To escape platform risk and high API costs, startups are building their own AI models. The strategy involves taking powerful, state-subsidized open-source models from China and fine-tuning them for specific use cases, creating a competitive alternative to relying on APIs from OpenAI or Anthropic.

Related Insights

The "AI wrapper" concern is mitigated by a multi-model strategy. A startup can integrate the best models from various providers for different tasks, creating a superior product. A platform like OpenAI is incentivized to only use its own models, creating a durable advantage for the startup.

China is gaining an efficiency edge in AI by using "distillation"—training smaller, cheaper models from larger ones. This "train the trainer" approach is much faster and challenges the capital-intensive US strategy, highlighting how inefficient and "bloated" current Western foundational models are.

While US firms lead in cutting-edge AI, the impressive quality of open-source models from China is compressing the market. As these free models improve, more tasks become "good enough" for open source, creating significant pricing pressure on premium, closed-source foundation models from companies like OpenAI and Google.

Fears of a single AI company achieving runaway dominance are proving unfounded, as the number of frontier models has tripled in a year. Newcomers can use techniques like synthetic data generation to effectively "drink the milkshake" of incumbents, reverse-engineering their intelligence at lower costs.

Startups are becoming wary of building on OpenAI's platform due to the significant risk of OpenAI launching competing applications (e.g., Sora for video), rendering their products obsolete. This "platform risk" is pushing developers toward neutral providers like Anthropic or open-source models to protect their businesses.

The choice between open and closed-source AI is not just technical but strategic. For startups, feeding proprietary data to a closed-source provider like OpenAI, which competes across many verticals, creates long-term risk. Open-source models offer "strategic autonomy" and prevent dependency on a potential future rival.

A common misconception is that Chinese AI is fully open-source. The reality is they are often "open-weight," meaning training parameters (weights) are shared, but the underlying code and proprietary datasets are not. This provides a competitive advantage by enabling adoption while maintaining some control.

Z.AI and other Chinese labs recognize Western enterprises won't use their APIs due to trust and data concerns. By open-sourcing models, they bypass this barrier to gain developer adoption, global mindshare, and brand credibility, viewing it as a pragmatic go-to-market tactic rather than an ideological stance.

While the U.S. leads in closed, proprietary AI models like OpenAI's, Chinese companies now dominate the leaderboards for open-source models. Because they are cheaper and easier to deploy, these Chinese models are seeing rapid global uptake, challenging the U.S.'s perceived lead in AI through wider diffusion and application.

A growing movement in the startup community involves not using OpenAI's API. Founders fear OpenAI, in its push for revenue, will release services that directly compete with and kill startups built on its platform, similar to Microsoft's historical "embrace, extend, extinguish" strategy.