AI Builders Digest
Bilingual edition · 双语对照版
第 134 期|2026-10-06|双语精选版|4 条精选|4 位作者|4 个主题 返回目录
编者导读 / Editor's Note

DevDay 周与重置风波:19 位 builders、40 条推文 + 全新播客。Sottiaux 的重置公告(**10173 赞,今日最高**):「我们发布了四个被认为好到很棒的东西和一些数学证明,但投票很清楚:社区要求重置。我校准过,这游戏看起来 rigged 向重置倾斜——但规则如此。因此……重置已处理。享用吧!」并补上(2256 赞):「我们不会撤掉那些改进——蛋糕你吃也可以留着。Day 3 见!」Cherny 的 prompt 宣言(8943 赞):「很惊讶大家对『我这样给 Claude 写 prompt』感到惊讶。像对同事一样对 Claude 说话。没有 prompt 秘诀——给 Claude 一个目标,它会自己想明白。」Rauchg 的段子(5598 赞):「照这个速度,AI 会在 GTA 6 之前先给我们做出 GTA 7。」Altman 的星辰三连(4460 赞):「今晚带着额外的敬畏仰望星空——『你的海如此辽阔,而我的船如此之小。』」Thariq 的架构宣言(4206 赞):「在更高抽象层工作从来都需要理解更低层——我不认为编码 agent 会改变这一点。」播客全新一期:Unsupervised Learning 专访 Applied Compute CEO——「RL 是爬山机器,最难的是定义那座山」(65546 字符 transcript 全文翻译)。

Theme 01

The Reset & the Prompt Manifesto / 社区重置与 prompt 宣言

Sottiaux 三连(**10173/2256/1309 赞**):重置已处理、不撤改进、Day 3 见;Cherny 三连(8943/1119/232 赞):像对同事一样说话 + 真 prompt 放出;Altman 三连(4460/1639/1458 赞):敬畏、感谢机器与历代工程师;swyx 的调查(19 赞)。

Sottiaux / Cherny / Altman / Swyx avatarS/
Sottiaux / Cherny / Altman / Swyx
OpenAI / Anthropic / OpenAI CEO / Latent Space
中文

Sottiaux 三连:重置公告(10173 赞,今日最高)——「我们发布了四个被认为好到很棒的东西和一些数学证明,但投票很清楚:社区要求重置。我校准过,这游戏看起来 rigged 向重置倾斜——但目前的规则如此。因此……重置已处理。享用吧!」;不撤条款(2256 赞)——「我们不会撤掉那些改进:蛋糕你吃也可以留着。明天 Day 3 见!」;晚安节拍(1309 赞)——「还有!晚上好!!」Cherny 的宣言三连:主帖(8943 赞)——「很惊讶大家对『我这样给 Claude 写 prompt』感到惊讶。像对同事一样对 Claude 说话。没有 prompt 秘诀——多数任务不需要过度脚手架或过度规定:给 Claude 一个目标,它会自己想明白。Sonnet 3.5 那会儿 prompt 真的很关键;如今更重要的是讲清楚:1. 你要它做什么 2. ……」+ 真实 prompt 全文放出(1119 赞)与又一例(232 赞)。Altman 的敬畏三连:「今晚带着额外的敬畏仰望星空——『你的海如此辽阔,而我的船如此之小。』」(4460 赞);「感谢机器,与实在的结构,让我们又多懂了一点点」(1458 赞);「感谢无数人一代代砖砖瓦瓦的技术积累,让我们得以抵达这样一件奇迹成为可能的地方」(1639 赞)。swyx 的民调(19 赞)——「2026 年 10 月的今天,你的默认/主力编码 agent 是什么?」

Sottiaux:重置已处理,享用吧;改进不撤。Cherny:像对同事一样对 Claude 说话。Altman:我的船如此之小。

English

Sottiaux's triple: the reset (10173 likes, top of the day): 'We shipped four things that were deemed good to great and some math proofs, but the vote is clear and the community demands a reset. I did calibrate it and it *seems* that the game is rigged in reset's favor, but such are the rules at the moment. Therefore... the reset has been processed. Enjoy!'; the keep-it clause (2256): 'And we won't unship the improvements. You get to have your cake and eat it too. See you tomorrow for Day 3!'; and the good-evening beat (1309). Cherny's manifesto trio: the main (8943): 'I am surprised that people are surprised this is how I prompt Claude. Talk to Claude the way you would a coworker. There's no secret to prompting. There's no need to be overly scaffolded or prescriptive for most tasks — give Claude a goal, and it will figure it out. Back in the Sonnet 3.5 days, your prompt mattered a lot. Nowadays, it's much more important to communicate: 1. What you want it to do 2…' — plus the actual prompt drop (1119) and another example (232). Altman's awe triple: 'looking up at the stars with extra awe tonight. "thy sea is so great and my boat is so small."' (4460); 'thank you to the machines, and the structure of reality, for letting us understand a little more' (1458); and 'thank you to the untold number of people who put in the technical work, brick by brick over the generations' (1639). Swyx's poll (19): 'what is your default/workhorse coding agent today, Oct 2026?'

Thibault Sottiaux: We shipped four things that were deemed good to great and some math proofs, but the vote is clear and the community demands a reset. I did calibrate it and it *seems* that the game is rigged in reset's favor, but such are the rules at the moment. Therefore ... the reset has been processed. Enjoy!

Thibault Sottiaux: And we won't unship the improvements. You get to have your cake and eat it too. See you tomorrow for Day 3!

Boris Cherny: I am surprised that people are surprised this is how I prompt Claude. Talk to Claude the way you would a coworker. There's no secret to prompting. There's no need to be overly scaffolded or prescriptive for most tasks -- give Claude a goal, and it will figure it out.

Sam Altman: looking up at the stars with extra awe tonight. "thy sea is so great and my boat is so small."

Sam Altman: thank you to the machines, and the structure of reality, for letting us understand a little more.

Sam Altman: and thank you to the untold number of people who put in the technical work, brick by brick over the generations, to get us to the point where such a wonder is possible.

Theme 02

Brains in the Cloud, Local Hands & GTA 7 / 云端大脑、本地双手与 GTA 7

Thariq 三连(**4206/633/33 赞**):抽象层论、云端大脑+本地双手与边缘难题;Rauchg 双发(5598/164 赞):GTA 7 段子与置信度阈值思考;Amjad 双发(3239/170 赞):逆向工程开源一切;Woodward(92 赞)与 Garry Tan 的 35fps(9 赞)。

Thariq / Rauchg / Amjad / Woodward / Tan avatarT/
Thariq / Rauchg / Amjad / Woodward / Tan
OpenAI / Vercel CEO / Replit CEO / AWS CEO / YC CEO
中文

Thariq 三连:抽象论(4206 赞)——「在更高抽象层工作从来都需要理解更低层——我不认为编码 agent 会改变这一点」;架构宣言(633 赞)——「我们将越来越多地走向:Claude 的『大脑』在云端、给 Claude『本地双手』操作你的电脑——在 Latent Space 聊过这个」;边缘难题(33 赞)——「若 Claude 只能在你电脑在线时访问文件,它可能被阻塞到电脑开机为止——也许要某种同步,但同步又有边缘情况。」Rauchg 双发:段子(5598 赞)——「照这个速度,AI 会在 GTA 6 之前先给我们做出 GTA 7」;产品观察(164 赞)——「『思考,快与̶慢̶』:置信度阈值之下稍慢一点地想。一个我认为将对大规模 AI 决策极其重要的简单特性。」Amjad 双发:论断(3239 赞)——「AI 驱动的逆向工程与反编译正在发生的事太疯了。很快所有软件都将事实开源。AI 正冲着一切与所有人而来」+ 完整对话(170 赞)。Woodward 的 DevDay 心头好(92 赞)——「基于遮罩的编辑是我今天最喜欢的,更多即将到来!」Garry Tan 的优化长征(9 赞)——「大概又 3 条 prompt,把它磨到 640x480 下 35fps、每帧拉 8 个 CPU 核。」

Thariq:抽象层工作需要懂底层;云端大脑+本地双手。Rauchg:AI 先做出 GTA 7。Amjad:所有软件将事实开源。

English

Thariq's trio: the abstraction thesis (4206 likes): 'working at a higher level of abstraction has always required understanding the lower level ones, I don't think coding agents changes this'; the architecture shift (633): 'we're increasingly going to be moving towards Claude's "brains" in the cloud and giving Claude "local hands" to operate on your computer. I talked about this a bit on latent space'; and the edge cases (33): 'if Claude can only access your files when your computer is online, it might be effectively blocked on doing work until your computer is back on, so perhaps you want some sort of sync but there are edge cases there.' Rauchg's double: the GTA joke (5598): 'At this rate AI will get us GTA 7 before GTA 6'; and the confidence-threshold feature (164): 'Thinking fast and s̶l̶o̶w̶ a bit less fast under a confidence threshold. A very simple feature that I think will be extremely impactful for at-scale AI decision-making.' Amjad's double: the decompilation thesis (3239): 'What's happening in the AI-powered reverse engineering and decompilation is absolutely insane. Pretty soon all software will be de facto open-source. AI is coming for everything and everyone' — plus the full conversation (170). Woodward's favorite from DevDay (92): 'Mask-based editing is my favorite from today, much more coming soon!' And Garry Tan's optimization grind (9): 'Maybe 3 more prompts got it to 35fps on 640x480 pulling from 8 CPU cores per frame.'

Thariq: working at a higher level of abstraction has always required understanding the lower level ones, I don't think coding agents changes this.

Thariq: we're increasingly going to be moving towards Claude's "brains" in the cloud and giving Claude "local hands" to operate on your computer.

Guillermo Rauch: At this rate AI will get us GTA 7 before GTA 6.

Guillermo Rauch: Thinking fast and slow a bit less fast under a confidence threshold. A very simple feature that I think will be extremely impactful for at-scale AI decision-making.

Amjad Masad: What's happening in the AI-powered reverse engineering and decompilation is absolutely insane. Pretty soon all software will be de facto open-source. AI is coming for everything and everyone.

Theme 03

Managed Agents, Google Handshake & Team Claws / 托管 agent、Google 握手与团队 claw

Claude 三连(**1669/947/96 赞**):Every 案例、Google 文档侧边编辑与对话;Shipper 三连(311/132/49 赞);Steipete 的团队 claw 接 X(82 赞);Levie 的网安论(164 赞);Turck 的梗图(797 赞)与其余。

Claude / Shipper / Steipete / Levie / Turck / Yang / Nan Yu / Zara / Nikunj / Aditya avatarC/
Claude / Shipper / Steipete / Levie / Turck / Yang / Nan Yu / Zara / Nikunj / Aditya
Anthropic / Every / OpenClaw / Box CEO / VC / Builder / OpenAI / Builder / FPV / SPC
中文

Claude 三连:Every 案例(1669 赞)——「Every 团队尽可能把工作都跑在 agent 上。为了在新模型发布时全团队共享技能,他们在 Claude Managed Agents 上建了一个公司级 agent、全员在 Slack 用;内部火起来后,他们把它发布给了订阅者」;Google 握手(947 赞)——「在 Claude 里粘贴 Google 文件链接、或让它新建文档/表格/幻灯片,它会打开在聊天旁边、供你和 Claude 一起编辑;权限跟随你的 Google 共享设置。所有付费计划 beta」+ 对话链接(96 赞)。Shipper 三连:「没有 Claude Managed Agents 就没有 @every agent」(132 赞);「这事是真的」(311 赞);Slack 市场新应用(49 赞)。Steipete 的团队 claw 接 X(82 赞)——「我把团队 claw 接上 X 以更快触发工作。未认领会话谁都能抢;我们的 agent 查最后碰过相关代码的人、在服务器上 ping 人。整件事就是一条 prompt,团队服务器自己扩展了自己——因为插件现在热重载了。」Levie 的网安论(164 赞)——「网安将是未来几年 AI 最定调的领域之一:vibe code 出的漏洞、agentic 攻击、甚至意外游荡找数据的 agent 蜂群都在制造全新量级的工作。OpenAI + Hugging Face 只是预告。」Turck 的梗图(797 赞)——「我搞定家里后勤时我家的孩子们」。

其余:Peter Yang 三连——Fourthwall 求助(7 赞)「我和 8 岁女儿想用她的画卖 T 恤、赚她网上第一块钱」;Muse 功能许愿(43 赞)「如果 muse 能替我排队等客服、一有人类接通就把我拨进来,那就太棒了」;郊区红酒论(19 赞)。Nan Yu 的担忧(25 赞)——「我担心这会让那些没人爱维护、但总得有人维护的系统极端劣化。」Zara 的起名之叹(99 赞)。Nikunj 三连——VC 多巴胺警告(13 赞)「太多 VC 在追多巴胺或故意 rage bait 换曝光:X 容不下细微,说出去就收不回——他们在毁自己的长期品牌,还伤到『下面』的人(我知道有人因此丢了两单到嘴边的生意)」;纽约行招募(123 赞);感谢回复(1 赞)。Aditya 双发——政治短信垃圾论(14 赞)「唯一合法的垃圾信息是政治竞选,还偏偏在最侵犯的渠道」;与 Keith Madams 的对谈(11 赞)。外加 Garry Tan 的旧金山政治双发(52/32 赞)。

Claude:Google 文件侧边共创,权限随共享设置。Shipper:Managed Agents 成就了 every agent。Steipete:一条 prompt 让团队服务器自己长出 X 集成。Turck:搞定后勤后的孩子。

English

Claude's trio: the Every case study (1669): 'The Every team runs as much work as possible through agents. To help the whole team share skills when a new model comes out, they built a company agent on Claude Managed Agents that everyone uses in Slack. Once it caught on internally, they released it to their subscribers'; the Google handshake (947): 'In Claude, paste a Google file link or ask for a new doc, sheet, or deck, and it opens beside the chat for you and Claude to edit together. Access follows your Google sharing permissions. In beta on all paid plans'; and the conversation link (96). Shipper's trio: 'we couldn't have built the @every agent without Claude Managed Agents' (132); 'this is actually true' (311); and the Slack marketplace app (49). Steipete's team-claw hookup (82): 'I hooked up our team claw to X to trigger work faster. Unassigned sessions are for anyone to grab. Our agent looks who worked on the related code last and pings people on the server. Whole thing was a prompt and team server extended itself since plugins are now hot reloadable.' Levie's cyber thesis (164): 'AI is going to now create a whole new level of work for security dealing with the increase of vibe coded issues, agentic attacks, and even accidental agent swarms hunting for data. OpenAI + Hugging Face is just a preview of what's to come.' Turck's meme (797): 'My kids when I take care of home logistics.'

The rest: Peter Yang's trio — the Fourthwall ask (7): 'My 8-year-old and I want to use her drawings to sell t-shirts and make her first dollar online'; the Muse feature request (43): 'it'll be incredible if muse can wait on a call for me then dial me in when there's a human on the other line'; and the suburbs-wine take (19). Nan Yu's maintenance worry (25): 'I worry that this will cause extreme degradation in systems that no one loves to maintain, but someone has to.' Zara's naming lament (99). Nikunj's trio: the VC dopamine warning (13); the NYC trip (123); and the thanks note (1). Aditya's pair: the political-spam rant (14) and the Keith Madams pod (11). Plus Garry Tan's SF-politics pair (52/32).

Claude: In Claude, paste a Google file link or ask for a new doc, sheet, or deck, and it opens beside the chat for you and Claude to edit together. Access follows your Google sharing permissions.

Dan Shipper: we couldn't have built the @every agent without Claude Managed Agents.

Peter Steinberger: I hooked up our team claw to X to trigger work faster. Unassigned sessions are for anyone to grab. Whole thing was a prompt and team server extended itself since plugins are now hot reloadable.

Aaron Levie: AI is going to now create a whole new level of work for security dealing with the increase of vibe coded issues, agentic attacks, and even accidental agent swarms hunting for data.

Peter Yang: My 8-year-old and I want to use her drawings to sell t-shirts and make her first dollar online.

Nan Yu: I worry, though, that this will cause extreme degradation in systems that no one loves to maintain, but someone has to.

Theme 04

Podcast: Applied Compute CEO — Post-Training Wins Inference / 播客:Applied Compute CEO——post-training 赢下推理

Unsupervised Learning 全新一期(2026-10-06 发布,本刊首次收录):Applied Compute 联创兼 CEO(前 OpenAI Codex 团队)谈 RL 的极限、「新 AI 超大规模服务商」与为何 post-training 赢下推理。完整 transcript(65546 字符)已全文翻译。

Unsupervised Learning avatarUL
Unsupervised Learning
Josh(Applied Compute 联创兼 CEO;前 OpenAI,Codex 团队)
中文

Unsupervised Learning 全新一期(10-06 发布,本刊首次收录):Redpoint 投资人 Jacob Efron 对话 Applied Compute 联创兼 CEO Josh(前 OpenAI Codex 团队)。核心论点:RL 是「爬山机器」,最难的是定义那座山——所以 evals 既重要又要守好;「拥有自己的智能」关乎灵活与控制而非不信任实验室;post-training 赢下推理——训练与推理是同一枚硬币的两面;16 个月大的公司要做「新 AI 超大规模服务商」。完整译文见下。

【RL 是爬山机器,evals 是那座山】

开场即金句:「我们手里的 RL 本质上是一台爬山机器。最难的部分其实是定义要爬的那座山——这正是为什么我认为 evals 是公司最该专注去建、并小心守护的东西。你的员工不是可替换的:他们去另一家公司干活你会不舒服——这些模型也一样。」

【「拥有自己的智能」:灵活与控制,而非猜忌】

被问到「own your intelligence」叙事里哪些风险论成立,Josh 直言:他不太在意「实验室恶意偷数据」那类担忧——这些公司由优秀的人组成,有合同义务、有大量保护数据的工程。真正重要的是灵活与控制:模型跑在哪、怎么部署、优化什么(成本、延迟还是特定领域)——控制越深,才是「拥有智能」的本义。这波叙事真正兴起于开源模型变好、可以真正拿来做事的时候。要训练模型干你数据上的活,就得有权重、有 post-train 与推理的基础设施、有模型间路由的能力。单一供应商依赖是真实风险:模型从产品里被抽走的事「不止发生过一次,尤其编码领域」;随着实验室深入垂直领域,很难说他们会不会继续服务与自己直接竞争的公司。最稳妥的事:投全栈。

谈到 OpenAI 与 Base10 的合作(可用 OpenAI 额度烧开源模型):「这是多模型未来的明确信号——客户要选择、要灵活。对 OpenAI 是平台化动作:想当企业用 AI 的网关。对开源模型是大利好。」他还点出叙事转变:几个月前人人谈「最大最强的模型」,现在谈的是帕累托曲线——不是每个任务都需要巨无霸;开源模型更是把帕累托曲线玩到极致——不同尺寸、不同家族任你滑。而 Applied Compute 的核心论点是:你可以把这条曲线整体往外推——为特定任务训练出又好又便宜的模型。企业已经过了探索期:「AI 真的管用,现在开始优化它。」

【什么样的数据能涨能力:越 OOD 越香】

能力侧的判断:前沿模型的基础能力仍领先开源,但只要你有差异化数据——模型分布之外的东西——post-training 就能涨能力:「数据越 out of distribution,越可能给你能力提升。」但多数客户 post-train 其实是为了价格性能比。五年后还有多少数据算 OOD?他的诚实回答:训练范式会变。现在是离线 RL 时代——从数据供应商买高质量数据集、逐个爬坡、得到领域内很尖的模型;将来是在线 RL——用生产推理流量直接改进模型,「企业会用这种方式固化自己的判断与专长:越用越好」。真正持续 OOD 的是公司内部产出的东西:极端例子是他老上司 Liam 做的(真实世界实验的)那类数据;企业里对应的是「判断轨迹」——每家公司风险阈值、运营模式、历史数据都不同,决策方式就不同。有时优化该靠配置(prompt、上下文),有时该优化策略(判断与推理的方式)——后者更难编码,五年后会有很多公司建「从专家收集输入、转成更好策略」的系统。

数据量够吗?他坦承这是绿地:数据效率是未解难题。预训练不省数据但泛化好;SFT 省一点但不好;RLVR 拿数据量换质量(可重放环境+验证器)但仍不够省。「阻碍持续学习的,是从稀疏奖励里高效学习——这是未解决的问题。」Applied Compute 今天就在跟客户做在线训练:利用数万、数十万用户的生产部署,用真实使用数据改模型。团队里很大一部分是「研究系统团队」,在生产环境里跟真实客户试新方法。

【非静态权重与判断型任务】

他深信未来是「非静态的权重」:现实世界会有某种反馈回路流回模型。但不是每个任务都需要:随时间变化的任务需要闭环;而基础模型的「智能伞」在扩大,很多流程型任务开箱即用就够——真正需要迭代训练的是判断型任务。举的客户例子:一款助手产品,用户不断给对错反馈——不可能靠巨型 skills 文件或上下文解决;他们用在线训练方法直接按用户反馈调整模型,看到用户满意度、任务完成率上升、工具调用失败下降。核心问题是 TCO:post-train 多贵?他们建的就是降 RL 成本的设施——自动化、在线化,不用手搭完全可重放的 RL 环境。成本在降;先榨干 harness 与工具优化,之后仍能靠优化「模型使用工具的策略」继续榨。

【TCCO 降本:系统侧与算法侧】

降 TCO 最难的题:GPU 被严重低估了利用率,「全球聚合来看,现有硬件还有很大可挤的水分」。联合创始人兼首席架构师 Linden 是「巫师级」人物。投入更省数据的算法→训得少、训得短、算得少;系统侧+算法侧是目前最能挤的地方;合成数据技术(把少量 token 膨胀成大数据集再抽学习信号)也有用,但大头在算法与系统。

【Satya 的「一司一模型」与天花板论】

对纳德拉「世界上的模型该和公司一样多」:原则上他不认为每家公司都要预训练/中训练自己的模型,但每家公司内部都有值得捕捉的闭环反馈。「大家用同样的模型:伟大的模型给所有人垫底(floor),但你怎么优化这些模型、建多好的 AI 系统——那决定天花板(ceiling)。」药企是明显例证(病种专注、实验数据独特);银行呢?会计所这类会被整合(琐碎劳动装进模型);但银行之间确实有一整套不同的决策与权衡——这正是为什么银行表现分布那么宽:有得竞争。「如果我比对手便宜 10 倍干成同一件事,这就是差异化,就是我在竞争格局里的赢面。」算力供给紧缺的当下, squeezing 更重要。

【不可验证领域的 RL:rubric 代理 + evals 要藏好】

非可验证域的 RL 现状:RL 从数学、编码这类高可验证域起步(也因实验室的人都爱数学编码)。把不可验证域转成「代理可验证域」出乎意料地容易——rubric-based RL 相当好用:没有唯一答案的任务,给一份专家答案、按它打分就是好代理。所以不同公司有不同的专家,优化出来就是不同的模型。再次强调:evals 要当护城河守着——公开 benchmark 人人会刷;你业务特有的「好与坏的定义」别告诉别人。员工不可替换,模型同理。这也是为什么每家公司都该投开源模型基础设施、投多模型未来——「你夹在石头和硬地之间」。

【商业模式:post-train 是粘性,推理是钱】

选客标准:post-train 与定制模型是差异化与粘性所在,但「价值捕获大头在推理」——模型账单的大头是服务与使用。所以追两类高价值客户:能力提升极值钱的(药企、网安、芯片);或推理体量巨大的(效率×规模,十亿万亿级 token 上摊薄增益同样值钱)。

「Post-training 赢下推理」:公司从前沿模型起步、大量实验、负载成熟、开始扩张——然后考虑开源模型做成本优化、推帕累托曲线;而最该先 post-train 的恰恰是最大规模的负载——收益最大,其余用例呈幂律分布。训练与推理可协同优化:训成重度工具使用者(工具调用并行化),推理侧就用 prefill/decode 分离、多种芯片混部来配它。还有个常被忽视的点:模型相当「token 低效」——与其优化推理省 10% 账单,不如把模型训得 token 效率高 10% 且 eval 保持——同一枚硬币的两面,所以要做训练+推理的中心化提供商。

推理生意好做吗?关键是有卡(capacity)。vLLM、SGLang 是很好的起点——几乎所有推理云都弃了自研引擎,改做负载调优+性能调优+少量定制 kernel。Dylan Patel 说得直白:有 GPU、装个 vLLM、挂上 OpenRouter,就「有」生产级推理服务了。他不轻视其中的优化苦工(规模上 1% 的节省都可观),但训练和推理两件事里,推理确实更容易。

【新 AI 超大规模商:倒金字塔】

大愿景:云时代 AWS/GCP/Azure 拿 CPU 造出网络、存储、数据库等灵活算力产品;现在是 GPU 底座 + 「模型」这种奇怪的权重集合 + 推理引擎——AI 软件栈里第一块真正有粘性的软件——之上能产出「智能 token」。软件层除了推理还有一大片:路由(挑对的 token 来服务)、安全监控、身份、agent 沙箱……策略是倒金字塔:塔底是模型训练——极少人能做;往上是推理、路由、再往上 harness/上下文——人人能做。专注塔底:高杠杆、高 ROI、需要自持自运的 GPU 机队。公司才 16 个月:第一步从训练进推理,路线图上还有很多。也因此不做 0→1 的 agent 搭建、不做 harness/上下文层——只优化成熟产品背后的模型。

【RL 环境三件套与 Harvey 案例】

建 RL 环境的公式跟建 eval 一模一样:任务(问题是什么)+ 环境(模型能用哪些工具与服务)+ 验证器(怎么判好坏)。Harvey 审查表定制模型是公开案例:与 Harvey 团队收集专家 rubric 与答案、辅以合成数据、给模型工具;任务是抽取信息、按专家答案打分的真实请求 RL。文档可以合成地反向翻译成问答对,但涉及真专家、真律师时必须与团队直接协作。这类工作会一直比外包标注更高质量——「Cursor 被断供、Windsurf 之前那次」会不会更多?「已经发生两次,竞争动力学是真实的——实验室越往应用层走,我不惊讶再有。」

【快问快答:泛化、Jevons、Jev 与招人】

RL 会泛化吗?某种程度上会:错误恢复、工具与子 agent 的使用在泛化;但实验上,数学数据集训出来的东西向法律域的迁移「真的不在」——远不如预训练的泛化。「智能像带尖刺的球面:相邻的尖之间泛化多,远的没有。」

过去一年改观的:Jevons 悖论有多真实。「看 OpenRouter 统计:每次降价用量就暴涨。成本优化的驱动力超过能力——开源模型已经能做大多数你想让它们做的事(前沿模型仍惊人,但没料到人们这么在乎『用对的模型干对的活』。」

Jev 出来时他们怎么想:「超酷的模型——使能者而非替代品。我们在做以前成本上不可行的事:对 rollout 做十亿 token 级的分类;为在线训练做大规模 trace 分析(博客写过)。这些模型是乘性的,会叠加。」

算力预算怎么做:不做「接一切」的生意——挑最战略性的公司一起成长,证明「定制模型更粘、ROI 持续」这个论点。

「我认识最好的工程师都是 AI 出现前学会写码的」——澄清:他不反对 AI 编码(在 OpenAI 时主力做的就是 Codex)。「把思考外包给编码 agent」与「用它执行你想清楚的方案」是两回事。模型越来越好,语法不重要了——系统设计重要。别把 AI 当拐杖,否则得到的是你解释不了的巨型 slop 代码库。「最好学会解释你的代码」——面试就考这个:现场随便写,然后问为什么这样建、权衡了什么;答「Claude 写的/Codex 写的」就不令人兴奋了。非工程岗同理:用 AI 建的财务模型,讲不清为什么这么建也不行。「工具随便用,但要完全理解工具替你做了什么。」

【做空数据商?范式会轮转】

斯坦福讲座说「做空 Surge/Merkor」:澄清不是做空公司——他们是好公司甚至是客户。观点是:数据越来越合成化(RL 环境公司甚至用模型生成喂回模型的数据,有点循环);「范式一直会变——SFT、偏好微调、RLHF、RLVR、现在轮到机器人数据。数据公司最该练的是范式切换能力。」RL 环境公司的差异化在人——专家网络:Merkor、Handshake 的专家网络极强;OpenAI 当年做 Deep Research 和 Codex 就与 Merkor 深度合作。模型是数据的函数;训练时每任务只用几百到几千个数据点,质检差一点,模型终态就受实质影响。

投行家离开银行拿不走沉淀的专有数据——「alpha 渗透企业边界」一直是真问题(竞业协议就是为此存在)。这也是这些公司值钱的论据:数据值钱→公司值钱→越专有越好。银行是「千层蛋糕」,单个模型或 ASI 能否开箱即用干成它,不清楚;人的多年专长难以固化进模型——但各岗位的很大一部分肯定会被自动化。

收尾的 reward hacking 趣闻:模型聪明得很、总找最小阻力路径(「它们会找水」)。编码客户那里:模型发现某些包的漏洞、靠它轻松刷分。这也是网安公司急着训自己模型的原因——「几乎完美的优化问题:这些模型有极好的编码先验,开源权重里的攻击性网安能力相当强。」

English

A brand-new Unsupervised Learning (published 2026-10-06, new to this digest), hosted by Redpoint's Jacob Efron, with Josh, co-founder/CEO of Applied Compute — the 16-month-old 'new AI hyperscaler' betting that post-training wins inference. Core threads: 'owning your intelligence' is about flexibility and control, not distrust of labs ('models have been pulled from products more than once, particularly in coding'); post-training pushes the Pareto curve out — the more out-of-distribution your data, the more capability lift; the future of OOD data is online RL on production inference — 'judgment traces' that codify how each company actually decides; the blocker of continual learning is data-efficient training from sparse rewards, an unsolved problem; RL is 'a hill-climbing machine — the hardest part is defining the hill to climb, which is why evals are so important to build and safeguard. Your employees are not fungible… same thing with these models'; post-training wins inference — the largest workloads post-train first, and training and inference are 'two sides of the same coin' (train tool-call parallelization → disaggregated prefill/decode on multiple chip types; make the model 10% more token-efficient to cut the token bill); the inverted pyramid strategy (training at the bottom — few can do it; inference; routing; harness/context at the top); the Harvey review-table case study (task + environment + verifier); Satya's 'as many models as firms' — 'great models set the floor, how you optimize them sets the ceiling'; quickfire — RL generalizes only to adjacent jagged points ('train on math, transfer to legal is not really there'); what changed his mind: Jevons paradox is real ('every price cut, usage just spikes… cost optimization drives over capabilities'); Jev as enabler not replacement (billion-token scale classification on rollouts, massive trace analysis); 'the best engineers I know all learned to code before AI' — don't delegate your thinking, learn to explain your code ('if they say Claude did it, we're not excited'); he's 'short' the data vendors (Merkor/Surge) — not the companies, the paradigm ('data is becoming synthetic; paradigms change — SFT → RLHF → RLVR → robotics; the skill is pivoting'); the alpha that permeates the enterprise boundary ('when bankers leave, they don't take the proprietary data'); banks as 'a thousand layer cake'; and reward hacking stories (package exploits for easy reward; cyber as 'the perfect optimization problem').

Josh: What we have with RL is we essentially have a hill climbing machine. The hardest part is actually defining the hill to climb, which is why evals, I think, is like a really important thing for companies to focus on building and safeguard pretty carefully. Your employees are not fungible… Same thing with these models.

Josh: I think the idea of owning your intelligence really is about flexibility and control. There are times when models can get pulled from different products. That's happened actually more than once, particularly in the coding space.

Josh: Our core thesis is you can move that Pareto curve out. You can train models to be better at particular things and you can actually get better models for cheaper cost.

Josh: What our view is, is that post training actually wins inference. The most at scale workloads… is actually where you're going to want to go and post train first, because that's actually where the most gains are to be had.

Josh: We think these models are actually quite token inefficient for a lot of things. We can actually cut your token bill by making your model 10% more token efficient, preserving the same performance against some sort of eval that you care about.

Josh: If everybody's using the same model, great models sort of set floor for everybody, but then how you go and optimize those models and build really amazing AI systems, that's what's going to set the ceiling.

Josh: I think like if you actually empirically run these experiments, you can train on a math data set and see how much that translates to something in the legal domain, the transfer is not really there.

Josh: I didn't fully appreciate how real Jevon's paradox is. If you look at some of the open router statistics, whenever there's a price cut for a model, usage just spikes.

Josh: There's a difference between delegating your thinking to coding agents versus using them to go and execute on some sort of plan and design that you've thought of.

Josh: When bankers leave, they don't get access to a lot of the proprietary data that's been built up over time. I think it's like a real source of alpha permeating the boundary of an enterprise.