2026-07-15XQuote

Source item

This piece by @GavinSBaker makes me wonder if @elonmusk might consider making future @grok models "open." 1- Like @nvidia they have the resources to maintain an open model. 2- They have activity in many other parts of the stack, which their model competitors do not. 3- It would be a interesting "full circle" from the original decision to make @OpenAI open. 4- There might be a way to leverage the real-time data in X as well, maybe a subscription to integrate that part. 100% speculation on my part.

Quoted context

These are the quoted author’s words.

The mega bull case for AI infrastructure would be *if* market share shifted away from certain frontier labs with 90%+ inference margins toward cheaper models, whether open-source or closed. It would increase the ROI on AI spend for end customers by increasing intelligence per dollar, which would drive incremental token demand. Margin dollars would effectively get redistributed from the frontier labs to AI infrastructure providers. The infra winners would be those with the lowest per token cost and the winners at the model layer would be those with the highest token efficiency. There are many reasons Jensen is so focused on open source, but this is likely the most important one as I think he is probably less worried about a monopsony these days. Lower margin % at the model layer = more margin $ at the infra layer all else equal. With SpaceX and Meta being vertically integrated and possessing the #3 and #4 models respectively it is more possible than ever. Note that Grok 4.5 is ahead of Fable for some useful tasks at a much lower cost, so ranking them #3 is conservative. This is not happening yet. Cheap, mostly open source tokens are likely the majority of volume today but the majority of economic value is still accruing to the most intelligent models. Might change though. We will see.
GavinSBaker ↗