Monday, 20th July 2026
We have been having extensive discussions around open source strategy. We will discuss it more at our next board meeting, but one thing we’d like to do soon is to create a language model with the approximate capability of GPT-3 that can run locally on consumer hardware and release that. We’d like to do it soon, before Stability or someone else does. In general, we think this helps discourage others from releasing similarly-powerful models, and makes it harder for new efforts to get funded.
— Sam Altman, Email to OpenAI's board, October 1, 2022 - exposed in Musk v. Altman (2026)
Who’s Afraid of Chinese Models? (via) Interesting proposal from Ben Thompson that both addresses the hypocrisy of labs outlawing distillation against their models despite training on unlicensed data, and could help US open models compete more effectively with their Chinese counterparts:
The U.S. should pass a law that (1) makes explicit that collecting data for training models is fair use, and (2) bars terms of service that forbid distillation, for U.S. companies at a minimum. Stopping distillation — which is literally just querying the API — is nearly impossible; the U.S. should go the other way and lean into a new copyright policy that both indemnifies the labs and also guarantees that what they learned fuels further innovation for everyone else.
Ben also theorizes that Alibaba's decision to release Qwen 3.8 Max as open weights - a reversal from their decision not to release Qwen 3.7 Max in May - may have been influenced by a recent speech by Xi Jinping, who said:
We should seize this rare, historic opportunity to encourage open source, openness, collaboration and sharing.
And on the subject of Qwen 3.8 Max - a new 2.4T parameter model (nearly as large as the 2.8T Kimi K3) - here's a pelican it drew:
I particularly enjoyed seeing these notes in the (extensive) reasoning trace: "Could add helmet? No." and "Maybe add small bell? no." and "Need maybe add small fish in basket? Not necessary."
I keep hearing anecdotes from people who used coding agents to reverse-engineer and automate devices in their homes.
I think this is an interesting illustration of the impact of the reduced cost of writing code.
Prior to agents, it was entirely possible to reverse-engineer home devices. The problem was the ROI - was it really worth all of that effort? More importantly, any experienced programmer knows that undocumented, unstable APIs like that may well change or break in the future. Is that initial work worth the effort if you're committing yourself to a frustrating cycle of maintenance in the future?
Coding agents change that equation entirely. The effort to get a simple automation working has dropped, as has the cost of trying and failing to get it to work. Since the code is so cheap, the idea of having to maintain it in the future - or throw it away and start again - carries way less psychological baggage.