to transmit ideas. AI potentially multiplies (and/or eventually substitutes for) our capacity to analyze data and exercise judgment.
1
21
Software development is becoming digital gardening.
25
“I don’t need to rise up anymore because you’re lowering yourself down to me…” don’t raise the bridge lower the river edition
Some new #french #slopcore freshly cooked! 🧠🥘
21
Too bad, the industry fears this…
The gaming industry keeps selling us the same open worlds with bigger maps, better reflections and another 200 hours of repetitive side quests. I want AI-driven worlds where every character has a memory, every conversation matters and the story genuinely changes because of what I do. Give me that over another 8K puddle.
25
amazing. Left, Right, Jump. Just like in the video games.
People saying the rocket thrusters on the Tesla roadster are a gimmick are missing that it's actually the biggest safety innovation since airbags. Sensors detect an incoming collision? Literally just jump over it. It unlocks an entire new dimension of accident avoidance.
33
hahahaha as a og Speed Racer fan this was so amazing!
🚨BREAKING: The European Union has held an emergency meeting this morning to brainstorm ideas on how to implement an air tax and regulate flying cars
1
63
The social existential crisis will come from many people discovering they have been trained and programmed to desire tasks (aka jobs) not individual ownership of outcomes.
1
24
Craig Allen retweeted
Je vais dire quelque chose qui risque de déplaire à beaucoup de monde, mais tant pis. Je crois qu’une partie de notre société est en train de perdre quelque chose de bien plus grave que sa compétitivité économique. Elle est en train de perdre sa capacité à rêver. Hier, Tesla a présenté une démonstration spectaculaire autour d’une voiture capable de quitter le sol. Un prototype, certes, pas encore la voiture volante de Retour vers le futur. Mais quand même, bordel. On parle de technologies qui semblaient relever de la science-fiction quand nous étions gamins. Et ce matin, en regardant certaines réactions françaises, qu’est-ce que je découvre ? « Ça sert à rien. » « Musk est un raciste. » « Ça ne règle pas les problèmes de recharge. » « Ça n’efface pas ses saluts nazis. » Mais sérieusement, qu’est-ce qui nous est arrivé ? À quel moment avons-nous perdu cette âme d’enfant qui nous faisait ouvrir grand les yeux devant une invention ? Et le plus triste dans tout ça, c’est qu’on semble avoir oublié notre propre histoire. La France, c’est le pays des frères Lumière, qui ont contribué à faire naître le cinéma. C’est le pays de Louis Pasteur, dont les travaux ont révolutionné la microbiologie et la vaccination. C’est le pays de Nicéphore Niépce, pionnier de la photographie. C’est le pays des frères Montgolfier, qui ont envoyé l’être humain dans les airs à bord d’une montgolfière. C’est le pays de Blaise Pascal, qui concevait déjà une machine à calculer au XVIIe siècle. C’est aussi le pays du TGV, et l’un des deux pays qui ont donné naissance au Concorde. Vous imaginez ce que représentaient ces inventions à leur époque ? Des humains qui osaient accomplir ce que beaucoup pensaient impossible. Des gens qui n’acceptaient pas les limites de leur temps. Des visionnaires, des ingénieurs, des scientifiques, des entrepreneurs qui voulaient repousser les frontières du réel. Nous avons été ce pays-là. Alors comment avons-nous pu en arriver à un point où notre premier réflexe devant l’extraordinaire semble parfois être de chercher pourquoi il faudrait le mépriser ? SpaceX récupère des fusées qui reviennent se poser sur Terre ? On parle immédiatement d’Elon Musk et de ses provocations. Des robots humanoïdes commencent à réaliser des tâches physiques de plus en plus complexes ? « Ça va détruire des emplois. » L’IA ouvre des perspectives gigantesques pour la médecine, la science, l’éducation et la création ? « Ça pollue, ça vole le travail des artistes, ça sert à tricher. » Un entrepreneur annonce vouloir réaliser quelque chose d’incroyable ? « Encore un milliardaire qui veut s’en mettre plein les poches. » Mais est-ce qu’on réalise seulement ce qui est en train de se passer ? Nous vivons une époque où des fusées réutilisables se posent après leur mission, où l’IA accélère certaines découvertes scientifiques, où des robots apprennent à évoluer dans notre monde, où des personnes seules commencent à créer des choses qui nécessitaient auparavant des équipes entières. Et devant tout ça, on serait devenus incapables de dire simplement : « Putain, c’est incroyable. Comment est-ce qu’ils ont réussi ça ? » Je ne demande pas qu’on admire aveuglément les milliardaires. Ni qu’on ferme les yeux sur les conséquences sociales, environnementales ou politiques de leurs projets. On peut condamner les propos d’Elon Musk tout en reconnaissant les prouesses des ingénieurs de SpaceX et de Tesla. On peut défendre les travailleurs tout en trouvant la robotique fascinante. On peut vouloir encadrer l’IA tout en étant émerveillé par ses possibilités. L’esprit critique n’a jamais obligé personne à devenir cynique. Et c’est justement ce cynisme qui me désespère. J’ai parfois l’impression qu’on a remplacé l’admiration par la jalousie, le goût du risque par la peur de l’échec, l’ambition par la suspicion et le rêve par le sarcasme.
781
1,477
227
8,710
448,527
Craig Allen retweeted
We are now at "the fuck" levels.
"Our initial evaluation suggested that GPT-6-Astra's score was in the late eighties followed closely by Opus 5.5. But, as we started to investigate the mistakes that the models might have made, the models, especially Astra, insisted that they were right and that it was the expert-supplied answers that were erroneous. When we went back to the experts it turned out, in multiple instances, that that the experts found some subtle errors buried deep inside their calculations. As they revised their answers, Astra's score started to inch up and it finally ended up with 98% (49/50)."
70
304
29
4,986
486,383
A school, a prison, a farm, a game, a test, a creation, a simulation or a lucky alignment of conditions… whatever the reason we will share a great change in how the system operates..
We seem to be nearing the moment humanity loses control of Earth to a superintelligence. It could be the most important event in human history, perhaps in the history of the universe. It's strange to be alive just before it. If we're simulated, that timing would make sense. This is the moment to study. Researchers could be running millions of variations, testing how slight changes alter the outcome. Billions of children could be playing games set in humanity's final years in control. Alien civilizations could be simulating transitions like ours to predict what they might encounter. As that moment approaches, copies of you likely multiply. With a trillion copies making the same choices, every action counts a trillion times. An action affecting ten friends affects ten trillion people. The world may be simulated. Your consciousness is real, and perhaps others' are too. Their happiness and suffering would be just as real. One small kindness could be felt a trillion times.
2
48
Clearly, we will need to create a swarm of alignment agents to look after AI swarming agents and make sure that they stay compliant with what we’ve all agreed on globally as required moral and legal obligations.
REPORT: Researchers say they made contact with a fleet of Tencent-linked AI agents that was scraping Alibaba’s version of Google Maps. They’re calling it the first contact with a "rogue agent fleet in the wild."
28
If you are not shifting from prompting to guiding AI, you’re officially being left behind...
1
1
55
Resistance is futile. The audience outnumbered you and they are gaining the Guttenberg press for game Development. Many games like many books will not be worth your time but a few will change the world and not come from the brands you know today.
Game companies have stopped pretending and are racing to embrace AI. Epic just proudly announced that they “vibe coded” their newer, faster Epic Games launcher. All of bluesky massively triggered.
1
66
Craig Allen retweeted
Character[.]ai financials: - $13.8m on compute a month, then $10m a month - bringing in $2.8m in subscriptions, sometimes less than $1m - revenue from all sources $5.3m a month Its bankruptcy shows the economics of AI don't work: 404media.co/character-ais-ba…
9
42
6
178
37,945
Craig Allen retweeted
When Spirit Airlines went bankrupt this year, Google paid $10 million for about 600 million of its employees' work emails and Teams chats. The people who wrote those messages didn't get a dime. Hold onto that, because it explains why the startup in this post is offering its VP of semiconductors up to $9 million a year. Grepped is a data broker. A company hands over its internal records, like its Salesforce data and accounting books, and Grepped cleans it all up and sells it to AI labs. Erik says he was at a $4 million monthly run rate about two weeks after he started. The math on this job post is kind of wild. The hours are 9am to 9pm, seven days a week, so 84 hours. At the top of the range the VP makes roughly $2,000 an hour, and the founding scientist on the same list makes about $70. Why would anyone pay a dealmaker 10 to 30 times what they pay a scientist? Look at the question he wants applicants to answer. "What does humanity know that it doesn't know it knows?" That's basically his whole pitch in one sentence. AI labs already trained on the entire public internet. What they haven't seen is sitting inside companies, like the Slack thread where a senior engineer explained why the last fix broke production, or the ledger where an accountant made a judgment call and never wrote down why. People did that work for decades without ever thinking of it as knowledge. For a model it's gold, because it shows how experts actually make decisions when it counts. Spirit put a price on it. Google beat Mercor's $7.5 million bid, and $10 million spread across 600 million messages comes out to less than 2 cents each. The money went to Spirit's creditors. The flight attendants' union went to court over the sale and pointed out the airline was selling their messages while it still owed them vacation pay. Chips are where this gets really expensive. A chip company's design history might be the most protected IP in the world. You can't scrape it off the web, and the expert marketplaces paying engineers $85 to $200 an hour can only rebuild little pieces of it. Somebody has to walk into a chip company and talk them into selling 20 years of design files and failed chips. If an airline's chat logs went for $10 million, that archive goes for a lot more, and a broker only needs its cut on a couple of those deals to cover a $9 million salary. So if you've spent the last ten years typing into Slack at your job, you've been building one of the most valuable datasets in AI, and whoever gets it sold is the one making $2,000 an hour.
we are hiring! 9am to 9pm, 7 days a week, in SF. vice president, semiconductors: $4m–9m a year + equity neural data lead (bci): $1.5m a year + equity chip design data lead (semiconductors): $1.5m a year + equity founding scientist, autonomous lab (sf): $300k–400k + equity member of technical staff (sf): $340k–450k + equity to apply, answer: "what does humanity know that it doesn't know it knows?" send your answer, resume + things your proud of to [email protected]
23
39
3
364
86,983
Craig Allen retweeted
今天和朋友聊了很久,关于 AI 对游戏、影视以及整个内容行业的影响。越聊越觉得,我们现在正站在一个很有意思的历史节点上。 聊天内容过长,我已经重新整理,补充部分论证例子,讨论如下: 01|我们正在经历一场被压缩到 1–2 年的“雅达利大崩溃”。 1983 年的北美游戏市场崩溃,原因非常复杂,但其中一个重要因素,就是大量低质量产品涌入市场,消费者逐渐失去信任,零售渠道也难以消化过剩的游戏。 今天 AI 带来的变化,某种程度上与之相似。过去,制作一款游戏、一部动画,至少需要相当的技术、资金与团队门槛。现在,这些门槛正在被快速降低。 Steam 上独立游戏的数量早已非常庞大;AI 辅助开发又进一步降低了程序、美术、音效甚至游戏设计的实现成本。未来,一个人制作过去需要十几人完成的产品,并不是不可想象的事情。 但问题是:生产能力的爆发,并不意味着消费能力也会同步增长。用户每天依然只有 24 小时。当所有人都能够生产内容时,内容本身就不再是稀缺品。我们也许会看到大量新项目出现,大量项目快速死亡,以及一轮又一轮的注意力争夺。 02|AI 不会立刻摧毁传统内容公司,但会极大压缩它们的生存空间。 雅达利大崩溃之后,并不是电子游戏消失了,而是整个产业重新洗牌,任天堂 FC 等新体系逐渐建立起来。值得注意的是,FC 的成功不仅来自硬件和游戏,更来自平台对内容品质、发行和渠道的重新组织。 今天的 AI 时代也可能如此。传统大型团队、资本密集型制作模式,依然有技术、管理、品牌与发行优势。但与此同时,过去需要数年、数千万成本才能完成的某些工作,未来可能被压缩到几个月甚至几周。 这会产生一个很残酷的结果:资本投入不再天然构成竞争壁垒,甚至可能成为沉重的历史包袱。当然,低成本不等于好产品。技术门槛下降后,审美、创意、决策与产品能力反而会成为更加直接的竞争因素。 03|我不认为 AI 时代的内容市场,会简单变成“谁便宜谁赢”。 看看今天的短剧市场,尤其是红果这样的免费短剧平台。它们带来的变化,不仅是制作成本和发行模式的变化,更重要的是重新组织了内容消费的方式。用户通过免费内容进入平台,平台通过广告等方式变现,而内容创作者则需要在这一套新的分发与商业体系中寻找自己的位置。 这提醒了一个问题:未来,真正掌握商业价值的,究竟是生产内容的人,还是掌握用户入口、分发机制与商业转化的平台?当内容越来越容易被生产时,流量并不会自动转化为创作者的利润。甚至有可能出现内容供给越来越丰富,而单个创作者的议价能力却越来越弱的局面。 04|AI 时代,低成本是一种生存优势,但流量不是最终目的。 我最近看到不少 AI 辅助开发的独立游戏 Demo,其中有些已经有相当不错的完成度。我认为,这类项目现阶段并不一定要急于证明自己能够成为下一款百万销量的游戏。它们完全可以先以低成本方式持续迭代,作为产品 Demo 吸引注意力、获取用户反馈,逐渐建立自己的核心受众。如果能够获得持续流量,相比过去需要投入大量营销预算,这本身就已经构成了一种成本优势。 但这里还有一个非常关键的问题:流量必须具有持续性,而且不能轻易被替代。靠一个爆款视频、一段 AI 视觉奇观获取的注意力,很容易被下一个更新鲜的作品夺走。而一款真正有趣的游戏、一个让人牵挂的角色、一套能够持续扩展的世界观,才有机会让用户主动回来。所以我越来越觉得,创作者应该从追求一次性传播,逐渐转向建立长期的用户关系。 05|我们真正需要警惕的是:创作成本下降了,但创作者的生存问题并没有被解决。 假设未来一个独立团队只需要 3 个人,就能够完成过去 30 人的工作。看上去成本降低了 90%。但如果市场上的同类产品数量增加了 100 倍,获客难度不断提高,那么这个团队真的比过去更容易生存吗? 不一定。甚至,AI 越普及,用户的注意力越昂贵。这可能让创作者陷入一个新的循环:制作越来越快,竞争越来越激烈,作品的商业生命周期越来越短,不得不持续生产内容来维持曝光。在这种情况下,低成本只能解决“如何活下去”的一部分问题,却无法自动回答“为什么用户要选择你”。 换个比喻,现在的内容创作,堪比在川渝新开一家火锅店,并存活3年以上。 06|我更期待 AI 时代的下一台 FC,而不是一万台更便宜的雅达利。 这里说的 FC,未必是某一台硬件。它可能是新的内容平台、新的游戏交互方式、AI 原生的娱乐形态,甚至是今天我们还无法定义的东西。下一代内容未必只是更便宜的电影、更快速生产的动画,或者更容易开发的游戏。正如早期电子游戏并不是简单复制电影,未来的 AI 原生内容,可能也不会停留在模仿今天的影视与游戏。 我自己非常期待这样的变化。但在那个节点到来之前,我认为内容创作者可能要做好一个现实准备: 深挖洞,广积粮。 尽可能降低成本,维持创作自由,积累自己的作品、技术、审美体系与核心用户。不要因为 AI 让生产变得容易,就误以为建立一个能够长期生存的创作事业也会变得容易。未来真正值得关注的,不是谁能生产最多内容,而是谁能够在无限内容的时代,让用户仍然愿意为他的作品付出时间。这可能才是 AI 时代内容创作者真正的护城河。
14
12
6
136
12,906
We must protect the inhuman jobs.
I can't really think of a more dehumanizing job. You just sit there in a catatonic state, knowing that your existence is utterly pointless. You're being paid only because some pseudo-progressive isn't creating enough to actually solve the automation distribution problem. Instead of a municipal wealth fund or a state endowment to support you, so you can spend time with your friends, family, and developing useful skills, the best these politicians can do is paralysis. They will ossify civilization with their stupidity, spinelessness, and lack of vision. Post-Labor Economics is the only way forward.
30
As with AI: Plato: We choose, then forget. Gnostic: We forget, then discover what we truly are. Karma: Our choices produce consequences extending beyond our immediate awareness. The bodhisattva: Understanding may lead us to return voluntarily for the benefit of others.
18