And generally, urinating the beans is not good, because otherwise the numbers fall.
They cannot claim any further that they have manipulated consciousness because it was known in advance that the content was being generated.
Twitter's capitalization was 40, fifty, sixty billion.
Twenty people in the world have never been a manager-- well, administrative staff are unable to serve this amount in different jurisdictions, countries, and work.
Looks a little like a shot in the leg.
And somehow I can't deal with something, I'm gonna get it. We're gonna keep this four of us. Sas, you told me you told Dorov not to let him out, he was released.
Given that we had the last video about Doura and the Telegram, I said that I think he-- he's gonna have questions further in his case. And it's just not gonna be taken off or closed. Well, they're on bail. I wanted to add two such comments on Telegram that I still have to ask, and I'm surprised they don't raise questions in the media. The only thing I saw yesterday at a Russian blogger was the first topic. He said he looked at the Telegram reports and found that Telegram was wasting on whether he had put out a number, whether it was a hundred and seventy million dollars a year, it was a loss, a loss, it didn't waste, and that's what they did. Losses. And speaking to people, people still don't understand that the massenger-- and when people say that Telegram is a dead one, they say, "How is he a wasteful one? But he makes money." I think the businessmen are the kind of money he can make, right? And then the man put it. Can you explain what he's spending on? I'd ask you a question about that video. Okay, look at our viewers, we're together and the audience in the comments, maybe they'll write, too, because people get, collect information from different sources. You write this, it's gonna be interesting for everyone. Where does he have the money on Telegram? That's another question. Where does he have the money to make it every year? I'd like to ask that the company never sold until recently, yes, never sold any stock. And there are things that always raise a very interesting question from where the money came from? I remember I had a partner in Telegram five years ago, so ICO wanted to do or something, that's how it was about the crypt, and the financial papers said it was on a monthly basis. It's worth tens of millions of dollars. And the question always comes from where the money is to spend it? Because the money with the Waxton wasn't exactly that big. There's no other project involved, I guess. So who's doing this? This is the first subject I've got, I still have three topics, three topics, yes, that's the question. The second topic I have to ask is that of five dozen employees in the company. And...
Thirty,
even.
No, there's thirty-seven type-stops and fifty-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-stops. Well, the media, the media always like these things to write. Does anyone understand the amount of requests and complaints, reports, all the complex stories that occur in such systems? Twenty people in the world have never been a manager-- well, administrative staff are unable to service such a volume in different jurisdictions, countries, work, register companies, legal entities. A lot of details. It's just physically impossible to do. And this second subject, which is, and it raises a big question. And there was some interesting news. We used to put her in last time, by the way, we didn't mention her, but we put her in a violinchot that when we came, the media came to the office in Dubai, there was no one there. This office is so purely temporary, it was temporary and untrue. The third subject that gives me the question, big one, now you're gonna say I'm just dropping it off, which I'm asking is how it's a coincidence, just so the French President decided to give something. The businessman himself may be allowed, although they have been refused very many times before. And the best question is how and why did the OAE document? Why would you give the Arab Emirates a passport? What did that even happen? What is it that a man in two countries is worth something nobody knows, right? Because making a massenger, especially in the state he was in, is a very strange thing. And the fourth question is the most important one I don't think is raised in the media and that's always the popularist, the way the information is. Everybody just throws, puts out some data, writes a lot of things. I liked how Tech-- TechCrunch, TechCrunch, too, not checking. I already understood that. TechCrunch wrote, so in Russia, the Telegram is the most used massager. Yeah? And so all Americans sit here, read that in Russia, the Telegram is the most used massager. And we were just laying down the statistics of the Russian analytical agencies and all the others that Telegram is not exactly the most used massager in the country, but the Pa-pa-pa WhatsApp used. And how yesterday Sasha and I met together here, and we were discussing that there were no nine hundred thousand users in Telegram. And because if we multiply all the countries and users that are in India, 100 million, there are 30 million in Russia, $30 million in the US, there are twenty-six or as many millions in Brazil, there are, Nine hundred million don't smell. That 900 million is the registration that went on the platform. So I can state that I have eight hundred billion registrations on the platform because Telegram used to register without a phone number, only with logic and password. Well, maybe today's not a Telegram. But we still got out, and it was video, and it shows that it's a matter of interest to people. It would be interesting how the viewers would discuss that, too, and what comments would be, who actually-- do you have any comments on those topics?
I mean, I think here, uh, you know what, look at a bunch of popular start-ups, right? So they have private companies, you know, no governance. About Telegram. So, private private private private accountants are a big problem. I think she's practically missing. So we saw a lot of crashes, yes, there's FTX the biggest yea that public companies have sometimes enough language in the report, and, well enough, that's quite vague, I'd say, that's enough. It's not a big deal, is it? So when the indicators are thrown, there are often enough ear-wrapping ears for the public. And all that is not financially reported, yes, any product metrics, is often so inaccurate. Like, this famous case with Telegram was recently, isn't it? They reported the beans in their monthly active users, and they knew they were the beans but they were reporting. And it's a public company, a public company, one of the most attractive, one of the most developed. It was in Twitter, it was in Twitter. It was in Twitter, yes. So they-- it's like Ma-Mask, his first Twitter attack, was that there were a lot of beans that everyone knew that a lot of beans, but they still report a number with bots because it's more comfortable. And generally, urinating the bots is not a good thing, because otherwise the numbers fall. And I think it's what happens to public companies, you know, public! Twitter's capitalization was 40, fifty, sixty billion. Well, at the pick, of course. I mean, uh, and it was happening anyway. And all accounts, except for what you can trust, are public financial statements, you can't be deceived. There's no way to fool around there, and there's nothing to do with it, something to wrap up, and everything else, pff, is quite certain-- any other number you see, there might be three, five times smaller, - a side. We need to be ready for this. I mean, there's no going to be a pattern, but at three, five times, it's possible.
And that's a lot of precedents.
Oh, yeah, generally, if this is about the Telegram story, you've been upsetting very interesting things now, and I tried to dig into your memory while you were talking, right? That's how everything I remember about Dorov, that, uh, from "Durov, get the wall" was so popular in the Waktack, and then, accordingly, it was not on radar for a long time. And that's where we talked to Tanya last time, too, that there was literally one or two photos in five or seven years. Then, Sasha, you reminded the story today when they started to cry, attracted investment and didn't go, did you? Then I couldn't get enough money. And there were return stories, something else. It's like my memory kept. And then the story that Durov got on the radar was very active and it felt like it was all kind of awkward, right? And interviewing Taquera, and everything that happens in France with citizenship and the other. I wonder what that would lead to. I don't know what this is all about, but I'm just looking at it, of course, I'm so curious.
Well, Telegram Telegram, Durov Durovsky, Massagers.
So, the other day, uh, the Apple presentation. And we're all waiting.
We all wait for their peddians, the real ones they've been representing a few months ago. And they said they'd let them out, right? Because the pdette they promised to do inside the operating system, considering, and, uh, including AI, it's very interesting that this would really work. While I've received a lot on Mac and the iPhone of different developers, I haven't seen anything really related to AI and with any integration, and with them, and AI distributed, which means everything is researching and studying. helps to interact together, and further integrates another GPT. And by the way, a very interesting thing, I think it's just that time is so phenomenal.
So everyone thought that OpenAI was a Microsoft topic and that Microsoft was guaranteed to take the lead for OpenAI. And there's news that OpenAI is gathering a round and is planning to participate in Apple and NVIDIA. I think that Microsoft should be lowered at the cost of the stock at this point. Well, it's not down yet, but it's interesting. In fact, it's not enough that Apple is the first time anyone wants to integrate into very serious technology, well, at least they said that, maybe they're not gonna do anything about it. Not that it might be the first time, but it's very serious, yes, very serious technology. And second, of course, what they plan to invest in there will, in the idea, change the market very seriously, the technological market in the future.
Definitely. I mean, Sam, of course, he's fearless, so he's playing some kind of fire thing. I mean, if we're just saying from the point of view that he's gonna need, uh, that, well, like his first big investor who believed him so seriously, it was Microsoft, and he's obviously telling everyone that he's... I'm willing to work with anyone, in principle. That, in my view, requires very courage and very strong self-confidence. Still, the OpenAI, though, if you look at the OpenAI, yes, their situation, I understand it's not super rainbow. So they only raised $11 billion. And I'm just checking out that they're losing five billion a year, right? I mean, whatever. I mean, they, uh, runway, maybe a year or a half from today, probably, right? I mean, it's a high probability. And in this situation, finding new investors can be stressful enough not to upset the current. And the fact that he's acting so aggressive is very commendable, very commendable.
Look, there's a structure that's specific to investment. I mean, they don't invest in company ownership, but in the first place, in the possession of some part of the future profit. Right, how much do I remember the capital structure of the
capital?
Yeah.
In fact, Microsoft-
And previous investments, they're already capped. Yeah, they're a capped.
Yeah. So it's a little different, like another... Already capped, can you explain now what's meant?
I mean, there, you know, there's a certain-- that is, restrictions on what return investors can get.
Oh, yeah. And that's why it was relative when they just said that Microsoft owns it. It didn't really get along with it, but everyone thought it was. And it says it's not. Yeah, Eldar, you said something.
Yeah. It was just a little more in the news that Microsoft could also be involved in this round. And you people, as well as acquaintance with this whole story, can you tell me how the rounds go? Openai says, "I want to attract more investment." And what happens next? They're talking to different companies, they're negotiating with each other. I'll buy so much, I mean I'll put so much in it, I'll put it in. How does that even happen if you try to explain it on your fingers?
There's an investor with whom the terms are discussed, and then everyone is working together to secure the balance. So, it looks like a master investor should take at least 30 per cent, uh, 30 per cent of the round.
Mm-hmm. So hypothetically with someone, impoundly, there, Apple, NVIDIA or the same Microsoft, for example, there was some initial agreement that we would attract, and then, accordingly, just scattered. potentially interested companies, yes, by market, who could be involved in this story.
Yeah.
Interesting.
But there's not much of that, is there? I mean, at this level, I think it's about 20 funds or companies in the world.
It could be, yes.
Natural
products.
Look, I think it's a strategy. I think it's a strategy. Perhaps the fact that Apple and NVIDIA will come in there will show everyone that this is a conditional non-profit organization, a conditional non-profit organization, that it is an independent structure. Or that it's an independent structure of American market leaders that it's not-- it's not letting investors in. Well, there's clearly investors from other countries who would want to go to OpenAI. They're just not gonna get any money, are they? I don't think they'll take money from the Chinese government, do I? Or the Arabs will take the money. I don't think that's gonna happen. And if we were to talk about, well, there's enough money and funds in the world that would love to go to OpenAI for such sums, yes, and say that we own it, then we created it. And what's going on in there with this conglomerate, it's probably just... interesting, it was originally planned and it was. Or is it a counterweight, such a tough, strong counterweight from Apple, Microsoft? This is certainly a very interesting situation, especially since Apple stated that ChatGPT would be integrated. So, basically, because in Bing, Sasha, in Bing integration, which is with AI, is there a whole OpenAI, or have they done something?
I can't say. I mean, when the hipoval was, exactly, it was--
Yeah, when they were hypooling, they said the operative-- that in search--- in Bing Microsoft, they built everything, it was OpenAI. And the pos-- and Apple now said he'd connect from AI ChatGPT. What's going on? So there's some side company that takes the lead, no other half--- well, that's the way I mean between Apple and Microsoft. NVIDIA okay. NVIDIA is super! I think finding this place is just the right, right, with the growth of its shares, right? You're kind of joining two other most expensive companies in the world. I mean, we're talking about three companies that cost more than three trillion dollars. They're only those, they're only three, right? And they're investing. I mean, it's a mark. Another point, how they're connected and connected. Here. There's still a Google missing. Well, he's a little different in capitalization, though he's not much of a total. The numbers are as crazy as you are. Here, let's see what's going on and what's the pdd. I think it's very important what the pdddate is gonna be. It's just that the days will be after this release, the next day, yes, after that issue, Apple will have a presentation. Let's see what they're really gonna have. I think that many things they'll say they'll be in the process, in the process of being progressively released. Recently, TechCrunch news was that it was supposed to be possible to remove a photograph in Apple in the developeric version by AI. But I don't see it personally, do I?
Maybe some kind of cortex or segment of people is available. That's not true. I want to go back to the subject today, and I think it's very important. We discussed very much the-- Tanya, just by studying the European law on restrictions and control of AI, said that the law had been adopted in early August, the marking of content and watermarks created by the Act. artificial intelligence. In the past two weeks, it has simply been the news that all companies and OpenAI and Microsoft and Adobe are synchronized, yes, with the law, California Law AB thirty-two eleven that The whole content will have to be marked, and especially the photos, videos, audios. And Mask said yes, which would be, so it would be, to mark the content. It's very interesting how everyone changes their opinion in the process.
They see their opinion in the process, uh, that's happening. Uh, so we're starting to enter a zone where everyone says the content will be marked, although the process of the content labelling, uh, does not exist. And if AGI does, AGI will not be in control of any label. I think.
Oh, that's very interesting. On the one hand, it looks like it, it's about the content label, yeah, here. Uh, can that be justified? That there are many fairies that come along, and the fight against these fairies can be built in this way. But in fact, who needs a fae to be generosized, I don't know, there, no use of OpenAI or any use of Anthropic or something. Oh, just an example. Oh, in public models for the generating of pictures, well, the same Midjourney, yes, there, or DALL-E from OpenAI, or something. They have no way of generating a specific content. Well, that's what it's called, uh, adult content. But any user who wishes to deploy Stable Diffusion locally if the equipment, uh, allows for the construction, removal of restrictions and the generation of any content that is needed. So, in fact, this kind of content comes into specific resources, yes, when it's created, uh, an imaginary virtual model and, there, it fills up the content of its account. So, why am I doing this? What if these big companies start labelling their content, it won't protect, uh, industry, the industry from what's gonna come up, and, uh, the feather content, some content, some sort of generated content. networks that don't mark. And considering that the open source of the model is basically close enough to the front, well, I understand they're not getting them all up there, but close enough to generate some kind of fireworks, yeah. In general, I think it's very scary-- it's not scary, very strange policy choices of companies, but, just in the forefront of some current, in the interest of an agreement with the government, with the Californian government. The government, with something else, accepts and acts like this, uh, amendments.
Because it looks a little like a shot to the leg, you know, or a minimum height of the threshold to abuse this kind of content generation.
I think it would be interesting if they were to discuss these laws together and participate in these laws and develop real, just a little further. What are they gonna do, for example, if AGI comes up in the sense of this law? So those who did this law, they really know they want to create others who do AGI. So, OpenAI, while joining this law, she discussed it with them, and what would happen in the terms of the creation of AGI, as far as this law goes, would it be contradictory or not? Wouldn't it be like, uh, some kind of big restrictions, loss to ordinary people, would it? Because what business is there catching and catching or something-
... at some point in time. That, I'm sure I am. Question: What happens to ordinary people and opportunities, with the capacity of people to use tools. We've all seen over the last quarter, especially in the summer, how many American operators have said that there's gonna be a lot in Europe--- there's no way to start operating and limiting, because that's what it is. Contrary to, uh, well, they can't integrate with them, yes, with European laws, with European law. So what happens next, huh? K-k-- someone thinks forward, there, in terms of horizon, uh, five, ten, fifteen or twenty years. I think the Chinese think they are. And the Chinese are clearly thinking, and, uh, they're obviously on this subject. They have a plan, they've already made up. They're here to come up with the law, know how this law will work for the next, I think, 20, fifty or seventy years. And under it, so everyone's rolling and doing everything, and they're going strictly, strictly agreed, strictly agreed, yes, and they're strictly designed, and AI, and AGI, and chips, and anything.
Well, at least it looks good-- they have a lot of things that look pretty coherent and very progressive.
Europe is really interesting, actually. Here, uh, they say there's, uh, modern I.M. models that don't meet European law. And there's a Mistral the same, yes, French model that's there for government grants and other things that develop. It is not a fundamental difference between the OpenAI, Anthropic or other models that do not enter Europe. So there's a story, too, I think, rather political obstacles to the model of its own, and therefore, not to the pressure of its big companies.
I think, after all, there may be a little plus for a mass consumer, as you know, to take off responsibility. It's like you show in the movie, there's a man smoking and writing that eighteen, there, until eighteen years, or how that content is marked--
Smoking hurts your health.
Yeah, that's killing. I don't know how much it really works. I'd like to know the statistics. Maybe the other way, it works that people must be blind to something. I mean, in principle, for such mass consumers, the content of the cry-creaters, that if there is this marking and the consumer of a potential content saw it, then it cannot be submitted to any claims. The fact that they manipulated consciousness was that it was known in advance that the content was being generated. I think there's a little bit of a plus on this law.
Although you certainly see things much more and more, and an interesting angle of view.
I'd like to get a few minutes to our graduation today. I think she's very interesting to the audience. The theme is where the world is, and the world, and those start-ups, and all the engineering start-ups. And there's a report like that just came out, and it's been found that 40 percent of the Big Tech engineers are in San Francisco Bay Area. That's all that's right next to San Francisco Bay. And there are over 20 percent of the start-ups, too, concentrated on IT. How did that happen? That's the most colossal number. If the United States is to take, the country is very distributed in terms of its own and its urban presence, resources and people, and everything that in the United States, fifty per cent of all the supernovators are here and so many - The start-ups. I'm not saying, if you compare the world, I think, if you compare it to the world, the numbers will be huge.
Well, I think it's just
Can I ask you one question why you're here?
A lot of talent, I see, is coming from countries like China and India. And it's probably the most simple place to live, yes, I guess, immigrants. I think it's quite simple.
Don't you just live.
Country for immigrants.
Not a country, yes. Why is San Francisco all of it? Why are all in the house?
No, California is the best place to live, right? Well, I guess it's just that. I mean, it's just easier to live here. And then San Diego and Los Angeles lost someday, and Sacramento lost San
Francisco.
And you mean, you're saying California's in terms of immigration laws, from the weather point of view, climate, different conditions, it's better at first, and everyone else just lost.
I think it's about the community, too, that people are talking. It's like bringing more people here. Because when you're in private with people, you see, you live in one of those towns, it's easier to attract investment and other things. Plus the climate is good. Many things, including legislation, until now.
Yeah, the law. This law, of course, is making things difficult, and it looks like they're gonna take it. Even Musk said it was necessary, they would accept 10,407.
What happens, Sash, when they accept it?
Well, there's gonna be a little restriction on new players to develop their models, I understand. But I'm not very hard to understand. I'm very hard to understand what it's gonna be, what it's gonna be like, long term effect. Very, very difficult to say.
It's complicated, it's very complicated. Especially, I think it depends very much on the overall progress in AI and in the technological market. What happens will depend very much on it.
Yeah, but it just might be a typical story like this, like the American Grandma, which you have some ceiling, then it's all growing up, getting up, getting up. Maybe there's something going on here too. Here. I mean, what's their intention inside?
And what the law will apply, it's very much.
This law, there's a lot of freedom in it, too. How they'll interpret it and apply it, it's not known yet.
They, they say-- that's the basic question, which was, I understand, the main question was open source. I understand that the auto- and the recent publication, that's literally The Information wrote, that the law author said that it wouldn't hit the open source. I mean, if that's true, there's no short-term-term effect.
Yeah, that's a plan question. Maybe they're bringing this law to make it more, uh, more able to work with large companies, yes, maybe some more. So what they're worth of their targets on this, we'll find out later, we'll find out later. Here. But the fact that when Elon Musk said, uh, that he wrote a comment on this subject, that shows that-- and the style of the comment shows, well, that the State--- he was clearly told that In this part, for example, the State must work.
Here. At least California. Well, thank you very much.
The issue is not as much as you as experts, but as the users of Apple. You expect a new 16th iPhone or you still feel that technically there's little change and you want to change? Or should we see what's going to happen at the presentation, what's the Apple Intelligence gonna show?
I'm waiting because I want to...
I don't, I'm sure.
We're at the audience, we asked the viewers. The audience, write. I'm waiting for you, for example. Uh, considering that I'm waiting for, of course, an update from AI perspective. I mean, I'm personally waiting for an update, yeah. Apple Intelligence, yes.
Sasha, Elnar, are you waiting?
But I'm the most likely person to be with Android for a long time, but I don't have a Type-C charge because I have a 14th iPhone with, uh, Lightning. Uh, that's what I'm waiting for more than the Apple Intelligence. But I'm interested to see Apple show it. Somehow it feels like it's gonna be very interesting and maybe something, uh, that's as useful as they say, yeah, it's gonna be with AI inside the phone.
It's a breakthrough, right?
E-eat hope. I hope she doesn't die after the presentation. Well, I'm just wondering what it is that we can show us.
I don't know-- I think only that old phone models are cheaper. Christina, the wife's button broke, and it's cheaper to buy a new phone. I think so.
You're practical.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
...the battery is getting a little faster. Well, I mean, obviously, how new phones are gonna feel better in skirts, so they'll find a way to sell them, but I'm not sure they'll be able to find some kind of problem to solve that they'll find a new solution for-- I mean, I doubt there's gonna be a satellite connection. I doubt it's gonna be there, but the solution is new to the battery. Very pessimistic.
Let's check it out.
Yeah, who wins.
I'll see you in exactly a week. It was, uh, ToTheMoon. We go out every Sunday, mostly Sunday. We're always four people. IT In websites from the Kremniy Valley and the world. Bye, everybody.