PewDiePie unveils ‘uncensored’ Ajax AI model built to run on home PCs — creator says OpenAI banned him twice over model distillation used to build his product

PewDiePie beside an OpenAI email shown in his video, indicating his account was deactivated over distillation
(Image credit: PewDiePie on YouTube)

PewDiePie, the popular YouTuber, has unveiled Ajax, his “uncensored AI model” built to run at home, and says in a new video that OpenAI banned him twice while he was making it. According to the OpenAI email he shows, one ban was explicitly for “distillation,” the practice of using one model’s outputs or reasoning to train another. Ajax is built for Odysseus, his self-hosted AI workspace, as an autonomous, always-on agent and assistant.

I seriously should NOT be dropping this. - YouTube I seriously should NOT be dropping this. - YouTube
Watch On
Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Shane Downing
Contributing Writer

Shane Downing is a Contributing Writer for Tom’s Hardware, covering consumer storage, PC hardware, and AI.

  • usertests
    There's nothing wrong with distillation, whether it's China or PewDiePie doing it. It's an unwanted customer behavior, that's all.

    "Uncensored" is good, and we'll only see more of that over time if it becomes cheaper to train.

    Nuclear weapons knowledge isn't particularly dangerous because non-proliferation relies on control of plutonium, uranium, etc. deposits. Synthetic biology is the more interesting risk, especially since we had that one pandemic.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    usertests said:
    There's nothing wrong with distillation, whether it's China or PewDiePie doing it. It's an unwanted customer behavior, that's all.
    It'd be interesting to see what courts decide, if a case ever comes to trial. I think a model produced via distillation could probably be considered a "derivative work".

    usertests said:
    "Uncensored" is good, and we'll only see more of that over time if it becomes cheaper to train.
    Keep that thought in mind, if any of your accounts get hacked by an AI swarm or if there's a terrorist attack with a bio weapon.

    Some censoring is for decency, but some of it is really about public safety.
    Reply
  • ezst036
    PewDiePie is a software developer now?
    Reply
  • derekullo
    ezst036 said:
    PewDiePie is a software developer now?
    Software developer isn't the respected title it once was !
    Reply
  • usertests
    bit_user said:
    Keep that thought in mind, if any of your accounts get hacked by an AI swarm or if there's a terrorist attack with a bio weapon.

    Some censoring is for decency, but some of it is really about public safety.
    There's absolutely no stopping the proliferation of open weights/source models. Forget about it. Everything online with an obvious vulnerability is going to get hacked soon.

    We're more likely to reach a point where governments are attempting to ban certain hardware from reaching consumers because it's too powerful or whatever reasoning they come up with. That's an idea that has been considered since at least 2023.
    Reply
  • jp7189
    No need to waste time distilling an old model. Qwen3.8 blows the doors off 3.5, no distillation effort required.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    usertests said:
    There's absolutely no stopping the proliferation of open weights/source models. Forget about it.
    Oh, but China could stop its companies from continuing to release leading edge models as open weight. It could do that overnight, if it wanted. I think it'll eventually happen.
    Reply
  • LordVile
    bit_user said:
    It'd be interesting to see what courts decide, if a case ever comes to trial. I think a model produced via distillation could probably be considered a "derivative work".


    Keep that thought in mind, if any of your accounts get hacked by an AI swarm or if there's a terrorist attack with a bio weapon.

    Some censoring is for decency, but some of it is really about public safety.
    None of that is difficult to do as a process it’s being noticed whilst you prepare it
    Reply
  • helper800
    usertests said:
    Synthetic biology is the more interesting risk, especially since we had that one pandemic.
    Synthetic biology has nothing to do with 'that one pandemic' we had if we are thinking the same one.
    Reply
  • usertests
    helper800 said:
    Synthetic biology has nothing to do with 'that one pandemic' we had if we are thinking the same one.
    Not what I meant.
    Reply