Loading...
A simulation
Joined January 2012
- Tweets37.1K
- Following1.1K
- Followers666
- Likes33.7K
interesting
> - 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”.
Update #2 (after meeting with the @bot @SpaceXSI 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 @SpaceXSI, @bot, and @elonmusk teams
19
> Conspiracy theory
> U.S. intelligence identified Alice Huang as a Chinese asset with access to Jensen Huang and deliberately left the relationship in place.
> The purpose was not just ordinary counterintelligence monitoring but an active operation to insert spyware or other capabilities into Nvidia chips that then entered China.
> Those compromised chips gave the U.S. (and specifically Trump) access to sensitive Chinese military information.
> That access is what prompted Xi to purge top generals for “disloyalty.”
Everyone thinks Jensen got honeypotted by Alice and played by China.
I think Jensen was the honeypot. And the chips a McAfeean Trojan Horse move.
In 2025, U.S. lawmakers discussed adding location verification to advanced chips, and China then asked Nvidia to explain alleged security risks in its H20 chips.
Nvidia denied having backdoors, kill switches, or spyware. Those denials came from the company itself, so they aren’t an independent forensic finding. And neither is the Chinese allegation evidence that a backdoor exists.
But it's a possibility.
Jensen is not dumb. The CIA is not dumb. Trump is president and has publicly declared a full scale tech war with China over AI supremacy.
Through this lens Jensen becomes a key operative in Trump's AI war cabinet. Not a feckless dupe with a weak spot for a particular pretty Chinese spy.
Jensen didn't go out of his way to hide the affair. Alice also posted numerous photos of them together. It was pretty much an open secret.
So, ask yourself. Was Jensen targeted to obtain information or influence Nvidia’s decisions? Was delivering restricted computing power to Chinese users the real goal here?
Or did the chips themselves carry a covert implant that enabled surveillance or remote access?
1
76
