Where the fuck is all the automation AI is so unbelievably smart and yet it's so useless at all other stuff It doesn't matter how much a I couldn't agent to use the software actually is getting better I'm gonna get faster. It's like I'm really getting worse open eyes and try to automate cuz more services 2020 what I want instead is smart software I want to expand what software itself can do such as things that should be automatable can then be automatable My favorite thing that you guys say is we don't prod not God Because if we had any other kind of like big lab leader even if they had joy they would never And then your view is so different. You're like no, we're gonna create a way better world for nuance Reasons I don't think we're on the path of our side in the saspocalypse story AI can write software But what if the bigger opportunity is putting intelligence inside the software itself in this episode then Horowitz and Martin Cuzato sit down with type-safe AI founder Diogo Almeida to talk about Jeff and a different vision for how AI changes computing Diogo argues that coding agents make it faster to produce the same kind of software We already have Jeff is aimed at expanding what software itself can do giving developers a new primitive for turning natural language intent Into decisions that programs can actually use they get into why reliability matters more than impressive demos What a new era of probabilistic programming could look like and why AI might make existing software dramatically more useful rather than simply replacing it And beneath all this is the question that drove Diogo to build type-safe in the first place if AI is already the smart Where is all the automation? today we have the founder and leader of type-safe Diogo with us who is a bit of a hero to both Martin and me He is not only building like a really interesting product But creating what we think is a very important movement.
So we're super excited about today. Thank you Maybe you can give us a brief on what is Jeb what is type-safe? Why is it important? Is it a curse friendly?
Elevator pitch which I tend to ramble on and I don't do well But like I realize my favorite elevator pitch for Jeff is where the fuck is all the automation? Like this is like so unbelievably tragic. Yes, so much intelligence AI is so unbelievably smart and yet So not that I hate on chatbots or coding agents I love them myself, but it's like so useless at all other stuff and it's tragic It's tragic so that we have so much like diamond in the rough but not polished for work But type-safe is making AI for software You know, we want to make AI powerful not just for humans in the loop But to actually build real software and Jeff to us is our first model in this whole space to make it way better to like make Automation, yeah, so it's been interesting because it's kind of caught fire in Suffering so one of the things that made us go what the hell's going on here is like every developer We know is calling us and going oh, this is frickin awesome great. It's fast.
It's great. Everything's better Then how does that because everybody thinks of all we've got cloud code. We've got code acts that we already have that What's the difference and then how does that lead to real automation? Oh, I?
Wish I had like a some slop visual because I have a favorite stop visual for this So I like cloud code and codecs. I love the description from Gary Tan and them It's just in time software incredible way to describe what they're doing Like it makes software on the fly and you can like program software and natural language But it has the same expressive power software what I want instead is smart software Like instead of automating software engineering I want to expand what software itself can do such that things that should be automatable can then be automatable and like in a more flowery language I want to express things like intent. I want to expand the vocabulary of what we can do And I can talk about like all sorts of like weird sci-fi things I want but like programming is like hyper specifying like valuable things and then infinitely replicating them It's so freaking cool. And I want to just make that more interesting So one way to think about it is instead of kind of a tool that Somewhat replaces a software engineer with a faster maybe not even as good software engineer what you're saying is no No, no, we're gonna super empower the software engineers.
We have to write way way way better more interesting things Yeah, so this is by the way I just think so many people miss this point and it's such a subtle point and it's so important to actually tease it out Which is if you use something like cloud code or code which is great or cursor Which is great? They write code but that code is the same thing a human being would have right maybe it's better Maybe it's worse But it's basically still code just like code look to ten years ago Yeah, and the thing with Jeff is whether or not your cloud code or a human you have this new primitive This new thing that you stick in your code that actually expands the power of software So instead of like writing code it is something that you include in your code Which by the way is interesting because it's this very powerful primitive to be great if you explain But it's also a little bit different than like how programmers think for example like it has this notion of probability Or so an intelligent layer inside the software You think like a library like a library that you can use natural language to describe what you want and you give it kind of a State machine and then it will choose what to do with some confidence levels Which we kind of haven't really had before oh there's a lot of tricks there I will jump into one thing first, which is I love the first thing you said in the direction of where the fuck is all the automation I love software so much. I wish I'd be writing it all day It's we would not recommend being a CEO to people but whatever and also it's wild that AI is so cool and software has been You know like that to me like no one can square this together The most we can do is add like a little chatbot in the side sometimes that can take actions But not all actions because some of the actions are not reliable I just want to give like that tiny side I love the point I'm gonna jump back to the point about like this is a little bit different way to think about it Yes, I think that machine native doesn't exactly match bits perfectly and like that's actually the art form that we are trying to do In our onboarding on day one I draw like the then diagram of like what AI is good at what is valuable in code? We're in the middle So you know we don't have like extrapolated floats for example I just bad at that but things like probabilities are not exactly novel and it's similar to that is just a classifier argument Yeah, Jeff is absolutely a classifier like classifiers are sick classifiers It's the same interface as like some of those ML concepts because these came from like practical people who are trying to make systems work And what I'm seeing is happening now is that Jeff actually my guess is that Jeff probably is better than having an MLE team from 2019 Making the stuff for you and you can just program it on the fly who knows what could be built because like there were not that many good NLE teams in 2019 very like narrow things and to be able to collect data set and measure it and all that and It is just the beginning by the way to this But do you think there's a slider bar here where like a one-end is like language and language out like we have today on the other end Is like an existing program and then you can kind of move between the two or do you think like this is like that point in the design space?
Which is language in kind of state machine out which is gonna solidifies the general purposeing for programmers? Oh, that's a tricky one So I will say the answer in my heart Yeah, I'm answering my heart is that it is a slider and actually when I design for the properties we have I might have made mistakes due to my personal preferences but like intelligence per dollar is my north star right now and it could be wrong just to be Intelligence per second might be more valuable in the short term But even like our interface like calling the input state. This is intentional like it's just Oh, that's great. Yes, that's meant to be the inside Like so we are really optimizing a lot of work I do is for even more complicated arrangements of the internal subprograms state.
Can you put intelligence in there? I think this is going to be an ever-present battle to have I we're very intentional about our design and Also pragmatically, I think certain things happen like it's easier to make an AI at these milliseconds So it'll be more like a database for a while than like a standard library thing But I would love it to be a standard library thing. Do I just put back what is the alchemy that creates a deal go? I mean like you speak You speak like an AI researcher you speak like a systems person you speak like a programmer and normally these things have been like not super overlapping And you're taking AI which we've been pushing towards being a being and you're making it a programmer's tool So maybe a little bit about your personal journey that my history is somewhat unorthodox I was a mathlete.
I was a award-winning mathlete the way I describe it is I was good enough. It's a cringe I was good enough math to get girls. So No, that was a big idea. And what kind of girls do you get when you're that good at math?
That's a nice way. Our audience needs to know. Oh, no We have to inspire the youth here. Don't do it.
It's not worth it. Just be cool and chill and interesting. Don't overcompensate. Wow I can't believe I said that.
I was a mathlete. But I actually never oh man It's also a little cringe. I never really liked math. I never really tried I was just like being fish in a little pond and to me math was back I was always the path I was set on but I hated it because it was always about like winning competitions But then computer science is actually a lot like math.
It's basically like math but cool and useful and fun and interesting And I still love giving algorithms interviews. It's not the best thing for me to do I don't know but do I love it? Yes, and does it like allow me to like sus people out really well? Yes, it does.
So I love computer science. I consider myself to be computer scientist much more before a researcher despite my history and Like what actually got me into it was I also won a Kegel competition not from sophisticated math But from like just automating like the fuck out of it. Um, you know like more nested loops more You know, it's all like a systems problem, you know, so that events eventually got to me Like I was forced to speak at NURPs normally in honor But I hated it because I just want to be in the mines was that from the Kegel thing? Yes.
Oh, wow Yeah, actually the Kegel host of it was Isabel Guillaume who was the co-inventor of the SVM actually I think first author I'm not 100% sure I'm first author And she just basically saw that I was like this person who really didn't fit into the research community and then adopted me and showed me Like it got me to meet all the AI people and that you know my career was just pushed into that direction from there opening I know it was like a startup with Jeremy Howard. No kidding. Yes. Yeah, that's cool And then Google Brain for a while and then retire for a while Yeah, and then eventually I was like just kind of tired of not doing anything I was like, you know what actually AI is pretty damn fun And I joined opening ice because of that reason and it worked out really well.
I mean really well. Yeah, incredible So you said something there that is so Unusual in today's world which is AI is really really fun and then the company has Such a different demeanor and view of AI than every everybody else My favorite thing that you guys say is we build prod not God Because if we had any other kind of like big lab leader they'd be like trying to even if they had joy they would cover that And then your view is so different You're like no, we're gonna create a way better world and it's gonna be awesome And there's gonna be not only of them not gonna be less jobs They'll be more jobs and they'll be way better jobs and everybody's gonna have a great time and like just be being around you like You clearly believe that so so tell us about that and like what this because for us, you know types of Jevitz is more than a company It's a whole movement towards a positive future that most people in the AI world kind of don't like Yes, they're not with it. I think they don't get it. Yes, you know like that It's just a classifier complaint is like an ML level concern while everyone else is having like a Jeff party We can do all the things that we wanted to do and I don't think if you don't like to get developers It'll be hard to understand what's really going on so 100% I agree with that I do think that there's like a pretty negative world painted that I obviously disagree with I think it's really comes from this like You know mono model kule that everyone believes I think they write one big brain to roll them all Sounds much more ominous You know like will that one is that one brain really on the path to rule us all like we have not automated really basic things I don't think we want people to be doing, you know, like if there's lots of really really basic stuff and I think that Man it pains me when the world is discord with the reality and like part of the pain is you know On the way the fuck is all the automation like how can we have a I be so freaking smart and Like there's so much so much financial incentive to automate stuff like yeah, you can excuse for diffusion I don't buy it at all I shouldn't name names but like obviously it's not true part of a problem is like the discordance with the reality and the fact that Yeah, he's like so much potential is what made it really tragic for me that we had not released this so now It's a now.
It's like a little bit of a party for me, but like I was afraid and I'm just are like There's the happy AI the people on Jeff and there's the morose AI the people are not yeah, it's it's really It's quite a kind of fascinating dichotomy It's it is really well give you an end to your automation point I had a funny conversation this morning with David George who runs our growth fun because we're talking about the new tools I said I've tried the news thing. He's like oh, it's awesome. I was like what you do with it He said I finally canceled my New York Times subscription That is hard to do You know, it's a kind of a it's a very tip of the iceberg of the things that are Horrible things to do that that we need to automate I think that if we want to be really intellectually honest and you're really in for the north automation We cannot fall into the same anti-patterns that AI is falling into which is really Focusing on outliers and denos right like a lot of people asking like what are your favorite use cases? And I'm not sure if they work I want them to work in the background such that like someone would trust that to run and not page them and like people can build on top of that too and You know, it's a little composable but like other things like safe Right, it's a different type of safety where like if you wanted to actually like run with resources associated with access to things You need guarantees for that or like at least statistical guarantees and so it doesn't go wrong Well, I don't think our bottles will be doing that anytime soon unless someone like does the software to do that which would be Very complex very flexed But um, but that in a way that we're not responsible right right I'm just kidding how long is this intuition been for collating?
So I remember talking to you maybe in post of 2017 It was a long we did talk about that. Yeah, and like and then like a lot of these ideas were in You know, you're talking about data be important and you're talking about like you want to focus on the task and like but like So I just like you know, was this like did you know that this is gonna end up being a classifier or was it just an intuition that like There's just kind of another way to view this entire kind of AI movement You know, so actually a fun story about that chat in the talk from 2017 I think my talk was actually a very similar theme. I think it was called something like AI modular in theory in flexible in practice Which is very soft very so a little bit consistent bet. I I think that this really started right before chat to gpt Like right when we released these things.
I did not have intuition about this and honestly I was not even I was very very pleasantly surprised by the generalization capabilities of rlychef when this just must be end of 2021 Like a fourth quarter of 2021 Like we were it was really really general like if you read the paper It's unlike other papers that are like trying to prove their point It is us actually, you know scientific method ish trying to disprove like is it cheating and You know, my favorite theory was why is it important to eat socks before meditating? We'd made sure that was not on the internet beforehand and like the models were able to like make plausible human looking answers for this And that to us in the team was the thing that clicked like this is not cheating Which you should always be a creative cheating in a mail and then what really got me burnt was like we released it You know, we did a you know, I'm obviously a big capabilities guy I did a lot to release that model. I I really thought that the model had like a decent chance of being aji and when it didn't that was like when my whole world came crashing down Oh, and I was like why you're kind of on the other train for a bit which I like that crazy trainer. Well, no I'll generalizes like maybe we have aji like rlychef generalizes pretty well rly are is the thing that doesn't generalize from what I've seen um and aji in the why is it I was just like more I mean like you know, you were being in chat gpt You were behind the can these early gpt's that was a very different goal, which is like creating a chatbot that will talk to the human being Was not a programmer's tool etc.
So I'm just wondering like oh, well actually early early like 2020 Opening I when we talked about aji people used to describe it as illio in every statement Um, so it's not like But like part we were talking about opening I can't trip part of it is that it's like intentionally vague So it's a wide like can't so that everyone can be inside of it But like I am not For nuanced reasons. I don't think we are on the path of rsi and I still don't think we're in the path of rsi and I did to them I do think that what open ed defined as aji is extremely doable automating most of the world's economically valuable work actually sounds like a Oh, man, I don't like there's a lot of work out there A lot of it is very wrote and simple and like by volume in order to be able to like outsource work You need like simple instructions that like basic people can do And as far as I can tell the intelligence of that has been available in models for quite a while now and like my Oh, man, you know chip on my shoulders like why is this not available and and then and then since rlajjef But again, it's like kind of bifurcated into gigantic over promise under deliver I think gpt3 was actually quite calibrated back in that day But because humans evaluate how good the models are it looks really good because they are the judge But we've been optimizing that to judge instead of the automation part and that has been the missing thing So I would say there's really really then that it like hit me, you know, like why is this thing not more useful? So you think that the measure that we should have is to what extinct you automate actual product of tasks that the I would say over-probess it under deliver. That's the dimension in particular you're talking to you believe you automate tasks I like I think in my heart.
It's like Google sci-fi, you know And I think that I think that that that is the canary in the coal mine for cool sci-fi Like are you really telling me that we like math is solved or like even like two years ago gpt way that google proof question answering is solved But we still can't handle a drive-through, right? Very hard thing to hold in your head at once and I think a lot of people don't have good answers to that I just test one thing which may not make sense Isn't there an argument though that like the real the distribution of the real world is Is different than the digital world, right? It's heavy-tailed. There's a lot of exceptions We don't have all the data and I mean it couldn't be the case that the reason we're not doing productive stuff in the real world is just like We don't have the data for that distribution.
We're not training on that distribution And this is why it's just been basically relegated to like these lower dimensional manifolds like whatever math or coder Um, I don't entirely buy the data argument in my opinion I do believe that there's a long tail for sure like that to be kind of crazy to deny And I don't think that in my like an area in the coal mine situation. We need to automate that long tail I think we need to be incredibly pragmatic on everything and like building reliable software is always an investment Right like it like you know, what are the three great virtues of a programmer laziness to not to do it again hubris and There's a thing. Yeah, no. Yeah, no.
No, this is from the pearl. Yeah. Yeah, there's a thing while you know I wish I wish I could remember it But like it's about like the laziness to like spend it for you know like 10 hours to do like the five-minute task instantly and to never have to do it again Like it only make like it should be an ROI decision for people who like automate stuff Like I would just like it to be automate a bowl And I think that people will just make like new kinds of work help hence the jev in jevons new kinds of work once that stuff is dual But like as like a benchmark I feel like it's useful to see can we actually automate the stuff that it really really looks like yeah I should be able to optimize open eyes. I'm trying to automate customer service since 2020, you know like it's You know, like it's not You know, it's wild.
Well on an inside. I mean inside companies There's very little that's automated right now like and the projects haven't worked Other program is worked amazing. Can you maybe classify the types of problems you think that are easier to automate? No, because it was kind of interesting So we've actually looked at support before the current dinner to wait and it's interesting you need a company and the company would say yeah We we answered 95 of all like, you know, like help desk calls and like that is so many But then you actually look at the day and you realize it's all passable And then like but if you did it by like uniqueness, there's only something like 50 percent or so it just feels like when you're dealing with humans and natural systems Like there's just kind of very kind of you know, like a long tail of exceptions And so to what extent did like every but probably every hour I have somebody ping me like I'm using job for this new use case I like I know I'd you know and it's like to what extent did you even predict like the broad range of use case for it?
Like to do assume that was gonna happen and have you been surprised by that or it's really surprised it did not assume it would happen this launch was Like not something like if anyone expected this they are probably insane, right like it is I don't think someone could Expect H at GBT for developers because check your key was for you know, like you know the normal users and It's weird. I actually don't even know what percentage of the people who are part of the jet party are developers themselves I can't imagine non-developers using it I don't know how they would use it But even my non-developer friends are just like part of the party in Twitter and meaning and everything like that So number one phenomenal number two This will be hard to convey in this short message because like it's been like a blood sweat and tears for years now like the amount I care about reliability is It's a lot like reliability is what this thing is if you don't understand that it'll be very hard to make like a copycat That's benchmarked like it's I feel like every nine of reliability is going to be so valuable for everyone even if it's not the most valuable thing Market cap wise because it will just enable new applications and like we are fighting for like all sorts of like weird nines of reliability that like we don't even fully understand Because we are just like you know, it's like really getting this like electric motor of AI of intelligence like into people's like workstations And they can figure out what to do with it. What is reliability mean in this context? Is this like availability of the model or is it like I call the model and it returns the same thing or like how do I think about reliability?
Yeah, so for something that's inherently kind of so not so much the former thing and the second thing is closer Like I would describe the first thing as kind of like uptime or SLAs the second thing I would maybe call closer to the termism. Yeah, something thirdly I would consider more like robustness So robustness I would kind of describe as similar intelligence every time. Oh, yeah So like not exactly the term is I think the term is it's useful for unit tests but not real systems Think about like if you add a uid to a prompt it should be the same because the same functionally It's not exactly deterministic I think that there's another layer of it that I don't really know what it's called yet Like maybe this is what I would call like some form of intelligence Which is it doesn't have to be the similar function every time but it needs to be smart every time You know like if you were in that situation Would this be an understandable thing for a human to think because a developer can program around that and actually to me the highest Honor of reliability will be to get to the point when people can program against Jev without making example queries Like you when you just trust him you'll be in like permaflow state just great and crazy software And like that's where a lot of software is today, right? I don't think it's totally unrealistic, but I'm gonna get a bit by the way This is kind of a weird question So like I mean feel free like if it's too weird just feel free but it occurs to me that actually the value of things like Coding agents goes down if you have a primitive like this in a way Which is like you could be like, you know, whatever some you know Codex builds all the software for me, but it doesn't actually use Jev And so like the software software creates a somewhat limited or you can be like okay I as a human being I will write the software without using a coding agent But I've got this very generalized primitive that makes running software easier So I do feel like see a future where it's like the coding agents using Jev and then you're telling the coding agents and then do you like redundancy Or do you feel it's like human simple?
It's more like a coding agent question than it is a Jev question. Oh, yeah for sure. My vibe is that I'm not in the coding mind as much as I'd like to be so you are you two might be in there more than I am It is sad, but my experience is that they are really good at syntax and really better semantics And I would say incredibly bad architecture. Yeah, so like to me architecture is like the most human creative part of software So I love using coding agents I think that jet is almost certainly not in distribution that would be spooky if they trained in our user data So probably not but I think that when it's using distribution I see no problem with like having to do this in text and the thing with architecture is that maybe the models are actually like not to just Crap it architecture, but maybe I think it's percent architecture and if you don't know anything about architecture to be fine So these are all like gray area trade-offs in order for you to navigate and sometimes speed is the knob for your company or project Turn like you're willing to do a 50 like 50 percent architecture instead of a 60 Because you want to move faster and have like codecs work overnight or something I'm not doing that Actually can one of the interesting things are phenomenal in the market already is that you know when the coding agents came out It was the saspocalypse and all their values dropped through the floor and then when Jeff came out every sas company is like this is a great thing ever So explain that I Don't know what else to say right like I think it's like quite natural like in the saspocalypse story The story that I feel like has panned out really poorly is that software is very cheap and perhaps easy to replicate Which I think I could I could believe the former I could not believe the latter because a lot of this stuff happens beneath the hood I'm maybe overly a software fanboy here.
Yeah, all of us Yeah, okay, I didn't know what you know, we have a lot of legacy around that Yeah, so I don't think that really panned out so sas seems like maybe the markets don't agree But I think sas is providing the same value to you Maybe the markets are just scared But I think that sasp will be one of the largest winners of like the whole AI game And I want to like work really really well with like all the biggest most boring most like in the know of user problem That's companies because I think that they are the best position to know what workflows to automate What do people need like that's what their bread and butter is and to spend it the big like you know Software is always a capex investment and like you spend it ahead of time in order to make this experience even better That gets you know like distributed to all of that massive users, so I think that it's gonna be I'm not gonna forecast anything about the financial markets But I think as far as like a capabilities games goes it's gonna be like an inverse apocalypse and I am so jazzed about it I should make a name. Yeah, yeah All of a sudden get like dramatically more useful and by the kind of capital investment like so much of a sas company's capital investment Actually getting to all the customers and so if you've gotten to all the customers and then you make you know Not just put a chatbot on your sas product, but actually make the software like way way better That's a hell of a thing I don't know if this is a realistic dream or not But I think that there's a world where like the multi-choice forms just disappear You know like I feel like they are like they're always like something mapping natural language that usually the software already has Into like a jet like output and I literally it's literally from the 80s. It's like it's called we used to call it for GL For generation language I think that do what I mean is going to be taking into the absolute next I can't promise anything, but it was so freaking cool Someone was using like a voice to control your computer and was basically constantly making decisions on like is this a command or is it Inserting text where's inserting text like that sounds so Like I feel like interfaces could just completely change and maybe we're gonna have to make it like cheaper faster. Yeah, yeah, then you're at Star Trek Just a profound intuition here, which is um, you know if you use AI today to generate software, right?
Just look at the same software that you did before but if you actually look at like the average PR for a large company, it's like 10 lines, right? Seriously, no, no, we actually did the study It's like 10 lines like you're automating 10 lines and by the way those 10 lines are like you're part of the learning from a customer or something So like you kind of optimize something that's actually pretty minimal But what it doesn't do is provide new capabilities to the software Right? It's kind of automating this thing which in the limit ends up being relatively minor And now like there's actually new capability and so like it could just be the case that just software just actually gets better Yeah, and but it didn't even before Jeff it It didn't even occur to me that like it doesn't matter how much you know, I couldn't agents who use the software actually is getting better I'm not getting faster. It's like actually getting worse just because like there's less oversight So I think this is well and often more insecure for sure for sure But you're actually now can make an argument like like like like apps will have new functionalities as a result of this because there is this New primitive that you're providing that in a way like it speaks natural languages and reason but it marries that to a state machine I If people take that as a takeaway that would be like the greatest compliment ever to what we are doing Like actually feel like it's almost too grand of a vision to expand beyond the three logic gates that we have into like You know, our types are kind of like one of the same logic But like when it's like a little brain in there like that would be the greatest compliment to like the types of legacy That is very huge non trivial huge thing for the world I'm not gonna like over promise under deliver that but I will fight for that Yeah, I mean listen I think pretty open questions to what like how deep can this get as far as like like really serious stuff like state consistency or Durability or like real systems level stuff where you actually need to like provide strong guarantees And so a hundred percent this will change things like whatever analyzing logs analyze emails providing a UI talking to the human Like that for sure, but like, you know, you could argue that over time this becomes a smart database You know, and also air traffic control system anything which we really need a little scary like I need to Make the easy work before it always my thought.
I also think there's going to be like an entire era of probabilistic programming That's opened up like my whether you know those are huge problems I'm like this I'm familiar with it. I actually think it's going to be like with the same like you could also call a job like So your co-founder Eric came from that background. He was Oh, oh, yeah, it goes up and down. Yeah, but like what I mean is a more I'm not a fan.
My brand is pragmatism Yeah, credible pragmatism. I'm not a fan of like biologically inspired stuff I think it's never worked It's useful to motivate crazy people to work on things for decades until it works and then they refine it into like the engineering The story of a I tell the neural nets for sure. Yeah, but like you know a lot of the stories about how it worked We're not accurate So like the hierarchical features of applications really didn't end up working because like otherwise resnets wouldn't have worked longer story I do think that it opens up like like from a system perspective I'm not excited about this part because it's really I'm excited for the world not about me programming this because it sounds like really Complicated. Yeah, but I think that as we have like lots of intelligence at lots of like different cost and speed tradeoffs The super systemsy types will be making tradeoffs at like you know, like gems are gonna be like a thousand times too So much for them.
They just want like approximate link to have an approximate guess like optimist Lee around here and there It's gonna be like so crazy the type of stuff that's available in the extreme systems And the good news is we get to like rebuild systems again, which is great We have a new we have a new primitive is having your way to go doing software like I mean we did this with the internet You know this being friend to clients are running we do this periodically and and by the way just because of the Cybersecurity issues. We probably have to rebuild almost all the systems to just make them safe. I would think I think it's pretty clear that They're like there's not or at least that critical. Yeah critical infrastructure.
Yeah. Yeah. Do you think about this more in terms of like apps? SaaS analytics or more in terms of like systems foundations or all the above for what I would think of or just general Application for the same when you think about like you're working on JAVEN like and you kind of envision the people are adapting it like You know like do you do even have an opinion?
I have a little bit and it's So the way I think of it is a little like a like deep into like the TCP guts, you know, like you know Like it's unreliable. You're so reliable Exactly And this is why I care about intelligence per dollar to be better when I think and how I got this included I work backwards from Evolution AI everywhere, you know, sci-fi and everything like all the software is AI over the place and I asked myself the question What percentage of the calls to AI imagine? It's like a function which what percentage are like for human consumption where you need There's a lot of it. Yeah, and it's gonna be like many nines and actually from that same question How many will be at the first layer versus like deep in the guts right?
I think that it's going to be many nights and we'll start at the first layer But like we need to if you don't aim for the guts that's weird Yeah, you know, it's going to take you a while together right? I think people don't understand to what extent like AI was kind of ships in the night with software Like even if you try to embed AI and software kind of like didn't behave right because software doesn't really take natural language And you like do all this weird stuff like you stick at the prompt like here's the JSON output that you want And here's a scheme and we'll never listen to it and so what you end up doing is taking the output and giving it to Human you're like that with it or another Ellen that is what a while loop is like a little bit like a Agent while you right like it's like from first principles It needs to be human in the loop which is chat or an agent Which is the while loop because like the natural language needs to be fed back in there And I will say I have watched this happen there was almost like this kind of like five stages of grief You know people pick up AI like I'm gonna use this you know within my software, right? And then you know, they do like go with like, you know, whatever denial like try to make it work in like anger They go to acceptance, which is like, okay, never mind I'm just gonna give this to another LMM to a human being so it's been very ships in the night I think this is the first time I have seen it's almost like actually you can take an LMM You can take AI you can actually map it to like like a state machine and you can do that productively and I hope so I will not want to over promise under deliver as well like I don't know if it's ready for all the applications that have been over promised I really really wanted to and my team will fight for that obviously like we Really really care about reliability. We could have released so much sooner I don't think people realize that and I don't think that honestly I don't think that they will I based on what I see at the Twitter discussion I think people never get it, but like it'll just have like that good vibe of like how I can trust this so well It's the anti frustration machine It's a I hope so I hope do what I mean right to me that is about like smoothness in the world like having everything I just move more smoothly together and interlink like a gears I actually have my whole like AI utopia on like different axes that I really really want and like do what I mean Is a huge part of this, you know like imagine if all technology just did what you mean that is like that's not so smart AI is right yeah, no, it's it's amazing and maybe that's the thought to close on do what I mean Yeah, I love it.
Thank you. Do I got this great conversation really? Thanks for listening to this episode of the a 60d podcast if you liked this episode be sure to like comment subscribe leave us a rating We're a view and share with your friends and family for more episodes go to YouTube Apple podcast and Spotify Follow us on x a 16d and subscribe to our sub stack at a 16d.substack.com Thanks again to listening and I'll see you in the next episode as a reminder the content here is for informational purposes only Should not be taken as legal business tax or investment advice or be used to evaluate any investment or security and is not directed at any Investors or potential investors in any a 16d fund Please note that a 16d and its affiliates may also maintain investments in the companies discussed in this podcast for more details Including a link to our investments, please see a 16d.com forward slash disclosures