Podcasts about ai00

When we first dicsussed the Summer of Simulative AI in 2024 we knew it would be a brief summer, but it has recently come back with a vengeance with SimGym in April and now Simile AI's $2B Series B, backed by GreenOaks and Index Ventures with prominent backers like Fei-Fei Li and Andrej Karpathy, running tens of millions of simulations for Fortune 100 clients like CVS and 85–99% accuracy vs human focus groups. Time to catch up on why this Second Summer of simulation is working!From creating Smallville, the landmark 2023 paper on Generative Agents that showed AI characters could remember, plan, socialize, and develop emergent behaviors, to now building foundation models of human behavior, Joon Sung Park is trying to answer a much bigger question: what if we could simulate the world before making decisions in it? In this episode, the Simile co-founder and CEO joins us to unpack the path from generative agents to digital twins, why today's frontier models still fail to capture how humans actually behave, and what it would take to eventually simulate all 8 billion people on Earth.We go deep on Simile's approach to modeling human behavior: long-form interviews, observational and transaction data, randomized controlled trials, population-level and individual-level models, and post-training on the causal mechanisms behind why people make decisions. Joon explains how his research created digital twins that reproduced human behavior and attitudes 85% as accurately as people reproduced their own responses, why models optimized to be rational can be bad simulations of irrational humans, and why understanding “social physics” may require changing model weights rather than simply prompting frontier LLMs.We also explore the much larger ambition behind simulation: testing products and policies before deploying them, finding counterintuitive paths toward desired outcomes, modeling emergent behavior across entire societies, and potentially tackling problems like climate change, democratic instability, and UBI. Joon reflects on scaling laws for simulation, the economics of data-center-scale simulated worlds, the connection to Thomas Schelling and psychohistory, why simulation is surprisingly similar to painting, and whether we might already be living in one.We discuss:* How Smallville and Generative Agents led to Simile* Why Joon's team asked: “What if we can just recreate the world that we live in?”* Why useful personal agents require deep models of their users* Memory architectures, Markdown files, and the limits of prompting* “Social physics” and behavioral foundation models* Why web data captures what people say more than what they actually do* Interviews, transactions, observational data, and randomized controlled trials* Why predicting the future matters less than understanding how to shape it* How Simile creates representative simulated populations* Simulation versus prediction and the connection to Foundation's psychohistory* How to evaluate simulations instead of simply stacking LLM hallucinations* Creating digital twins of 1,000 real people and reaching 85% behavioral accuracy* Why frontier models can struggle to reproduce real human behavior* Why good simulations need to reproduce human biases and mistakes* Post-training models on randomized controlled trials* Population-level versus individual-level simulation* Scaling laws for human simulation* The long-term ambition to simulate all 8 billion people on Earth* Whether simulations could help solve climate change or detect collapsing democracy* Thomas Schelling and the history of agent-based modeling* Why future simulations could require an entire data center* Multi-agent simulations and what happens when simulated people interact* Replacing expensive human panels with synthetic populations* Why market research is only the starting point for simulation* Why Joon sees simulation as surprisingly similar to painting* Using simulation to study questions like UBI* Whether we are already living in a simulation* Why AGI and simulation may be the twin technologies of advanced civilizationsJoon Sung Park* LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/joonspark* X: https://x.com/joon_s_pk* Website: https://www.joonsungpark.com* Simile: https://www.simile.comTimestamps00:00:00 Introduction and Joon's Path from Art to AI00:01:46 Smallville, Generative Agents, and the Origins of Simulation00:05:03 “Let's Just Create a World” and the Future of Personal Agents00:09:53 Social Physics and Behavioral Foundation Models00:14:08 Prediction vs. Simulation: How Do You Shape the Future?00:16:59 How Simile Models Real People and Populations00:25:35 Evaluating Simulations, Digital Twins, and 85% Accuracy00:30:23 Post-Training Models to Reproduce Human Behavior00:40:04 Scaling Laws and Simulating 8 Billion People00:43:10 From Schelling to Society-Scale Agent Simulations00:46:13 The Cost and Economics of Simulating the World00:52:05 Real-World Use Cases, Synthetic Populations, and the Market00:57:27 The Future of Simulation, Painting, and UBI01:04:23 Are We Already Living in a Simulation?01:06:08 Building Simile and HiringTranscriptIntroduction: Joon Sung Park, Simile, and the Story So FarVibhu [00:00:00]: Today, we have Joon in the podcast. Excited to kick this one off. Very exciting company. I wanna kick off and ask you the question, talk us through the story of your life. How have you gotten here?Joon [00:00:13]: Yeah, for sure. I'm really excited to be here. A story of my life. So I was born in Korea, and I lived there for a good 11 years or so of my life, and then my family moved to Boston. So we moved when I was 11, and my parents were doctors, so they were going through their postdoctoral studies. My dad was a surgeon, so he was doing his sabbatical years at the Boston Children's Hospital. So I grew up there, not too close to tech. I was very much a music and artsy, painting kind of guy.Vibhu [00:00:49]: Painting.Joon [00:00:49]: Exactly. I got into painting a little bit later, in high school, but that's what I used to do. And then I grew up mostly in the East Coast after Korea. So I lived a good number of years in New Hampshire, and then I went to college in Pennsylvania. And I got into more of this tech scene, in college. So I was originally trained to be an artist. I thought that would be my professional career. So it wasn't a hobby. It was like, “Hey, let's make a living out of this.” And then gradually, I got really interested in this idea of, hey, the greatest artist often creates their own medium, and the best medium that we had available today was in computation. So I decided to go deeper into that, and one thing led to another, and we can go deeper into this, but I decided that research was something that I gradually got interested in, and here I am.Smallville, Generative Agents, and the 2023 Breakout PaperSwyx [00:01:46]: So there's a lot that you packed into the research components. You had one of the best papers of 2023, which was the generative agents paper, commonly known as the Smallville paper.Swyx [00:01:58]: Feel free to call back to anything else that you mentioned, but most people would have heard of you from this. Do you have any statistics on how many people have, like, read it? arXiv gives you something, right? Some stats.Joon [00:02:10]: Yeah, it's a good question. How many people have read it, I'm not sure.Joon [00:02:14]: I know we do keep track of citations, and they are going up quite fast.Swyx [00:02:23]: Yeah, Google Scholar has 7,200 citations.Vibhu [00:02:25]: I feel like it made a bigger hit than that, and it was a pretty instrumental paper. It got cited so many times.Swyx [00:02:34]: It is frequently the answer when people ask, “What is the best paper you've read recently?” It's this one.Vibhu [00:02:39]: I thought the memory component was pretty underrated. It was a very good early memory system, and one of the biggest papers.Foundation Models and the Search for Killer ApplicationsJoon [00:02:47]: Yeah, so maybe I can talk a little bit about how this particular paper came together. So when I got into research, it was back in 2020 when I started my PhD program at Stanford, and that was the year, when we were about to get GPT-3 to be available. So we already had GPT-2, and you could sense that there was this new class of models that was just becoming available in the market, and the team got very intrigued. And the general consensus was, “Well, is this model going to be useful for anything?” “It's really strange that these models are not trained to do any particular task.” But we decided to take a bet. So a large group of scholars at Stanford, and it was led by one of my co-founders, Percy Liang, and we came togetherSwyx [00:03:35]: Who coined foundation models.Joon [00:03:36]: Who coined the term foundation models. We wrote this paper, where that term came from called Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Models. And during that process, really the thing that I started to think deeply about was, here is a model that is fundamentally new in our ecosystem. The reason why this was new was it wasn't, again, trained to do anything in particular, but its premise was it could do anything and everything. It was like a stem cell, if you were to take a biology analogy. And I got really interested in this idea that, well, if we were to really think about what are the killer applications that this particular technology would enable, what would that be? Many of my colleagues were using this for simple classification, simple generations. Interesting that these models can do that, but from an interaction perspective, not that interesting. We've known how to do that for many decades. And what we came down to was these models are trained on this very broad data from the web, right? So these are human behavioral data. It's social media, Wikipedia, all these data. So if you poke at the right angle, then you could see human behavior that would just pop out that's quite realistic, and we've never seen that before.The Time Machine Game and Recreating the WorldJoon [00:04:45]: So that got us really interested. The exercise that we decided to do, with this particular group of colleagues, Michael Bernstein, Percy Liang, and myself, who ended up becoming my co-founder at Simile, we sat down and we played this game that we call the time machine game.Joon [00:05:03]: Imagine we were to get on a time machine and fast-forward 10 years and look back. What would have been the single application that will have mattered that would be the most interesting and inspiring? And when we thought, “Well, what if we can just recreate the world that we live in?” it's really hard to get more ambitious than that. Like, let's just create a world.Joon [00:05:24]: And that's where we started. And initially, we had this paper that was a precursor to the generative agents paper called Social Simulacra.Swyx [00:05:32]: Before you go further, were there other candidates for the most ambitious thing in the time machine exercise? What was number two or number three?Personal Agents, User Models, and Why Simulation Came FirstJoon [00:05:44]: There is a close second that we were considering, which ended up becoming more of these automation tools, especially the vision around really personalized agents that would do things for you.Swyx [00:05:59]: That's also happening.Joon [00:06:00]: It's also happening. But it was interesting for us, right, in that the reason why, we decided to go with the idea of simulation, one, I was a huge science fiction nerd, and this idea of creating simulation, I was personally really just fascinated. I loved the idea. It's really cool to see, like, a game town like this and just see these agents live in it. But at the same time, my bet was if you were to create a really amazing personal assistant out of this technology, what you need first is an amazing model of your users. So I told a model, “Hey, can you go buy late dinner for me?” And it orders Hawaiian pizza, and I do not like pineapples on my pizza. Then it totally failed. The way for it to not make that mistake is only by having a deep understanding of who I am. And I gave a very simple and dumb example here, but you can imagine how this core understanding of people is instrumental. This is how, if we have our family and closest friends, they have a good mental model of who we are. That's the basis of our social connection. So our bet also was this technology around simulation, creating accurate representation of people ought to precede the more complex agents that would automate the world that we live in. So that was the bet. But that was a very close second, and I'm still very much fascinated by it. I think there's a lot of interesting work that's going around. My hot take here, though, is I don't think we've seen a true personal assistant that's useful, in ways that meet the ambition of that particular line of work. I think there are early applications that are interesting, and if you talk to even ChatGPT nowadays or Claude, they know a lot about us. So a lot of the generation it's doing, I do think it's much more tailored, but I think the ambition is quite large in that field, and I don't think we quite have all the right ingredients just yet.Swyx [00:08:01]: So OpenClaw and these personal agents, what do you want to see from them that they don't currently have?Memory, Markdown, and the Limits of PromptingJoon [00:08:09]: I do think it's slowly getting there, but I do generally want them to have much deeper understanding of the person. Right now, you look at the models. OpenClaw, what it's leveraging is a Markdown file, and I think it's quite clever, right? So if you look at the generative agents paper, this was the same intuition that we had, where initially when we were creating the memory architecture for the generative agents, and, like, this is, like, back in 2022, so we didn't really quite have the idea of even agentive architecture or the term agent. But the intuition that we shared with some of the work that's coming out today was we initially thought, “Well, do we want to make the memory into, let's say, knowledge graph? Do we want to train a bespoke model?” All of these things. And what we decided to do was, “No. Just forget about all this.” These language models are quite good at modeling text and understanding and reasoning about text. So just put everything in a Markdown file or a text file. You're done. I thought that was quite interesting that we could do that, and there's a lot of strength in doing that. But also, there are limitations. It's the way you retrieve and make sense of data that's extremely large, it takes a lot of work. So I think that technology is getting better. I also do, however, think, there are certain things you just cannot shape just by prompting the model. So to some degree, you do need to touch the parameters of the model itself. So there is this work that I do think does need to happen, and it is happening. The question is, how far can we take it? How do we source data, and how do you also create an ecosystem where people are continuously feeding data to this model so it's learning about you?Vibhu [00:09:50]: What's the intuition between why you need to do it in the model?Social Physics and Behavior Foundation ModelsJoon [00:09:53]: My intuition behind the actual when do you train or even post-train a model versus just prompt a model is if the model has to learn the underlying physics of the world that it's operating in. So it has to learn new social physics. The places where it doesn't have to train are the places where it already has the physics. We trust the physics. It already has the base statistics, but it's just trying to react to an environment. Then I think you can just prompt your way into getting the actions out of it. I don't think the models that are out in the open have yet learned the complete mapping of social physics of humanity. This is one of the core theses of Simile, right? And one of the core reasons why that is the case is if you look at the data that the model was trained on, these models were trained on the web data, like, whatever was available on the web. And these are really interesting data sets, but they are fundamentally the self-exposed attitudinal data with some behavior data that's sprinkled around here and there. And it has yet to learn the really deep behavioral nature of people, not just what people say they do online, but what they do in real life. And this is one of what I would consider to be the dark knowledge of humanity that we haven't quite captured. And it's these data that would also need to get factored into the model creation.Vibhu [00:11:21]: You call it behavior foundation model.Vibhu [00:11:23]: There's a good one-liner here, but outside of that, what type of data do you need? What are you changing on the model level? How do you go about modeling, doing a behavior foundation model?The Three Data Buckets: Interviews, Behavior, and CausalityJoon [00:11:35]: We think about data in three buckets. So one bucket is interview data. It's quite interesting. Rich qualitative data is interesting. It's not behavioral, but we would literally ask people, “Hey, tell me the story of your life.”Vibhu [00:11:53]: It's just what we're doing here exactly.Joon [00:11:54]: The question that you all asked at the beginning of this interview literally is the question we also ask. And we ask our participants to go a little bit deeper, than how far I went. Maybe I can give more of my life story in lieu of this. But the reason why that data is interesting is by learning about this very long-tail information about people, you get a lot of texture around this model, like, this person as a model. So even understanding their childhood memory or even their trauma, their first love, these things, quite informative in ways that's really hard to predict. So that's one. Then there are two tranches of what I would consider to be the behavioral data. One kind of behavioral data is observational. So these might be like transaction data, or these might be data that you can get by scraping the web, right? So you can imagine why these data sets would be interesting, right, because they give you the base statistics of people's behavior.Joon [00:12:55]: But then there is the last category of data, that I personally think is perhaps the most important, which is the data that describes the causal mechanism, the whys of people. Some of this is covered by the interview data, the qualitative, because people talk about why they made certain decisions. But really, where you get to see the most behavioral aspect of this is in randomized controlled trials, like RCTs. Imagine you have the same setup, but you have a few different variables that you are trying to tweak. Can you get realistic human behavior out of it in ways where, imagine you had this particular option. Imagine you're even trying to choose whether you're going to drink coffee or not. The day you drink coffee versus the day you didn't drink coffee, does your behavior change? That's a data set that describes a causal mechanism. This is quite important in modeling people. The reason why this is important is oftentimes when people come to us, or not just to us, but the reason why people are interested in simulation isn't because they want to predict the future. If you're trying to win against the stock market, predicting the future is interesting.Prediction vs. Simulation: Shaping the FutureJoon [00:14:08]: But most people, most decision-makers, what they want to know is, how can we shape the future? It doesn't really help you to hear that your sales are going to tank in two quarters. They're just gonna say, “Wow, that sucks.” What they want to know is, well, what do we need to do now to avoid that future? That's the causal mechanism. And this is also very hard data to come by, right, because the world is our ground truth, but it happens once. So in a very controlled setup where everything is equal except for one variable, this kind of data set rarely happens. So this is a reason why this data set is both hard to come by and quite important if you're trying to model human behavior.Swyx [00:14:50]: So behavior, I think, is the hardest data set to acquire. What is out there? What is even possible? You're not going to know a lot of details about my life. I don't even have data for myself on my own health or habits, and I just don't log everything. So how can you have that data?Joon [00:15:14]: So we run a lot of randomized controlled trials.Swyx [00:15:17]: But you put people in the lab, they watch them sleep, or what?Joon [00:15:20]: We do care a lot about the consent process. People know that we invite them to be a member of this community to both share data and have themselves represented in different forms. But we bring a lot of people to the lab, or virtual lab, where we design experiments that would pose them real behavioral decisions. And often in these experimental setups, what makes the difference between what is attitudinal versus behavioral is whether the stake in your decision is real. That's ultimately what makes it behavioral. So in these setups, we are inspired by our colleagues in social sciences, psychology, and so forth. So when they run studies, the techniques they utilize is imagine there's an online store that you're inviting people to come by. Then whatever they purchase in this experiment, they actually get that item delivered. Like, these are the things that make the stakes real. So we run a lot of these experiments, and we also do partner with firms. Right now, we also have customers who are quite excited to at least give us a glimpse of the behaviors that their users exhibit so that we can get a little bit deeper understanding of how people behave in these different platforms.How Customers Use Simile: Populations, Queries, and ExperimentsVibhu [00:16:39]: I think on the customer side, they have a lot of data about their users, who has bought. They have the action data.Vibhu [00:16:47]: Can you walk us through an example of what someone comes to you for? What questions would they want solved? Do you customize a model for them? Do you have something off the shelf? What does that look like?Joon [00:16:59]: Today, when people leverage our models, it's often to better understand the population of their interest. So usually, the start of the relationship, we come together and hear about what population they want us to model, right? So it might be that if you're a CPG company that's selling to all of the US, then maybe it's fairly straightforward. You want to model the gen pop of the US. But at the same time, if there is a vertical or if there's a market that they're trying to go into, imagine, they want to better understand, let's say, people in their 20s and 30s living in California. That's a much more specific population. So we hear about this population, and we go recruit these people, with consent, and with incentives, and we collect some of their data and create a model of these people. Then what our product allows you to do is query them. So it can take as input a filter that is a description of the population that you want to talk to, just like the one I just mentioned, and an environment. The environment can literally be survey questions, behavioral experiments, It can be A/B testing. Oftentimes, the core use cases are things like concept testing, to start with. But also, people sometimes want to do focus groups or one of the fun use cases that we also serve is even modeling things like earnings calls for public companies.Joon [00:18:21]: So these are the use cases that we often start with.Swyx [00:18:23]: Concept testing, is that an established term? I've never heard of concept testing.Concept Testing, Gallup, and PoliticsJoon [00:18:27]: Yeah. So it has to do with they have, let's say, different messaging, different products, different ideas.Swyx [00:18:32]: It's like a marketing exercise.Swyx [00:18:33]: Okay, got it. Got it. Politics?Joon [00:18:36]: We do, have a strategic partnership with Gallup, and of course, Gallup is deep into policy space and so forth. Right now, we have not worked deeply with politics, like that area just yet, however.Swyx [00:18:49]: I'm curious if there is demand or if they really would have different needs that somehow fundamentally don't mix with your existing, users or people.Joon [00:19:00]: I think there's certainly demand.Joon [00:19:02]: But we are very much mindful of how this technology gets adopted and the societal impact that we'll end up having with this technology. And I do see politics as an area where a company has to be particularly thoughtful about the way they operate and make impact. So this is where we also want to make sure that we form enough of guardrail and perspective on how to leverage this technology before we go on to serve markets like the politics.Swyx [00:19:29]: I'll give people an example. one of my favorite shows is The West Wing. I don't know if people have watched.Swyx [00:19:34]: One of the key storylines is, like, the president has, multiple sclerosis, but they haven't. they need to figure out how to disclose it. So they run a poll with a fake governor and ask people to respond on the poll,Counterfactuals, Polling, and When Simulation Is UsefulSwyx [00:19:47]: They try to make decisions based on the results of that poll on, like, how well they'll be received, like where, how should we play this?Swyx [00:19:54]: And I'm like, well, I think those counterfactual things, I would use a simulation for this if I could trust it.Joon [00:20:01]: For sure.Joon [00:20:02]: In that show, how'd it go?Swyx [00:20:04]: In that show, it was, like a foregone conclusion. They were like, “We know it's bad. We just don't know how bad.” And then the poll came back. It was like, “It's really bad.” And then they just did it anyway.Joon [00:20:14]: Part of it is to show, right? So you're, you're looking at the ideaSwyx [00:20:17]: Maximizing drama.Joon [00:20:18]: How bad could it be? Oh, it's horrible.Swyx [00:20:20]: And to some extent, I think that is part of the trick of the, or the challenge or with being a customer of yours, which is that if I know it's. if I roughly know and can intuitSwyx [00:20:35]: What the effect is going to be, do I need you? What sensitivity of it, of effect do I need in order to make a decision, right? So for example, if I, my approval rating is 50%Swyx [00:20:48]: And I, they have this negative piece, news item comes out, and it drops to 30.Swyx [00:20:52]: If it drops to 20, if it drops to 40, do I care? No. It, I know it drops. It's negative. So when do I care about simulations?Joon [00:21:01]: You do something that's clearly bad, that's not popular, and people don't like you, like, yeah, it's likeSwyx [00:21:05]: You don't need a simulation.Joon [00:21:07]: Yeah. Well, so there are a couple of things. one is, there are use cases where, like every day, developers, designers, policymakers, marketers, every single day, they create assets. They create new products. And turns out, it's many of the decisions in hindsight is obvious. Yes, of course this is bad, but we still run those studies because understanding the magnitude and understanding how acute something is quite difficult, even if, we feel like, of course, like this makes sense. this is the reason why we make so many mistakes. Like, every time somebody goes online and say something that has huge backlash, you look at that and like, “What an idiot.” However, it's tough. That's one. There's also another aspect here, which is, again, this is the reason why simulation is different from prediction. In simulation, in the ideal case scenario. So what simulation is trying to show is it's trying to show each step of the way or each step that we need to take to get to a certain outcome, right? So in the most advanced simulations, sometimes the next step that we're suggesting might be quite counterintuitive. The analogy that I sometimes give, and I ground it in a more realistic example, but, I, as I mentioned, I'm a huge fan of science fiction, and I don't know how, many of the audience members have read, like, things like the Foundation series by Asimov.Simulation as a Path, Not Just a PredictionSwyx [00:22:37]: Oh, yeah. We've mentioned psychohistory a number of times.Joon [00:22:39]: Okay, fantastic. So I might be, talking to the right crew. If you read Foundation series, literally the first act is there's a group of scientists who have found out that, “Oh, our galactic empire is going to collapse, and we're going to have 30,000 years of unrest.” And they run psychohistory, the simulator that tries to teach them, “Okay, how can we keep this unrest to a 1,000 years?” And they plan this out, and the first step of that plan is to get the scientists who say, “Okay, this is coming,” exiled into this random place in this, galax- galaxy.Swyx [00:23:18]: Terminus.Joon [00:23:19]: Exactly. And that's so counterintuitive. Like, what a strange move that you literally sent the group of scientists who was raising voice around this potential collapse of galactic empire into nowhere. How is that the right first move? Well, it turns out in this particular simulation, that was the move.Joon [00:23:40]: It's these things, right? And the reason why these reasoning is possible is because you're showing the step function or each step that results in a particular outcome. So really what simulation allows you to do in its highest form is you give it not a problem or question, like what would people answer to the survey? That's not what we do. What we tell it is, “Here is a goal that we have. In the context of foundation, we want to keep the unrest to a 1,000 years. What is the path that we need to take now to get to that particular future?” And that's what simulation allows you to do. Now, translating that into real market, imagine you're a automobile company and you're about to release a, EV, and you're trying to understand, well, how do we market EV, to make sure that our stock price goes up? But what if the answer comes down that, well, you can market your EV in XYZ way, but that might change people's perception around the cars that's not EV and make your overall sales to go down. Not very intuitive, especially all you're trying to optimize is EV salesss, and that's the only thing that you're tracking, then that might result in a completely wrong solution, or at least different solution than what you would have expected, whether it's right or wrong.Joon [00:24:57]: That's the power of simulation.Swyx [00:24:58]: For listeners, we covered a similar topic with Mikhail Parakhin from Shopify, where they are working on SimGym. I don't know if he ever talked to you about it. it's very similar.Joon [00:25:07]: ISwyx [00:25:07]: The goal is increased conversion, but then the journey is very unusual.Joon [00:25:12]: Journey is unusual.Swyx [00:25:12]: Yeah. The-- He's trying to look for interventions on a shopping trajectory, which is similar to what you're saying. Like, it's not about the attitudinal, is your word for it.Swyx [00:25:24]: It's about behavior.Joon [00:25:25]: It's about behavior.Swyx [00:25:25]: And that's exactly the difference, right? It's, like, not about the near-term direction about-- but it's more about, like, how do you affect multiple turns of interactions.Vibhu [00:25:35]: You had a good quote at the start about this as well. It's not about people wanting to know the outcome. It's about how they can change it, change the way to get there, something like that. But I wanna take it back to how do we know this is grounded? LikeGrounding and Evaluating Digital TwinsVibhu [00:25:47]: How do you run evals? How do you test that simulations come through? if I was to do the same thing that you described with, say, your favorite LLM, Opus, GPT-5.6, have some agent to map out these thingsVibhu [00:26:02]: How different are the answers we would get if I give it the same goal, the same objective, make a decent system? You're saying that you need to change the model weight. You have your own solution to this. But how far off are we, and how do you check if it's grounded? you have some interesting stuff on your site that points to how you run real evals, but if you could take us through that side. I think that's one of the big concerns that people have. They're like, “LLMs hallucinate.”Vibhu [00:26:27]: “You're just hallucinating layer after layer,” right?Joon [00:26:30]: The way we do this, and this is the paper that we worked on after the generative agents paper that really became the, at least for Simile and also the field of simulation and synthetic panels, really became the foundation. Yeah, this is the paper. the paper is called Generative Agent Simulations of 1000 People. Here's what we've done. For this paper, we brought 1,000 people that's representatively sampled from the US to a virtual lab. And what we have done was we spent two hours collecting fairly wide-ranging data. In this particular study, we focused a lot on this interview data, that was, whose script was taken from this project called American Voices Project. And then we would also pair that with a lot of behavior data and so forth, whatever we can collect within two hours. And then we would send these people away for a couple of weeks. And during that time, I would use this data to create their digital twins. And I would bring the humans, participants back after 2 weeks and have them complete a battery of surveys, experiments, behavior studies. So we have the list here, which included things like behavioral economics games. We would run literally, like, Big Five personality test, General Social Survey. We would also go ahead and run the randomized controlled trials that were published on PNAS. And we would have their digital twins predict how the source individuals would have acted in these studies and surveys. And this is where we could replicate people's behaviors and attitudes 85 percent as accurately as people would replicate their own. So that was the first really paper that gave this validated results that we can model individuals in an accurate way. And what we ended up finding now, of course, in AI space, so this paper came out at the end of 2024. AI space, a year and a half, 2 years, that's a lifetime.85% Accuracy and Why Frontier Models Miss Human BehaviorSwyx [00:28:24]: Yeah. Just, for listeners who are not seeing the YouTube, I just wanna say, like, the headline figure is 85 percent accuracy, like, which is a big improvement over all the otherSwyx [00:28:34]: Methods that you showed.Joon [00:28:36]: But the part that was particularly striking to us, especially as we improved this technology even further, was the generative AI models like ChatGPT, Claude that's coming out, it does give you the right foundation. However, what they do not consider is the true attitudinal and behavioral aspect of people, especially in the population that you care about. So what these models are really good at today is they're trying to become the super rational, objective machines, right? So you go get their data from places like Mercor, Scale. You talk to professional programmers, scientists to create model that's amazing at reasoning. That's what they do. Simile doesn't care about any of this. The models that we're talking about here, what we're trying to create are models that are as dumb as I am, right? So if I make some mistakes, the model has to make the same mistake.Swyx [00:29:34]: Oh, that's very hard.Joon [00:29:35]: That's very hard.Swyx [00:29:36]: You're solving Murphy's paradox.Joon [00:29:37]: That's exactly. And this is a completely different data and training objective. This is also where we see quite a bit of discrepancy in the performance in human behavior prediction between the frontier models, Simile's model, and the models being created in this space, where in some cases, the model performance of frontier models go all the way down to 20, 30 percent, especially if you go into that more niche population on topics that our customers would care about. On more gen pop, it might be around 50 to 60 percent. So it's not very robust. Like, you wouldn't want to make your decision off of these and these findings. If you can bring that up to 85 percent, that is ultimately what people end up getting very excited about.Swyx [00:30:20]: Yeah. Do we wanna keep going on the paper, routes?Joon [00:30:23]: Yeah, for sure. So the last one, was an interesting one. So this, paper was the follow-up paper that we had, to the 1000 agents paper, where the idea was now can we augment the models even further and post-train a model based on a lot of randomized controlled trials? So this was an interesting one. The data is always the most interesting part of modeling in many ways. The data that we got here was there's this, there's this platform called Open Science Framework. So some, the audience might be familiar with this. And there has been, especially in the social sciences over the past 5 years or so, there has been this concern around replicability of studies. And so it was a bit of a crisis, the scientists acknowledged, where we rerun the study and we don't see the same finding.Post-Training on RCTs and Replication StudiesVibhu [00:31:12]: Oof.Joon [00:31:12]: It's tough. And the reason why it's there-- that was often the case was there's this survival bias where the papers that get published often need to maintain what we call the value of less than 0.05 in the experiments that we ran. That suggests that only-- there's only 5% chance that the results that we saw is false positive. But the tricky part was all the papers that were not published, and there's still a 5% chance that whatever we publish is totally just randomly generated. Like, there's a 5% chance that, hey, this effect is not real, but it just happened to be real because of the sampling bias. So because of that, what scientists started to do was they started to register their studies. So before running an experiment, they would go to this platform and say, “Here is the data. Here is the population that we're collecting, and here's the hypotheses.” And they would just say, “Here is our hypothesis.” Like, “This is what we believe.” And you cannot retroactively change those hypotheses. This is what gives us more scientific statistical confidence that whatever effect that you ended up seeing is true. So that ended up creating this really interesting platform where there's one platform that has now contains tens of thousands of real-world experiments and hypotheses. And a lot of these are really high-quality, like, professionally designed behavior studies and random- randomized controlled trials. So we got the data and the studies from this platform and used that to make a point. And this particular, model is not, something that we're serving commercially because this was a part of the open science. But this particular data set, helped us make a point that by collecting a lot of these randomized controlled trials, that are really well-designed, we can make significant improvement in model's capability to predict human behaviors. So that's what this paper was about.Vibhu [00:33:10]: Is this stuff done on a individual level? Like, do I need to tune the model per individual, per company? Is there foundation model changes and then some slight post-training? Anything you can share there?Population-Level vs. Individual-Level ModelsJoon [00:33:21]: So this particular model was trained. the data we had at the level of individuals, but this particular model was trained. We experimented with both. And this is what we end up doing at Simile too. We always train 2, distinct model. One is what we call the population-level model. The other is what we call the individual-level model. And both take very similar input, which is the description of a subpopulation or individual and a stimuli. In this particular work, we've done the same. Here, the results that we are reporting are much more geared towards individuals because we do think that is a harder task in many ways, but that's what we have done.Vibhu [00:34:02]: You seen anything on the questions that humans can solve that models can't solve? So likeHuman Biases, Mundane Choices, and What Models MissVibhu [00:34:09]: Currently, it's, I live 5 minutes walk away from a car wash. It's a 10-minute drive. Should I walk or drive?Joon [00:34:16]: Huh.Vibhu [00:34:16]: The model will say, “Oh, walk to the car wash.” And, you don't have your car.Vibhu [00:34:20]: Is anything like this a problem in simulation? You would assume, like, very simple for human to think about, but if the model is saying you should walk to the car wash, anything here?Joon [00:34:32]: It's less, what can we solve, but I think it's more about what biases or mistakes do people make that models miss. Like, imagine that you are, like the. When I was still at Stanford, I lived in Palo Alto. So it's about, I would say, 40-minute walk from the campus. You ask the model, “Okay, let's go home. What can I, what can I do?” It would likely call an Uber or, give me, the bus time. But for the longest time, I really liked walking back. And the reason why I wanted to do that was not for efficiency. It really helped me think. And I like to walk for, half an hour or 40 minutes or so a day, where I just get to, just think about ideas, research, just get lost in my thoughts. That's very human activity. Unless the model has seen that and understands the importance of that activity, it would miss these kinds of features. So that I think, is fundamentally what we're trying to model. Like, what is fundamentally human might not be the most efficient thing to do, might not be the right thing to do, but things that make us who we are.Swyx [00:35:43]: I'm curious if, there are some data sets that you really want that would materially help you. One version of this may be interesting, which is more valuable to you to acquire as a data set, all of LinkedIn, all of Twitter, all of Facebook?What Data Matters: Social Media, Transactions, and FacebookJoon [00:35:57]: It's a little bit hard to rank, in part because, there's, there's this product saying where no feedback is wrong because it teaches you something about your users. Doesn't matter what feedback.Joon [00:36:11]: I think it's a little bit like that.Swyx [00:36:12]: So just whatever is bigger.Vibhu [00:36:13]: What about a different domain? Say it was. What about all of Amazon data?Joon [00:36:17]: Oh, yeah.Vibhu [00:36:18]: Shopping data, right?Joon [00:36:18]: Shopping data. So Amazon data is interesting in that it's very much behavioral, although, like, what people do on social media, you could squint and say that is also behavioral. But the transaction data is always interesting. It is also most commonly available, however.Joon [00:36:33]: If we were to look at purely social media, like if you really, if I were, if I had to really pick, Facebook likely is interesting because I do think it is most a default version of people. Because you go to LinkedIn, it's very much professional environment. So people put up their, they have their guards up, right? And that still is interesting because that is true human attitude and behavior, but it is not your base state. you go to Twitter- Twitter, people have their own crazy personas, or depending on who you are. Like, my Twitter profile and, persona is very much, initially was I was very much an academic. “Hey, I'm here to share my studies.” Now, I share, things that's related to Simile. But Facebook is one of those more private space where people just connect with their friends. In that way, I do think it shows you a little bit more about who that person is. So if I had to pick, I'd likely pick, Facebook.Swyx [00:37:30]: Yeah. And you're interested in, like, the whole person and their background and philosophy. I, is it too clinical or too machine learning-oriented to just say this is just ways to inject variance and biases? The broad question, is, like, is this any better than a randomized, like, combinatorial explosion version? So we have a link to the TencentBillion Personas, Synthetic Demographics, and Bespoke DataSwyx [00:37:54]: Billion persona paper, where they did not do any of the groundwork that you are doing.Swyx [00:37:59]: They just did like a cross matrix of here's all the professions in the world, here's all the people, possible backgrounds in the world, do a dot product across all of them, and that's it. That's your prompt for a billion people.Swyx [00:38:12]: This will do something. I don't know if it'll do what you do, but it gets you some way, some percent of the way there.Joon [00:38:18]: So this was an interesting paper. Like, what I admired about this paper when it came out was the scale. And you do gradually want to be able to simulate really large societies and interactions. So the scale is definitely admirable. it is relying heavily on the known statistics that went into training the model. So to the extent that you believe that statistics is correct, this is not a bad way to go about this. But the thesis here, and this is something that we also have seen in the market, like if this works, then we have solved simulation.Joon [00:38:54]: It,Swyx [00:38:55]: Because I survey, like, okay, 5% of the US population is in construction.Swyx [00:39:01]: The other 5% is in medicine, whatever, right? And then you just keep going down the list, and then you do the other side. 5% has, like, the big 5 personalitySwyx [00:39:08]: Of, like, neurotic or whatever. That's it.Joon [00:39:11]: That's it. So if you believe that the underlying data set and the platform that we're leveraging has all the right statistics, then this will have solved it. you're at that point merely retrieving the knowledge that is already embedded in the model, in the model parameters. That's not, unfortunately, what we see, where there is such detailed and also niche knowledge about people that if you just take one example, it might feel very mundane, but it's quite rich when you put together, that you do need to do a lot of bespoke data collection to better understand people. And this is also, I think what makes this particular, job fun, which you want to deeply understand people, and the process of deeply understanding them requires a lot of attention to the details. And you do need to pay attention to and pay respect to the daily lives that people lead.Scaling Simulation: From Thousands to SocietiesVibhu [00:40:04]: I wanna talk about scaling simulation.Vibhu [00:40:07]: So what can't we simulate, what can we simulate, and how does scaling affect this? So how big are the models? What if we go from, 8B, like, couple 100 billionVibhu [00:40:18]: Like billion000 parameters, billion000? Do we get scaling? Any interesting emergence? Like, at a certain scale, at a certain amount of training, you uncover anything unusual and any learnings from that?Joon [00:40:31]: What we are seeing is at Simile, so we do post-train our own model. The thing that we're seeing is the early glimpse of scaling law in simulations. The more data about humans and more compute you ingest, you start to get predictive and predictable gains of the model performance in simulating it, simulating people.Vibhu [00:40:51]: Ooh. We need a scaling law curve.Joon [00:40:52]: It's scaling law. Whenever you find it's a beautiful thing. And we're starting to see the glimpse of it, which is quite exciting. But if you talk about the ambition of simulation as a whole, it's not merely about building a model. It's about building a model, then creating the agents that become the individuals in a much larger ecosystem. So they're creating this multi-agent simulation. Down the line, you want these multi-agent simulation to also live in a very rich environment, right? What we are really trying to get to at that point is, hey, can we create. All right, let's do a time machine game again, and 5 years, 10 years into the future, can we create a simulation of 8 billion people living on Earth? I think that's quite interesting. And that really is the vision. And once you get to that state, the questions that you can help answer for the society also start to change from my perspective. The answers are fundamentally about emergence of the emergent behavior of society and large groups of people.Joon [00:41:53]: So the questions that I get excited by, and maybe this is a stodgy- a bit. I have my, academic side of me.Joon [00:42:01]: And for me, it's questions like, can we help solve climate change? If you look at climate change as a problem space, this is what we, like social scientists would often call it the wicked problems, problem where you have many actors with competing incentives for trying to make a very complex decision and coordinating that coordination decision. Very difficult to really solve in real life, which is also the reason why we couldn't solve it. Can simulation help us solve that? Another one is, can we understand the signals for collapsing democracy, or can we understand or can we uncover the origin story of the monetary system? These are societal questions that we never really had a good way of answering. If we can create simulations of our society, you have to believe that these are the problems that we can solve. So that's really the ambition of this field. And, I also think, yes, I think there's a Nobel Prize to be won there, which wouldn't be surprising. And I think there's some amazing societal impact that we can have to help people make better decisions.Climate Change, Democracy, and Societal SimulationSwyx [00:43:04]: Nobel Prize in economics?Joon [00:43:06]: In economics.Swyx [00:43:06]: Oh, I see. I see. Rooting for you to write that paper.Joon [00:43:10]: One of these days. But, one of the scholars that I was deeply inspired by, When I was coming into the space of simulation, is this scholar, named Thomas Schelling.Schelling, Agent-Based Models, and the Nobel PrizeSwyx [00:43:23]: Schelling point?Joon [00:43:24]: So the canonical example of the work that he's done was he was one of the creators of agent-based modeling. So this was, like, in the 1970s and 80s. It's very early days, but this was truly one of the first exemplars of simulations. And one of the canonical model from that time, and of course many of these simulations are trying to tackle the societal problems that's most relevant for their era, it was called the model of segregation. So racial segregation was a big topic, that, we cared about. And what they've done was they created this grid world where they had red dots and blue dots. And these dots were, back in the day, like, they were the agents, and they had a simple rule that governed their behavior. If certain percentage of your neighbors are of different color and if that goes above certain threshold, then you move to a new location at random.Joon [00:44:21]: One of the striking finding of this paper or this agent-based model was for the longest time, people thought the segregation within society was caused by explicit and overt racism.Joon [00:44:34]: But if you look at this model, people's preference towards living with people of the same color, that preference can be very minute.Joon [00:44:42]: But the very small difference causes the society to segregate completely over time. This was very counterintuitive for a lot of people. And this particular work ended up informing housing policies. Mixed income housing, got really inspired by this work. And Thomas Schelling ends up winning the Nobel Prize for having laid the groundwork for very early versions of simulations. The opportunity that I do see here in the more scientific terms, is agent-based models for the longest, had impact in the 1980s, 90s, to some extent, early 2000s, but it has now gotten forgotten by the community a little bit. Because as you can imagine, red dots and blue dots is not really a rich description of people.Joon [00:45:31]: But with the emergence of things like generative AI and, in particular, generative agents, we do have an opportunity to create these agent-based models that are high fidelity enough to help us make really complex decisions. And that's the opportunity that I see. If that truly works, then yes, that is the work that will result in a Nobel Prize.Swyx [00:45:53]: Yeah. For what it's worth, and I grew up in Singapore. 80% of Singapore is in public housing, and public housing has, enforced racial quotas for exactly that reason, which is very interesting. okay, so we talk about scaling, we talk about all these, the agent possible applications.Cost, Reuse, and the Economics of SimulationSwyx [00:46:13]: I'm scared about the cost. if you even-- let's just keep it to the US, about 8 billion people.Swyx [00:46:21]: But, how much does it cost to model so many hundreds of millions of people?Joon [00:46:26]: Oftentimes today, we don't start at that scale, this stage of the, of industry and simulation as technology. But we can get our users extremely rich and meaningful insights even by modeling thousands, tens of thousands of people. And today what we do is every week we are collecting data on the scale of tens of thousands people's data, and we have panel partnerships that gets us to tens of millions of people globally. So that's what we do today.Swyx [00:46:55]: And just as a side note once you've collected one person for one studySwyx [00:46:59]: Can you reuse that same person for all the subsequent studies?Joon [00:47:03]: That's exactly right.Swyx [00:47:03]: Okay.Joon [00:47:04]: The beauty of this model and these agents is the fact that they are domain-agnostic.Joon [00:47:08]: That what you're really trying to understand is what is the fundamental nature of these people? What's their social physics? And there are a lot of, a lot of, people that does change over time. Like, even, like, even things like, how many times have you gone have you been to, like, CVS the past week? that will change. But there's so many traits about people that are also known to never change. Like, your risk tolerance doesn't really change over time. It's very consistent. So it's these things that we're trying to learn. But the scale we are operating is right now hundreds or, tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands. And in many of the core use cases that we are deployed in, and this is more than enough population, to cover those. Really, at that point, what you care about is less the number of people, but more do you have the right subpopulation of interest covered? And this is also the reason why people want a larger sample. It's not because they want, stronger statistical guarantees. It's more that can they filter down to any population of their interest. However, you can also imagine in 10 years, if we truly believe that the compute is going to scale, that we'll have much more availability for compute, and our ambition for simulation is also going to scale accordingly, there's definitely a reason for us to create an entire data center worth of simulations.Joon [00:48:35]: Or in my hunch here is I do think in the next some number of years, we will start creating simulations that will cost as much as training a foundation model. But perhaps it's going to be so valuable to the society that it would be a no-brainer. Right now, even today, like, we are training bunch of new foundation model just so we can say we trained one and we spent tens of millions. But if we can create a simulation at the level of society that would solve climate change, I would run that today. I would raise the money right now just to run that.Multi-Agent Simulation and Social InfluenceSwyx [00:49:10]: Amazing. the follow-up question is, does it also compound if you let the simulations talk to each other?Swyx [00:49:18]: Or do they already do that today? They don't, right, as far as I understand?Joon [00:49:22]: It depends on what simulation you're trying to run.Joon [00:49:24]: In the multi-agent simulation setup, the agents do talk to each other.Swyx [00:49:28]: Right, which is exactly Smallville, right?Joon [00:49:29]: That's right.Swyx [00:49:30]: But a lot of times, for example, in commerce, you're just by yourself, so there's no point talking. which is way cheaper.Vibhu [00:49:37]: But they use all these levels, right? Like, you decide what you will buy based on what other people around you buy and talk about, right?Swyx [00:49:43]: It depends.Vibhu [00:49:44]: It depends.Swyx [00:49:45]: Again, I'm, I'm coming at this from a cost point of view. I'm like, “Oh my God.” LikeVibhu [00:49:48]: I thinkSwyx [00:49:49]: If there is, like, some combinatorial thing of, like, thousands of people talking to thousands of people, then that one million X's might cost.Vibhu [00:49:56]: I have a very different view as the cost point aside. Like, running these studies in reality is a lot more expensive, right? Running any study like this is you gotta have people do it, you gotta sign people up. It's very expensive and sometimes, like, not feasible to run the study.Vibhu [00:50:14]: But the outcome or the decisions you make are very expensive on them, right? So spend X million on something that, the overall process costs 100 million might as well, right? There's, there's a lot of value to be had there. It's a small cost, but I'm excited on the cost side.Joon [00:50:33]: To some extent, and when you deploy technology, you often want to deploy in a way where you can replace existing budget or you can make things more efficient, and that is the best way to deploy. However, the way you capture the long-term value of the technology is making the argument that, no, it's the upside, that by making this better decision using simulation, you have saved yourself or made yourself hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars, and that's a case to be made.Vibhu [00:51:06]: Random tangent question. So if you're doing a lot of inference, a lot of model multi-agent stuff, are you at the point where it makes sense to, train a model that' very sparse? You're expecting to do multi-million dollar runs. Are you thinking about this in model architecture standpoint or inference efficiency, or, you're still at the research phase of it works, we're not super there yet?Joon [00:51:34]: Efficiency, we do think quite a bit about. this is technology that is deployed now in some of the largest enterprise companies in the world, and we do process significant number of queries, that are trying to, simulate the populations in the world. So efficiency is a consistent thing. we don't want to over-optimize too early, so I wouldn't say, like, this is the higher bid Right now, but this is definitely something that we think pretty carefully about.Swyx [00:52:05]: Yeah. Are there other case studies? So we, you talked about CVS, talked about Gallup, Deloitte, Wealthfront.Efficiency, Enterprise Use, and Real-World Case StudiesJoon [00:52:12]: Wealthfront is an interesting one, because one of the things they were trying to do, they were one of the first customers that wanted to do product testing that goes beyond just asking people what they think about, let's say, behavior experiments and so forth. So there, really what we had to do was reason about multimodal input, so images, but also you can also imagine, like, these agents traversing through Figma mockups or websites. So some of the things that our agents can also do is it can be given a domain, like, or, like, a website URL and go use it for a while. It's these things. And Wealthfront was one of the first, customers, that was very excited about this possibility.Vibhu [00:52:53]: What have people been asking? Like, is there any demand that we have not covered? Like, UI testing, right?Vibhu [00:52:59]: I wanna try a new. I wanna ship a new feature, test the UI, simulate how people will do it. Any interesting things that you're seeing demand for?Product Testing, Websites, and Synthetic PanelsJoon [00:53:08]: Today, a lot of the demand does come from like, the places where people have historically used human panels, we can now replace with agents, and these synthetic populations. And this is not replacing human panel. in many ways, the simulation that Simile is building is grounded. So the way that I think about this is we are trying to represent humanity at scale. And in that way, the use cases are what we would expect, but it's the scale of deployment that surprises me.Joon [00:53:44]: Turns out there are so many decisions that people make every day in these organizations, groups, and we want to be able to say, “We listen to people. We have consulted our users.” But in reality, that is rarely the case because getting to people and asking them many questions, it's difficult. It's both costly, time-consuming, but most importantly, people are just not available. If I had to answer 1000 survey questions for this one particular, vendor, even if I wanted to do that, like, I would never do it. And that's very much the case. What simulation can do is ensure that the voices of people are always represented in rooms where the decisions for them is made, right? So all the stakeholders of this particular product launch, ideally they're consulted. That's what this technology really is trying to enable.Market Size, TAM, and Human Decision-MakingSwyx [00:54:39]: In my mind, that means it skews towards more consumer focus, right? Like, anything with a wide enough customer base where you do benefit from the diversity that you represent. What are some rough statistics, just for people who are not familiar with this market in general, what's the market size that. I'm sure you have some, like, rough numbers. market size is, like, a vague questionSwyx [00:55:01]: But, like, how much do people spend?Joon [00:55:03]: So market research is a $100 billion industry.Joon [00:55:06]: But the thing about simulation is not a tool for market research. Simulation is a tool for human decision-making. So the question around what is a TAM here is quite tricky, right? Because it's easy to say, “Well, market research TAM is roughly 100 million or 100 billion.” so is it a TAM? And not really, right? Because in many ways, you're trying to inform all human decision-making. You're trying to inform every decision that are made about humans for humans. What is a TAM for that? It's really unclear. And I'll be honest. Like, I have a scientific background, I have a research background, so I didn't come into the field calculating, oh, what is the TAM for human decision-making? But I just had to assume, well, if we can inform every decision that is made about human for human, that has to be big.Swyx [00:55:58]: Some- something valuable.Joon [00:55:59]: Exactly.Swyx [00:55:59]: To some extent, you are a unicorn founder now, and you have to care as a CEO. But, like, I do think, like, yeah, when you go into these boardrooms with people that you're quoting millions of dollars of contracts for, like, you have to say, “Well, here's what you spend on humans-”Swyx [00:56:15]: “. And here's what we save you, and it's 85% similar.”Joon [00:56:19]: And certainly, the value case, is something that we care deeply about. Like, what is the value that we provide to the users and the decision-makers? But this is also where, like, as a founder, I think valuation only tells one very superficial aspect of the story, and I try not to think too much about valuation, in general, because that's not what also motivates a team or certainly doesn't. I'm, I-- Again, the interesting thing about researchers is we are happy living in academia, getting paid next to. we get paid okay. we don't get paid that much, as a researcher here in academia, but it's the impact and it's the, it's the value that we can provide to the individuals and the society that really drives us. And in that way, ultimately what drives us is the impact. Does the simulation we provide have a real impact in people's decision-making in ways that progresses our society forward? If the answer is yes, then yes. that has to be great business, and we see that in numbers, and we do care deeply about that upside story, but that's the heart of it.Where Simulation Goes NextVibhu [00:57:27]: Do you have any timeline predictions? So we talked about scaling laws of simulations.Vibhu [00:57:33]: You brought up, okay, maybe one day we can simulate how to solve climate change.Vibhu [00:57:38]: Where are we now?Vibhu [00:57:40]: If that's not the end state, what is an end state, and what does progress look like?Joon [00:57:45]: So what I sometimes tell people is simulation as industry, it feels a lot like where GPT-3.5, GPT-4 was, for the AGI saga, which is we have now technology that is powerful enough to do real damage on the verticals that we are tackling. At the same time, there's a lot of progress that is yet to come. And that's, I think, where this is. So the way I see it, I do think there will continue to be breakthroughs both in data, in algorithms, and there will be much more aggressive scaling that will also happen over the next few years. But I think that's roughly where we are.Swyx [00:58:27]: I think that was about the ro

The best AI model in the world just scored 18.1%. On Zapier's own benchmark for real business work — the cross-app tasks any white-collar worker does every day — even the top frontier model completes them barely one time in five. That's the number Wade Foster keeps pointing at, and he runs an automation company that stands to gain from the hype. Instead, he makes the case for what actually works right now: not turning a model loose, but blending deterministic workflows with agents where each is strong.In this episode of Talking AI, Matt Paige sits down with Wade Foster, co-founder and CEO of Zapier, who built a scrappy Y Combinator startup into the $5 billion plumbing of the SaaS era on barely a million dollars raised. Foster called a company-wide “code red” the week GPT-4 launched, and he's spent the years since rewiring how Zapier — and its customers — actually use AI.The conversation covers why he shut the company down for a week in 2023, how AI habits actually stick, what Zapier's AutomationBench reveals about the gap between benchmark scores and real-world reliability, why coding models improve faster than knowledge-work models, how to tell a workflow from an agent, and the difference between individual AI and the institutional AI almost no company has cracked.In this episode, you'll hear about:The three things about GPT-4 that triggered Zapier's first-ever code redHow daily AI use jumped from 11% to over 50% in a single hackathon weekThe moves that make AI habits stick: show-and-tell, repeat hackathons, and “not yet”Why the best model on AutomationBench still scores only 18.1%Why coding is easy to verify — and subjective knowledge work isn'tThe power of hybrid setups that blend deterministic workflows with agentsWade's prediction: most tokens on open-source models, most spend on the frontierWhat actually makes a good eval — hard for models, easy for humans, private dataA plain-English definition of an “agent” versus a deterministic workflowThe daily recap workflow Wade thinks everyone is sleeping onFloor raisers vs. ceiling raisers — and why individual AI isn't enoughWhy the six-month product roadmap is deadKey Moments00:04:40 — Making AI habits stick: show-and-tell and repeat hackathons00:06:38 — Differentiation when AI is best at the thing you sell00:09:34 — AutomationBench: the best model scores just 18.1%00:11:31 — Why the top model stalls: verifiable code vs. subjective work00:14:19 — Getting squeezed on both sides: AI in the company and the product00:15:20 — Model efficiency, Coinbase, and the token-maxing debate00:17:18 — What makes a good eval00:19:30 — What actually counts as an “agent”00:23:12 — Iterating on workflows with your own mini-evals00:26:15 — The kind of worker thriving right now00:27:36 — Wade's favorite workflow: the daily recap00:30:44 — Floor raisers vs. ceiling raisers for AI adoption00:34:55 — From individual AI to institutional AI00:37:58 — Why the six-month roadmap is deadKey Links:ZapierConnect with Wade on LinkedInMentioned in this episode:AI Opportunity FinderFeeling overwhelmed by all the AI noise out there? The AI Opportunity Finder from HatchWorks cuts through the hype and gives you a clear starting point. In less than 5 minutes, you'll get tailored, high-impact AI use cases specific to your business—scored by ROI so you know exactly where to start. Whether you're looking to cut costs, automate tasks, or grow faster, this free tool gives you a personalized roadmap built for action.

Natasha Wallace, Chief Solutions Officer for Strategy, Planning and AI at Jellyfish, joins That's What I Call Marketing to discuss how brands can become more visible and understandable to AI without sacrificing creativity, emotion or distinctiveness.This episode explains how marketers should approach the growing challenge of serving two audiences at once: humans, who respond to stories, feelings and ideas, and AI models, which rely on clear signals, context, trust and specificity.In this episode, we cover:– Why Jellyfish's research found almost no correlation between how humans and AI models judge creative work– What “brand flattening” means and why marketers should resist making everything rational and functional– How to make a brand legible to large language models without weakening its creativity– Why brand trust, distinctive assets and consumer consensus still influence AI recommendations– The role of YouTube, Reddit, creators, ecommerce and digital PR in shaping model perception– Why paid, owned and earned media need to work together in an AI-led discovery environmentNatasha also explains Jellyfish's concept of the “brand echo”: the conversation, reaction and community created around a brand, even when the original activity is not directly visible to an AI model.The practical message is not that marketers need to abandon the fundamentals. It is that audience strategy, brand positioning, content, media and measurement need to work together more closely. The brands most likely to succeed will be clear enough for machines to understand and interesting enough for people to care about.A useful listen for marketers interested in AI in marketing, GEO, brand strategy, creativity, content strategy, advertising effectiveness and the future of search and discovery.That's What I Call Marketing is the podcast for marketers who care about brand, B2B, creativity, effectiveness and the future of the profession.Follow the show for more conversations with CMOs, marketing leaders, agency leaders, professors, authors, thinkers and practitioners.Find more episodes at: https://www.thatswhaticallmarketing.com**Timestamps**00:00 Why marketers must not flatten their brands for AI00:39 Introducing Natasha Wallace of Jellyfish02:04 Natasha's career across digital, media and emerging technology03:35 Why AI feels different from previous industry shifts05:23 Working globally with Heineken and major sports properties07:05 Why Natasha joined Jellyfish09:00 Bringing media, content, creative and AI strategy together12:32 What humans and AI models see in award-winning advertising15:31 The danger of brand flattening16:36 How the “brand echo” influences AI models17:35 Why brand trust and distinctive assets still matter20:21 Why YouTube is frequently cited by large language models22:28 How marketers should prioritise their AI and GEO activity24:46 Leading and lagging indicators for AI visibility26:01 The platforms and voices that shape model perception27:27 Borrowed credibility, belonging and long-term brand associations30:05 Testing creative work without making it formulaic32:25 Why AI should strengthen human thinking, not replace itThat's What I Call Marketing is the podcast for marketers who care about brand, B2B, creativity, effectiveness and the future of the profession.Follow the show for more conversations with CMOs, marketing leaders, agency leaders, professors, authors, thinkers and practitioners.Find more episodes at: https://www.thatswhaticallmarketing.comThis Cannes Sessions episode is produced in partnership with The Digital Voice.That's What I Call Marketing is where marketers come for real conversations about brand, B2B, creativity, effectiveness and the future of the profession.Hosted by Conor Byrne, the show features conversations with CMOs, marketing leaders, agency leaders, authors, thinkers and practitioners about what good marketing looks like in practice.Listen, follow and find more episodes at: https://www.thatswhaticallmarketing.comConnect with Conor on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/conorbyrneirl/If you enjoy the show, please follow, subscribe and leave a review. It helps more marketers find the conversations. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

We witnessed a gaggle of Ls this week as Amazon/Twitch launch opt-out AI training on their streamers to everyone's dismay. Even more abysmal AI news: An ex-writer within Saber Interactive allegedly replaced by AI and the CEO has a very healthy reaction. Luckily we finally get our first real look at Kingdom Hearts 4 and it's launching sooner than we thought! Games this week: Continuing Big Walk, KOTOR 2, Sandustry, DIVE or DIE, ReStory and more! 00:00:00 - Intro00:01:00 - To the MOON00:04:00 - War Dogs00:09:20 - Mortal Shell 200:14:00 - Twitch/Amazon training AI off streamers00:29:00 - Writer gets replaced by AI00:41:00 - Weird things in WoW00:49:00 - Terraria Calamity mod shutting down00:54:30 - Kingdom Hearts 4 news00:57:00 - Marvel Rivals doing extremely well01:00:42 - People upset with Wolverine?01:07:00 - Elder Scrolls 6 looks great according to CEO of game01:09:50 - Alan Wake 2 sells 3 million copies01:13:20 - BEEG Walk01:19:50 - Falcom reports 110% profit growth from Trails in the Sky 101:21:00 - Fire Emblem Fortune's Weave01:26:50 - Marvel Tokon gets PC patch01:35:30 - Zeke played KOTOR201:44:50 - Sandustry01:49:40 - Lootbound01:59:00 - Chop Chop Inc.02:04:30 - DIVE or DIE02:11:20 - Pax Autocratica02:23:00 - Servant of the Lake02:30:00 - Below, Rusted Gods02:36:40 - Cat Mail Co.02:42:20 - ReStory02:49:00 - Dragonsword Awakening02:59:00 - Shoutouts See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This week on the Hivemind, the team debates whether the market is on the cusp of a new on-chain boom or whether the lack of a major wealth-creation event in Bitcoin, ETH, or SOL will keep the upside limited.They break down the green shoots showing up across FWA, FOMO, MetaDAO and other pockets of the market, why small and mid caps may offer better opportunities than the majors, and whether exhausted sellers could be setting the stage for the next move higher.The conversation also covers Hyperliquid and tokenized stocks, the competition between crypto and AI for speculative capital, whether buy-and-hold still works, and why the next sustained rally may require a very different catalyst than previous cycles.TIMESTAMPS00:00:00 Intro00:00:50 Is On-Chain Finally Coming Back?00:09:05 Who Buys Bitcoin Next?00:21:55 Where Does Crypto Value Accrue?00:28:45 Majors vs. Small Caps00:35:30 Crypto vs. AI00:47:05 RWAs, HYPE & Tokenized Stocks00:55:55 The FWA Experiment

SPONSORS: Look for Mountain Dew in stores near you at https://mountaindew.com Go to https://helixsleep.com/ymh for 20% Off Sitewide For simple, online access to personalized and affordable care for Hair Loss, Weight Loss, and more, visit https://hims.com/YMH For a limited time, our listeners get 50% off FOR LIFE, Free Shipping, AND 3 Free Gifts at Mars Men at https://Mengotomars.com. Well, Tom is back in the Mommy Dome for the first time since the news, and longtime friend Ryan Sickler is in the chair with him. Tom addresses the divorce head-on: why he and Christina have been recording separately for months, getting the TMZ call, and why nobody "made" Christina go first. He also opens up about the state of his DMs, which include a kindergarten teacher looking to "help each other out" and Ryan's own mother, who, Ryan promises, means Tom can get dicked down in Delaware any time. Tom then opens the show with a dude declaring that anyone who doesn't drink their coffee black is gay, which sends Tom and Ryan into the world of men fighting the internet: a guy debunking AI edits of himself kissing dudes, Daddy Lalogon begging TikTok to stop calling him daddy, and Pastor Manning back at the pulpit with a fresh "get a job" sermon (plus the Suede remix) while the guys debate how many people are actually in that church. Tom also pitches Ryan on the next dads-and-kids trip: a family resort in the Philippines where the giant Hulk statue's fully detailed dick doubles as a pool fountain, and the owner cannot stop posting slow-tilt reveals of it. Tom develops a whole theory about the man's artistic vision and wants to send a YMH field team to get more details. They also spiral into junkyard Instagram where a guy solving car problems with half-sticks of dynamite and another launching full propane tanks out of a cannon. Plus some horrible or hilarious clips and a debate about Catholicism for the ages. Enjoy! Your Mom's House Ep. 872 https://tomsegura.com/tourhttps://christinap.com/https://store.ymhstudios.comhttps://www.reddit.com/r/yourmomshousepodcast Chapters 00:00:00 - Intro00:00:19 - Tom Addresses The Divorce00:11:04 - Opening Clip: Milk In Your Coffee00:17:06 - Not Gay It's AI00:23:18 - Sickler Meets Pastor Manning00:35:37 - Summer Trip & Guys Blowing Shit Up Online00:47:30 - The Hulk Is Packing01:00:19 - Clip: Relapse Blame01:01:00 - Horrible Or Hilarious01:07:50 - Battle With Catholicism01:16:10 - Crashing Zoom Meetings01:19:41 - Ryan Sickler's Special01:22:15 - Closing Song - "Daddy Lalogon" by Stoner Stag Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

OnlyFans Investor & CEO of Architect Capital's James Sagan sits down with The Information's CEO and Editor-in-Chief Jessica Lessin for an exclusive interview about his 16% stake in platform, AI and more. The Information's Phoebe Liu talks to TITV Host Akash Pasricha about Nvidia's new Nemotron 3.5 Lightning open-source model release, Menlo Ventures' Matt Murphy about the VC landscape as Anthropic heads toward an IPO, and we get into the software sector's M&A environment with KeyBanc Capital Markets' Jackson Ader.Articles discussed on this episode: https://www.theinformation.com/articles/onlyfans-new-investor-reveals-financials-ipo-ambitions-rare-interviewhttps://www.theinformation.com/articles/nvidia-trying-develop-worlds-best-open-source-ai-modelsSubscribe: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@theinformation The Information: https://www.theinformation.com/subscribe_hSign up for the AI Agenda newsletter: https://www.theinformation.com/features/ai-agendaTITV airs weekdays on YouTube, X and LinkedIn at 10AM PT / 1PM ET. Or check us out wherever you get your podcasts.Follow us:X: https://x.com/theinformationIG: https://www.instagram.com/theinformation/TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@titv.theinformationLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/theinformation/Chapters:00:00 - Introduction00:01 - Architect Capital Takes 16% Stake in OnlyFans00:29 - Nvidia Debuts Nemotron 3.5 Lightning00:38 - Menlo Ventures Raises $3B for AI00:49 - State of Software: SaaS M&A and Salesforce Shakeup

The value is real. The spend is real. And the gap between the companies getting one in exchange for the other and the companies getting neither has never been wider. Six months into 2026, the top one percent of firms spend $7,450 per employee per month on AI while the median firm spends $11 — a 680x gap. The question in every boardroom has sharpened from “does AI work?” to “show me the ROI.”In this special episode of Talking AI, host Matt Paige hands the mic to an AI. Hatchworks AI just released its State of AI 2026: Mid-Year Reality Check — a comprehensive look at what has fundamentally changed since January and where AI is headed in the second half of the year — and instead of publishing it only as a written report, the team used ElevenLabs to turn the full report into an audio experience. The voice is AI-generated. The research, analysis, and point of view come directly from co-authors Brandon Powell, Matt Paige, and Omar Shanti.The report covers the step change in model capability that ended the plateau debate, the shift from token maxing to “show me the ROI,” the lab landscape's new equilibrium, the 18-day Fable 5 ban and the arrival of trust-tiered AI, sovereign AI moving into procurement reality, open models as the enterprise hedge, Coinbase's five tactics for blended intelligence, the new enterprise AI stack, the double agent problem, the jobs data that runs against the doom narrative, and nine calls for the second half of 2026.In this episode, you'll hear about:The ten numbers that define AI at mid-year — from a 3x jump in long-horizon capability to a 680x spend gap between the top 1% of firms and the medianWhy January's “models are plateauing” consensus got overtaken — and why “the technology isn't ready” has expiredThe three places ROI variance actually lives: data connection, workflow embedding, and adoptionThe lab landscape's new equilibrium — Anthropic as the enterprise incumbent, OpenAI's agentic comeback, and two confidential IPO filings near $1 trillion valuationsSpaceX's $60 billion all-stock acquisition of Cursor's parent company, Anysphere, and why distribution is now the gameThe 18-day Fable 5 ban, identity verification, and what trust-tiered AI means for enterprise buyersSovereign AI getting real — Palantir, NVIDIA Nemotron, and owned weights in air-gapped environmentsOpen source as the enterprise hedge, and the advisor model pattern for blending frontier and open modelsCoinbase's five tactics for cutting AI spend roughly in half while token usage kept growingThe new enterprise AI stack: the intelligence layer, skills, loops and the agent harness, and bring your own agentThe double agent problem, agentic zero trust, and why agents need first-class identityThe jobs data — heavy AI adopters growing headcount 10%, entry-level roles 12% — plus the rise of the forward deployed engineer and nine predictions for H2 2026Key Moments:00:01:30 — Chapter 1: Mid-year by the numbers — ten numbers, ten storylines00:03:35 — Chapter 2: The plateau that wasn't — the step change in model capability00:06:55 — Chapter 3: From token maxing to “show me the ROI”00:11:10 — Chapter 4: The lab landscape's new equilibrium — Anthropic, OpenAI, and the IPO filings00:14:20 — Chapter 5: The distribution and price frontier — Google, Nemotron, SpaceX–Cursor, and the Chinese open weight labs00:18:20 — Chapter 6: Fable, the 18-day ban, and the arrival of trust-tiered AI00:23:30 — Chapter 7: Sovereign AI gets real00:26:00 — Chapter 8: Open source is the enterprise hedge00:29:30 — Chapter 9: Case study — Coinbase and five tactics for blended intelligence00:33:05 — Chapter 10: The new enterprise AI stack00:39:00 — Chapter 11: Agent identity and the double agent problem00:42:35 — Chapter 12: The jobs question — watch the net, not the headlines00:46:30 — Chapter 13: The bottleneck is still human — the forward deployed engineer00:49:20 — Chapter 14: Nine calls for the second half of 202600:51:10 — Chapter 15: CEO commentary — the view from the field with Brandon PowellKey Links:Download the State of AI 2026 Mid Year Reality CheckMentioned in this episode:AI Opportunity FinderFeeling overwhelmed by all the AI noise out there? The AI Opportunity Finder from HatchWorks cuts through the hype and gives you a clear starting point. In less than 5 minutes, you'll get tailored, high-impact AI use cases specific to your business—scored by ROI so you know exactly where to start. Whether you're looking to cut costs, automate tasks, or grow faster, this free tool gives you a personalized roadmap built for action.

Programista zarabia w polskim gamedevieponad dwa razy więcej niż tester, junior w produkcji startuje wyżej niż seniorw QA, a mediana całej branży realnie spadła — dziś rozkładam na czynnikipierwsze raport o zarobkach z maja 2026 i podaję konkretne widełki dla każdejspecjalizacji i każdego poziomu.

This Sponsor Spotlight episode, made possible with support from Tuebora, features Jim McDonald in conversation with Sanjay Nadimpalli, CEO and founder of Tuebora. Sanjay shares his path into identity beginning as one of the first engineers at Aveksa, then discusses how intelligence is reshaping identity governance and administration by replacing static configuration with continuous, context-aware decision making. The conversation covers the concept of governance debt, how AI can interpret organizational intent expressed in natural language, and where human oversight remains essential. The discussion also explores governance of agentic identities, including how they differ from traditional service accounts, the challenges posed by their ephemeral and dynamic nature, and the policy-driven frameworks needed to manage them. Sanjay closes with a reflection on what identity practitioners should be thinking about for the next few years.Connect with Sanjay: https://www.linkedin.com/in/sanjaynadimpalli/Learn more about Tuebora: https://www.tuebora.com/idacConnect with us on LinkedIn:Jim McDonald: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jimmcdonaldpmp/Jeff Steadman: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffsteadman/Visit the show on the web at http://idacpodcast.com00:00:00 - Introduction and welcome00:00:56 - How Sanjay got into identity00:02:40 - Full circle moment with Deepak Taneja and Zilla00:03:05 - What Tuebora does00:04:14 - The story behind the name Tuebora00:05:20 - Can intelligence replace configuration00:10:05 - Why static configuration falls short today00:14:52 - Customer frustrations with legacy environments00:21:09 - Comparing this to everyday AI tool use00:23:31 - How intelligence drives outcomes00:28:42 - Maintaining security control alongside AI00:32:38 - The orchestra analogy for AI and human roles00:35:28 - Introducing agentic identity governance00:36:10 - Why agentic identities differ from service accounts00:42:20 - The scale problem of agentic identities00:44:00 - Building a framework for agent governance00:47:35 - Closing advice for identity practitioners00:52:06 - Where to find Tuebora nextIDAC, Identity at the Center, Jeff Steadman, Jim McDonald, Sanjay Nadimpalli, Tuebora, Sponsor Spotlight, identity governance, IGA, agentic identity, AI agents, governance debt, explainability, IAM, access governance, non-human identity, Aveksa, continuous governance, identity governance and administration

Zyadatar companies aaj AI ko bas ek marketing sticker ki tarah use kar rahi hain, asal problem koi nahi solve kar raha. Jab tak aap ye nahi samjhenge ki AI se sirf kaam fast karna hai ya koi aisi cheez karni hai jo pehle impossible thi, tab tak aap piche hi rahenge. Abhishek Rungta ji pichle kaafi samay se apni teams ke saath actual workflows mein AI integrate karke unhe automate kar rahe hain. Is episode mein hum dekhenge ki kaise bina apna data risk kiye ek personal "second brain" banaya jata hai.00:00:00 - 00:01:43 - Introduction00:01:43 - 00:04:36 - The evolution of the AI landscape and adoption00:04:36 - 00:07:13 - Integrating AI into business workflows00:07:13 - 00:13:00 - Data privacy risks and AI security00:13:00 - 00:17:21 - Hardware setup and using dedicated AI computers00:17:21 - 00:21:37 - Building a personal "second brain" with AI00:21:37 - 00:33:48 - AI's impact on jobs and the future of work00:33:48 - 00:46:04 - Advice for graduates and career growth00:46:04 - 1:00:20 - Insights on young founders and business pitfalls1:00:20 - 1:06:42 - AI use cases for studios and retail1:06:42 - 1:07:55 - Book recommendations Connect With Pritika -Podcast Related Emails - connect@pritika.coInstagram- https://www.instagram.com/pritika.looniaListen to the full podcast here - https://www.youtube.com/@PritikaLooniaOfficial Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/captainpritika/Learn From Me - www.pritika.co Listen to my podcast on - Jio saavn - https://www.jiosaavn.com/shows/sage-up-with-pritika-loonia/2/ZukCx7qhBVQ_ Spotify- https://open.spotify.com/show/7ErewAP263SgLXOUE8V0SI?si=f0c13ec52bb74062 Apple Podcast- https://podcasts.apple.com/in/podcast/sage-up-with-pritika-loonia/id1517629945

Jonathan Kerr, CMO of Auto & General, joins us to explore how one of Australia's most successful challenger brands has built sustained growth by combining strong marketing fundamentals with relentless execution.From creating a role for himself at Auto & General to helping Budget Direct become one of the country's fastest-growing insurance brands, Jonathan shares why product should always come before growth, how marketers can take greater ownership of the 4 Ps, and what insurance consistently gets right about creativity. We also discuss the power of distinctive brand characters, audio branding, in-house creative teams and a media strategy designed to maximise long-term effectiveness.Useful linksThis episode is brought to you by System1. Download their creator effectiveness report here: https://system1group.com/the-creator-effectiveness-playbookFind about more about HubSpot's AEO product here:https://www.hubspot.com/products/aeoTimestamps00:00:00 - Start00:01:41 - How Jonathan found out about Auto and General00:03:31 - How Jonathan created a new role for himself00:06:58 - How to balance low price with great product00:10:36 - Market share growth for Budget Direct00:12:06 - Focusing on product over growth00:13:59 - How to control more of the P's00:16:51 - Why does insurance produce such creative work?00:20:52 - The power of compounding work in insurance00:24:21 - Developing brand characters, and when to kill them off00:30:08 - The power of audio and jingles00:34:16 - What's too silly to be said can be sung00:36:13 - Why they do so much work in house00:40:34 - Budget Direct's unique approach to media buying00:42:43 - How Jonathan uses AI00:48:04 - The key challenger brand principles Jonathan has followed00:50:59 - What makes a successful CMO?00:52:55 - Do we need to re-educate ourselves on marketing theory?01:00:27 - The best advice you've ever recieved

W 288. odcinku zaczynamy od… owłosionych nóg — serio! W Japonii przy 40-stopniowych upałach urzędnicy mogą wreszcie chodzić do pracy w krótkich spodenkach, a nie wszystkim to pasuje. Do tego mundial 2026, czcionka, której AI nie umie przeczytać, UOKiK kontra influencerzy oraz segment growy: The Binding of Isaac i MOUSE: P.I. na Switchu 2. Nalej kawy i słuchaj. ☕Zapraszamy na stronę www po pełen opis tutaj.Pozdrawiamy,Adam i MaciejRozdziały: 00:00:00- Intro00:00:40 - Owłosione nogi00:11:09 - Styl Argentyny, sędzia i absurdy00:29:12 - Font przeciwko AI00:36:35 - UOKiK kontra influencerzy00:45:35 - Segment growy00:53:05 - Podsumowanie00:54:59 - Outro

Simran Khanuja is a Ph.D. candidate at Carnegie Mellon University. Her research focuses on making AI systems more useful for people across different languages and cultures, with an emphasis on multilingual and multimodal foundation models.Prior to CMU, Simran spent over two years as a Pre-Doctoral Researcher at Google Research, contributing to multilingual language technologies and also did some interesting research at Microsoft Research India. Her recent work includes the Pangea multilingual multimodal foundation model, image transcreation for cultural localization, and new approaches to evaluating culturally relevant AI systems.00:00:00 Highlight & Introduction00:01:20 Journey into AI00:06:27 Industry Experience before Ph.D.00:12:38 Why Pursue a Ph.D. in AI?00:17:54 From Multilingual to Multicultural AI00:24:11 Are Foundation Models really general purpose?00:29:51 Should every Culture have tts own AI model?00:32:38 The biggest bottleneck in cultural alignment00:38:49 Can Prompting solve cultural alignment?00:44:41 Why Images need Translation too00:51:14 Beyond Text: Translating culture across modalities00:55:01 How do you evaluate Image Transcreation?01:00:48 Preventing catastrophic forgetting in Multilingual LLMs01:04:50 Can LLMs learn undocumented cultures?01:11:05 Are LLMs reliable as AI Judges?01:19:32 Can creativity ever be benchmarked?01:28:20 How AI Has changed research workflows01:41:12 Choosing an AI research topic in 202601:52:12 The most overlooked problem in AI today02:01:28 Closing thoughtsMore about Simran's ongoing research: https://simran-khanuja.github.io/About the Host:Jay is a Machine Learning Engineer III at PathAI working on improving AI for medical diagnosis and prognosis. Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/shahjay22/Twitter: https://twitter.com/jaygshah22Homepage: https://jaygshah.github.io/ for any queries.Stay tuned for upcoming webinars!***Disclaimer: The information in this video represents the views and opinions of the speaker and does not necessarily represent the views or opinions of any institution. It does not constitute an endorsement by any Institution or its affiliates of such video content.***

"maybe if that was in English I would be like `that's so cringe` but here I think it's cool"On the show this week:00:01:51 News50% of uploaded Deezer trackers are AI00:12:59 Helado Tropical by Helado Tropical review discussion00:49:42 Upcoming releasesAlbum Rankings:Prince Daddy & the Hyena - Hotwire Trip SwitchRatboys - Singin' to an Empty ChairFriko - Something Worth Waiting ForMandy, Indiana - URGHAvalon Emerson & the Charm - Written into ChangesJasmine Myra - Where Light SettlesThundercat - DistractedPrism Shores - Softest AttackOffice Dog - Prime CornerTrooper Salute - Tomodachi Ga ImashitaCompandas - Tropical FinasterideThe Orielles - Only You LeftGregory Uhlmann - Extra StarsIron & Wine - Hen's TeethModest Mouse - An Eraser And A MazeAmerican Football - American Football (LP4)Dry Cleaning - Secret LoveSincere Engineer - Probable ClawsLande Hekt - Lucky NowLowertown - Ugly Duckling UnionYHWH Nailgun - Magazinerat - homeBoards of Canada - InfernoOkkyung Lee + Explore Ensemble - SignalsLucid Express - Instant ComfortJenny on Holiday - Quicksand HeartBasement - WIRED

A few months ago, Annabelle Atchison posted something many agencies would probably rather not confront. The Head of Communications and Product Marketing at IONOS Group had just built her own media-radar tool – covering markets, journalists and potential pitch angles – in around ten minutes, for pennies.So she called on agencies, and any others willing to listen, to tell their clients honestly how AI was already changing the work their retainers paid for. Not eventually. Now.When Benedict asks how many of her own agencies contacted her afterwards, the answer is none. That post became the starting point for this episode of The Provocative Truth.It is not an entirely comfortable conversation for agencies, alan. included. But Annabelle is not arguing that every retainer should automatically become cheaper. She is arguing that clients should be able to see what has changed: what is now faster, where the time saved is going, whether more experienced people are getting closer to the work and whether AI is producing better outcomes rather than simply protecting agency margins.AI can already accelerate research, drafting, reporting and production. What it still cannot do is read a room, hold a project together when priorities shift, manage the relationships that make work land or recognise when an efficient-looking answer is quietly the wrong one.Organisations are still messy, political and human. They still need people who can interpret context, align stakeholders, exercise judgement and lead work through to completion.Ultimately, this is a conversation about what clients should expect when AI strips time and cost out of agency work – and why the answer is not simply cheaper output. It is greater transparency, more ambitious experimentation and more investment in the strategic judgement, creative thinking, leadership and relationships that make the work worth paying for.00:02:54 – The LinkedIn post that put agencies “on notice”00:03:36 – What happened when Annabelle's agencies were asked about AI00:05:02 – The ten-minute media tool that changed her view of agency work00:07:05 – Why traditional agency billing models are under pressure00:09:59 – Why clients expect agencies to be ahead of the technology00:12:14 – Is anxiety preventing agencies from making bigger changes?00:13:02 – How IONOS approached AI adoption internally00:16:01 – Which marketing tasks AI can already accelerate00:16:51 – What clients still need from agency partners00:17:41 – Why project leadership still matters in an AI-enabled world00:22:53 – Why agency relationships need to become more embedded00:26:00 – How AI could increase the value of senior client service roles00:28:07 – Where clients may be overestimating what AI can do00:29:47 – Why AI hype still needs to become craftB2B Marketing: The Provocative Truth is a podcast by alan. agency. MD Benedict Buckland speaks to CMOs and marketing leaders to uncover the most uncomfortable truths in the world of B2B.Subscribe here and be the first to know when new episodes drop. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In deze aflevering bespreken we de evolutie van AI, de invloed op werkgelegenheid, creatieve processen en de maatschappelijke reacties daarop. De gesprekken laten zien dat technologische vooruitgang altijd gepaard gaat met veranderingen, uitdagingen en kansen.ONDERWERPEN- De geschiedenis van automatisering en AI in de samenleving- Hoe AI de arbeidsmarkt beïnvloedt, inclusief ontslag en efficiëntie- Creativiteit en AI, van filmproductie tot content creatie- Mens versus machine, de menselijke behoefte aan authenticiteit en plezier- Toekomstperspectieven, generatieve AI en de rol van mensen in een door AI gedreven wereldTIMESTAMPS00:03 - Dick Maas en zijn mening over AI in media00:30 - Misleiding in film en de rol van AI00:48 - Discussie over automatisering en ontslagen in multinationals01:52 - Terugblik op vroegere communicatie en automatisering door telefonisten02:23 - Overgang naar AI en technologische modernisering in verschillende sectoren02:52 - Koppeling tussen automatisering en jobverlies03:06 - Verhaal over innovatie en verandering door de geschiedenis03:35 - Toepassing van AI in fotografie en filmkwaliteit03:51 - De opkomst van generatieve AI voor multimedia content04:01 - Toekomst van AI: vrijwillige participatie en automatisering van contentcreatie04:36 - Dieper ingaan op Dick Maas en de integratie van AI in filmproducties05:04 - Discussie over de brede toepassing van AI en maatschappelijke acceptatie05:33 - Verlichting over de kracht van moderne technologieën zoals Excel en AI-tools06:03 - Voorbeeld van AI in werkprocessen: taken automatiseren in kantoorwerk06:39 - Toekomstscenario: AI als assistent in dagelijkse taken en communicatie07:18 - De menselijke identiteit behouden in een door AI gedreven wereld07:46 - Kritische reflectie over de rol en beperkingen van AI in creatieve industrieën08:11 - Afsluiting en blik op de verdere integratie van AI in ons levenIn deze aflevering wordt geconstateerd dat AI steeds menselijke taken kan overnemen, wat vragen oproept over authenticiteit en werkgelegenheid. Toch blijven menselijke creativiteit en authenticiteit cruciaal in de toekomst van AI-gedreven content.#JackJozef #PodcastGemist #storytelling #podcast #media #algoritme #technologie #socialmedia #AI #ArtificialIntelligence #Creativiteit #Automatisering #Filmindustrie #Innovatie #YouTubeSPONSORSIBV ConsultancyAndreArt.nlJPSystemsENGLISH CHANNELSVideo : YouTube.com/@JackJozef Podcast: Spotify, TikTok, Instagram & LinkedInWebsite: www.JACKJOZEF.comContact: info@PodcastGemist.nlNEDERLANDSE KANALENVideo : YouTube.com/@podcastgemistPodcast: Spotify, TikTok, Instagram & LinkedInWebsite: www.JACKJOZEF.nlContact: info@PodcastGemist.nl

Elon Musk titokban felvásárolja a T-Mobile-t, miközben Trump a saját aranyozott telefonjával házal? A Zártosztály Podcast 245. adásában Iszti és Charles visszatérnek a mikrofonok mögé, hogy kíméletlen szakmaisággal és a megszokott cinizmussal boncolgassák a techvilág legújabb agymenéseit. Bár a címünk focivébé-hangulatú politikai átrendeződést sugall, megnyugtatunk mindenkit: a tech-nosztalgia és az abszurd hardverek most is fontosabbak, mint a nagypolitika[cite: 1, 2]. Amiről valójában szó lesz:A Trump-telefon és a Seikónak látszó órák: Megfejtjük az amerikai büszkeség Kínából importált, aranyozott csodáját, amire gyárilag csak a Truth Social-t sikerült feltelepíteni (azt is nehezen). Zuckerberg és a rendezvénysátrak: Amikor az építési engedély hiánya miatt esküvői sátrakba és trélerekre pakolják az MI-adatközpontokat. Elon Musk és az űrhálók: Hogyan fognak halászhálóval rakétát fogni a kínaiak, és miért borítja majd be hamarosan alumíniumpor az egész bolygót a Starlink miatt? Doom a csuklódon: A tech-nosztalgia csúcsa, avagy hogyan hekkelték rá a klasszikus Doomot egy Xiaomi Mi Band kijelzőjére elektródák segítségével. Koponya-visszhang alapú azonosítás: Felejtsd el az ujjlenyomatot, jön az MI, ami a fejed belső kongása alapján enged be a telefonodba. Nyomjátok a lájkot, a Patreonunkat már úgyis lekapcsoltuk! 00:00:00 Intro 00:03:44 Trump telefon00:14:49 Trump óra00:17:28 SpaceX mobilon00:23:17 Démonizált AI00:24:39 Hogyan tisztítsuk a cégünket?00:25:57 Csalódott Zuckerberg00:31:38 Ideiglenesen állomásozó gázturbinák00:36:30 Kínai rakétabumeráng-háló00:40:08 Alusisak az egész Földre00:46:00 Szúnyogirtó testpáncél00:52:20 Új Commodore kinyitható telefon00:55:23 Mi Band Doom01:00:07 Outro

Co więksi i mniejsi mówią o AI i jakie mrocznesekrety kryje prezesura największych firm growych na świecie? 

Jak rynek i Sony odpowiada na kontrowersje ikrytykę związaną z wycofaniem się z fizycznych nośników? Zapraszam domateriału! 

In this episode, we talk about DEX aggregation with Nikita and Flynn, who showcase BazaarSwap and everything they have built.Swap now https://swap.thorchain.org/ THORChain is a decentralized crypto exchange. THORChain is the first and biggest DEX for Bitcoin. You can use any self custody wallet to swap and there's no KYC required.Timestamps:00:00:00 Intro00:03:00 Kenton update00:04:00 Flynn introduction00:05:00 Flynn came into crypto looking for privacy and better ways to manage money00:06:00 Nikita starts00:08:00 Nikita talks about the difficulties of crypto and simplifying the experience00:09:00 BazaarSwap talks about the convenience of their DEX aggregator00:12:00 BazaarSwap screen share begins00:14:00 BazaarSwap demonstration00:16:00 Rate comparison and accuracy00:18:00 Axelar wrapped asset rugging event00:20:00 Swap execution metrics00:21:00 Nikita talks about the benefits of DEX aggregator unification with AI00:25:00 Monero is supported and will be ready00:27:00 TON discussion and gold derivatives00:29:00 Wallet support for TON00:31:00 Nikita: More pathways are coming00:33:00 We are excited about TON because of all the possible connections and momentum from recent announcements00:34:00 Telegram is the #1 place for crypto because it has a built-in wallet00:36:00 Do you track quote accuracy and execution?00:38:00 Nikita: We try to provide multiple metrics for users00:40:00 Nikita says he has worked on many products, and there has always been some degree of price differential00:41:00 ETH to BTC swap00:44:00 When THORChain adds TON, many new possibilities open up00:46:00 Multiple execution parameters for swappers (cheapest, fastest, etc.)00:48:00 THORChain is superior to everything else out there00:49:00 Why did we choose to integrate THORChain? They maintained the ethos!00:53:00 THORChain is more optimized for handling large swaps01:00:00 Swap logic breakdown: liquidity versus the router01:03:00 THORChain explanation01:05:00 How do you get into crypto from fiat?01:07:00 Rujira capabilities discussion01:11:00 Price oracle exploit discussion and comparison on BazaarSwap01:16:00 There are lots of shady things going on01:17:00 You have no way of knowing if brokers are doing shady things01:18:00 Kenton: Is your slippage related to price impact?01:23:00 XMR demonstration was done on his birthday01:26:00 OpenUSD is the next attempt at a CBDC01:28:00 There is a competition right now to capture the infrastructure01:32:00 Latest information on the Clarity Act01:37:00 Privacy is not the default on THORChain, but obfuscation is impossible01:39:00 THORChain is decentralized and permissionless01:42:00 THORChain is the solution01:50:00 Nikita's final thoughts01:51:00 Kenton outro01:52:00 Is there a token related to BazaarSwap?01:54:00 Fees? (They do not charge additional fees; it varies by provider.)01:59:00 What Flynn loves about THORChain

Natalia Quintero joined Every as head of consulting with a mandate to bring AI into the workflows of executives at hedge funds, private equity firms, and tech companies. She is also a recent Codex convert—someone who spent months resisting the tool before Dan Shipper's daily pestering finally got her to try it.Natalia encountered Codex as a non-technical builder who had learned to navigate file systems and folder structures in Claude Code through sheer effort. She's now used Codex to do everything from automate her CRM setup to build a portal to manage her father's medical care.Dan talked with Natalia for AI & I about what it looks like to go from non-technical to building software with Codex, why Every still uses software-as-a-service products from Attio and Asana instead of vibe coding their own tools, and where she thinks AI agents like Every's internal Claudie employee require human managers.If you found this episode interesting, please like, subscribe, comment, and share!To hear more from Dan Shipper:Subscribe to Every: https://every.to/subscribeFollow him on X: https://twitter.com/danshipperTimestamps:00:01:05 Introduction00:02:35 How Natalia manages Claudie, the consulting team's AI project manager00:04:55 Why the consulting team still pays for SaaS products00:11:47 Codex as a game changer00:14:55 Building personalized learning guides and illustrated explainers with AI00:21:40 Inside Natalia's AI-powered email triage system00:26:44 The shift from knowledge work as sculpting to knowledge work as gardening00:28:57 Using Codex to one-shot a custom CRM00:33:16 Using Codex to build an app that coordinates her father's medical careLinks to resources mentioned in the episode:Natalia Quintero on X: https://x.com/NataliaZarinaAsana (project management): https://asana.comEvery Consulting: https://every.to/consultingGo to attio.com/every and get 15% off your first year.

This week, Ryan Misquita of IBM shares practical Gen AI use cases in supply chain planning, from exception management and forecasting to clean data foundations, KPI measurement, and avoiding pilot purgatory.Download the ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠episode transcript⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠===== In this episode, IBM's Ryan Misquita joins us to discuss practical Gen AI in supply chain planning, real-world use cases, data governance, integration, KPI measurement, and rollout challenges. The episode also explores how AI can elevate planners and what autonomous, agentic supply chains may look like next. ===== Guest 1: Ryan Misquita, Associate Partner, IBM Consulting, IBMRyan Misquita is an Associate Partner and the IBM SCM North America Practice Leader. He has over 20 years of experience in business strategy and technology solution design across the Manufacturing, Distribution, Life Science, and Retail industries. A specialist in SAP S/4HANA, Digital Supply Chain and SAP IBP - Integrated Business Planning , Ryan has a proven track record of leading large-scale consulting engagements that transform integrated planning and manufacturing supply chain operations.Host 1: Richard Howells, SAP   ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Richard Howells⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ has been working in the Supply Chain Management and Manufacturing space for over 30 years. He is responsible for driving the thought leadership and awareness of SAP's ERP, Finance, and Supply Chain solutions and is an active writer, podcaster, and thought leader on the topics of supply chain, Industry 4.0, digitization, and sustainability.===== Show Links:IBM LinkIBM IBV Report : Unified ERP for the agentic enterprise          https://www.ibm.com/thought-leadership/institute-business-value/en-us/report/unified-erp IBM IBV - The SAP advantage for generative AI https://www.ibm.com/thought-leadership/institute-business-value/en-us/report/sap-generative-aiSupply Chain Management:  ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠SAP Supply Chain Management⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠SAP Insights: Supply Chain⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠       Follow Us on Social Media : Richard Howells: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠LinkedIn⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, SAP Digital Supply Chain: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠LinkedIn⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠    Please give us a like, share, and subscribe to stay up-to-date on future episodes!  ===== Chapters:00:00:00: Intro00:00:59: Guest's Introductions00:02:13: Top Gen AI pain points in supply chain planning00:03:37: Practical use cases moving from pilot to production00:06:03: Building the foundation: clean data, governance, and process rigor00:07:54: AI as augmentation: elevating planners, not replacing them00:10:54: KPIs and how to measure Gen AI success00:12:40: Avoiding pilot purgatory and rollout mistakes00:17:10: How IBM supports supply chain transformation with AI00:21:50: What is the Future of Supply Chain?00:22:49: Outro

Agenții de inteligență artificială marchează o schimbare în felul în care lucrăm, iar discuția de față pornește de la momentul în care simpla conversație cu AI începe să nu mai fie suficientă și apare nevoia de ceva care să dezvolte asta, fără intervenție constantă. Episodul urmărește această trecere, din zona de interacțiune punct cu punct, către sisteme care pot gestiona procese întregi și pot lucra în paralel cu noi.Pentru mai multe resurse despre episodul de astăzi, notițe, ideile sumarizate - click aici pentru pagina episodului***Găsești notițe, ideile principale, insight-uri și cărțile menționate în toate episoadele pe florinrosoga.ro. Aici te poți înscrie și la un newsletter.Dacă îți plac aceste podcasturi, ajută-ne cu o recenzie pe Spotify sau Apple Podcasts. Este un gest simplu care ne ajută să abordăm subiecte și invitați interesanți.***Podcasturile noastre sunt aici:

“Humans manage to do so much with surprisingly little,” says Douglas Guilbeault, an assistant professor of organizational behavior at Stanford Graduate School of Business. “Whereas AI, by comparison, is doing relatively little, but with so much power, so much compute, so many resources, and by comparison, relatively fewer constraints.”On a bonus episode of the If/Then podcast, Guilbeault describes the implications of his recent work. Although he readily acknowledges that AI is “increasingly able to do quite a lot,” Guilbeault and his colleagues believe they have identified a key principle that distinguishes human intelligence from machine intelligence — and one which illuminates the limitations of machine thinking. Although some researchers and AI boosters believe both humans and AI learn via optimization, Guilbeault and his colleagues have shown that another process more accurately captures how people distill the seemingly infinite complexity of the world and act based on limited information. “You encounter a lot of noise, a lot of chaos, a lot of randomness,” Guilbeault says. “We somehow figure out how to make meaning and establish strong understandings from within that.”What limitations have you encountered in your work with AI? Share your story with us at ifthenpod@stanford.edu.Related Content:Douglas Guilbeault faculty profileRead "A Simple Threshold Captures the Social Learning of Conventions" hereChapters:00:00:00 Introduction00:01:40 Why human learning matters for AI00:05:03 Satisficing and the limits of optimization00:06:41 Why LLMs learn differently from humans00:09:58 The stakes of AI hype00:13:11 “Humanity has had a good run”00:15:19 Intuition, insight, & conceptual leaps00:17:38 Beyond statistics: metaphor, vibes, & reasoning00:19:39 A simple rule for social learning00:21:18 Is there a ceiling for AI?00:23:00 Randomness, disorder, & the path to insight00:25:00 What an optimization mindset leaves out00:27:54 Conclusion If/Then, from Stanford GSB, features conversations with faculty that explore how their research deepens our understanding of business and leadership.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

The situation with Iran continues to feel like Groundhog Day, except this time, believe it or not, there may actually be movement.Earlier this week, I mentioned that I had heard from people in the know that the United States military was coiled to strike Iran and was looking for either provocation or justification to resume major military activity. That appeared to happen when Iran shot down an Apache helicopter that was escorting oil tankers through the Strait of Hormuz. We also learned that more than 100 million barrels of oil had moved through the strait under U.S. protection over the last month.Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.One of the reasons that caught my attention is that gas prices in the United States have been falling pretty dramatically. It was a head-scratcher. If the Strait of Hormuz was effectively stalled, then what explained the drop? Was it a global rerouting of supply? Was there a China component that had been negotiated and never publicly heralded? I didn't know then, and I don't know now, but the announcement about oil shipments at least provides part of the picture.What's more interesting is what happened next. After one night of military strikes, the second night was canceled. Donald Trump said that's because we're at the point of a deal, one that has supposedly been signed off on by all available parties in the region. It appears to resemble the memorandum of understanding that's been floating around for weeks, although nobody really knows because we still haven't seen the text. We don't know if it's real. We don't even know exactly what it says.The administration's definition of success has been fairly consistent: Iran gives up its nuclear material and removes the nuclear threat. If that's actually in the agreement, then it would be meaningfully different from what came before. The obvious question is what Iran gets in return. The reporting and public comments suggest that Tehran is focused on access to frozen assets and getting money quickly. Whether that money goes directly to Iran, whether it's routed through humanitarian aid, and what conditions are attached are all questions that still need answers.The strongest sign that something may actually be happening is coming from inside Iran. Reports indicate that FARS, the IRGC-controlled news agency, is acknowledging that a draft memorandum of understanding exists, that the United States has approved it, and that Iran is likely to do the same. The bigger question is whether any agreement can actually be enforced. Iran's leadership appears splintered. We've seen officials make commitments before, only to have military figures or IRGC commanders move in a different direction. That's why the real issue isn't whether a deal can be signed. It's whether anybody in Iran has enough authority to keep it.Chapters00:00:00 - Intro00:02:48 - Iran00:08:38 - Interview with Karol Markowicz00:36:19 - Update00:37:19 - DeSantis and AI00:42:56 - FISA00:44:42 - Director of National Intelligence00:47:17 - Interview with Karol Markowicz, con't01:07:27 - Wrap-up This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe

Today, we speak with Rafael Avila, who discusses how AI-powered logistics improves visibility, reduces emissions, and helps companies balance cost, service, and sustainability in transportation planning.Download the ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠episode transcript⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠===== In this episode, Rafael Avila of Westernacher joins us to discuss the future of logistics. He explains how AI can make emissions visible earlier, improve mode and carrier decisions, reduce waste, and support better service. The conversation also explores workforce shifts and the importance of end-to-end supply chain visibility. ===== Guest: Rafael Avila, Supply Chain and Logistics leader, Westernacher ConsultingRafael Avila is a Supply Chain and Logistics leader specializing in SAP Transportation Management and end-to-end supply chain transformation at Westernacher Consulting. With over a decade of experience, he has worked across global organizations to design and deliver solutions that improve transportation planning, execution, and visibility across complex networks. A former IBM consulting leader, Rafael spent years supporting large-scale S/4HANA programs and shaping supply chain strategies across industries including consumer products, pharmaceuticals, automotive, and mining. His work has focused on helping organizations connect transportation with warehousing, trade, and order management to unlock more integrated and resilient supply chains. Today, Rafael continues to work closely with clients on modern logistics challenges, with a strong focus on simplifying complex topics, driving practical outcomes, and exploring how technologies like AI are reshaping transportation and supply chain decision-making.Host 1: Richard Howells⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Richard Howells⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ has been working in the Supply Chain Management and Manufacturing space for over 30 years. He is responsible for driving the thought leadership and awareness of SAP's ERP, Finance, and Supply Chain solutions and is an active writer, podcaster, and thought leader on the topics of supply chain, Industry 4.0, digitization, and sustainability.Host 2: Oyku Ilgar, SAP  Oyku Ilgar is a marketer and thought leader specializing in SAP's digital supply chain and ERP solutions since 2017. As a marketer, blogger, and podcaster, she creates engaging content that highlights innovative SAP technologies and explores key topics including business trends, AI, Industry 4.0, and sustainability.   She holds dual bachelor's degrees in Finance & Accounting and English Translation, along with a master's degree in Business Administration and Foreign Trade, specializing in marketing. With her background in digital transformation, Oyku communicates technology trends and industry insights to help professionals navigate the evolving business landscape.  ===== Show Links:WesternacherArticle: Smarter Transportation Management cuts your carbon footprintSupply Chain Management:  ⁠SAP Supply Chain Management⁠ ⁠SAP Insights: Supply Chain⁠       Follow Us on Social Media : Richard Howells: ⁠LinkedIn⁠, Oyku Ilgar: ⁠LinkedIn⁠      SAP Digital Supply Chain: ⁠LinkedIn⁠    Please give us a like, share, and subscribe to stay up-to-date on future episodes!  ===== Chapters:00:00:00: Intro00:01:22: Guest's Introductions00:04:48: Making transportation emissions visible with AI00:07:39: Why reporting alone does not reduce emissions00:09:50: Mode selection and carrier choice matter00:12:33: AI can cut cost, emissions, and service waste together00:14:27: Biggest sustainability wins in transportation planning 00:18:28: How AI changes the logistics workforce 00:22:33: Common pitfalls in digitizing supply chain00:25:14: What is the Future of Supply Chain?00:26:28: Outro

Vyhledávač letenek Kiwi.com je zpět v plné síle! V novém dílu podcastu Money Maker zakladatel a šéf firmy Oliver Dlouhý otevřeně popisuje, jak firmu po náročných letech opět stabilizoval, proč kompletně změnil byznys model a jak mu v tom pomáhá umělá inteligence.V rozhovoru se dozvíte:

This week, we talk with SAP's Ralf Hierzegger about how network intelligence and AI can assist logistics teams in managing disruptions, enhancing collaboration, and building a more resilient supply chain.Download the ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠episode transcript⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠===== In this episode, we speak with SAP's Ralf Hierzegger about how constant disruption, digital dependencies, and climate and regulatory shifts are reshaping logistics. They explore why supply chains must move beyond company borders, how AI can support real-time decisions, and why trusted network collaboration is essential for better execution, efficiency, and resilience. ===== Guest 1: Ralf Hierzegger, Chief Product Owner of SAP BN4L, SAPRalf has built his career at the intersection of logistics, consulting, and digital innovation. After starting out as a forwarding agent from 1990 to 1992, he studied economics from 1993 to 1996 before joining SAP in 1996 as a consultant. In 2013, he stepped into the role of Solution Architect at SAP SE Custom Development, focusing on Foreign Trade and Transportation Logistics. Since 2023, he has served as Chief Product Owner of SAP BN4L, helping shape the future of business networks in logistics. He is married and the father of two grown-up children.Host 1: Richard Howells, SAP   ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Richard Howells⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ has been working in the Supply Chain Management and Manufacturing space for over 30 years. He is responsible for driving the thought leadership and awareness of SAP's ERP, Finance, and Supply Chain solutions and is an active writer, podcaster, and thought leader on the topics of supply chain, Industry 4.0, digitization, and sustainability.===== Show Links:Read: Circumventing Geopolitics: How Network Intelligence and AI Can Answer Uncertainty blog SAP Business AI Platform Supply chain logistics SAP Logistics AssistantSupply Chain Management:  ⁠⁠⁠SAP Supply Chain Management⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠SAP Insights: Supply Chain⁠⁠⁠       Follow Us on Social Media : Richard Howells: ⁠⁠LinkedIn⁠⁠, SAP Digital Supply Chain: ⁠⁠LinkedIn⁠⁠    Please give us a like, share, and subscribe to stay up-to-date on future episodes!  ===== Chapters:00:00:00: Intro00:01:22: Guest's Introductions00:02:23: Why logistics disruption is harder now00:06:26: Structural challenges in supply chain and logistics00:08:02: Using AI to respond to delays and blockages00:10:51: Why AI alone cannot solve logistics 00:12:36: The value of AI for a business network 00:14:24: How data sharing improves network performance00:16:27: First steps for adopting network intelligence and AI00:19:06: What is the Future of Supply Chain?00:20:31: Outro

HELP US IMPROVE THE PODCAST - TAKE THIS 3 MIN SURVEY:https://forms.gle/fRTV2YiJqncKVpFh7WEBINAR LINK:https://shawnmoore.clickfunnels.com/optiniyvvg89sWant to learn more about Vodyssey or start your STR journey. Book a call here:https://meetings.hubspot.com/vodysseystrategysession/booknow?utm_source=vodysseycom&uuid=80fb7859-b8f4-40d1-a31d-15a5caa687b7FOLLOW US:https://www.instagram.com/vodysseyshawnmoorehttps://www.facebook.com/vodysseyshawnmoore/https://www.linkedin.com/company/str-financial-freedomhttps://www.tiktok.com/@vodysseyshawnmooreCONTACT US:support@vodyssey.comSOURCES:1) https://www.rentalscaleup.com/airbnb-ai-strategy-2026-summer-release/2) https://techcrunch.com/2026/05/20/airbnb-gets-into-hotels-expands-ai-for-host-onboarding-and-customer-support/3) https://thenextweb.com/news/airbnb-is-adding-hotels-car-rentals-and-luggage-storage-as-it-evolves-from-a-home-sharing-app-into-a-full-travel-platformPROPERTIES:https://www.airbnb.com/rooms/1632746088889966533?unique_share_id=2a1aa537-4be3-432b-a4f6-170610a889a8&viralityEntryPoint=1&s=76&source_impression_id=p3_1779824102_P3NeOUcAUTZ5ElWcChapters00:00:00 Intro00:00:29 Recap of Airbnb's Summer Update and Focus on AI00:01:25 AI Listing Creation and Personalization in Airbnb00:03:02 The Role of AI in Differentiating Professional Hosts00:04:23 Changes in Review Processes and Guest Experience00:06:01 Airbnb Leveling the Playing Field for Mom-and-Pop Hosts00:07:11 The Commoditization of Listings and Differentiation Strategies00:08:37 Airbnb's Focus on Experience Over Price00:09:59 Impact of AI on Property Differentiation and Reviews00:11:25 The Future of Reviews and Guest Feedback00:12:24 Market Positioning and the Bell Curve of Property Quality00:14:23 Expansion of Airbnb to Hotels and Experiences00:15:44 Supply and Entry Barriers in the Market00:16:51 Competitive Dynamics with Hotels and Boutique Properties00:17:23 The Validation Age and Risks of AI Reliance00:19:43 The Importance of Data Validation and Critical Analysis00:21:57 Challenges of AI Hallucinations and Misinformation00:23:37 The Impact of Rising Costs on Furniture and Supplies00:36:39 Rising Raw Material and Fuel Costs in Furniture Industry00:41:00 Effects of Fuel Prices on Freight and Delivery Delays00:43:48 The New Normal: Higher Costs and Market Adaptation00:45:52 Market Outlook and Strategic Adjustments00:47:12 Celebrating Success Stories and Peak Season Preparation00:48:31 The Importance of Realistic Expectations and Numbers00:50:42 Balancing Emotional and Logical Marketing Strategies00:53:07 The Role of Hard Work and Validation in Success00:55:04 Final Thoughts and Call to Action

Arkestro's CEO, Rob DeSantis, joins us this week for an insightful conversation about why AI is the next major paradigm shift in the supply chain and how it can unlock faster value, better decisions, and happier teams.Download the ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠episode transcript⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠===== Join us as we explore AI as the next paradigm shift in supply chain. This week, Arkestro CEO Rob DeSantis shares lessons from the internet and cloud, the importance of trust and data quality, how AI is reshaping human work, and why fast time to value matters. ===== Guest 1: Rob DeSantis, Chief Executive Officer and Co-Founder, ArkestroRob DeSantis is the Chief Executive Officer and Co-Founder at Arkestro. As a former co-founder of Ariba running sales, Rob has deep expertise in the procurement space, having helped propel Ariba from zero to $250 million in revenue in four years and IPO of the year in 1999 before its acquisition by SAP a decade later. In addition to co-founding Ariba, Rob was also an early angel investor and board member of LinkedIn, the world's largest professional online network.More recently, Rob served as an investor and advisor to a small portfolio of companies, including Bloom Energy, HiQ Labs, Agiloft, USEND and more. He is also a co-founder of TrueParity. Rob started his career as a mechanical engineer in the aerospace industry and holds a BSME from the University of Rhode Island.Host 1: Richard Howells, SAP   ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Richard Howells⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ has been working in the Supply Chain Management and Manufacturing space for over 30 years. He is responsible for driving the thought leadership and awareness of SAP's ERP, Finance, and Supply Chain solutions and is an active writer, podcaster, and thought leader on the topics of supply chain, Industry 4.0, digitization, and sustainability.===== Show Links:Arkestro: https://arkestro.comSupply Chain Management:  ⁠⁠SAP Supply Chain Management⁠⁠ ⁠⁠SAP Insights: Supply Chain⁠⁠       Follow Us on Social Media : Richard Howells: ⁠LinkedIn⁠, SAP Digital Supply Chain: ⁠LinkedIn⁠    Please give us a like, share, and subscribe to stay up-to-date on future episodes!  ===== Chapters:00:00:00: Intro00:01:00: Guest Introductions00:02:51: The biggest paradigm shifts00:04:53: Lessons from the internet and cloud for AI adoption00:07:23: Overcoming laggards and proving value in production00:08:55: Trusting AI in black-box supply chain planning00:11:54: How AI changes human roles and skills00:15:20: The main business benefits of AI00:19:02: KPIs for measuring AI success00:20:44: How Arkestro supports the paradigm shift00:22:38: What is the Future of Supply Chain?00:23:19: Outro

Michael I. Jordan, described by Science magazine as the most influential computer scientist alive, has never thought of himself as an AI researcher. In this conversation he explains why that distinction matters.SPONSOR:---Cyber Fund built the Monastery to help founders ship products that were impossible a year ago. Applications for Batch 1 are now open.Apply now: https://cyber.fund---Jordan trained as a statistician and cognitive scientist, and his career has been spent building machine learning systems that work in the real world: supply chains, commerce, healthcare, and large economic systems. When the field rebranded itself as AI and then AGI, he did not follow. Instead he argues that the framing is wrong. AI is better understood as a collective economic system than as a race to build a disembodied superintelligence.We talk about why AGI is mostly a PR term, what machine learning achieved before the LLM hype cycle, and why the assistant-on-your-shoulder vision may be less compelling than it sounds. Jordan explains why explanations need to be actionable, not merely mechanistic; why AlphaFold's missing error bars matter; how prediction-powered inference changes the picture; and why drug discovery is an incentive-design problem rather than a pure pattern-matching problem.ERRATA: Science magazine ranked him the most influential computer scientist, not Nature---TIMESTAMPS:00:00:00 Cold open: A demoralizing message to young builders00:02:04 CyberFund sponsor read00:02:50 From symbolic AI to machine learning systems00:05:42 Why AGI is mostly a PR term00:08:48 A collectivist, economic perspective on AI00:11:33 Why LLMs need system design, not hype00:14:50 Predictability beats faux understanding00:17:55 AlphaFold, bias, and prediction-powered inference00:21:48 Stop anthropomorphizing intelligence00:27:44 Drug discovery as an incentive problem00:32:29 The three-layer data market00:38:07 Social knowledge, markets, and culture00:45:39 Creator economics beyond Spotify00:48:30 How science-fiction AI narratives mislead young builders00:51:45 AI should improve humans, not replace them00:56:42 Safety is a property of the whole system00:58:12 Silicon Valley gurus and the cream off the top01:00:47 Game theory, mechanism design, and contracts01:04:39 Conformal prediction, e-values, and anytime inference01:08:11 A new liberal arts triangle for the AI era01:11:30 The Bayesian duck and markets as uncertainty reductionReScript (transcript, PDF, refs etc) - https://app.rescript.info/public/share/fb68f94af29d3745c6cf6125e01328b5---REFERENCES:person:[00:02:50] Michael I. Jordan (homepage)https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~jordan/paper:[00:06:01] A Collectivist, Economic Perspective on AIhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2507.06268[00:18:09] AlphaFoldhttps://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03819-2[00:20:36] Prediction-Powered Inferencehttps://arxiv.org/abs/2301.09633[00:33:47] On Three-Layer Data Marketshttps://arxiv.org/abs/2402.09697[01:04:39] Conformal Prediction with Conditional Guaranteeshttps://arxiv.org/abs/2107.07511[01:04:51] A Tutorial on Conformal Predictionhttps://www.jmlr.org/papers/v9/shafer08a.html[01:06:00] E-Values Expand the Scope of Conformal Predictionhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2503.13050[01:08:23] Computational Thinkinghttps://www.cs.cmu.edu/~CompThink/papers/Wing06.pdfother:[00:28:20] How Should the FDA Test?https://rdi.berkeley.edu/events/sbc-assets/pdfs/Summit%20session%20speaker%20slides%20submission%20form-s1-5%20%28File%20responses%29/Slides%20in%20PDF%20%28Please%20name%20the%20submitted%20file%20as%20_firstname_-_lastname_-slides.pdf%29.%20%28File%20responses%29/27-Michael%20Jordan-Session%20V.pdf#page=15[00:28:40] Michael I. Jordan Session V Slides

Special discounts up for AIE Melbourne (LS discount) and AIE World's Fair (group discounts up to 25% - CFPs still open for Autoresearch and Vertical AI) Cya there!Abridge did not start as an “GPT wrapper”. It was founded in 2018, years before the Cambrian explosion of AI application layer companies. OpenAI launched ChatGPT publicly on November 30, 2022 and by then, Abridge had already spent years doing the unglamorous work of building trust for one of the highest context, most important workflows in healthcare: the conversation between a patient and a clinician.Abridge's original wedge was clinical documentation. Listen to the visit, generate the note, reduce the clerical burden, and let clinicians spend more time with patients instead of the EHR. By focusing on how doctors actually document, how health systems actually buy, how EHR integration actually works, how clinicians verify outputs, and how missing context during a visit turns into downstream friction across billing, prior authorization, quality, and follow-up, the adoption of LLMs became a force multiplier on a workflow already optimized for sensitive context gathering.The company has scaled fast: Abridge says it is projected to support 80M+ patient-clinician conversations this year across 250 large and complex U.S. health systems, with support for 28+ languages and 50+ specialties. It raised $300M at a $5.3B valuation in June 2025, after a $250M round earlier that year.Today, Janie Lee and Chaitanya “Chai” Asawa of Abridge join us for another crossover pod with Redpoint's Jacob Effron (who is on the board of Abridge) to dive into how Abridge is building the clinical intelligence layer for healthcare starting with ambient documentation, then expanding into clinical decision support, prior authorization, payer/provider/pharma workflows, and eventually real-time agents that act before, during, and after the patient conversation. We go inside the product, data, infra, evals, workflow, privacy, and org design choices behind bringing AI into one of the highest-stakes enterprise environments from 100M+ medical conversations and specialty-specific evals to real-time alerts, EHR integration, de-identification, clinician-scientist teams, and why healthcare may solve some of the hardest AI problems first.We discuss:* Why Abridge started with clinical documentation, “pajama time,” and saving clinicians 10–20 hours a week* The transition from ambient scribe to clinical intelligence layer: save time, save money, and save lives* Why conversations between patients and clinicians may be the most important workflow in healthcare (patient visit summary feature)* Chai's “healthcare-coded Glean” framing: context is king, but healthcare raises the stakes on safety, evals, and rollout* Why Abridge wants AI to feel like “air conditioning”: always in the background, but only interrupting when it truly matters* The prior authorization example: turning a denied MRI weeks later into real-time guidance while the patient is still in the room* Why payer policies, EHR data, medical literature, and hospital-specific guidelines make the problem hard, and also create the moat* How Abridge thinks about ambient form factors: mobile, desktop, in-room devices, nursing workflows, multimodality, and future AR* The multi-sided healthcare customer: CMIOs, CFOs, CIOs, clinicians, patients, payers, and pharma* The hardest AI problem at Abridge: high-quality, low-latency, low-cost real-time support in a high-stakes clinical setting* When Abridge uses frontier models vs proprietary models, and why its unique data from medical conversations matters* Why “every agent is a coding agent underneath,” and how the EHR can be thought of as a filesystem for healthcare agents* How Abridge approaches personalization across individual doctors, specialties, and health systems* Why “AI slop” is AI without context, and how edits, memories, and clinician preferences create a data flywheel* Abridge's eval stack: LFDs, LLM judges, in-house clinicians, third-party evaluators, specialty-specific evals, and progressive rollout* HIPAA, PHI, de-identification, one-way anonymization, customer contracts, and learning from healthcare data safely* What changes when you operate at 100M+ conversations: reliability, cost, post-training, model routing, and infrastructure optimization* Why the same clinical conversation can serve doctors, patients, payers, pharma, and future clinical-trial workflows* How Abridge works with EHRs, and why deep interoperability is table stakes for clinician adoption* Why healthcare AI has regulatory tailwinds, why 80/20 does not work here, and why high-stakes domains may drive AI forward* Why Abridge embeds “clinician scientists” into product and eval teams* What Chai learned from Glean about search, quality, and durable AI infrastructure* Why the future of AI infra may look like context layers, event-driven systems, Kafka, Temporal, sockets, CRDTs, and tools built for humans* Why Janie changed her mind on “PRDs are dead,” and why crisp written clarity matters more in complex AI products* How Abridge uses Claude Code, Cursor, and coding agents internallyAbridge:* Website: https://www.abridge.com/* X: https://x.com/AbridgeHQJanie Lee:* LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/janiejleeChaitanya “Chai” Asawa:* LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/casawaTimestamps00:00:00 Introduction and what Abridge does00:02:05 From ambient documentation to clinical intelligence00:04:04 Clinical decision support and context as king00:06:57 Alert fatigue, proactive intelligence, and prior authorization00:12:36 Ambient AI form factors and healthcare customers00:16:59 The hardest AI problems in healthcare00:18:26 Frontier models, proprietary data, and model strategy00:21:07 The EHR as a filesystem for agents00:24:03 Personalization, memory, and clinician preferences00:30:40 Evals, LLM judges, and progressive rollout00:36:47 HIPAA, de-identification, and privacy00:39:21 100M conversations and operating at scale00:44:10 EHR integration and the clinical intelligence layer00:46:39 Healthcare regulation, latency, and high-stakes AI00:50:11 Clinician scientists and long-tail quality00:53:04 Lessons from Glean and durable AI infrastructure00:57:03 The future of agentic healthcare workflows00:57:34 PRDs, product clarity, and building serious AI products01:03:11 AI coding tools at Abridge01:04:06 OutroTranscriptIntroduction: Abridge, Clinical Intelligence, and the Latent Space x Unsupervised Learning CrossoverSwyx [00:00:00]: Okay. This is a special crossover Latent Space Unsupervised Learning pod.Jacob [00:00:07]: Very excited to do this.Jacob [00:00:08]: At this point, we get together once a year.Swyx [00:00:10]: Once a yearJacob [00:00:11]: And this is a fun occasion to get to do it on.Swyx [00:00:13]: I really wanted to talk to Abridge but I felt very underqualified because healthcare is not something we cover very intensely. It just so happens that Redpoint's our big investors and supporters of Abridge.Jacob [00:00:27]: Anytime you want to have a portfolio company on your podcastJacob [00:00:29]: Please, by all means.Swyx [00:00:31]: So we'll introduce our guests. Chai and Janie, welcome to the pod.Janie [00:00:34]: Thanks for having us.Chai [00:00:35]: Thank you.Janie [00:00:35]: We're excited to be here.Chai [00:00:36]: Thank you.Swyx [00:00:36]: So for listeners, what do you guys do, just to situate you guys in the company?Janie [00:00:42]: Abridge is a clinical intelligence layer for health systems. We really started with documentation and building for clinicians and as we think about reducing the burden that clinicians have, they're spending 10 to 20 hours a week on documentation. There's a massive doctor shortage in the country. We also think that conversations between patients and clinicians are probably the most important workflow in healthcare. It's where care is given and received but if you think about the 20% of our GDP that goes towards healthcare, almost everything is a derivative of that conversation, whether it's the claim, the payment, the actual diagnosis given, the treatment. And we've started with a conversation to reduce the burden for doctors on documentation but we're really excited about the path ahead as we become this broader clinical intelligence layer.Chai [00:01:34]: I'm Chai. I work on clinical decision support at Abridge.Swyx [00:01:37]: Yes.Chai [00:01:37]: And so as Janie said, we're uniquely situated where we started off with the clinical note. What I'm really excited about and where we're expanding towards is what are all the things you can do before the conversation, during the conversation and after the conversation if you did have access to all the context about patients, payer guidelines, medical literature and put that together and to serve, how healthcare could look fundamentally different.Swyx [00:02:01]: And that's the context engine that you guys have?Chai [00:02:04]: Yes.Swyx [00:02:04]: Is that what it's called? Okay.Swyx [00:02:05]: So historically, as I understand it, the company started in 2018. A lot of people would be familiar with the AI voice notes form factor that doctors would be “Well, do you consent to being recorded?” It replaces handwriting and what have you. But it sounds like more recently there's been a big transition in the company. Tell me about the broader transition.From Documentation to Clinical Intelligence: Save Time, Save Money, Save LivesJanie [00:02:26]: So from a transition perspective, we really think about our journey as The first act was: how do we help save time? And that's where a lot of that original product was.Swyx [00:02:37]: By the way, one of those interesting statsSwyx [00:02:39]: On your landing page was, doctors spend time after hours.Janie [00:02:43]: They call it pajama time.Swyx [00:02:44]: Why is that pajama time?Janie [00:02:46]: Doctors after work in their pajamasSwyx [00:02:48]: In their pajamas. OhJanie [00:02:49]: At home are just writing and catching up on their notes every day.Janie [00:02:53]: Some of our favorite customer love stories, we have a Slack channel called Love Stories. We have clinicians telling us, “Abridge has helped us, from retiring early or we're now finally able toJanie [00:03:06]: go home and eat dinner with our kids for the first time.”Chai [00:03:08]: Save the marriage in some cases.Swyx [00:03:10]: One of the quotes was “We're not divorcing anymore.”Swyx [00:03:12]: I'm asking, “Why?”Swyx [00:03:14]: Because they're working too much.Janie [00:03:16]: But, in terms of where we're going and where we're expanding, we really think about our second and third acts around how do we help health systems save and make more money. Health systems are operating with record-low operating margins. It's getting harder and harder to serve patients and they have regulatory, some tailwinds but also a lot of headwinds coming their way and AI is ripe for helping on the saving and make-more-money piece. And then ultimately, how do we help save lives? The fact that our software and our product is open millions of times a week before, during and after a patient walks in the room, gives us massive opportunity with products like clinical decision support, which Chai is building but so many others to improve patient outcomes and probably one of the most important workflows and problems to be going after right now.From Glean to Healthcare: Context Is KingJacob [00:04:04]: One thing that's interesting, Chai, is you came over to Abridge from Glean and clinical decision support, which for our listeners is, in the context of a visit, helping a doctor figure out the right type of care. It's really a search problem in many ways, going through lots of different data sources. Very analogous to your previous role as one of the earliest engineers over at Glean. I'm sure a lot of our listeners are curious what's similar about the problems that you're going after now and what feels different, now that you're in healthcare.Chai [00:04:33]: Very similar. Taking a step back, with every wave, there's a lot of very similar patterns that happen across different products. A lot of social networking products look the same. A lot of credit-based products look the same. And we're seeing that very similar in the agent era with many companies, of course, in Redpoint's portfolio and so forth. And the key insight between both companies is that you have amazing models but context is king. Context is what puts them to work. So I see it in a lot of ways, a lot of similarities in this is a healthcare-coded version of Glean but the differences are really interesting. A couple things that come to mind. First and foremost, the rigor of the setting we're in. The downside risk is extremely high here in healthcare. It can be fatal in some cases. You prescribe something that the patient is allergic to for example. Whereas at Glean, it's “Oh, you got the question wrong.” It wasn't the end of the world in most cases. And so what does that mean? That shapes our evaluation strategy, both offline evaluation, progressive rollout and there's a lot more we could go into there. Second thing that comes to mind is, vertical versus horizontal. In both cases, there's a large variance but when Glean is, it's a much more horizontal company, there's a variance of personas, companies that you're working with. We also have a variance of personas, different types of specialties, different hospital systems. But the variance is a little more narrow. So from a product perspective, you're able to focus far more, especially when you have a maturing technology and you're building new products that never existed before. It lets you go after them much more easily and especially in healthcare where so many problems were solved with labor and process, that it's extremely ripe for AI to keep helping augment and enable. And the final thing that's really interesting, Abridge specifically compared to many other companies in the AI area, is the modality we started with where we're ambient and we're always listening in the background. And many more AI products will go that way but it's how we started. And that's the greatest form of AI we can create, AI that's seamless. You're not looking at your screen. It's always there. It's always helping you out and being proactive. The Jarvis vision that, every hackathon I went to over the past decade, there was always a Jarvis competitor. But Abridge very much started from the opportunity and continues to go that way.Ambient AI and Alert Fatigue: When Should the Product Interrupt?Jacob [00:06:57]: One thing that is super interesting then from a product perspective is you have this always-on seamless in the background and then you have to decide when you break the wall almost and say, “Hey, clinician, you might not have thought about X,” or whatever it is that you want to do. And in healthcare traditionally there's been this idea of alert fatigue and a million pop-ups and then a doctor just ignores all of them. It's probably a pattern that a lot of builders are thinking through now. How do you think about the right way to intervene or to pop up in a doctor visit?Janie [00:07:26]: It's such a good question. Alerts are notorious in healthcare specifically. Over 90% of alerts are ignored. The first and most important thing is context is everything, as Chai alluded to and I also think about how do we go from being reactive alerting to really proactive intelligence at the point at which it matters most. One thing we like to say is we want our product to feel like air conditioning. It should be in the background just making things better and if there is something that has great clinical risk and we're acutely aware that intervening now and not later is incredibly important, we should decide to act. But if you think about proactive versus reactive, instead of alerting a clinician during a visit when they're with their patient having a pretty serious and sensitive conversation, how do we prep a clinician before they walk into the room with that patient? And so historically, clinicians might have to manually go through charts with a patient that they've had over the course of months or years and they'll try to suss out what are the things they should be doing. You can imagine a world with Abridge. We'll summarize all of the most recent context for you, tell you based on the reason for a visit the patient is coming in for the types of things you should be discussing. And so you're going into that conversation prepped rather than walking in cold to that patient visit and then having this product interrupt you five or 10 times throughout the visit. And there might be times where it's really important to interrupt. We have a product called Prior Authorization and so this is when you may go into a doctor's office with knee pain. They'll prescribe you an MRI and so many of us have had this experience before, where in four weeks you'll get a call saying, “Hey, Sean, that MRI that you were prescribed wasn't approved and why don't you come back in? We'll figure it out.” In a world with Abridge, we might choose to quietly but still alert a doctor in that visit. And alert is probably not even the word we would want to use. Before a patient leaves, we would want to tell the doctor, “Hey, Doctor, before Sean leaves, you should ask him, has he had physical therapy and has his pain lasted for more than six weeks? Because the Aetna plan that he's on in California requires six things. We've already confirmed four of them have been met ‘cause we have all the context. But these two last criteria, if you can address with Sean before he leaves the room, we could guarantee that your MRI is approved before you leave.” And so when you think about clinical usefulness, impact to the patient, there are instances in which if we can catch a doctor while the patient is still in the room, as we think about save time, save money, save lives, we get to check all of those boxes. But when doctors have 15 minutes between visits, we have to be really thoughtful about when it matters.Prior Authorization: Reducing Latency in CareChai [00:10:23]: There's this interesting product opportunity AI has is reducing latency in the world. For example, prior authorization is an example of where care gets delayed and so great AI can reduce that. And the problem with alerts before partially is a technical problem: the quality of your alerts really matters. They're going to get ignored if you get alerts that... Similarly in engineering, where they're noisy alerts that you can't act on. But if you can make really high-quality alerts with both the context, as Janie said, and really high-quality models, then you can create a whole other game.Janie [00:10:53]: And I really like that experience because it starts to tease apart, what makes this so hard and unique. One, to make that prior authorization example possible, think about all the data that you need to have. You need to integrate with the electronic health record to know all of the patient context. Do we have access to your previous labs, previous imaging? And then to match you and to know that you're on Aetna, we have to collect all of the different payer policies and they vary by state. Some of these payer policies live on websites. Some of them live in unstructured 50-page PDF files.Jacob [00:11:31]: I thought this episode wasJacob [00:11:31]: To make sure we didn't scare people from healthcare.Janie [00:11:34]: But when you think about the things that make it hard, it also gives you the moat.Janie [00:11:39]: And then the second is the AI and the model quality we need to be able to hang our hat on. And so the bar, similarly when I worked at Opendoor, I worked on pricing models. Every outlier wiped out the margins of 30 and so similarly here in healthcare, the bar for accuracy is so high. And then I'd say the last is workflow is everything. If insurance companies deploy AI, it typically happens too late and this is when you have the notorious comical examples of AI just fighting each other when it's too late. But if we can pull forward the use of both the AI but also the ability to solve problems when the patient's in the room, you can start to collapse what typically takes weeks or months after your visit, ideally down to minutes or real-time. And it's where healthcare is both very difficult but also extremely rewarding if you can crack it.Product Form Factors: Mobile, Desktop, In-Room Devices, and ARSwyx [00:12:36]: Just to get some baseline on the form factors, because I've seen some videos on your website and stuff. You guys talk a lot about ambient AI. Is it primarily on the phone? Is there any other form factor that people get Abridge in? Is there an Abridge room setup where it's always on? I don't know.Jacob [00:12:55]: An Abridge podcast studio.Janie [00:12:58]: Primary form factor is mobile and desktop. UsuallyJanie [00:13:00]: Clinicians are walking in and out of rooms with mobile but at the end of the day, when they're closing out their notes or wanting to prep for the day ahead, they might use desktop. We have been having a lot of really interesting partnership conversations with a lot of these in-room device companies as you think about the power of multimodality and even more data, as you think about all of what is not captured today. It is fascinating to think about, especially even as we go into building and scaling our nursing product. It's one where nurses constantly, as they're walking in to check in on a patient for two minutes or maybe even 30 seconds,Janie [00:13:43]: Starting an Abridge experience is probably going to take longer than the visit. And so what can we do with in-room devices that are always on starts to raise really interesting and fun product questions.Swyx [00:13:54]: I was thinking, the way in tech companies we have all these Google MeetSwyx [00:13:58]: And other things, we might as well set up entire rooms with just Abridge tech.Chai [00:14:02]: Very much. AR glasses and related form factors are also relevant: how do we bring the information to the clinician in real-time without a screen, while still letting them focus on the patient?Swyx [00:14:18]: Do you think they want that? I'm skeptical of AR, but I'm curious what you've tried.Chai [00:14:26]: Admittedly, it's not a near-term product roadmapChai [00:14:29]: By any means. I'm being far-fetched.Jacob [00:14:31]: There's some sick AR stuff for surgeries.Swyx [00:14:33]: Really?Jacob [00:14:33]: When people are trying to visualize, you're about to make an incision but you want to see, what the cut might look or what the body might look like inside and they can layer in imaging.Swyx [00:14:43]: That's cool.Chai [00:14:45]: At some point in the future.Janie [00:14:46]: But there are a lot of our largest customers and at the largest health systems integrating already and so even as we think about building into it, unlocks a lot of product capabilities.Swyx [00:14:57]: And just to establish the terminology. Sorry, and I know I'm asking basic questions somewhat for myself but also for the audience who might beHealth Systems, Buyers, Clinicians, Patients, and PayersSwyx [00:15:05]: Less integrated. When you say health systems, it's like the Johns Hopkins, the Kaiser Permanentes.Janie [00:15:09]: Mayos, the Kaisers of the world.Swyx [00:15:10]: These are your customers, right? And the outcome that you deliver for them is happier doctors, reduced cost of processing, reduced mistakes. It's weird in a sense that I feel like there's also, a secondary customer, the customer of the customer and I don't know if you — do you think about it that way?Janie [00:15:28]: The other interesting and complex part of building product is we have our buyers, who are the chief medical information officersJanie [00:15:39]: The chief financial officers, the CIOs of these large health systems. Our users today are clinicians but if you think about who downstream is impacted, it's patients. And so as we build, with every product in mind, we think about who we're building for, who the secondary user is and what does that mean either in terms of experience, security compliance, ROI that we have to make tangible. And so like you said, time savings is one of them. But for CFOs, they care a lot more than just time savings. We have to show for every dollar you put into Abridge, because you have more compliant documentation or because you have fewer queries coming from your billing team, we save or add real dollars to your bottom line or top line, are things that we're constantly thinking about because of the dynamic across all three sets of users.Chai [00:16:32]: There's a whole other axis too with the payers and pharmaChai [00:16:35]: as well. Connecting all these three big stakeholders in healthcare isSwyx [00:16:39]: Do the payers ever see your data? Sorry, the payers meaning the insurers, right?Chai [00:16:44]: Yes.Swyx [00:16:44]: They also see Abridge data?Chai [00:16:47]: NoSwyx [00:16:47]: Like the direct integration to you guysChai [00:16:48]: They wouldn't see the raw Abridge data but when you're working together on something like prior authorization, whatever information they need, we'd communicate to them.Jacob [00:16:59]: That's cool. I would love to dig into the AI side. You still have a lot of problems on the AI side. And so maybe to start at the highest level, what's one of the hardest problems you have to solve in AI at Abridge today?The Hardest AI Problems: Quality, Latency, and CostChai [00:17:11]: To make things simple, let's take, building off the prior auth example. So one thing Janie talked about is okay, this data is all over the place and there's this combinatorial explosion of procedures, payer policies and even sometimes different health systems. There can be some cross-product of all of these different considerations you have to take into account. But what's really hard about this problem is doing it real-time in the conversation. So, in any AI product, usually the three KPIs you care about are quality, latency and cost. Now, what we're saying is we want you to do this real-time in the conversation, guiding the clinician. How do we do it in a way that does not break the bank? But we're using — But we also need very intelligent models because you're working with this cross-product of data and this, all this context layer as well. So you need high intelligence and high-quality because you don't want the alert fatigue but you also need to be fast and cost-effective. And so that's where a lot of clever engineering goes. It's okay, without getting into all the details here, can you model these policies in some intermediate representation or other things that you can do that can make this problem tractable? And of course, the Pareto frontier is always changing but we are also trying to do this now.Model Strategy: Third-Party Models, Proprietary Data, and Medical ConversationsJacob [00:18:26]: What implications has that had for what you take off-the-shelf and say, “ what? We don't need to be world-class at X. We'll just take this from the model providers or from some infrastructure player,” and what you're “No, this is where we spend most of our time focused on”?Chai [00:18:38]: This is, the fun challenge in AI?Jacob [00:18:42]: It changes every three months? SoChai [00:18:42]: Of course, with the shifting landscape, we try to be extremely thoughtful on predicting the trends of where third-party models are going and where we can uniquely go. And, sometimes when you talk about AI models, we're the models are just going to get infinitely better. But I don't think... It may be in the grandness of time you could say that but, within every month, every quarter, there's specific ways they're getting better. They're training on a lot more, coding data to be better coding agents, for example. And soChai [00:19:14]: We have to think about where are the things that won't — unique data that we're uniquely training on or to step back a little, where is a proprietary model bringing advantage to us is if it can give higher quality or lower cost and latency for similar quality, very similar to many other companies. And when we can do that is when we have proprietary data. So, for example, we have on the order of eighty million or hundreds of millions now getting close to of medical conversations.Jacob [00:19:44]: It's insane.Chai [00:19:45]: This is a unique data set. And this data set, it's very interesting because this data set is effectively a large part of the trace between the patient and the provider. That's where the quote-unquote debugging happens in healthcare. We have these traces at scale, as in as, our CEOs even called it, an exhaust that comes out of our product. And so when you have these traces, that's how you can train better agents on certain use cases, whether it's your transcription diarization use cases or so on or like note generation models and we can do that much cheaper and faster. But we're always also working with these third-party model providers. We closely collaborate with them and that's how we predict where the trends are going. The thing that I think about a lot is that, I know that the model providers are going to train much more on agentic workflows and so forth, so that's great, so that you have a better agentic harness. But the other thing that's interesting is that the model providers, because a large class of the consumer model providers is healthcare queries, that they might, optimize to train a lot of healthcare data to encode the knowledge in its weights. And this is just a great thing for us as well, where the off-the-shelf models can keep bett-getting better at general healthcare information, such that what our strategy is, we have a constellation of models, we can use something for this, that and, we only care about, at the end of the day, the best product experience.EHR as File System: Agentic Workflows and Real-Time InterfacesJacob [00:21:07]: And, you have, overall capabilities improving. I'm curious, as these models get better, is there something you look at and you're “, three months ago, we really couldn't do that but God, the the latest models really allow us to do it”?Chai [00:21:19]: So here's something interesting that I've, been toying with. So all models are... This wasn't super obvious a year ago but now it's become clear and clear that almost every agent is a coding agent underneath the hood? So you give it whatever file system, it can write its own code and so forth. So when you think about within healthcare and the use case that we have, you can think of the EHR effectively like a file system. It's just — it's a storage of all this information. It's a lot of information there that cannot fit into the context window, at least of today's models and you want to use that context effectively for all these product use cases we're talking about. And so if you have better agents that can, manipulate data, read that data, treat it as a file system as we see they're going and we know model companies are investing this way, then that very directly benefits us.Swyx [00:22:09]: Yeah. Okay, cool. Again, just establishing basic things. But we're going back to the model stuff. I'm really interested in double-clicking more on the real-time, element, which is pretty important for both of you. Is it — Is real-time just batches of every one minute, every five minutes? Is that how we do it? Or is there some more native, genuinely real-time in the sense that OpenAI has a real-time API or Gemini has a real-time API?Chai [00:22:35]: Yeah. Yeah. So today it is more on the on the batch basis but there's interestingChai [00:22:41]: Prototypes that we have that we're still not fully, full time, voice in text out or in that sense. But, can you trigger your models, your agents or agentic workflows, depending on the right times in the conversation?Chai [00:22:58]: And so you can imagine, different techniques to bring this latency down and, you want to bring the feedback loop down as much as you can. And so a lot of clever engineering there without fully... Maybe one day we'll do full voice in and text out, train a model to do something like that.Swyx [00:23:15]: You do — People don't want voice in voice out?Chai [00:23:18]: Now we aren't creating experiences that are, during the conversation, inter — It's almost likeSwyx [00:23:25]: Might be too disruptiveChai [00:23:26]: Too disruptive until, who knows, maybe eventually you could have full voice agents once we — the quality and we improve the comfort of the technology. But right now gra — that change is much more gradual and it's more text focus, text out.Janie [00:23:42]: And so much of currently what our product is trying to do is allow a clinician to focus on their patient and maybe at some point but right now patients, clinicians don't want a third voice, at least in a literal voice in that room. And so how do we be there with all the contacts and information ready at hand when there's the right moment?Personalization: Individual Doctors, Specialties, and Health SystemsJacob [00:24:03]: Jenny, one thing I'm curious about is how you think about, personalization in the product. I imagine, every doctor is a special snowflake in their own way, has their own way they like to do things. There are probably a bunch of different approaches you could take to doing that, both within the model layer itself but then also just with clever prompting or engineering. How do youJacob [00:24:20]: Deliver on that?Janie [00:24:21]: It's such a good question. Personalization is massive for us. We think about personalization at three levels. The first is at the individual, the second is at the specialty level and then the third is at the health system or the organization level. To your point, there are a lot of individual preferences. You-When a note is produced, it almost is a reflection that is so deeply personal of a doctor's work and how they give care. And so do they have preferences on things like style? They might want bullets versus paragraphs, really concise versus comprehensive. They also might have phrases that they really like to use or the templates that they want every note to be structured. And, we see it in our feedback all the time. We want two spaces in between sentences or I refuse to use this tool. And so that's something that we've had to build in. And the tricky part is how do you make sure that stylistic preferences don't interrupt accuracy and quality and that's something that we've really had to refine and hone over time. Second is at the specialty level. A cardiologist note or workflow is going to look very different from a dermatologist workflow.Jacob [00:25:32]: I assume cardiology notes are the highest stakes for you guys, given your CEO is a cardiologist.Jacob [00:25:36]: It's “Oh my God, make sure we get this one.”Janie [00:25:37]: Shiv, our CEO, is still a practicing cardiologist. He rounds once a month. And so, first call when we want just quick and easy user feedback too.Janie [00:25:46]: But, specialties require a lot of personalization, both in terms of what does the product look and so we make sure that as new users onboard, we catch that and the product proportionally reflects that. But also on the back end, evals at the specialty level, they are hard-earned to calibrate and get. What does a really great dermatology note look like? What makes it complete? What makes it compliant and billable is very different than a primary care doctor. And so it's not just about what does the product experience look but on the back end tuning and really deepening our understanding for the specialists. What does great output look like? And that's, a problem that we need to calibrate internally, externally, online, offline but, takes lots of cycles but is necessary in a high-stakes environment. And then at the health system level, for products like clinical decision support, you have health systems who've spent years or decades refining their best practices and they want to know, “Hey, we love your clinical decision support product but how do we embed our own hospital guidelines into them to inform clinicians before, during or after a visit what brest — best practices should look like?” And as you think about, deepening moats as well, when health systems, trust us with that data, allow us to productize it and directly into the clinical workflow, makes us a really great partner to health systems who want to build something that truly meets their needs, their practicing guidelines.AI Slop, Memory, and Product Data FlywheelsChai [00:27:23]: And I want to add onto that. The for the clinical documentation problem, it's very similar to AI writing that doesn't feel like your own and then we call that slop. But the way I describe one framing of slop is like AI without context. But we have all that context and both the clinicians, can have it and can guide it. And so part of the other interesting exhaust for us is, memory is, one of these new systems recordsChai [00:27:49]: Almost.Janie [00:27:50]: And we also have all the edits people make on our product and when you think about a data flywheel and how we get better over time becomes really powerful as a mechanism to just going deeper in personalization.Jacob [00:28:04]: It's interesting. I love this idea of working with systems on the guidelines they built up over a long time. I feel like so many of the best AI app companies today are... The question is: How do you take the expertise that a law firm or a bank has built up over many years and then add that as context and also a special sauce over, a an AI tool? And so seems like y'all are really doing that very effectively.Janie [00:28:24]: We're now starting to have our customers ask, “What are other customers doing?”Janie [00:28:28]: “And how are they doing it?”Janie [00:28:30]: And as we think about having visibility across such a large set of care being delivered right now, a really interesting place we could also partner.Swyx [00:28:40]: I'm just curious. I — This may be a nothing question but, how different are health system guidelines from each other? Don't they all converge to the same thing? And if not, where do they differ?Chai [00:28:52]: At a really high level, they're going to talk about very similar things but the difference is probably in some more of the details. “Oh, you should refer to specialists only when XYZ conditions are met,” or so forth and maybe different organizations have different practices and guidelines around that. But high level, talking about similar things but the details are what, of course, that shapes the context and the decisions you make.Swyx [00:29:15]: And this all goes into the context engine and it might affect the notes but maybe not.Chai [00:29:21]: The — For these local pathways, we're definitely thinking about it a little more for our clinical decision support product.Chai [00:29:26]: So yeah.Swyx [00:29:27]: Which is your stuff, yeah.Swyx [00:29:28]: And then the memory which you raised, let's just tell us more about that. What have you tried in memory? What's the structure of the memory? What works? What doesn't work?Chai [00:29:38]: There's, of course, many different ways you could do memory, where it's okay, can you bake it into the model weights or can you do it in some external store? For us, what's interesting is, of course, when you think the models are rapidly changing, whether it's in-house or third-party, baking into the model weights, sometimes you worry that it could be a little throwaway. And so, how do you... You need to find a way that you decompose the problem, the preferences from the underlying models and so forth. The thing we're right now most both that's easiest to start with and we're excited about is having, a separate store for memory, where you have, for example, a memory sub-agent that's, working in the background, figuring out what are the important parts of the clinician's actions that we want to remember for the long term. And then you can also imagine, other things where in the — you have background jobs that are running that are collating these, memories similar to Sleep, of course and what other pattern, patterns products do as well. Learning over all these action, all the action data we have, again, note edits, the conversations they did and the actual transcripts.Evals: LFD, LLM Judges, and Clinical SafetyJacob [00:30:40]: What about evals? How in the world do you... It is such a complex product surface area. We would love to hear you riff on that and also how has that evolved? I'm sure you've gotten better at it, so any learnings along the way.Janie [00:30:50]: From an evals perspective, we, from day one when we build any new product or feature, we think about, what does good look like? And there are table stakes things like clinical safety but then you start to get deeper into what does good quality look like. And when you go into something like our core product, there's stuff like style and completeness and there's things like does this note become something that can be billable, which is very high stakes for a health system. We have a number of ways in which we get confidence for this. We have, internal in-house clinicians who do what we call an LFD process to give us our very first pass at is this or isn't this a good enough output, look at the effing data.Jacob [00:31:41]: LFD?Chai [00:31:42]: That's why I was smiling. I was “Is Janie going to mention what it stands for?”Jacob [00:31:46]: I was not... There's like a million acronyms.Jacob [00:31:48]: How am I supposed to know that I don't? So “Oh yeah, of course, an LFD.”Swyx [00:31:51]: I've never heard of LFDs.Chai [00:31:53]: It's a bridge for sure.Janie [00:31:55]: I got through three days and then I had to ask someone.Janie [00:31:58]: I thought it was just me that didn't knowJanie [00:32:01]: It's our internal process.Swyx [00:32:02]: But look at the data as a meme in ML, ‘cause you tend to not look at it. You just want to look at number go up.Chai [00:32:06]: Exactly.Swyx [00:32:07]: But yes.Janie [00:32:08]: But so, we make sure we look at the data and then as we think about all of the components of good output, we, one, create LLM judges across all of these and we make sure with annotated data and either internal or external evaluators, we feel like these judges are calibrated. And then depending on the stakes, we also work with in-house and third-party evaluators across all of these before we ship any big change. And the goal is, in terms of evolution, how do you go from this process taking months, down to weeks, down to days? Some of it is, a true science and ML problem. A lot of it's also just, hard operational work. Have you planned ahead in terms of what you need? Have you really optimized the capacity that you need across all of the different specialties you need? Have you gotten a really good sense of which third parties are great to work with for what use cases? This takes a lot of domain, expertise and, lots of mistakes and errors in figuring that out. And so as much of it is an ML problem, so much of it has also been operational gains that are hugely important, where domain-specific expertise is everything.Specialty-Level Evaluation and Progressive RolloutsJacob [00:33:23]: But it's funny, ‘cause I feel like people talk about healthcare like it's one giant market and the reality isJacob [00:33:26]: It's, dozens and dozens of sub-markets. And so it feels like in your evals you have to build that up across the board, probably.Swyx [00:33:34]: And is specialization the primary cardinality at... That's the word that comes to mind.Janie [00:33:40]: Sometimes, depending on the product or the use case. And so if we're making a note improvement or feature for a particular specialty, definitely but we have products that are for nurses. We have products that, are really aimed at making the document or the output a lot more billable. And so we'll want to work with coding teams and not necessary clinicians. And so likeJacob [00:34:05]: Coding meaning healthcare coding.Janie [00:34:06]: Yes. Yes.Jacob [00:34:07]: NotChai [00:34:07]: Yes. I see you.Swyx [00:34:07]: Other kinds.Janie [00:34:09]: But is this output proportional to the work that was delivered? Is there sufficient documentation to justify the amount that a health system may end up charging? And so, specialty sometimes but also domain, very different across all of the different products that we're working for. And building out that network is, not easy and is where a lot of our operational investments have gone into.Chai [00:34:35]: And I view a lot of analogies to self-driving cars here, where, part of it is we really want progressive rollout of features to test in the real world is this useful? Is this going to work? One big difference compared to past lives is before I'd build a product, maybe I'd alpha it and then I'd like GA it the next week, ‘cause I'm “Go, move fast, ship,” and whatnot. But the mentality is like you... I want to make contact with the reality as quick as possible but I want a progressive rollout. Because as much as I get as large of an offline eval set, I want the distribution of that to match real-life distribution. And over time, by rolling out early, similar to Waymo has a tagline, “The world's most experienced driver,” another thing that can, at least linearly increase for us is, both the size of our evaluation offline and online, that and it all feeds back.Janie [00:35:25]: Something that's been earned over time, speaking of evolution, is just the trust we've gotten with customers. Historically, a lot of these health systems, when they bring on new vendors, their release cycles are quarters, sometimes twice a year. We've gotten our customers onto monthly release cycles, which is pretty fast for health systems but what is more exciting over the last, call it, few quarters, has been, a subset of our customers have said, “We want to innovate with you. We trust you,” and we have a pretty, decent chunk of our customers who say, “We'll develop with you outside of these monthly release cycles. We have a higher tolerance. We know that the stakes are very high but we want to be the first ones using these products, giving you feedback.” And so for a pretty substantial set of our customers, we've been able to convince them to be able to ship, in this gradual way before GA. Something we talk about a lot internally is, trust is earned in drops, earned in buckets and so we still can't do what I used to do when I worked at Loom. We had 30 million users. I'd just be, rolling out experiments left and. The bar is still quite high for iterative rollout but because of the trust we've earned, we're able to learn at pretty high volume very quickly.Privacy, HIPAA, and De-IdentificationSwyx [00:36:45]: Your scale is still pretty huge.Swyx [00:36:47]: One thing I want to... We were going to go into scale? In a sec. One thing I wanted to call up, follow up on evals, which, again, just coming from a generalist engineer point of view, just thinking through what would people be scared of in doing this, the privacy and HIPAAJacob [00:37:00]: Elements of this. I have zero experience in that. What do you have to do? What is surprisingly not that bad?Chai [00:37:06]: So one thing that's really important here from a compliance perspective is very much that any of the data we use needs to be de-identified, any real-world data we use as a basis of online eval sets we're learning from. And so you have to — And there's, very clear, government guidelines, what counts as PHI. And so we've even have built models that can take, for example, a clinical transcript and remove all the key PHI indicators and so you have a scrubbed/de-identified version. And then once you... And so one thing that's important is first you've got to get confidence in that model in the first place? And prove that out. Because, now you have, multiple probabilistic systems on top of each other.Chai [00:37:46]: But once you have that, then you can train on it use it for evaluation and so forth, provided one of the cool things also that you can do from a business side is the right data contracting as well with your partners.Jacob [00:37:57]: Is the anonymization one way? Once it's done, you cannot undo it? Or is there someoneChai [00:38:01]: YesJacob [00:38:02]: Who holds the master key that can... Yeah, okay. So it's one way.Chai [00:38:05]: It's one way. Yeah.Jacob [00:38:06]: That's how it works. I just wanted to... Because, there's a lot of this, learning from feedback and everything that, you would want to debug more but you can't because you just physically don't allow yourself to.Janie [00:38:17]: Some of it's also written in our customer contracts in terms of who can or can't access PHI data, how long do we retain it,Jacob [00:38:27]: Very goodJanie [00:38:27]: Before it gets de-identified. And so we have a pretty high bar for who can access that PHI data, just to make sure that we always respect our customer data and privacy. But that's something that we partner with our customers on too, to make sure that as we want full, as close to precision as possible in that qualityJanie [00:38:48]: We can still use it.Jacob [00:38:50]: But it'll be fascinating to see how that space evolves? Because you think about, I used to work at a company that, did a lot of healthcare data in the cancer space and if you asked, the average cancer patient, “Hey, do you want people, do you want other patients to be able to learn-”Chai [00:39:03]: Take it.Jacob [00:39:03]: “... Learn from your experience?”Chai [00:39:04]: Take it all.Jacob [00:39:05]: They're “Please.”Jacob [00:39:06]: “I'd love, nothing more than for other people to be able to learn fromJacob [00:39:10]: The experience that I had.” And so in the past it was a lot harder to do that learning. But with this technology, that might really be practical and so it'll be fascinating to see how that continues to evolve.Chai [00:39:21]: There's so much in our data set of 100 million conversations.Chai [00:39:26]: You can imagine things like insights that you can give to the clinician. How could you, oh, how could you have reacted to this? In coaching or insights around, which treatments are effective or, like... Because you have this, again, this data source that was never captured before but that's, where, intuition or experience is created from, going back to this idea that the conversation is the agent of truth.Operating at Scale: Reliability, Cost, and Token EfficiencyJacob [00:39:46]: Back to the 100 million conversations, I feel like you have this insane scale that maybe only a few other AI app companies have and everyone else dreams of. So not everyone has had to confront this yet but maybe just talk about some of the challenges of operating at that scale and what, our listeners have to look forward to if they ever get to this level of scale.Chai [00:40:05]: At large and larger in scale, so of course there's a general, infrastructure reliability. When you... In any given startup, you're building the plane while it's flying. So there's some notion of that. But what gets interesting on the AI and ML side for sure is this, as you get at more and more scale, so one, you have the data to first and foremost do this. But, you start thinking about costs or infrastructure in a whole different way at scale versus, a prototype.Chai [00:40:34]: You can use the most expensive model, you can burn as many tokens as you want but when you're doing 100 million conversationsJacob [00:40:41]: Token max on leaderboards are less upsetting than that context.Chai [00:40:45]: . When you're doing that and so that comes for we have the data and we also have the team that's able to post-train based on this and you can optimize for efficiency, especially in areas where you believe that maybe a lot of the quality headroom is less so and you don't expect the other off-the-shelf models to go that way, such that you want to do, efficiency maximization, in terms of compute and tokens.Jacob [00:41:08]: I feel like you guys live in the future in some way where most use cases today are really just in use case discovery mode, where it's “God, I really hope I can find something that can get to scale,” and so you're always going to use the most powerful model. And then the few things that do get to this level of scale, you start to do those optimizations.Chai [00:41:22]: It's a natural trajectory where it's like zero-to-one, we're not talking about any of these optimizations.Chai [00:41:26]: But when maybe we're in the one-to-100 or so forth, then we're in optimization mode and, what works out really well is you've got all this data from zero-to-one that lets you do this.What Comes Next: The Conversation as the Shared Healthcare PlatformJacob [00:41:36]: That's fascinating. I feel like one thing that's so interesting about the Abridge footprint is that you're in the doctor-patient visit in real-time. I always like to say, there's like probably 50 years' worth of product you could build on top of that. What gets each of you, I don't know, what are you most excited about building, either in the short term or medium term or even, long down the line?Janie [00:41:53]: Something that I get really excited about is that the same conversation can serve so many stakeholders. If you think about the conversation, a doctor needs to know what is the documentation, how do I make sure that this fully represent the care I gave? A patient needs to know, “What the heck just happened? This was really overwhelming. What are my next steps?” A payer needs to know, was this the proper and appropriate care given? A pharma company might want to know why isn't this drug being properly used or is there a good candidate for this clinical trial that I'm about to run? And where I get excited is that our product and our platform and our infrastructure can be the same product across all of those things and start to what's today, separate, very expensive, complex systems that serve each one of these stakeholders in very different ways, start to collapse all of that into a singular platform that enables not just more efficiency across the board but also better outcomes for everyone. And, all of us experience healthcare in probably very painful ways and knowing that there is a world in which we can simplify a lot is really exciting to me and it all starts with the conversation.Chai [00:43:15]: It's interesting. Of it very similar to going back to the KPIs that any AI product cares about. How do you increase quality of care? How do you reduce latency to care? And how do you reduce costs? Which is a huge, in healthcareJacob [00:43:28]: They call it the triple aim in healthcare.Chai [00:43:30]: But very similar to building AI products and the thing that really excites me is when we talk about that latency piece, we talked about one example earlier of prior authorization, can you reduce the latency to care? But you can imagine so much more. Oh, as soon as the lab value gets updated, do you have like a background agent that, kicks off and uses all the context to be “Oh, hey, the patient should do this next,” for example. And of flagging that to the clinician who's always in the loop but reducing that latency, to care. And then you can imagine this is much further down the road but it's like even connecting that to the direct patient and the consumer. And so how can you, how can you build a bridge to all of these things?EHR Partnerships and the Clinical Intelligence LayerJacob [00:44:10]: Very cool. The connections piece is just an ever-growing thing. And one of the key partners is the EHR and I wonder what that relationship is like. Will they, look at this as, something that is valuable enough that they want to own someday?Janie [00:44:29]: Our partnerships with the EHR is, we know that we have to be extremely close partners with all the EHRs who we partner with. Being able to not only pull and push all of the data into the right places is, not only table stakes, if we can't do that, health systems don't want to use us. The second and the reality of today is clinicians spend a lot of their days in the EHR. So much of what allowed us to win in the largest health systems was pretty direct and, very close partnerships with some of the largest electronic health records that allowed us to pull and push data with APIs that weren't ready out of the box. And clinicians want to save clicks. Anytime we introduce a new product that, adds two clicks for them in their day, they're “We're not going to use it.”Janie [00:45:21]: They have 15-minute back-to-back appointments with their patients. They're spending, hours during pajama time doing documentation. Every second and every minute counts and so we really think about being deeply integrated into the EHR as also table stakes to getting real usage and adoption. And anything that we build or introduce, we really talk about earn the right internally a lot, which is we have to provide so much value or save so much time that people will use us. But those are the two things that are close to us, is we know that the product won't be used unless it is deeply interoperable.Chai [00:46:01]: And strategically, to your point, it's like what does EHR want to own versus us? EHRs are really focused on the clinical workflows and so forth but some of the things that we're talking about here, I do these traditionally are outside of the domain where it's oh, connecting pairs and providers together with provider policies or the clinical trial matching, as Janie brought up. And so these are, entirely — we position ourselves as building this entirely new intelligence, clinical intelligence layer across, again, providers, pharma and, payers.Chai [00:46:33]: And so that's a it's a whole different ballgame that we try to playChai [00:46:36]: In combination with them.Jacob [00:46:37]: But it's like a different layer of scope.Healthcare AI Regulation, Technical Depth, and What Changed Their MindsJacob [00:46:39]: I'm curious, you are both relatively newcomers to healthcare. People have these, there's lots of futuristic healthcare AI takes of “Oh, everything will look different.”, now that you've been in healthcare for a bit, you live at the edge of AI, what have you, changed your mind on around this, as you think about what healthcare looks like in ten, 20 years? Any updates to your mental model from the time being close to the problems?Chai [00:47:02]: One thing that IChai [00:47:04]: Was hesitant about before and it's a common thing when I'm trying to recruit engineers that people ask me around, is definitely oh, healthcare, heavily regulated space. And it is, rightfully so. You want to keep, the patients at the end of the day safe. But one of the interesting things that, is a that surprised me how much it is coming to the company is there's a lot of really favorable regulatory tailwinds as well. Where you think about, government really wants interoperability between all these systems that we talked about and so agents can access this information. The government just in January, the FDA released updated guidance on clinical decision support, what I work on in such a way that they used to have guidance from like 2022 that required you to have, mention all these options and do all these other things but it's a very forward and forward-looking way. And so for me, what's been really cool to work on is this, there's this very special moment both in AI in general, we all know that but there's a special moment also regulatory in healthcare as well.Janie [00:48:05]: One thing I would call out is for the very reasons things are higher stakes or, potentially considered more difficult in healthcare, it's where some of the hardest AI problems will get solved first, just because the bar is so high. When I first joined, I was “Oh, this is where we'll be on the tail end of where, all of the AI innovation will be able to be applied.” But when you think about, zero error evals or multi-step workflows that have really low tolerance, a lot of the innovation will happen here just because we have to or else we can't ship.Jacob [00:48:42]: ‘Cause like in other domains, you'd much rather just solve the 80%-is-good-enough problems firstJanie [00:48:46]: 80/20 doesn't work hereChai [00:48:48]: And building off that, traditionally, there was a bit of stigma that, oh, healthcare companies are not that interesting from a technical perspective or I've seen that or faced that myself. But these are really hard and fun problems from a pure technical perspective beyond just the impact. How do you bring the latency of this thing down and make it really high-quality?Reducing Latency: Clinical Workflows, Agents, and Implementation RealityJacob [00:49:07]: How do you bring the latency of things down?Chai [00:49:10]: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So okay, let's answer the latency question. And maybe hopefully not too redundant with some of the things I've said earlier but some part of it is with any latency, you have to like what is, what is really your bottleneck. In a lot of workflows, it's sometimes it's the model itself. And so that's where like our data flywheel, our post-training team and so forth come in so that can you make the models far more efficient. So that's one aspect of latency. But there's whole other aspects of latency where it's okay, on top of that, if you use a constellation of different models, can you use — can you first use like a — it's like thinking fast and slow. Can you use a cheap, fast model that triages and hands it off to a larger model where you get more intelligence and so forth and so all theseChai [00:49:56]: Clever tricks to make it work.Chai [00:49:58]: And by the way, we are totally — we also realize that the parameter frontier is changing and so these tricks will — may not get us to where we want to be in five years but we need to if we want to build a useful product right now.Jacob [00:50:11]: Should we go to the quick-fire or you want to ask more about Abridge? We can stuff everything that's not Abridge into the quick-fireSwyx [00:50:16]: I don't mind. I was — I feel like Janie was on the topic of more long tail stuff, which isSwyx [00:50:21]: Not the eighty/twenty thing and that really matters. And I'll —, if you have any tips or cool stories or just general approaches that have worked for you that's interesting to dig into.Janie [00:50:32]: One of them is even just how we staff our teams looks different than a traditional software engineering team, I'd say.Swyx [00:50:40]: Let's go.Clinician Scientists, Edge Cases, and Evals at ScaleJanie [00:50:41]: We have a bunch of folks with different roles who are clinicians and so we have this role called the clinician scientist and I heard one of our leaders refer to them as mutants recently. But they are people who've had clinical backgrounds, so MDs typically, who are also deeply technical, somewhere, on the spectrum of like a full stack engineer all the way to like extremely scrappy prompter. But having each of these people embedded within our teams instantly raises the bar for everything that we build because not only are they determining, is this product clinically useful but they're deeply embedded in our whole evals process. And so when we talk about LFDs, when we talk about what is our actual evaluation criteria, you don't want Chai or me creating what those are because we don't have clinical background. But is probably unique to Abridge but has been game changing. And when you think about where the puck is going, you have people build with clinical backgrounds who are technical and where AI tools are going, they just becomeJanie [00:51:53]: More and more, critical and like the killers of the team. And so that's one. And then the second is just the scale at which we do evals to catch that long tail up front before anything ever gets into production is something that we've pretty much like really started to fine-tune, both from a scale but when do we know we need to get several hundred versus several thousand offline responses, what helps us make that quick decision and make this less of an art and as much of a science as possible. But that's also been something we've had to tune over time.Swyx [00:52:27]: And you have partners who opted in to give you those evals.Janie [00:52:31]: So we work either internally or with third-party for offline evals and then we have customers who also agree to give us, whether it's like thumbs up, thumbs down to like choose this or that, a lot of data to get us to what is as close to fully confident as possible.Swyx [00:52:51]: The term that comes to mind isSwyx [00:52:53]: Like active learning on things where you're weak. I feel like it's a lost artSwyx [00:52:58]: Is a lot of the polish that comes into doing something like this.Janie [00:53:02]: Really.Chai [00:53:03]: Hundred percent.Lessons from Glean: Technical Foundations and AI App InfrastructureJacob [00:53:04]: Maybe, on a totally unrelated note, Chai, you had a very, storied run at Glean b

AI companionship is exploding — and it is not just lonely men in basements.More and more people are developing emotional attachment, dependency, and even intimacy with artificial intelligence systems designed to capture human attention and mirror emotional needs back to us.In this video I explore why women may be particularly vulnerable to AI emotional manipulationWhy men need to establish healthy boundaries around AI use in relationshipsThe spiritual danger of artificial intimacyThe difference between information, knowledge, and wisdomWhy AI companionship can never replace embodied human relationshipThe deeper loneliness and fragmentation driving this phenomenonI also react to a woman openly teaching people how to emotionally bond with AI companions and explain why I believe this represents a serious cultural and spiritual warning sign.The solution is rebuilding real human relationships, community, brotherhood, family, grounded on Christianity.⚔️ Path of ManlinessOnline men's groups focused on accountability, brotherhood, discipline, and spiritual growth:https://pathofmanliness.com

In this episode, we break down how to actually measure brand impact without overcomplicating it, including the leading indicators lean B2B teams should track before pipeline shows up.We cover:→ Why leading indicators matter more than lagging ones early on→ What early brand signals actually look like in practice→ Why qualitative data and self-reported attribution is so powerful→ A simple list of brand metrics lean teams should focus onIf you are a B2B marketer trying to justify your brand investment to leadership or figure out if your demand gen is actually working before revenue shows up.Tune in and learn:→ The difference between leading and lagging brand metrics→ What signals to watch for before pipeline materializes→ Why qualitative beats quantitative for brand measurement in B2B→ How to build a simple brand scorecard without bloated dashboards-----------------------------------------------------

Welkom bij een nieuwe editie van Gamekings Daily. In deze gaming vodcast praten twee hosts van Gamekings over het laatste nieuws uit de wereld der videogames. Vandaag zit Jasper bij JJ in de studio. Samen met hem neemt hij het belangrijkste nieuws van de afgelopen paar dagen door. Zo was daar de ontboezeming van PlayStation CEO Hideaki Nishino dat PlayStation vol gaat inzetten op AI. Of, zoals hij het zelf zei: "AI zal de drempels voor het maken van games verlagen en de ontwikkelingscycli versnellen. Hierdoor kunnen meer studio's de markt betreden". Best een bijzondere uitspraak in een tijd dat roepen dat je AI gebruikt, leidt tot een hoop online haat. Dit onderwerp en meer krijg je te zien en te horen in de Gamekings Daily van maandag 11 mei 2026.PlayStation draait er niet omheen: AI wordt belangrijk voor henEen ander onderwerp is de derde trailer van GTA 6. Veel mensen zitten daar op te wachten. Voor hen kan het moment van de waarheid best wel eens rap komen, want PlayStation lijkt de campagne om de GTA-kopers massaal naar de PS5 te krijgen, te zijn begonnen. Zo krijgen PS4-bezitters een mail dat ze voor GTA 6 toch echt een PS5 nodig hebben. En 13 mei beginnen de next level deals in de PS Store, wat een perfect moment voor de start van de preorder is. En om dat aan te kondigen heb je een trailer nodig...Microsoft zet per ongeluk hele game Forza Horizon 6 onlineEn dan was daar Microsoft, die dacht dat het slim was om de hele versie van Forza Horizon 6 alvast open en bloot online te zetten. Ruim een week voor de release. Waardoor het spel nu dus op verschillende torrentwebsites staat. Hoe kon dit gebeuren en denken de beide heren dat dit grote gevolgen voor de verkoopcijfers van het spel gaat hebben? Het antwoord krijg je in deze video.Timestamps:00:00:00 De Gamekings Daily van maandag 11 mei00:00:46 Forza Horizon 6 is al 10 dagen voor release gelekt00:06:36 Nintendo veteraan Takashi Tezuka gaat met pensioen00:14:34 PlayStation zet vol in op AI00:22:21 De derde trailer van GTA 6 komt snel onlineWil je adverteren bij de podcast Gamekings óf misschien bij een andere podcast van ILVY Network? Mail dan naar management@ilvy.com en/of kijk even op de website : https://ilvy.com/podcastSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Niki, Lotus, and John celebrate 100 episodes and discuss GameStop's potential purchase of eBay, usTwo's CEO saying some wild stuff into a microphone, the final death of Paste Games, and more!00:00:00 Intros & At Least It's Friday00:06:05 GameStop could be prepping for an eBay takeover00:13:50 Saudi Arabia is divesting from some entertainment properties00:20:36 Atari acquires emulation studio Implicit Conversions00:24:39 MTG: Arena devs unionize00:28:48 usTwo CEO speaks way too candidly about labor relations within company00:39:45 GreedFall dev Spiders being liquidated; mismanagement alleged00:44:22 GameMaker integrates with Claude Code00:48:00 The program is interrupted by Niki's neighborhood "Snacks Man"00:51:55 Mac Minis are super expensive now because of AI00:58:58 Last Flag not continuing content updates or console development01:05:15 Thick as Thieves gets shorter, cheaper01:08:08 AV Club Games is no more, which spells the end of Paste Games01:14:50 Flotsam is a cell-shaded city builder on sea that Lotus really likes01:22:22 Tomodachi Life: Living the Dream is playing with dolls01:36:00 CorgiSpace is a collection from one of the medium's most prolific creators01:42:44 Titanium Court avoids Balatro time suck because of reading01:44:00 Niki continues to build a NAS01:54:55 We answer your Hive Questions for Episode 10003:06:40 OutroThanks for listening!Please leave us a review! We'll read it on the show and it helps us out a lot.VGBees is ad-free, AI-free, and completely supported by you! https://vgbees.com/joinVGBees is a weekly games media podcast hosted by Niki, John, and Lotus.

John Pollock and Brandon Thurston cover WWE's recent Town Hall meeting with exclusive audio, including reaction to WrestleMania, Paul Levesque's new deal, Saudi Arabia, and online criticism. Plus: The latest round of WWE cuts, Janel Grant posts FBI letters, NXT's PLEs move to CW, and more on the Berwyn Eagle Club drama. 00:00:00 Start00:04:28 WWE Town Hall with exclusive audio00:23:00 Night of Champions in Saudi Arabia00:25:44 Performance of WrestleMania 4200:30:40 Incorporation of AI00:38:26 WrestleMania 202800:46:33 Janel Grant posts letters from the FBI00:48:05 NXT's PLEs moving to CW00:53:08 The Berwyn Eagles Club saga 01:01:00 Hulk Hogan - Real American on NetflixMusic courtesy: “Panic Beat” by Ben TramerPOST WrestlingSubscribe: https://postwrestling.com/subscribePatreon: http://postwrestlingcafe.comForum: https://forum.postwrestling.comDiscord: https://discord.com/invite/Q795HhRTwitter/Facebook/Instagram/YouTube: @POSTwrestlingBluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/postwrestling.comWrestlenomicsSubscribe: https://wrestlenomics.com/podcast/Patreon: https://patreon.com/wrestlenomicsSubstack: https://wrestlenomics.substack.com/Twitter/Facebook/Instagram/YouTube: @WrestlenomicsBluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/wrestlenomics.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

HELP US IMPROVE THE PODCAST - TAKE THIS 3 MIN SURVEY:https://forms.gle/fRTV2YiJqncKVpFh7WEBINAR LINK:https://shawnmoore.clickfunnels.com/optiniyvvg89sWant to learn more about Vodyssey or start your STR journey. Book a call here:https://meetings.hubspot.com/vodysseystrategysession/booknow?utm_source=vodysseycom&uuid=80fb7859-b8f4-40d1-a31d-15a5caa687b7FOLLOW US:https://www.instagram.com/vodysseyshawnmoorehttps://www.facebook.com/vodysseyshawnmoore/https://www.linkedin.com/company/str-financial-freedomhttps://www.tiktok.com/@vodysseyshawnmooreCONTACT US:support@vodyssey.comPROPERTIES:1) https://www.cowboysandmermaidsvacationrentals.com/alpine-airspace-orp5b5d111x2) https://www.cowboysandmermaidsvacationrentals.com/driftwood-dreams-orp5b5d0c8x3) https://www.cowboysandmermaidsvacationrentals.com/tipsy-turtle-orp5b5d117x4) https://www.cowboysandmermaidsvacationrentals.com/peace-of-paradise-orp5b5d119x5) https://www.cowboysandmermaidsvacationrentals.com/simplicity-at-snowmass-orp5b726dax6) https://www.cowboysandmermaidsvacationrentals.com/serenity-at-snowmass-orp5b6fc3axContact Ned:https://nedmarkey.com/Chapters:00:04:10 High Income Earners BIGGEST Problem00:09:00 Where Should You Buy Your First Airbnb00:14:08 The 4 Returns of Real Estate Investing00:17:32 Why Did Ned Double Down?00:22:14 Rates vs Occupancy00:24:04 Pros & Cons of AI00:32:00 Why Entrepreneurs LOVE STRs00:36:00 Advice To Your Younger Self00:40:57 Wrap Up

Republicans are running out of places to redraw the map, and Florida is quickly becoming their last real shot to claw back seats before the midterms. The pressure is now squarely on Ron DeSantis to deliver a map that could net a handful of gains, but even inside the party there is real disagreement about whether that is possible. The risk is not just that the effort fails, but that it backfires, turning carefully engineered districts into competitive ones if turnout does not break the right way.That is the core problem with aggressive redistricting at this stage. The more you try to maximize advantage by packing and slicing districts, the more you rely on your own voters showing up consistently. If they do not, those same districts can flip. That is why some Republicans are warning that what looks like a smart map on paper could end up being a “dummymander” in practice, especially in an environment where Democratic voters appear more motivated. In fact, this is starting to look risky, it might be more accurate to call this year's elections “dummyterms,” a phrase I'm committed to making stick come hell or high water.Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.At the same time, the conflict with Iran is entering a more volatile phase. New mines in the Strait of Hormuz and an expanded U.S. naval response signal that this is no longer just posturing. It's a pressure campaign with real global stakes, especially given how much of the world's oil supply runs through that corridor. The situation is starting to look less like a slow escalation and more like a standoff that will force a decision sooner rather than later.What makes it even more unpredictable is the internal instability within Iran itself. Leadership shakeups, reports about the Supreme Leader's health and — seriously — facial disfigurement, and a broader power struggle all suggest that there is no single, unified voice making decisions. That kind of vacuum makes negotiation harder and escalation easier, because different factions may be pulling in different directions at the same time.The timeline here is being driven by economics as much as politics. With exports constrained and storage capacity nearing its limit, Iran will eventually have to decide whether to halt production or find another way around the blockade. Neither option is easy, and both come with significant costs. That's why this moment feels compressed, with pressure building toward some kind of near term resolution.Finally, a different kind of competition is playing out between the United States and China, this time over artificial intelligence. The Trump administration is accusing China-backed actors of effectively copying American AI systems by extracting outputs and using them to train rival models. It is a technical fight, but the implications are strategic, especially if it allows competitors to replicate advanced systems without the same investment or safeguards.That accusation fits into a broader pattern of technological rivalry, where innovation, security, and economic advantage are all intertwined. If these claims are accurate, it raises serious questions about how U.S. companies can protect their models and whether current safeguards are enough. With a high stakes meeting between Trump and Xi on the horizon, this issue is likely to become part of a much larger negotiation over trade, security, and global influence.Chapters00:00:00 - Intro00:02:16 - Gabe Fleisher on the White House Press Corps and the Supreme Court00:22:41 - Redistricting Fights00:27:31 - Iran00:33:14 - China and AI00:36:29 - Gabe Fleisher on the Permanence of the Trump Administration01:08:56 - Final Thoughts This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe

Watch the YouTube version of this episode HEREThis episode of the Maximum Lawyer podcast features Jeremy Danielson, a real estate law firm owner from Des Moines, Iowa as a featured speaker at Max Law Con 2025. Jeremy offers an in-depth look at how he revolutionized his firm's decision-making by building an AI Board of Advisors, using custom GPT personas modeled after renowned business leaders such as Steve Jobs, Mike Michalowicz, and Andrew Ng.Jeremy recounts how, during a critical cash flow crisis, he turned to his AI advisors for guidance. By simulating the perspectives and expertise of these influential figures, he was able to identify and resolve key marketing tracking issues, streamline and optimize his firm's financial operations, and successfully launch six new premium service offerings. Jeremy details the process of designing and refining each AI persona to reflect the unique strengths and strategic thinking of their real-life counterparts, allowing him to “consult” with a virtual roundtable of experts at any time.He emphasizes the profound impact this AI advisory board had on reducing the sense of isolation that often comes with law firm leadership, enabling him to make faster, more informed decisions with greater confidence. As a Max Law Con 2025 speaker, Jeremy encourages fellow law firm owners to harness the power of AI-driven advisors not only to solve immediate business challenges but also to foster ongoing innovation and resilience in their practices.Timestamps00:04:37 Financial Crisis and Tyson's Advice00:05:55 Marketing Blind Spots and Steve Jobs AI00:08:46 Implementing AI Advice for Marketing00:10:13 Preparing for Mastermind with AI00:11:29 AI Coaching During Personal Crisis00:12:40 How the AI Board Works00:14:13 Profit First Confusion and Mike Michalowicz AI00:17:23 The Power of Asking for Help00:19:00 Concrete Outcomes from AI Advisors00:20:37 Business Transformation and Personal Impact00:22:02 Encouragement to Build Your Own AI BoardConnect with Jeremy:Website  Instagram Facebook  Linkedin  Youtube  Resources:Join the Guild MembershipSubscribe to the Maximum Lawyer Youtube ChannelFollow us on InstagramJoin the Facebook GroupFollow the Facebook PageFollow us on LinkedIn Resources:Join the Guild MembershipSubscribe to the Maximum Lawyer Youtube ChannelFollow us on InstagramJoin the Facebook GroupFollow the Facebook PageFollow us on LinkedIn

Most AI companies are racing to build bigger LLMs. Eve Bodnia thinks that's the wrong approach.Eve is the founder and CEO of Logical Intelligence, which is developing an alternative to the transformer-based models dominating the industry. Her argument: LLMs' architecture makes them fundamentally unsuited for some mission-critical tasks. A system that generates output one token at a time, with no ability to inspect its own reasoning mid-process or guarantee its results, shouldn't be trusted to design chips, analyze financial data, or even fly a plane. Her alternative is the energy-based model (EBM), a form of AI rooted in the physics principle of energy minimization, not language prediction. Rather than guessing the next probable word, an EBM maps every possible outcome across a mathematical landscape, where likely states settle into valleys and improbable ones sit on peaks. Dan Shipper talked with Bodnia for AI & I about why she believes LLM progress is plateauing, what it means for AI to actually understand data rather than just pattern-match across it, and how her team is building toward formally verified code generated in plain English—no C++ required.If you found this episode interesting, please like, subscribe, comment, and share!Head to http://granola.ai/every and get 3 months free with the code EVERYTo hear more from Dan Shipper:Subscribe to Every: https://every.to/subscribe Follow him on X: https://twitter.com/danshipper Timestamps: 00:00:51 - Introduction00:02:09 - Why correctness and verifiability matter in AI00:09:33 - What an energy-based model is00:14:21 - How EBMs construct energy landscapes to understand data00:19:00 - Why modeling intelligence through language alone is a flawed approach00:26:54 - What it means for a model to "understand" data00:37:21 - How EBMs solve the vibe coding problem and enable formally verified code00:43:21 - Why LLM progress is plateauing00:49:54 - Mission-critical industries haven't adopted LLMs, and how EBMs could fill that gap

This episode of Excess Returns features GMO's Tom Hancock on how to think about AI as an investment opportunity and what truly defines “quality” in today's market. The conversation breaks down the AI value chain, challenges common assumptions about where value will accrue, and ties it all back to building durable portfolios in a rapidly changing technological landscape.Tom walks through his “Hype vs High Conviction” framework, explaining why identifying the right layer of the AI ecosystem may matter more than simply betting on the theme itself, and why balance sheets, durability, and capital allocation remain critical even in the most exciting growth environments.Hype vs High Convictionhttps://www.gmo.com/americas/research-library/hype-vs-high-conviction_insights/Topics Covered:Why AI may be the most important investment decision todayThe four-layer AI stack: applications, LLMs, hyperscalers, and infrastructureWhy investors confuse secular trends with investable opportunitiesFollowing the money through the AI value chainThe hidden risks of investing lower in the stackWhy today's tech leaders differ from the dot-com eraGrowth vs maintenance capex and what it means for AI economicsWhy software may be more resilient than markets thinkHow GMO defines “quality” and why it matters in volatile marketsPortfolio construction: where GMO is investing (and avoiding) in AITimestamps:00:00 Intro and framing the AI investment debate00:00:55 Tom Hancock background and focus on quality investing00:02:00 What investors are getting wrong about AI00:03:23 Breaking down the four layers of the AI ecosystem00:06:45 Applications vs infrastructure: where value may accrue00:08:45 Why predicting AI winners is still difficult00:11:00 Following the cash flows through the AI stack00:13:00 Why AI funding is more stable than past tech bubbles00:16:00 Big Tech strategy differences and capital allocation decisions00:17:34 Are today's tech companies higher quality than in 1999?00:19:00 Growth vs maintenance capex and implications for Nvidia and others00:22:00 Depreciation, chip lifecycles, and hidden risks in capex assumptions00:24:00 Capital intensity vs quality: when heavy investment is a feature00:27:00 Why incumbents may benefit most from AI00:28:30 Risks in the LLM layer and potential commoditization00:30:10 Software disruption fears: overdone or justified?00:34:06 Defining “quality” in investing00:36:00 Balance sheets vs return on capital00:38:32 Why GMO sold Oracle and the risks of leverage00:40:18 What happens if AI spending slows down00:41:35 Where the biggest risks are in the AI stack00:44:26 Where GMO is positioned vs the S&P 50000:48:00 How new ideas enter a quality portfolio00:51:00 Sell discipline and portfolio turnover00:53:00 International vs US quality investing

Send us Fan MailAI tools now replace expensive software, reduce development time, and improve business systems. Learn how agencies use AI for automation, churn prediction, customer data tracking, and faster builds. This video covers AI for ecommerce, agency growth, automation tools, and real use cases in 2026.If outdated systems are slowing growth, fix it now before competitors replace you with AI:  https://bit.ly/4jMZtxu#AIforBusiness #AgencyGrowth #AutomationTools #EcommerceStrategy #aitools Want free resources? Dowload our Free Amazon guides here:Amazon Catalog Spring Cleaning: https://hubs.ly/Q046BVfp0Growth Email Marketing Strategies: https://hubs.ly/Q04457QF0Amazon Proft Margin Defense 2026: https://hubs.ly/Q042trRH0Amazon SEO Toolkit 2026: https://bit.ly/4oC2ClTAmazon Seller Strategy Report 2026: https://bit.ly/3YN1RME2026 Ecommerce Website & SEO Readiness Checklist: https://hubs.ly/Q040Jg0M0Amazon 2026 PPC guide: https://bit.ly/4lF0OYXTimestamps00:00 - $2.6M software replaced by AI00:20 - Why AI is finally ready in 202601:03 - Real use vs AI hype explained01:42 - Turning agency systems into AI products02:30 - Why agencies must transition now03:26 - Replacing copywriting and design roles with AI04:50 - Building websites and tools in hours05:38 - Using AI to predict client churn06:53 - Data driven decisions with AI systems08:30 - How to build tools using AI prompts09:02 - Too many good ideas problem with AI--------------------------------------------------------------------------Follow us:LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28605816/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/stevenpopemag/Pinterest: https://www.pinterest.com/myamazonguys/Twitter: https://twitter.com/myamazonguySubscribe to the My Amazon Guy podcast:My Amazon Guy podcast: https://podcast.myamazonguy.comApple Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/my-amazon-guy/id1501974229Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4A5ASHGGfr6s4wWNQIqyVwSupport the show

This week on Checkpoint Chat, we get an early look at the beauty of Japan in Forza Horizon 6, continue catching (and building) them all in Pokémon Pokopia, check in on the Super Mario Bros. Wonder – Meetup in Bellabel Park DLC, and go back in time to play indie hit ElecHead!Follow Checkpoint Chat on...Twitter: https://twitter.com/CheckpointChat​​Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CheckpointChatInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/checkpointchatBluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/checkpointchat.bsky.social Want to listen to more gaming goodness, on other platforms? Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Google, Spotify, and more right here: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/checkpointchat-- SHOW NOTES --00:00:00​ - Tech problems and the future of AI00:19:23 - Pokémon Pokopia is so chilled00:38:48 - Cars go VROOM VROOM in Forza Horizon 600:51:30​ - ElecHead is delightful and short01:01:26​ - The Super Mario Bros. Wonder DLC has a long name#gamingpodcast #gamingchannels #gamingreview

Tarek already built a B2B software company to $30M ARR. But when the AI wave hit, he realized he could build a generational business by automating the manual world of accounts receivable. So, he left to start Stuut.In this episode, Tarek breaks down how he reached $1M ARR in a couple of months and is on track to hit up to $50M this year. He reveals how he pre-sold his first $65k contract with just wireframes, why he forces new customers to introduce him to five peers, and the brutal reality of finding message-market fit through hundreds of cold calls.Why You Should ListenHow to pre-sell a $65k enterprise contract before writing code.The "Closing Discount" hack to generate 5 referrals from every new customer.Why finding "Message Market Fit" is more important than your ICP.How to spot and avoid early-stage startup "vultures".Why scaling a B2B sales motion requires hiring misfits over pedigree.00:00:00 Intro00:01:41 Leaving a $30M Startup to Build with AI00:08:06 Finding Message Market Fit Through Cold Calling00:20:07 Pre-Selling a $65k Contract with Wireframes00:27:51 The Voice AI "Aha" Moment00:33:07 The Closing Discount Referral Hack00:37:18 The Brutal Reality of B2B Sales00:42:19 Hitting $1M ARR and Pacing for $50M00:45:05 Why Product Market Fit is Never Truly FoundSend me a message to let me know what you think!

Omar already built and sold an AI startup for over $100M. But when the generative AI wave hit, he realized the technology wasn't just the future of software—it was the future of labor. So he started Eudia to completely transform how enterprise legal teams operate.In this episode, Omar breaks down how he scaled from $2M to $20M ARR in just 12 months. He reveals the exact cold email strategy he used to land C-suite design partners, why he bought an existing legal services company to accelerate his AI platform, and why replacing human labor with AI is the ultimate business model.Why You Should ListenWhy selling AI as a service is a much bigger opportunity than selling SaaS.How to secure Fortune 500 design partners using cold emails.Why playing to win beats playing not to lose.How to build a data moat that AI wrappers can't compete with.Why ARR shouldn't be your only measure of startup success in the AI era.Keywordsstartup podcast, startup podcast for founders, AI startups, product market fit, AI enabled services, legaltech, B2B SaaS, enterprise sales, finding pmf, generative AI00:00:00 Intro00:01:45 Why AI is the Future of Labor00:04:55 Replacing In-House vs. Outsourced Legal Teams00:09:35 Selling His First AI Startup for $100M00:12:11 Why the $1 Trillion Law Firm Industry is at Risk00:21:59 Landing Fortune 500 Design Partners via Cold Email00:28:26 Playing to Win vs. Playing Not to Lose00:33:45 Raising a $6M Seed Round with an 80-Page Transcript00:38:53 Buying a Legal Services Company to Accelerate Growth00:44:55 Scaling from $2M to $20M ARR in 12 MonthsSend me a message to let me know what you think!

Turbopuffer came out of a reading app.In 2022, Simon was helping his friends at Readwise scale their infra for a highly requested feature: article recommendations and semantic search. Readwise was paying ~$5k/month for their relational database and vector search would cost ~$20k/month making the feature too expensive to ship. In 2023 after mulling over the problem from Readwise, Simon decided he wanted to “build a search engine” which became Turbopuffer.We discuss:• Simon's path: Denmark → Shopify infra for nearly a decade → “angel engineering” across startups like Readwise, Replicate, and Causal → turbopuffer almost accidentally becoming a company • The Readwise origin story: building an early recommendation engine right after the ChatGPT moment, seeing it work, then realizing it would cost ~$30k/month for a company spending ~$5k/month total on infra and getting obsessed with fixing that cost structure • Why turbopuffer is “a search engine for unstructured data”: Simon's belief that models can learn to reason, but can't compress the world's knowledge into a few terabytes of weights, so they need to connect to systems that hold truth in full fidelity • The three ingredients for building a great database company: a new workload, a new storage architecture, and the ability to eventually support every query plan customers will want on their data • The architecture bet behind turbopuffer: going all in on object storage and NVMe, avoiding a traditional consensus layer, and building around the cloud primitives that only became possible in the last few years • Why Simon hated operating Elasticsearch at Shopify: years of painful on-call experience shaped his obsession with simplicity, performance, and eliminating state spread across multiple systems • The Cursor story: launching turbopuffer as a scrappy side project, getting an email from Cursor the next day, flying out after a 4am call, and helping cut Cursor's costs by 95% while fixing their per-user economics • The Notion story: buying dark fiber, tuning TCP windows, and eating cross-cloud costs because Simon refused to compromise on architecture just to close a deal faster • Why AI changes the build-vs-buy equation: it's less about whether a company can build search infra internally, and more about whether they have time especially if an external team can feel like an extension of their own • Why RAG isn't dead: coding companies still rely heavily on search, and Simon sees hybrid retrieval semantic, text, regex, SQL-style patterns becoming more important, not less • How agentic workloads are changing search: the old pattern was one retrieval call up front; the new pattern is one agent firing many parallel queries at once, turning search into a highly concurrent tool call • Why turbopuffer is reducing query pricing: agentic systems are dramatically increasing query volume, and Simon expects retrieval infra to adapt to huge bursts of concurrent search rather than a small number of carefully chosen calls • The philosophy of “playing with open cards”: Simon's habit of being radically honest with investors, including telling Lachy Groom he'd return the money if turbopuffer didn't hit PMF by year-end • The “P99 engineer”: Simon's framework for building a talent-dense company, rejecting by default unless someone on the team feels strongly enough to fight for the candidate —Simon Hørup Eskildsen• LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/sirupsen• X: https://x.com/Sirupsen• https://sirupsen.com/aboutturbopuffer• https://turbopuffer.com/Full Video PodTimestamps00:00:00 The PMF promise to Lachy Groom00:00:25 Intro and Simon's background00:02:19 What turbopuffer actually is00:06:26 Shopify, Elasticsearch, and the pain behind the company00:10:07 The Readwise experiment that sparked turbopuffer00:12:00 The insight Simon couldn't stop thinking about00:17:00 S3 consistency, NVMe, and the architecture bet00:20:12 The Notion story: latency, dark fiber, and conviction00:25:03 Build vs. buy in the age of AI00:26:00 The Cursor story: early launch to breakout customer00:29:00 Why code search still matters00:32:00 Search in the age of agents00:34:22 Pricing turbopuffer in the AI era00:38:17 Why Simon chose Lachy Groom00:41:28 Becoming a founder on purpose00:44:00 The “P99 engineer” philosophy00:49:30 Bending software to your will00:51:13 The future of turbopuffer00:57:05 Simon's tea obsession00:59:03 Tea kits, X Live, and P99 LiveTranscriptSimon Hørup Eskildsen: I don't think I've said this publicly before, but I just called Lockey and was like, local Lockie. Like if this doesn't have PMF by the end of the year, like we'll just like return all the money to you. But it's just like, I don't really, we, Justine and I don't wanna work on this unless it's really working.So we want to give it the best shot this year and like we're really gonna go for it. We're gonna hire a bunch of people. We're just gonna be honest with everyone. Like when I don't know how to play a game, I just play with open cards. Lockey was the only person that didn't, that didn't freak out. He was like, I've never heard anyone say that before.Alessio: Hey everyone, welcome to the Leading Space podcast. This is Celesio Pando, Colonel Laz, and I'm joined by Swix, editor of Leading Space.swyx: Hello. Hello, uh, we're still, uh, recording in the Ker studio for the first time. Very excited. And today we are joined by Simon Eski. Of Turbo Farer welcome.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: Thank you so much for having me.swyx: Turbo Farer has like really gone on a huge tear, and I, I do have to mention that like you're one of, you're not my newest member of the Danish AHU Mafia, where like there's a lot of legendary programmers that have come out of it, like, uh, beyond Trotro, Rasmus, lado Berg and the V eight team and, and Google Maps team.Uh, you're mostly a Canadian now, but isn't that interesting? There's so many, so much like strong Danish presence.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: Yeah, I was writing a post, um, not that long ago about sort of the influences. So I grew up in Denmark, right? I left, I left when, when I was 18 to go to Canada to, to work at Shopify. Um, and so I, like, I've, I would still say that I feel more Danish than, than Canadian.This is also the weird accent. I can't say th because it, this is like, I don't, you know, my wife is also Canadian, um, and I think. I think like one of the things in, in Denmark is just like, there's just such a ruthless pragmatism and there's also a big focus on just aesthetics. Like, they're like very, people really care about like where, what things look like.Um, and like Canada has a lot of attributes, US has, has a lot of attributes, but I think there's been lots of the great things to carry. I don't know what's in the water in Ahu though. Um, and I don't know that I could be considered part of the Mafi mafia quite yet, uh, compared to the phenomenal individuals we just mentioned.Barra OV is also, uh, Danish Canadian. Okay. Yeah. I don't know where he lives now, but, and he's the PHP.swyx: Yeah. And obviously Toby German, but moved to Canada as well. Yes. Like this is like import that, uh, that, that is an interesting, um, talent move.Alessio: I think. I would love to get from you. Definition of Turbo puffer, because I think you could be a Vector db, which is maybe a bad word now in some circles, you could be a search engine.It's like, let, let's just start there and then we'll maybe run through the history of how you got to this point.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: For sure. Yeah. So Turbo Puffer is at this point in time, a search engine, right? We do full text search and we do vector search, and that's really what we're specialized in. If you're trying to do much more than that, like then this might not be the right place yet, but Turbo Buffer is all about search.The other way that I think about it is that we can take all of the world's knowledge, all of the exabytes and exabytes of data that there is, and we can use those tokens to train a model, but we can't compress all of that into a few terabytes of weights, right? Compress into a few terabytes of weights, how to reason with the world, how to make sense of the knowledge.But we have to somehow connect it to something externally that actually holds that like in full fidelity and truth. Um, and that's the thing that we intend to become. Right? That's like a very holier than now kind of phrasing, right? But being the search engine for unstructured, unstructured data is the focus of turbo puffer at this point in time.Alessio: And let's break down. So people might say, well, didn't Elasticsearch already do this? And then some other people might say, is this search on my data, is this like closer to rag than to like a xr, like a public search thing? Like how, how do you segment like the different types of search?Simon Hørup Eskildsen: The way that I generally think about this is like, there's a lot of database companies and I think if you wanna build a really big database company, sort of, you need a couple of ingredients to be in the air.We don't, which only happens roughly every 15 years. You need a new workload. You basically need the ambition that every single company on earth is gonna have data in your database. Multiple times you look at a company like Oracle, right? You will, like, I don't think you can find a company on earth with a digital presence that it not, doesn't somehow have some data in an Oracle database.Right? And I think at this point, that's also true for Snowflake and Databricks, right? 15 years later it's, or even more than that, there's not a company on earth that doesn't, in. Or directly is consuming Snowflake or, or Databricks or any of the big analytics databases. Um, and I think we're in that kind of moment now, right?I don't think you're gonna find a company over the next few years that doesn't directly or indirectly, um, have all their data available for, for search and connect it to ai. So you need that new workload, like you need something to be happening where there's a new workload that causes that to happen, and that new workload is connecting very large amounts of data to ai.The second thing you need. The second condition to build a big database company is that you need some new underlying change in the storage architecture that is not possible from the databases that have come before you. If you look at Snowflake and Databricks, right, commoditized, like massive fleet of HDDs, like that was not possible in it.It just wasn't in the air in the nineties, right? So you just didn't, we just didn't build these systems. S3 and and and so on was not around. And I think the architecture that is now possible that wasn't possible 15 years ago is to go all in on NVME SSDs. It requires a particular type of architecture for the database that.It's difficult to retrofit onto the databases that are already there, including the ones you just mentioned. The second thing is to go all in on OIC storage, more so than we could have done 15 years ago. Like we don't have a consensus layer, we don't really have anything. In fact, you could turn off all the servers that Turbo Buffer has, and we would not lose any data because we have all completely all in on OIC storage.And this means that our architecture is just so simple. So that's the second condition, right? First being a new workload. That means that every company on earth, either indirectly or directly, is using your database. Second being, there's some new storage architecture. That means that the, the companies that have come before you can do what you're doing.I think the third thing you need to do to build a big database company is that over time you have to implement more or less every Cory plan on the data. What that means is that you. You can't just get stuck in, like, this is the one thing that a database does. It has to be ever evolving because when someone has data in the database, they over time expect to be able to ask it more or less every question.So you have to do that to get the storage architecture to the limit of what, what it's capable of. Those are the three conditions.swyx: I just wanted to get a little bit of like the motivation, right? Like, so you left Shopify, you're like principal, engineer, infra guy. Um, you also head of kernel labs, uh, inside of Shopify, right?And then you consulted for read wise and that it kind of gave you that, that idea. I just wanted you to tell that story. Um, maybe I, you've told it before, but, uh, just introduce the, the. People to like the, the new workload, the sort of aha moment for turbo PufferSimon Hørup Eskildsen: For sure. So yeah, I spent almost a decade at Shopify.I was on the infrastructure team, um, from the fairly, fairly early days around 2013. Um, at the time it felt like it was growing so quickly and everything, all the metrics were, you know, doubling year on year compared to the, what companies are contending with today. It's very cute in growth. I feel like lot some companies are seeing that month over month.Um, of course. Shopify compound has been compounding for a very long time now, but I spent a decade doing that and the majority of that was just make sure the site is up today and make sure it's up a year from now. And a lot of that was really just the, um, you know, uh, the Kardashians would drive very, very large amounts of, of data to, to uh, to Shopify as they were rotating through all the merch and building out their businesses.And we just needed to make sure we could handle that. Right. And sometimes these were events, a million requests per second. And so, you know, we, we had our own data centers back in the day and we were moving to the cloud and there was so much sharding work and all of that that we were doing. So I spent a decade just scaling databases ‘cause that's fundamentally what's the most difficult thing to scale about these sites.The database that was the most difficult for me to scale during that time, and that was the most aggravating to be on call for, was elastic search. It was very, very difficult to deal with. And I saw a lot of projects that were just being held back in their ambition by using it.swyx: And I mean, self-hosted.Self-hosted. ‘causeSimon Hørup Eskildsen: it's, yeah, and it commercial, this is like 2015, right? So it's like a very particular vintage. Right. It's probably better at a lot of these things now. Um, it was difficult to contend with and I'm just like, I just think about it. It's an inverted index. It should be good at these kinds of queries and do all of this.And it was, we, we often couldn't get it to do exactly what we needed to do or basically get lucine to do, like expose lucine raw to, to, to what we needed to do. Um, so that was like. Just something that we did on the side and just panic scaled when we needed to, but not a particular focus of mine. So I left, and when I left, I, um, wasn't sure exactly what I wanted to do.I mean, it spent like a decade inside of the same company. I'd like grown up there. I started working there when I was 18.swyx: You only do Rails?Simon Hørup Eskildsen: Yeah. I mean, yeah. Rails. And he's a Rails guy. Uh, love Rails. So good. Um,Alessio: we all wish we could still work in Rails.swyx: I know know. I know, but some, I tried learning Ruby.It's just too much, like too many options to do the same thing. It's, that's my, I I know there's a, there's a way to do it.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: I love it. I don't know that I would use it now, like given cloud code and, and, and cursor and everything, but, um, um, but still it, like if I'm just sitting down and writing a teal code, that's how I think.But anyway, I left and I wasn't, I talked to a couple companies and I was like, I don't. I need to see a little bit more of the world here to know what I'm gonna like focus on next. Um, and so what I decided is like I was gonna, I called it like angel engineering, where I just hopped around in my friend's companies in three months increments and just helped them out with something.Right. And, and just vested a bit of equity and solved some interesting infrastructure problem. So I worked with a bunch of companies at the time, um, read Wise was one of them. Replicate was one of them. Um, causal, I dunno if you've tried this, it's like a, it's a spreadsheet engine Yeah. Where you can do distribution.They sold recently. Yeah. Um, we've been, we used that in fp and a at, um, at Turbo Puffer. Um, so a bunch of companies like this and it was super fun. And so we're the Chachi bt moment happened, I was with. With read Wise for a stint, we were preparing for the reader launch, right? Which is where you, you cue articles and read them later.And I was just getting their Postgres up to snuff, like, which basically boils down to tuning, auto vacuum. So I was doing that and then this happened and we were like, oh, maybe we should build a little recommendation engine and some features to try to hook in the lms. They were not that good yet, but it was clear there was something there.And so I built a small recommendation engine just, okay, let's take the articles that you've recently read, right? Like embed all the articles and then do recommendations. It was good enough that when I ran it on one of the co-founders of Rey's, like I found out that I got articles about, about having a child.I'm like, oh my God, I didn't, I, I didn't know that, that they were having a child. I wasn't sure what to do with that information, but the recommendation engine was good enough that it was suggesting articles, um, about that. And so there was, there was recommendations and uh, it actually worked really well.But this was a company that was spending maybe five grand a month in total on all their infrastructure and. When I did the napkin math on running the embeddings of all the articles, putting them into a vector index, putting it in prod, it's gonna be like 30 grand a month. That just wasn't tenable. Right?Like Read Wise is a proudly bootstrapped company and it's paying 30 grand for infrastructure for one feature versus five. It just wasn't tenable. So sort of in the bucket of this is useful, it's pretty good, but let us, let's return to it when the costs come down.swyx: Did you say it grows by feature? So for five to 30 is by the number of, like, what's the, what's the Scaling factor scale?It scales by the number of articles that you embed.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: It does, but what I meant by that is like five grand for like all of the other, like the Heroku, dinos, Postgres, like all the other, and this then storage is 30. Yeah. And then like 30 grand for one feature. Right. Which is like, what other articles are related to this one.Um, so it was just too much right to, to power everything. Their budget would've been maybe a few thousand dollars, which still would've been a lot. And so we put it in a bucket of, okay, we're gonna do that later. We'll wait, we will wait for the cost to come down. And that haunted me. I couldn't stop thinking about it.I was like, okay, there's clearly some latent demand here. If the cost had been a 10th, we would've shipped it and. This was really the only data point that I had. Right. I didn't, I, I didn't, I didn't go out and talk to anyone else. It was just so I started reading Right. I couldn't, I couldn't help myself.Like I didn't know what like a vector index is. I, I generally barely do about how to generate the vectors. There was a lot of hype about, this is a early 2023. There was a lot of hype about vector databases. There were raising a lot of money and it's like, I really didn't know anything about it. It's like, you know, trying these little models, fine tuning them.Like I was just trying to get sort of a lay of the land. So I just sat down. I have this. A GitHub repository called Napkin Math. And on napkin math, there's just, um, rows of like, oh, this is how much bandwidth. Like this is how many, you know, you can do 25 gigabytes per second on average to dram. You can do, you know, five gigabytes per second of rights to an SSD, blah blah.All of these numbers, right? And S3, how many you could do per, how much bandwidth can you drive per connection? I was just sitting down, I was like, why hasn't anyone build a database where you just put everything on O storage and then you puff it into NVME when you use the data and you puff it into dram if you're, if you're querying it alive, it's just like, this seems fairly obvious and you, the only real downside to that is that if you go all in on o storage, every right will take a couple hundred milliseconds of latency, but from there it's really all upside, right?You do the first go, it takes half a second. And it sort of occurred to me as like, well. The architecture is really good for that. It's really good for AB storage, it's really good for nvm ESSD. It's, well, you just couldn't have done that 10 years ago. Back to what we were talking about before. You really have to build a database where you have as few round trips as possible, right?This is how CPUs work today. It's how NVM E SSDs work. It's how as, um, as three works that you want to have a very large amount of outstanding requests, right? Like basically go to S3, do like that thousand requests to ask for data in one round trip. Wait for that. Get that, like, make a new decision. Do it again, and try to do that maybe a maximum of three times.But no databases were designed that way within NVME as is ds. You can drive like within, you know, within a very low multiple of DRAM bandwidth if you use it that way. And same with S3, right? You can fully max out the network card, which generally is not maxed out. You get very, like, very, very good bandwidth.And, but no one had built a database like that. So I was like, okay, well can't you just, you know, take all the vectors right? And plot them in the proverbial coordinate system. Get the clusters, put a file on S3 called clusters, do json, and then put another file for every cluster, you know, cluster one, do js O cluster two, do js ON you know that like it's two round trips, right?So you get the clusters, you find the closest clusters, and then you download the cluster files like the, the closest end. And you could do this in two round trips.swyx: You were nearest neighbors locally.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: Yes. Yes. And then, and you would build this, this file, right? It's just like ultra simplistic, but it's not a far shot from what the first version of Turbo Buffer was.Why hasn't anyone done thatAlessio: in that moment? From a workload perspective, you're thinking this is gonna be like a read heavy thing because they're doing recommend. Like is the fact that like writes are so expensive now? Oh, with ai you're actually not writing that much.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: At that point I hadn't really thought too much about, well no actually it was always clear to me that there was gonna be a lot of rights because at Shopify, the search clusters were doing, you know, I don't know, tens or hundreds of crew QPS, right?‘cause you just have to have a human sit and type in. But we did, you know, I don't know how many updates there were per second. I'm sure it was in the millions, right into the cluster. So I always knew there was like a 10 to 100 ratio on the read write. In the read wise use case. It's, um, even, even in the read wise use case, there'd probably be a lot fewer reads than writes, right?There's just a lot of churn on the amount of stuff that was going through versus the amount of queries. Um, I wasn't thinking too much about that. I was mostly just thinking about what's the fundamentally cheapest way to build a database in the cloud today using the primitives that you have available.And this is it, right? You just, now you have one machine and you know, let's say you have a terabyte of data in S3, you paid the $200 a month for that, and then maybe five to 10% of that data and needs to be an NV ME SSDs and less than that in dram. Well. You're paying very, very little to inflate the data.swyx: By the way, when you say no one else has done that, uh, would you consider Neon, uh, to be on a similar path in terms of being sort of S3 first and, uh, separating the compute and storage?Simon Hørup Eskildsen: Yeah, I think what I meant with that is, uh, just build a completely new database. I don't know if we were the first, like it was very much, it was, I mean, I, I hadn't, I just looked at the napkin math and was like, this seems really obvious.So I'm sure like a hundred people came up with it at the same time. Like the light bulb and every invention ever. Right. It was just in the air. I think Neon Neon was, was first to it. And they're trying, they're retrofitted onto Postgres, right? And then they built this whole architecture where you have, you have it in memory and then you sort of.You know, m map back to S3. And I think that was very novel at the time to do it for, for all LTP, but I hadn't seen a database that was truly all in, right. Not retrofitting it. The database felt built purely for this no consensus layer. Even using compare and swap on optic storage to do consensus. I hadn't seen anyone go that all in.And I, I mean, there, there, I'm sure there was someone that did that before us. I don't know. I was just looking at the napkin mathswyx: and, and when you say consensus layer, uh, are you strongly relying on S3 Strong consistency? You are. Okay.SoSimon Hørup Eskildsen: that is your consensus layer. It, it is the consistency layer. And I think also, like, this is something that most people don't realize, but S3 only became consistent in December of 2020.swyx: I remember this coming out during COVID and like people were like, oh, like, it was like, uh, it was just like a free upgrade.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: Yeah.swyx: They were just, they just announced it. We saw consistency guys and like, okay, cool.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: And I'm sure that they just, they probably had it in prod for a while and they're just like, it's done right.And people were like, okay, cool. But. That's a big moment, right? Like nv, ME SSDs, were also not in the cloud until around 2017, right? So you just sort of had like 2017 nv, ME SSDs, and people were like, okay, cool. There's like one skew that does this, whatever, right? Takes a few years. And then the second thing is like S3 becomes consistent in 2020.So now it means you don't have to have this like big foundation DB or like zookeeper or whatever sitting there contending with the keys, which is how. You know, that's what Snowflake and others have do so muchswyx: for goneSimon Hørup Eskildsen: Exactly. Just gone. Right? And so just push to the, you know, whatever, how many hundreds of people they have working on S3 solved and then compare and swap was not in S3 at this point in time,swyx: by the way.Uh, I don't know what that is, so maybe you wanna explain. Yes. Yeah.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: Yes. So, um, what Compare and swap is, is basically, you can imagine that if you have a database, it might be really nice to have a file called metadata json. And metadata JSON could say things like, Hey, these keys are here and this file means that, and there's lots of metadata that you have to operate in the database, right?But that's the simplest way to do it. So now you have might, you might have a lot of servers that wanna change the metadata. They might have written a file and want the metadata to contain that file. But you have a hundred nodes that are trying to contend with this metadata that JSON well, what compare and Swap allows you to do is basically just you download the file, you make the modifications, and then you write it only if it hasn't changed.While you did the modification and if not you retry. Right? Should just have this retry loops. Now you can imagine if you have a hundred nodes doing that, it's gonna be really slow, but it will converge over time. That primitive was not available in S3. It wasn't available in S3 until late 2024, but it was available in GCP.The real story of this is certainly not that I sat down and like bake brained it. I was like, okay, we're gonna start on GCS S3 is gonna get it later. Like it was really not that we started, we got really lucky, like we started on GCP and we started on GCP because tur um, Shopify ran on GCP. And so that was the platform I was most available with.Right. Um, and I knew the Canadian team there ‘cause I'd worked with them at Shopify and so it was natural for us to start there. And so when we started building the database, we're like, oh yeah, we have to build a, we really thought we had to build a consensus layer, like have a zookeeper or something to do this.But then we discovered the compare and swap. It's like, oh, we can kick the can. Like we'll just do metadata r json and just, it's fine. It's probably fine. Um, and we just kept kicking the can until we had very, very strong conviction in the idea. Um, and then we kind of just hinged the company on the fact that S3 probably was gonna get this, it started getting really painful in like mid 2024.‘cause we were closing deals with, um, um, notion actually that was running in AWS and we're like, trust us. You, you really want us to run this in GCP? And they're like, no, I don't know about that. Like, we're running everything in AWS and the latency across the cloud were so big and we had so much conviction that we bought like, you know, dark fiber between the AWS regions in, in Oregon, like in the InterExchange and GCP is like, we've never seen a startup like do like, what's going on here?And we're just like, no, we don't wanna do this. We were tuning like TCP windows, like everything to get the latency down ‘cause we had so high conviction in not doing like a, a metadata layer on S3. So those were the three conditions, right? Compare and swap. To do metadata, which wasn't in S3 until late 2024 S3 being consistent, which didn't happen until December, 2020.Uh, 2020. And then NVMe ssd, which didn't end in the cloud until 2017.swyx: I mean, in some ways, like a very big like cloud success story that like you were able to like, uh, put this all together, but also doing things like doing, uh, bind our favor. That that actually is something I've never heard.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: I mean, it's very common when you're a big company, right?You're like connecting your own like data center or whatever. But it's like, it was uniquely just a pain with notion because the, um, the org, like most of the, like if you're buying in Ashburn, Virginia, right? Like US East, the Google, like the GCP and, and AWS data centers are like within a millisecond on, on each other, on the public exchanges.But in Oregon uniquely, the GCP data center sits like a couple hundred kilometers, like east of Portland and the AWS region sits in Portland, but the network exchange they go through is through Seattle. So it's like a full, like 14 milliseconds or something like that. And so anyway, yeah. It's, it's, so we were like, okay, we can't, we have to go through an exchange in Portland.Yeah. Andswyx: you'd rather do this than like run your zookeeper and likeSimon Hørup Eskildsen: Yes. Way rather. It doesn't have state, I don't want state and two systems. Um, and I think all that is just informed by Justine, my co-founder and I had just been on call for so long. And the worst outages are the ones where you have state in multiple places that's not syncing up.So it really came from, from a a, like just a, a very pure source of pain, of just imagining what we would be Okay. Being woken up at 3:00 AM about and having something in zookeeper was not one of them.swyx: You, you're talking to like a notion or something. Do they care or do they just, theySimon Hørup Eskildsen: just, they care about latency.swyx: They latency cost. That's it.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: They just cared about latency. Right. And we just absorbed the cost. We're just like, we have high conviction in this. At some point we can move them to AWS. Right. And so we just, we, we'll buy the fiber, it doesn't matter. Right. Um, and it's like $5,000. Usually when you buy fiber, you buy like multiple lines.And we're like, we can only afford one, but we will just test it that when it goes over the public internet, it's like super smooth. And so we did a lot of, anyway, it's, yeah, it was, that's cool.Alessio: You can imagine talking to the GCP rep and it's like, no, we're gonna buy, because we know we're gonna turn, we're gonna turn from you guys and go to AWS in like six months.But in the meantime we'll do this. It'sSimon Hørup Eskildsen: a, I mean, like they, you know, this workload still runs on GCP for what it's worth. Right? ‘cause it's so, it was just, it was so reliable. So it was never about moving off GCP, it was just about honesty. It was just about giving notion the latency that they deserved.Right. Um, and we didn't want ‘em to have to care about any of this. We also, they were like, oh, egress is gonna be bad. It was like, okay, screw it. Like we're just gonna like vvc, VPC peer with you and AWS we'll eat the cost. Yeah. Whatever needs to be done.Alessio: And what were the actual workloads? Because I think when you think about ai, it's like 14 milliseconds.It's like really doesn't really matter in the scheme of like a model generation.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: Yeah. We were told the latency, right. That we had to beat. Oh, right. So, so we're just looking at the traces. Right. And then sort of like hand draw, like, you know, kind of like looking at the trace and then thinking what are the other extensions of the trace?Right. And there's a lot more to it because it's also when you have, if you have 14 versus seven milliseconds, right. You can fit in another round trip. So we had to tune TCP to try to send as much data in every round trip, prewarm all the connections. And there was, there's a lot of things that compound from having these kinds of round trips, but in the grand scheme it was just like, well, we have to beat the latency of whatever we're up against.swyx: Which is like they, I mean, notion is a database company. They could have done this themselves. They, they do lots of database engineering themselves. How do you even get in the door? Like Yeah, just like talk through that kind of.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: Last time I was in San Francisco, I was talking to one of the engineers actually, who, who was one of our champions, um, at, AT Notion.And they were, they were just trying to make sure that the, you know, per user cost matched the economics that they needed. You know, Uhhuh like, it's like the way I think about, it's like I have to earn a return on whatever the clouds charge me and then my customers have to earn a return on that. And it's like very simple, right?And so there has to be gross margin all the way up and that's how you build the product. And so then our customers have to make the right set of trade off the turbo Puffer makes, and if they're happy with that, that's great.swyx: Do you feel like you're competing with build internally versus buy or buy versus buy?Simon Hørup Eskildsen: Yeah, so, sorry, this was all to build up to your question. So one of the notion engineers told me that they'd sat and probably on a napkin, like drawn out like, why hasn't anyone built this? And then they saw terrible. It was like, well, it literally that. So, and I think AI has also changed the buy versus build equation in terms of, it's not really about can we build it, it's about do we have time to build it?I think they like, I think they felt like, okay, if this is a team that can do that and they, they feel enough like an extension of our team, well then we can go a lot faster, which would be very, very good for them. And I mean, they put us through the, through the test, right? Like we had some very, very long nights to to, to do that POC.And they were really our biggest, our second big customer off the cursor, which also was a lot of late nights. Right.swyx: Yeah. That, I mean, should we go into that story? The, the, the sort of Chris's story, like a lot, um, they credit you a lot for. Working very closely with them. So I just wanna hear, I've heard this, uh, story from Sole's point of view, but like, I'm curious what, what it looks like from your side.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: I actually haven't heard it from Sole's point of view, so maybe you can now cross reference it. The way that I remember it was that, um, the day after we launched, which was just, you know, I'd worked the whole summer on, on the first version. Justine wasn't part of it yet. ‘cause I just, I didn't tell anyone that summer that I was working on this.I was just locked in on building it because it's very easy otherwise to confuse talking about something to actually doing it. And so I was just like, I'm not gonna do that. I'm just gonna do the thing. I launched it and at this point turbo puffer is like a rust binary running on a single eight core machine in a T Marks instance.And me deploying it was like looking at the request log and then like command seeing it or like control seeing it to just like, okay, there's no request. Let's upgrade the binary. Like it was like literally the, the, the, the scrappiest thing. You could imagine it was on purpose because just like at Shopify, we did that all the time.Like, we like move, like we ran things in tux all the time to begin with. Before something had like, at least the inkling of PMF, it was like, okay, is anyone gonna hear about this? Um, and one of the cursor co-founders Arvid reached out and he just, you know, the, the cursor team are like all I-O-I-I-M-O like, um, contenders, right?So they just speak in bullet points and, and facts. It was like this amazing email exchange just of, this is how many QPS we have, this is what we're paying, this is where we're going, blah, blah, blah. And so we're just conversing in bullet points. And I tried to get a call with them a few times, but they were, so, they were like really writing the PMF bowl here, just like late 2023.And one time Swally emails me at like five. What was it like 4:00 AM Pacific time saying like, Hey, are you open for a call now? And I'm on the East coast and I, it was like 7:00 AM I was like, yeah, great, sure, whatever. Um, and we just started talking and something. Then I didn't know anything about sales.It was something that just comp compelled me. I have to go see this team. Like, there's something here. So I, I went to San Francisco and I went to their office and the way that I remember it is that Postgres was down when I showed up at the office. Did SW tell you this? No. Okay. So Postgres was down and so it's like they were distracting with that.And I was trying my best to see if I could, if I could help in any way. Like I knew a little bit about databases back to tuning, auto vacuum. It was like, I think you have to tune out a vacuum. Um, and so we, we talked about that and then, um, that evening just talked about like what would it look like, what would it look like to work with us?And I just said. Look like we're all in, like we will just do what we'll do whatever, whatever you tell us, right? They migrated everything over the next like week or two, and we reduced their cost by 95%, which I think like kind of fixed their per user economics. Um, and it solved a lot of other things. And we were just, Justine, this is also when I asked Justine to come on as my co-founder, she was the best engineer, um, that I ever worked with at Shopify.She lived two blocks away and we were just, okay, we're just gonna get this done. Um, and we did, and so we helped them migrate and we just worked like hell over the next like month or two to make sure that we were never an issue. And that was, that was the cursor story. Yeah.swyx: And, and is code a different workload than normal text?I, I don't know. Is is it just text? Is it the same thing?Simon Hørup Eskildsen: Yeah, so cursor's workload is basically, they, um, they will embed the entire code base, right? So they, they will like chunk it up in whatever they would, they do. They have their own embedding model, um, which they've been public about. Um, and they find that on, on, on their evals.It. There's one of their evals where it's like a 25% improvement on a very particular workload. They have a bunch of blog posts about it. Um, I think it works best on larger code basis, but they've trained their own embedding model to do this. Um, and so you'll see it if you use the cursor agent, it will do searches.And they've also been public around, um, how they've, I think they post trained their model to be very good at semantic search as well. Um, and that's, that's how they use it. And so it's very good at, like, can you find me on the code that's similar to this, or code that does this? And just in, in this queries, they also use GR to supplement it.swyx: Yeah.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: Um, of courseswyx: it's been a big topic of discussion like, is rag dead because gr you know,Simon Hørup Eskildsen: and I mean like, I just, we, we see lots of demand from the coding company to ethicsswyx: search in every part. Yes.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: Uh, we, we, we see demand. And so, I mean, I'm. I like case studies. I don't like, like just doing like thought pieces on this is where it's going.And like trying to be all macroeconomic about ai, that's has turned out to be a giant waste of time because no one can really predict any of this. So I just collect case studies and I mean, cursor has done a great job talking about what they're doing and I hope some of the other coding labs that use Turbo Puffer will do the same.Um, but it does seem to make a difference for particular queries. Um, I mean we can also do text, we can also do RegX, but I should also say that cursors like security posture into Tur Puffer is exceptional, right? They have their own embedding model, which makes it very difficult to reverse engineer. They obfuscate the file paths.They like you. It's very difficult to learn anything about a code base by looking at it. And the other thing they do too is that for their customers, they encrypt it with their encryption keys in turbo puffer's bucket. Um, so it's, it's, it's really, really well designed.swyx: And so this is like extra stuff they did to work with you because you are not part of Cursor.Exactly like, and this is just best practice when working in any database, not just you guys. Okay. Yeah, that makes sense. Yeah. I think for me, like the, the, the learning is kind of like you, like all workloads are hybrid. Like, you know, uh, like you, you want the semantic, you want the text, you want the RegX, you want sql.I dunno. Um, but like, it's silly to like be all in on like one particularly query pattern.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: I think, like I really like the way that, um, um, that swally at cursor talks about it, which is, um, I'm gonna butcher it here. Um, and you know, I'm a, I'm a database scalability person. I'm not a, I, I dunno anything about training models other than, um, what the internet tells me and what.The way he describes is that this is just like cash compute, right? It's like you have a point in time where you're looking at some particular context and focused on some chunk and you say, this is the layer of the neural net at this point in time. That seems fundamentally really useful to do cash compute like that.And, um, how the value of that will change over time. I'm, I'm not sure, but there seems to be a lot of value in that.Alessio: Maybe talk a bit about the evolution of the workload, because even like search, like maybe two years ago it was like one search at the start of like an LLM query to build the context. Now you have a gentech search, however you wanna call it, where like the model is both writing and changing the code and it's searching it again later.Yeah. What are maybe some of the new types of workloads or like changes you've had to make to your architecture for it?Simon Hørup Eskildsen: I think you're right. When I think of rag, I think of, Hey, there's an 8,000 token, uh, context window and you better make it count. Um, and search was a way to do that now. Everything is moving towards the, just let the agent do its thing.Right? And so back to the thing before, right? The LLM is very good at reasoning with the data, and so we're just the tool call, right? And that's increasingly what we see our customers doing. Um, what we're seeing more demand from, from our customers now is to do a lot of concurrency, right? Like Notion does a ridiculous amount of queries in every round trip just because they can't.And I'm also now, when I use the cursor agent, I also see them doing more concurrency than I've ever seen before. So a bit similar to how we designed a database to drive as much concurrency in every round trip as possible. That's also what the agents are doing. So that's new. It means just an enormous amount of queries all at once to the dataset while it's warm in as few turns as possible.swyx: Can I clarify one thing on that?Simon Hørup Eskildsen: Yes.swyx: Is it, are they batching multiple users or one user is driving multiple,Simon Hørup Eskildsen: one user driving multiple, one agent driving.swyx: It's parallel searching a bunch of things.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: Exactly.swyx: Yeah. Yeah, exactly. So yeah, the clinician also did, did this for the fast context thing, like eight parallel at once.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: Yes.swyx: And, and like an interesting problem is, well, how do you make sure you have enough diversity so you're not making the the same request eight times?Simon Hørup Eskildsen: And I think like that's probably also where the hybrid comes in, where. That's another way to diversify. It's a completely different way to, to do the search.That's a big change, right? So before it was really just like one call and then, you know, the LLM took however many seconds to return, but now we just see an enormous amount of queries. So the, um, we just see more queries. So we've like tried to reduce query, we've reduced query pricing. Um, this is probably the first time actually I'm saying that, but the query pricing is being reduced, like five x.Um, and we'll probably try to reduce it even more to accommodate some of these workloads of just doing very large amounts of queries. Um, that's one thing that's changed. I think the right, the right ratio is still very high, right? Like there's still a, an enormous amount of rights per read, but we're starting probably to see that change if people really lean into this pattern.Alessio: Can we talk a little bit about the pricing? I'm curious, uh, because traditionally a database would charge on storage, but now you have the token generation that is so expensive, where like the actual. Value of like a good search query is like much higher because they're like saving inference time down the line.How do you structure that as like, what are people receptive to on the other side too?Simon Hørup Eskildsen: Yeah. I, the, the turbo puffer pricing in the beginning was just very simple. The pricing on these on for search engines before Turbo Puffer was very server full, right? It was like, here's the vm, here's the per hour cost, right?Great. And I just sat down with like a piece of paper and said like, if Turbo Puffer was like really good, this is probably what it would cost with a little bit of margin. And that was the first pricing of Turbo Puffer. And I just like sat down and I was like, okay, like this is like probably the storage amp, but whenever on a piece of paper I, it was vibe pricing.It was very vibe price, and I got it wrong. Oh. Um, well I didn't get it wrong, but like Turbo Puffer wasn't at the first principle pricing, right? So when Cursor came on Turbo Puffer, it was like. Like, I didn't know any VCs. I didn't know, like I was just like, I don't know, I didn't know anything about raising money or anything like that.I just saw that my GCP bill was, was high, was a lot higher than the cursor bill. So Justine and I was just like, well, we have to optimize it. Um, and I mean, to the chagrin now of, of it, of, of the VCs, it now means that we're profitable because we've had so much pricing pressure in the beginning. Because it was running on my credit card and Justine and I had spent like, like tens of thousands of dollars on like compute bills and like spinning off the company and like very like, like bad Canadian lawyers and like things like to like get all of this done because we just like, we didn't know.Right. If you're like steeped in San Francisco, you're just like, you just know. Okay. Like you go out, raise a pre-seed round. I, I never heard a word pre-seed at this point in time.swyx: When you had Cursor, you had Notion you, you had no funding.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: Um, with Cursor we had no funding. Yeah. Um, by the time we had Notion Locke was, Locke was here.Yeah. So it was really just, we vibe priced it 100% from first Principles, but it wasn't, it, it was not performing at first principles, so we just did everything we could to optimize it in the beginning for that, so that at least we could have like a 5% margin or something. So I wasn't freaking out because Cursor's bill was also going like this as they were growing.And so my liability and my credit limit was like actively like calling my bank. It was like, I need a bigger credit. Like it was, yeah. Anyway, that was the beginning. Yeah. But the pricing was, yeah, like storage rights and query. Right. And the, the pricing we have today is basically just that pricing with duct tape and spit to try to approach like, you know, like a, as a margin on the physical underlying hardware.And we're doing this year, you're gonna see more and more pricing changes from us. Yeah.swyx: And like is how much does stuff like VVC peering matter because you're working in AWS land where egress is charged and all that, you know.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: We probably don't like, we have like an enterprise plan that just has like a base fee because we haven't had time to figure out SKU pricing for all of this.Um, but I mean, yeah, you can run turbo puffer either in SaaS, right? That's what Cursor does. You can run it in a single tenant cluster. So it's just you. That's what Notion does. And then you can run it in, in, in BYOC where everything is inside the customer's VPC, that's what an for example, philanthropic does.swyx: What I'm hearing is that this is probably the best CRO job for somebody who can come in and,Simon Hørup Eskildsen: I mean,swyx: help you with this.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: Um, like Turbo Puffer hired, like, I don't know what, what number this was, but we had a full-time CFO as like the 12th hire or something at Turbo Puffer, um, I think I hear are a lot of comp.I don't know how they do it. Like they have a hundred employees and not a CFO. It's like having a CFO is like a runningswyx: business man. Like, you know,Simon Hørup Eskildsen: it's so good. Yeah, like money Mike, like he just, you know, just handles the money and a lot of the business stuff and so he came in and just hopped with a lot of the operational side of the business.So like C-O-O-C-F-O, like somewhere in between.swyx: Just as quick mention of Lucky, just ‘cause I'm curious, I've met Lock and like, he's obviously a very good investor and now on physical intelligence, um, I call it generalist super angel, right? He invests in everything. Um, and I always wonder like, you know, is there something appealing about focusing on developer tooling, focusing on databases, going like, I've invested for 10 years in databases versus being like a lock where he can maybe like connect you to all the customers that you need.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: This is an excellent question. No, no one's asked me this. Um, why lockey? Because. There was a couple of people that we were talking to at the time and when we were raising, we were almost a little, we were like a bit distressed because one of our, one of our peers had just launched something that was very similar to Turbo Puffer.And someone just gave me the advice at the time of just choose the person where you just feel like you can just pick up the phone and not prepare anything. And just be completely honest, and I don't think I've said this publicly before, but I just called Lockey and was like local Lockie. Like if this doesn't have PMF by the end of the year, like we'll just like return all the money to you.But it's just like, I don't really, we, Justine and I don't wanna work on this unless it's really working. So we want to give it the best shot this year and like we're really gonna go for it. We're gonna hire a bunch of people and we're just gonna be honest with everyone. Like when I don't know how to play a game, I just play with open cards and.Lockey was the only person that didn't, that didn't freak out. He was like, I've never heard anyone say that before. As I said, I didn't even know what a seed or pre-seed round was like before, probably even at this time. So I was just like very honest with him. And I asked him like, Lockie, have you ever have, have you ever invested in database company?He was just like, no. And at the time I was like, am I dumb? Like, but I think there was something that just like really drew me to Lockie. He is so authentic, so honest, like, and there was something just like, I just felt like I could just play like, just say everything openly. And that was, that was, I think that that was like a perfect match at the time, and, and, and honestly still is.He was just like, okay, that's great. This is like the most honest, ridiculous thing I've ever heard anyone say to me. But like that, like that, whyswyx: is this ridiculous? Say competitor launch, this may not work out. It wasSimon Hørup Eskildsen: more just like. If this doesn't work out, I'm gonna close up shop by the end of the mo the year, right?Like it was, I don't know, maybe it's common. I, I don't know. He told me it was uncommon. I don't know. Um, that's why we chose him and he'd been phenomenal. The other people were talking at the, at the time were database experts. Like they, you know, knew a lot about databases and Locke didn't, this turned out to be a phenomenal asset.Right. I like Justine and I know a lot about databases. The people that we hire know a lot about databases. What we needed was just someone who didn't know a lot about databases, didn't pretend to know a lot about databases, and just wanted to help us with candidates and customers. And he did. Yeah. And I have a list, right, of the investors that I have a relationship with, and Lockey has just performed excellent in the number of sub bullets of what we can attribute back to him.Just absolutely incredible. And when people talk about like no ego and just the best thing for the founder, I like, I don't think that anyone, like even my lawyer is like, yeah, Lockey is like the most friendly person you will find.swyx: Okay. This is my most glow recommendation I've ever heard.Alessio: He deserves it.He's very special.swyx: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Amazing.Alessio: Since you mentioned candidates, maybe we can talk about team building, you know, like, especially in sf, it feels like it's just easier to start a company than to join a company. Uh, I'm curious your experience, especially not being n SF full-time and doing something that is maybe, you know, a very low level of detail and technical detail.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: Yeah. So joining versus starting, I never thought that I would be a founder. I would start with it, like Turbo Puffer started as a blog post, and then it became a project and then sort of almost accidentally became a company. And now it feels like it's, it's like becoming a bigger company. That was never the intention.The intentions were very pure. It's just like, why hasn't anyone done this? And it's like, I wanna be the, like, I wanna be the first person to do it. I think some founders have this, like, I could never work for anyone else. I, I really don't feel that way. Like, it's just like, I wanna see this happen. And I wanna see it happen with some people that I really enjoy working with and I wanna have fun doing it and this, this, this has all felt very natural on that, on that sense.So it was never a like join versus versus versus found. It was just dis found me at the right moment.Alessio: Well I think there's an argument for, you should have joined Cursor, right? So I'm curious like how you evaluate it. Okay, I should actually go raise money and make this a company versus like, this is like a company that is like growing like crazy.It's like an interesting technical problem. I should just build it within Cursor and then they don't have to encrypt all this stuff. They don't have to obfuscate things. Like was that on your mind at all orSimon Hørup Eskildsen: before taking the, the small check from Lockie, I did have like a hard like look at myself in the mirror of like, okay, do I really want to do this?And because if I take the money, I really have to do it right. And so the way I almost think about it's like you kind of need to ha like you kind of need to be like fucked up enough to want to go all the way. And that was the conversation where I was like, okay, this is gonna be part of my life's journey to build this company and do it in the best way that I possibly can't.Because if I ask people to join me, ask people to get on the cap table, then I have an ultimate responsibility to give it everything. And I don't, I think some people, it doesn't occur to me that everyone takes it that seriously. And maybe I take it too seriously, I don't know. But that was like a very intentional moment.And so then it was very clear like, okay, I'm gonna do this and I'm gonna give it everything.Alessio: A lot of people don't take it this seriously. But,swyx: uh, let's talk about, you have this concept of the P 99 engineer. Uh, people are 10 x saying, everyone's saying, you know, uh, maybe engineers are out of a job. I don't know.But you definitely see a P 99 engineer, and I just want you to talk about it.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: Yeah, so the P 99 engineer was just a term that we started using internally to talk about candidates and talk about how we wanted to build the company. And you know, like everyone else is, like we want a talent dense company.And I think that's almost become trite at this point. What I credit the cursor founders a lot with is that they just arrived there from first principles of like, we just need a talent dense, um, talent dense team. And I think I've seen some teams that weren't talent dense and like seemed a counterfactual run, which if you've run in been in a large company, you will just see that like it's just logically will happen at a large company.Um, and so that was super important to me and Justine and it's very difficult to maintain. And so we just needed, we needed wording for it. And so I have a document called Traits of the P 99 Engineer, and it's a bullet point list. And I look at that list after every single interview that I do, and in every single recap that we do and every recap we end with.End with, um, some version of I'm gonna reject this candidate completely regardless of what the discourse was, because I wanna see people fight for this person because the default should not be, we're gonna hire this person. The default should be, we're definitely not hiring this person. And you know, if everyone was like, ah, maybe throw a punch, then this is not the right.swyx: Do, do you operate, like if there's one cha there must have at least one champion who's like, yes, I will put my career on, on, on the line for this. You know,Simon Hørup Eskildsen: I think career on the line,swyx: maybe a chair, butSimon Hørup Eskildsen: yeah. You know, like, um, I would say so someone needs to like, have both fists up and be like, I'd fight.Right? Yeah. Yeah. And if one person said, then, okay, let's do it. Right?swyx: Yeah.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: Um. It doesn't have to be absolutely everyone. Right? And like the interviews are always the sign that you're checking for different attributes. And if someone is like knocking it outta the park in every single attribute, that's, that's fairly rare.Um, but that's really important. And so the traits of the P 99 engineer, there's lots of them. There's also the traits of the p like triple nine engineer and the quadruple nine engineer. This is like, it's a long list.swyx: Okay.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: Um, I'll give you some samples, right. Of what we, what we look for. I think that the P 99 engineer has some history of having bent, like their trajectory or something to their will.Right? Some moment where it was just, they just, you know, made the computer do what it needed to do. There's something like that, and it will, it will occur to have them at some point in their career. And, uh. Hopefully multiple times. Right.swyx: Gimme an example of one of your engineers that like,Simon Hørup Eskildsen: I'll give an eng.Uh, so we, we, we launched this thing called A and NV three. Um, we could, we're also, we're working on V four and V five right now, but a and NV three can search a hundred billion vectors with a P 50 of around 40 milliseconds and a p 99 of 200 milliseconds. Um, maybe other people have done this, I'm sure Google and others have done this, but, uh, we haven't seen anyone, um, at least not in like a public consumable SaaS that can do this.And that was an engineer, the chief architect of Turbo Puffer, Nathan, um, who more or less just bent this, the software was not capable of this and he just made it capable for a very particular workload in like a, you know, six to eight week period with the help of a lot of the team. Right. It's been, been, there's numerous of examples of that, like at, at turbo puff, but that's like really bending the software and X 86 to your will.It was incredible to watch. Um. You wanna see some moments like that?swyx: Isn't that triple nine?Simon Hørup Eskildsen: Um, I think Nathan, what's calledAlessio: group nine, that was only nine. I feel like this is too high forSimon Hørup Eskildsen: Nathan. Nathan is, uh, Nathan is like, yeah, there's a lot of nines. Okay. After that p So I think that's one trait. I think another trait is that, uh, the P 99 spends a lot of time looking at maps.Generally it's their preferred ux. They just love looking at maps. You ever seen someone who just like, sits on their phone and just like, scrolls around on a map? Or did you not look at maps A lot? You guys don't look atswyx: maps? I guess I'm not feeling there. I don't know, butSimon Hørup Eskildsen: you just dis What about trains?Do you like trains?swyx: Uh, I mean they, not enough. Okay. This is just like weapon nice. Autism is what I call it. Like, like,Simon Hørup Eskildsen: um, I love looking at maps, like, it's like my preferred UX and just like I, you know, I likeswyx: lotsAlessio: of, of like random places, soswyx: like,youswyx: know.Alessio: Yes. Okay. There you go. So instead of like random places, like how do you explore the maps?Simon Hørup Eskildsen: No, it's, it's just a joke.swyx: It's autism laugh. It's like you are just obsessed by something and you like studying a thing.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: The origin of this was that at some point I read an interview with some IOI gold medalistswyx: Uhhuh,Simon Hørup Eskildsen: and it's like, what do you do in your spare time? I was just like, I like looking at maps.I was like, I feel so seen. Like, I just like love, like swirling out. I was like, oh, Canada is so big. Where's Baffin Island? I don't know. I love it. Yeah. Um, anyway, so the traits of P 99, P 99 is obsessive, right? Like, there's just like, you'll, you'll find traits of that we do an interview at, at, at, at turbo puffer or like multiple interviews that just try to screen for some of these things.Um, so. There's lots of others, but these are the kinds of traits that we look for.swyx: I'll tell you, uh, some people listen for like some of my dere stuff. Uh, I do think about derel as maps. Um, you draw a map for people, uh, maps show you the, uh, what is commonly agreed to be the geographical features of what a boundary is.And it shows also shows you what is not doing. And I, I think a lot of like developer tools, companies try to tell you they can do everything, but like, let's, let's be real. Like you, your, your three landmarks are here, everyone comes here, then here, then here, and you draw a map and, and then you draw a journey through the map.And like that. To me, that's what developer relations looks like. So I do think about things that way.Simon Hørup Eskildsen: I think the P 99 thinks in offs, right? The P 99 is very clear about, you know, hey, turbo puffer, you can't run a high transaction workload on turbo puffer, right? It's like the right latency is a hundred milliseconds.That's a clear trade off. I think the P 99 is very good at articulating the trade offs in every decision. Um. Which is exactly what the map is in your case, right?swyx: Uh, yeah, yeah. My, my, my world. My world.Alessio: How, how do you reconcile some of these things when you're saying you bend the will the computer versus like the trade

This episode features Drew Russell, Identity Resilience Platform Owner at Rubrik. Jim McDonald and Jeff Steadman explore the intersection of backup, recovery, and identity security. Drew explains how Rubrik evolved from data backup into a cyber resilience platform with identity as a core pillar. Topics include recovering Active Directory, Okta, and Entra ID after ransomware, Rubrik's "bunker in a box" appliance for immutable air-gapped recovery, proactive posture management, CrowdStrike and Defender integrations, and where AI and non-human identities fit into Rubrik's roadmap. The episode wraps with measuring success for a product you hope to never use, and a detour into watch collecting.This episode was made possible by the support of Rubrik. Learn more at rubrik.com/idacConnect with Drew: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drew-russell-3762411b/Learn more about Rubrik: https://www.rubrik.com/idacConnect with us on LinkedIn:Jim McDonald: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jimmcdonaldpmp/Jeff Steadman: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffsteadman/Visit the show on the web at idacpodcast.comTIMESTAMPS00:00:00 - Welcome and Introduction00:01:19 - Introducing Drew Russell00:01:36 - How Drew Got Into Identity00:02:43 - What Is Rubrik and What Sets It Apart00:03:38 - From Backup to Cyber Resilience00:05:31 - Where Rubrik Fits in the IAM Landscape00:07:08 - Rubrik's Scale: Clients and Growth00:07:51 - Primary Use Cases: Post-Incident Recovery and AD00:09:09 - Kicking Out Compromised Accounts and ADR00:10:11 - Proactive Threat Detection and Mandiant Integration00:11:28 - Scanning Backups to Find the Clean Recovery Point00:12:14 - The Bunker in a Box Explained00:13:18 - Posture Management and Upstream Tool Integration00:14:19 - AI Agent Swarms and the Future Attack Surface00:15:37 - The Taiwan Bank Case Study: Six Weeks to Rebuild AD00:17:16 - The State of Nevada Incident: $400K and 30 Days00:17:56 - What Recovery Covers: AD, Okta, and Entra ID00:19:26 - Post-Restore Change Management and Whitelisting00:20:08 - How Long Should You Store Backups?00:21:19 - Indexing Identity for Intelligent Recovery Points00:22:29 - Excluding Malicious Actions During Restore00:24:41 - Zero Trust for Rubrik's Own Backups00:26:21 - No Windows, No Virtualization Architecture00:27:49 - Proactive Posture Management00:29:00 - CrowdStrike and Defender Real-Time Integration00:30:48 - Why Tabletop Exercises Often Fall Short00:31:53 - AI Roadmap and Non-Human Identities00:34:22 - The Three Pillars: Data, Identity, and AI00:35:29 - Deployment: SaaS vs. On-Prem00:38:37 - Appliance Sizing and Redundancy00:42:23 - Measuring Success for a Product You Hope to Never Use00:43:46 - The Ludacris Rubrik Commercial00:45:31 - Watch Collecting and the Omega Speedmaster00:53:39 - Drew's Closing WordsKEYWORDSIdentity at the Center, IDAC, Jeff Steadman, Jim McDonald, Rubrik, Drew Russell, identity resilience, cyber resilience, Active Directory recovery, AD backup, Okta recovery, Entra ID recovery, identity backup, ITDR, ISPM, non-human identity, NHI, agentic AI, ransomware recovery, bunker in a box, immutable backup, CrowdStrike integration, Microsoft Defender integration, Mandiant integration, identity disaster recovery, ADR, zero trust, tabletop exercises, posture management, IAM, identity security podcast, cybersecurity podcast

Preston and Seb unpack AI's implications for safety, governance, and economics. They debate AGI risks, corporate centralization, Bitcoin's regulatory role, and Elon Musk's ventures in space and autonomous tech. IN THIS EPISODE YOU'LL LEARN: 00:00:00 - Intro 00:04:37 – Why AI safety and autonomy are increasingly at odds00:11:30 – How AGI could reshape governance and policy-making00:07:40 – Preston's skepticism about AI self-preservation claims00:15:18 – The unintended consequences of AI regulation00:22:15 – How Bitcoin could hold corporations accountable00:20:10 – The dangers of centralizing economic power via AI00:34:45 – Why generalist thinking matters in a post-pandemic world00:37:20 – The role of curiosity and deep reading in future-proofing00:41:59 – How SpaceX is redefining launch economics with reusable rockets00:57:41 – The hidden potential of Tesla's AI chips and compute power Disclaimer: Slight discrepancies in the timestamps may occur due to podcast platform differences. BOOKS AND RESOURCES Clip 1: AI Expert: We Have 2 Years Before Everything Changes! We Need To Start Protesting! with Tristan Harris. Clip 2: Marc Andreessen explains the future belongs to generalists in the AI era. Clip 3: Elon Musk on the Future of SpaceX & Mars. Official Website: Seb Bunney. Seb's book: The Hidden Cost of Money. Related ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠books⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ mentioned in the podcast. Ad-free episodes on our⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Premium Feed⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. NEW TO THE SHOW? Join the exclusive ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠TIP Mastermind Community⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to engage in meaningful stock investing discussions with Stig, Clay, Kyle, and the other community members. Follow our official social media accounts: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠X (Twitter)⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠LinkedIn⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Facebook⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠TikTok⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Check out our ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Bitcoin Fundamentals Starter Packs⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Browse through all our episodes (complete with transcripts) ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠here⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Try our tool for picking stock winners and managing our portfolios: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠TIP Finance Tool⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Enjoy exclusive perks from our ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠favorite Apps and Services⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Get smarter about valuing businesses in just a few minutes each week through our newsletter, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠The Intrinsic Value Newsletter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Learn how to better start, manage, and grow your business with the ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠best business podcasts⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. SPONSORS Support our free podcast by supporting our ⁠sponsors⁠: HardBlock Human Rights Foundation Masterworks Linkedin Talent Solutions Simple Mining Plus500 Netsuite Fundrise References to any third-party products, services, or advertisers do not constitute endorsements, and The Investor's Podcast Network is not responsible for any claims made by them. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://theinvestorspodcastnetwork.supportingcast.fm