When a 'Model' Isn't Just a Model: Redefining AI Systems for the Builder's Era
When a ‘Model’ Isn’t Just a Model: Redefining AI Systems for the Builder’s Era
๐ฌ Great keynote by Jensen Huang at CES 2026 [1]! Great content and also love the ease of his presentation style. Miguel: We are not the only ones presenting in front of a black screen once in a while ;)
๐ I agree with Jensen, it’s super exciting to see more and ๐บ๐ผ๐ฟ๐ฒ ๐ผ๐ฝ๐ฒ๐ป-๐ถ๐๐ต ๐ณ๐ฟ๐ผ๐ป๐๐ถ๐ฒ๐ฟ ๐บ๐ผ๐ฑ๐ฒ๐น๐ ๐ฏ๐ฒ๐ถ๐ป๐ด ๐ฝ๐๐ฏ๐น๐ถ๐๐ต๐ฒ๐ฑ by different providers. Sounds like NVIDIA is taking a big stake in this. Really key for me is that providers not “just” release open-weight models but also the data they trained on and the process used to train them. Jensen mentions the obvious responsible AI argument which is super important. This is the only way 3rd parties can verify the models and understand things like bias being introduced by the training data, copyright infringements, and alike. From my perspective, equally important: ๐ข๐ฝ๐ฒ๐ป ๐ถ๐ ๐ผ๐ป๐น๐ ๐๐ฟ๐๐น๐ ๐ผ๐ฝ๐ฒ๐ป ๐๐ผ ๐บ๐ฒ ๐ถ๐ณ ๐ ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐ป ๐ฏ๐๐ถ๐น๐ฑ ๐ถ๐, ๐บ๐ผ๐ฑ๐ถ๐ณ๐ ๐ถ๐ ๐๐ผ ๐บ๐ฎ๐ธ๐ฒ ๐บ๐ ๐ผ๐๐ป ๐๐ฎ๐ฟ๐ถ๐ฎ๐ป๐, ๐ฎ๐ป๐ฑ ๐’๐บ ๐ฎ๐น๐น๐ผ๐๐ฒ๐ฑ ๐๐ผ ๐ฑ๐ผ ๐๐ผ.
๐ค ๐ฆ๐ฝ๐ฒ๐ฎ๐ธ๐ถ๐ป๐ด ๐ผ๐ณ ๐บ๐ผ๐ฑ๐ฒ๐น๐… ๐๐ถ๐ด๐ต๐น๐ ๐ผ๐๐ฒ๐ฟ๐น๐ผ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ฒ๐ฑ ๐๐ฒ๐ฟ๐บ. Everything becomes a “model” these days. When we talk about frontier models, those are actually a composition of multiple models, with quite some plumbing, orchestration, and integration into external tools. Way more than “just” a machine learning model. I really think we need a dedicated term for these compound systems. Makes my brain hurt, but I actually don’t have a good suggestion for a term. What about you?
๐ก Jensen: “The entire fabulary stack of the computer industry is being reinvented. You no longer program the software, you train the software. You don’t run it on CPUs, you run it on GPUs.And whereas applications were pre-recorded, pre-ompiled and run on your device, now applications understand the context and generate every single pixel, every single token completely from scratch every single time.”ย
This is a strong statement, and I really think directionally this is correct. It’s good for users to some extent. For builders, it’s happening already today. Few of my coffee chats with other builders, be it customers or colleagues, don’t include elements of talking about how they started to co-build dedicated applications for their needs, with their use cases at heart.
๐ง At the same time, as Werner pointed out with his Renaissance Developer[2] narrative, it doesn’t mean that we builders should fear our jobs or forget what we learned in the past. AI systems are probabilistic, while often we need reliable results. Building on the fly is both costly - in the end, we’re building very similar use cases and applications over and over again - and unreliable. Each time we build something, it might, actually will, not work as expected.
๐งฉ So after all, it’s not just machine learning models, but compound systems where we can apply all good software engineering practices. These systems can use tools which can be reused, tested, and yes, can also be co-built with AI. This way we can navigate cost & reliability versus flexibility. And note - cost beside USD is also a proxy for energy required. Less is better. We need that.
๐ What terminology do you use when discussing these complex AI systems? Share your thoughts below!
๐ If you’re building with AI today, I’d love to hear about your approach to balancing flexibility and reliability.
๐ Want to dive deeper into the Renaissance Developer concept? Let’s connect and discuss how traditional software engineering practices still matter in the AI era.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8fL0RUmbP0
[2] https://thekernel.news/articles/dawn-of-the-renaissance-developer/
Cross-posted to LinkedIn