Palmer Luckey: Autonomous Weapons Are Ancient and Why Anduril Won't Build Humanoids | Moonshots Live | EP #295

Wow. So much brighter out here. It is. It's, you know, the future is bright. There's a light flare in the future. Yeah. So, uh, welcome everybody to the Oscars of Optimism that, of course, we're opening up the summit with the King of Autonomous Weapon Systems. All right. So, uh, I want to start with the fact that we're awarding three X-Prizes this week. Palmer, congratulations for winning our wildfire X-Prize. Thank you so much. Yeah. This one's been a long time. It has. Let's get, let's get the, the slide up here. So Palmer won $2.2 million for Andrew. As if you needed. Um, a million of, a million of that from Lockheed, which was kind of interesting. We do a lot of work with Lockheed. Yeah. We also compete with them, but we, uh, in the, in the, in the defense base, it's a, you know, we, we compete with their fighter jet division and we partner with them on some of their payloads. And so we do a lot of stuff together, but you mean you've both been trying to get the Autonomous Firefighting stuff going for a long time. For a while. I mean, you got this prize announced back in 2019. It's been a long time. Andrews, one of our first two products was an Autonomous Firefighting Tank that we started building in 2017, finished in 2019. It's insane that we let fires become conflagrations before you put them out. And it, well, and it's kind of insane that, uh, people are saying, oh, then, you know, the technology's finally made as possible. And I don't, I'm not going to correct them too often in public, but it's, I mean, this has been possible for over a decade. Yeah. It's, let's watch, let's become politically, politically impossible to ignore the problem now. I'll watch a one minute video clip of what your team achieved. And if you walk us through it here. Sure. So you, this was, uh, an example of what we were doing at the test site where we were, uh, detecting fires, classifying fires. What you don't really see in here is that you also need to reject false fires. That was part of the test as well. So you have to know, you know, who's a guy smoking a cigarette? Who's a guy? What's a, what's a campfire? What's a road flare? And then what's something that shows the characteristics of real fire? That's what you need to flag to people. That's what you need to flag to emergency services. Uh, and then you need to match make the type of fire to the right asset that's in the area. And so you want to basically use the most cost effective thing that can respond and get there in time. And if something's growing faster, you might need something different if it's in woods versus on a brush hill. You might need something different. And so, you know, it's a bit about detection, classification, rejection, matchmaking, and then going and, and hitting the target. And the last thing I'll say is that with most of what we do, uh, our work with the military, you'd go through many of these same steps. But if you find a target, let's say it takes you, you know, an hour to, an hour to get to somebody versus 10 minutes. It usually doesn't make as much of a difference. When you're talking about fire, though, the difference between 10 minutes and an hour response, totally different tools you're going to need to respond with. You know, a bomb is, is, is a bomb, whether or not it takes a day or an hour or a minute to get there. Uh, but when you, when a fire is, is, is mistasticizing, you need to pick the right thing that can put it out before it gets too large. Amazing. You know, uh, we're going to be announcing something in a month's time, uh, that you're funding a new X prize and, uh, it's going to be secret until then. But we're going to tease it now, uh, another $10 million prize. Would you share, share with us what we're going to do? Sure. You know, uh, the, you know, we, we should, we should keep the details secret because there's, there's some, there's some good twists. But suffice to say that I'm not, I'm not interested in joining the race to push AI forward with my money. I think that the, the, the, the, the artificial intelligence side of models is, is, is pretty well covered by plenty of people. I think we've not been doing enough understanding biological intelligence, particularly beyond people. And so this is going to be a prize around understanding how animals think and making so that we can communicate with them 10 times better than the current state of the art for the current smartest species and not just trained animals, but wild animals in their own, in their own language. Amazing. And I think that there's actually a lot that we're going to be able to learn. I mean, if you look at, uh, large language models, they're kind of this, you know, they're, they're, they're based on, uh, humanity's way of thinking and communicating distilled. And I think that there's plenty to learn from all of the other species that are on this planet. I wouldn't be surprised if it has applications for, for, for AI, particularly AI where you need to be, uh, more efficient, more, you know, more power efficient, more time efficient, uh, you know, a, a, a different point of view. Two heads are better than one, whichever, uh, whatever metaphor you want to use. Love it, love it. All right. I want to kick off the first official question here. Pedoom. Where in the AI industry, the defense industry, what's your pedoom? I'm just not worried, uh, about AI dooming. I guess I'm not worried about AI, uh, doing the killing. I'm very, very worried about evil people using moderately competent AI to do evil things. Exactly. And I am kind of frustrated by a lot of people who are new to the dooming hobby. Um, it's, it's, it's sort of like how we had to deal with, uh, you know, the war in Ukraine happens and all of a sudden, all these people who have had the dumbest opinions you've ever heard about the military for their whole life, uh, and people who believed we lived at the end of history that we had moved past conflict that we lived in a world where you could just write a nasty letter in the UN forgetting that that only works if it's backed up by credible threat of violence and then all of a sudden they change their minds. You're seeing this with AI. People who have not thought about this problem for more than a couple years or maybe even just a couple months, uh, are, are, are saying, oh my god, this is the biggest threat to humanity. And these are people who spent almost no time actually analyzing what the largest threats to humanity are. They haven't spoken to any of the experts in this area. They certainly weren't frying freeze dried food and building prepper bunkers, you know, like, like, like me and many of my, my, my buddies, uh, who, who, who have indulged fantasies about what doom could look like and also thought realistically about it. And so, uh, yeah, the AI doom is way down the list for me. I'm, I'm a, I'm a big optimist. I think it's going to massively reduce the cost of resource extraction, processing, transformation. You're going to see every part of society become subject to the same economies of scale and efficiency that automated industries that automated without AI have seen. So think like agriculture or, uh, or textiles, you can buy two weeks of calories for less than one hour of federal minimum wage labor. That's crazy. Let's give it up for, uh, Palmer here. You're going to see that for everything. Dave. So I got a really, um, pressing question on my mind. I'm, I'm kind of a feeds and feeds and chips and AI foundation models guy. And so, uh, when you're putting systems in the field, weapons in the field, uh, you can, you can put the intelligence inside it and there's always been a big problem for the Air Force. Like, if we're going to start flying drones instead of pilots, who's going to unleash the weapons and how's that decision going to get made? And the, the downside of transmitting it back to headquarters is the, you have latency. Uh, the upside is you have a lot more compute. Uh, what you can put locally in a device in a robot in the field and the plane is limited, but it's really, really fast. So what's your philosophy on like, you know, I think a lot of people would say, well, are we going to have self-contained decision making weapons wandering around the enemy territories? Or are we going to, like, are we going to have, you know, control at the head? Yeah, more or less. The, the real concern isn't so much the latency or, or the, or the speed of computation. The problem is that if you rely on, uh, you know, central, a central location to do your compute, you now need to have command and control that has a good, high bandwidth communication back and forth between you and potentially thousands or tens of thousands of active assets. And if your enemy jams your communications or intercepts your communications or hacks your communications, you're done. Uh, or worse, they just skip targeting all the stuff in the field. And they go for the place where it's all being controlled. You know, we saw, we saw this. I, there was, uh, there was, there was, there was this documentary that George Lucas was working on. And, and the trade federation, they had, they had their central AI command and control blown up. And that was how the battle of NEPBU actually resolved was all the battle droids lost. Oh, yeah, they all fell over. That's right. They all fell over. And so, uh, I think that that's, that, that's the practical reality. This driving the need to have autonomy living, not back home, but forward. There's other areas like, uh, you go under water. You can't talk to us. Yeah. Yeah. And sometimes you could talk to things, but you don't want to. Having radio emissions actually exposes you necessarily. And so what, what you, for better or for worse, you're going to need is I actually don't think it's as much of a shift as people think. Um, I, that there's a lot of people who look at say, oh my god, Pandora's box is being open. You're going to have weapons that are making their own kill decisions. And they don't recognize the reality, which is that that's been the case for decades. Uh, you look at the, you look at the, the, you look at the age of system on destroyers. It has a fully autonomous mode. You can flip a button and it will shoot down anything that comes within whatever range you programmed it with. Without any human confirmation you look at seawiz and seeram for shooting down incoming missiles incoming mortar incoming artillery fire Incoming missiles or incoming speedboats Same thing you can put them in fully autonomous modes and I mean it going back to NUM we had missiles you could launch from an aircraft they flow over the horizon try to identify the right radio emitters that they believed Corresponded with a surfaced air missile let's site and then struck them without any you know the person had to sign I'm going to send it in this area. They're going to look for this signal and I know that there's this probability They're going to get it right that decision is going to remain with people, but autonomous weapons are Widely widely there's a whole other talk. We're not going to have today, but I will I do have a rant about this We're actually autonomous weapons have existed for thousands of years if you look Defined as kind of weapons that can execute the intent of what you program to do Independent from the operator of the engineer you look at for example pitfall traps that allow people to walk over them But then capture the commander on his horse when he walks by and it's heavy or you look at a certain poison traps that would That would kill people who had who had certain characteristics not kill people with other characteristics or not kill animals You look all in many types of land mines and sea mines and even even torpedoes And so it depends on on your exact definition, but even going into myth or people are creating golems that can you go out and fight on their Fight on their behalf or defend your defend their city I guess my argument is we've had autonomous weapons for a very very long time It's just a new set of technology that's that's making them better. So technical question on that the foundation models that go into those Those remote systems right now Yeah, well, it's the right right now the open source models are all Chinese So I'm pretty sure you're not going to be putting Chinese models into remote weapons Are you going to build androle foundation models or how are you going to get AI in those devices? I mean, we've been doing it since 2017 so we're way ahead of everybody where we're a decade beyond that question I think that we also don't the foundation models of people are building or not the types of models you want to be doing this They're not that they're largely non-deterministic. They're non-auditable It's it's a very different category the thing that we are building unfortunately has very few consumer applications and vice versa They're of course our LLM use cases for defense that make a lot of sense But it's not guiding my missile or our classifying radiar radar radar radar feeds I mean and we we're also we can't build models that ingest text and then spit out text I need to process raw data radar data feeds I need to process sonar data from passive listening stations on submarines. That's it's it's pretty highly specialized and I will take some credit here All these people who are talking about how AI is going to change everything they are mostly recent converts Andral industries you might notice the acronym is AI So and that was not that was not a mistake Alex jump in yeah I think maybe dovetailing on our discussion of driving bench. We're now in an era when it's possible to take frontier models Drop them into a robotic embodiment and get pretty stunning results So I'd love to ask you a question maybe about the scaling hypothesis as it applies to autonomous weapon systems or autonomous systems in general If you have to extrapolate out is there a Moore's law? Is there an experience curve for what as obviously the capabilities of underlying frontier models whether they're from Frontier leaps proper or from AI as Those progress do we see any equivalent of a Moore's law for the autonomous systems themselves and and maybe the second half of the question would be Do you think ultimately we achieve some sort of convergence you andral it makes a variety of embodiments and a variety of different form factors Do you see ultimately some general purpose? Category killer robot that is equivalently the generalist robotic embodiment just like we now have generalist models that are capable of doing substantially any task No, I don't think so on the defense side I think that for manufacturing and for hospitality and medicine you might see this because you get economies of scale that That that that that are really that are really material for those types of businesses and you know a humanoid robot may not be The optimal form for a burger griller, and it may not be the optimal form for a firefighter It may not be the optimal form for a nurse or an assembly text only the smiling But even if it's not optimal the fact that it is shared with humanity in its form makes it a really really good form factor Now I can make one robot that does all of these things and I would probably rather have a let's say robot That's 5% slower or you know less reliable than the optimal burger flipping robot if I can share commonality with that with that nurse In defense that's not really the case because you are in this constant race to not just barely beat your adversary But to massively overpower them to try and make it where the goal is not to just barely win a conflict on the margins It is to fight unfair to have overwhelming threat of violence underpinning whatever diplomatic overtures or negotiations you have And and and everyone's always pushing the limit so if I if I have a jet that has a reliable 5% every time edge over the enemy That's worth paying a lot of money for right like I and and I think the the The loss in performance you would see through lack of specialization probably makes it non-viable like to go to the to the extreme like a you know I build robot submarines and those have a specialized form that needs to dive to 6,000 meter depth and and sit on the bottom of the ocean for months at a time And then I have other stuff that's on the surface and and you know their robotic systems that you know roll up a hill and and they loiter and then I have other things that are You know aerial vehicles that are doing very specialized tasks, and I just can't imagine a convergence that would make sense unless you're telling me that we're going to get something cool like like humanoids that have like you know on board fusion reactors and they can dive to 6,000 feet Definitely why why are you building those? I mean if anybody you should look you could potentially build such a thing but then very quickly You realize that specialization would allow you to build something even better you say okay, I've built something that can dive to the bottom of the ocean and fly to the moon Man, it could get to the moon a lot faster if it didn't have to all right dive to the bottom of the ocean So I think I think defense is going to be this one where kind of like you look at for example the difference between cars where everything has shared platforms within a manufacturer Manufacturing they also share a lot of the same standards in the interfaces I think that you compare those like motorsport where it's all completely different that's continuously pushing forward I think the defense side is probably always going to be this this weird branch of exotic highly specialized robotic system You know I expected if anybody was going to be building humanoid robots would be you I've opted out because I because I believe in them If I didn't believe that humanoid robotics had such a powerful future then I would probably build them but I want Andral to build things that wouldn't exist otherwise That's what I generally want to maximize your marginal impact but they correct all the other people are already doing a great job I like I want to use their robots and and do things with them like I think humanoids are going to be an incredible general artificial intelligence interface between AI and remote systems And a lot of legacy platforms that were designed for a person you know pull the lever push the button read the screen like we're going to be able to take all those and automate them without replacing them entirely So you have a lot of things like radar systems that cost millions tens of millions even hundreds of millions of dollars nobody wants to man them during a hot conflict Because they're the first thing that's going to go but if I can put humanoid robots in them I've now been able to automate them without that So yeah I'm not going to build humanoids this is also why Andral is not building like small quadcopter attack drones too many other companies doing a great job there's a lot of a lot of areas and we're not going to do space launch like we do space products we have a lot we operate a lot of our own satellites and a lot of our own sensors in space But I don't want to be a launch provider that's for all the other billionaires to let them handle that that's fantastic You know when you're operating Andral industries you're decentralizing defense right the Pentagon and ministries of defense globally have been the most centralized entity in the history of humanity You're sitting on the edge dealing with that you must have a massive immune system problem where people inside the entity are going now we've done that before we can do it better Either try and suck you in or they transmit you out how are you navigating that interface because you're doing it in a way that I've never seen anybody succeed do it I think that this is a problem that's very very hard at the beginning Oh I said the wrong thing Wow No idea Well until someone gets on the intercom tells us The AI Congratulations What were we talking about what was it? Seriously I knew the intercom was going to come on What were we talking about again? Centralization of Pentagon rules decentralized I'm going to keep talking to you Just keep talking to you I can't So we've gotten through this I think early on there was that concern that Andrew was not going to be able to get through that, our hardest problem raising money. Kippy, would you please shut this down? I've been through enough of these to know how it's going to work. There we go. I imagine. One of our early problems was that our investors said, Palmer, potential investors, they said, look, we believe that you'll be able to build things that work. We believe you'll be able to build products that are great, but we don't believe the government is capable of actually purchasing them at scale because, I mean, you talk about centralization, you know about the issues for people who don't. Until just a few years ago, you had about 80% of M-DAPs, major defense acquisition programs, so basically anything that matters, 80% of M-DAPs went to five companies, and that's it. And I mean, you've seen incredible consolidation, centralization. Andral has been successful because we use, we're less of a contractor and more of a product company. We've got money to build products, then we sell them, and we've gotten to the point now where people in government have done very, very well, betting on Andral, and then miraculously we finish on schedule, we finish on time, and then the next program manager says, I know how I can make my job easy, I just give the contract to Andral. Got it. So, it's got to take guts to enter the defense industry, right? The most incestuous, you know, self-licing ice cream cone on the planet. But what insanity gave you the balls to do that? The insanity was the reason that I got into it. The first page of our pitch deck said Andral will save taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars a year by making tens of billions of dollars a year. The idea being, we're not just making products that we're selling, but we are displacing the systems that cost needlessly ten times what they should. Yeah, thank you. It doesn't seem crazy, but, you know, I can't put myself on the same pedestal as him, but one of my mentors and idols growing up, and then also early in my career, was John Carmack, the founder of it, John is great. John is incredible. And for people who know no, he's basically the inventor of the modern 3D game engine, first-person shooters, also started a rocket company that could eat it in there. He was competing in the X-Prize, and I remember, and he was one of the, if not the only one, to be doing reusable variables. Exactly. He took a vertical land. And nobody else was even trying to do that. I remember there's this name on the side of his vehicle's end video. How do you pronounce that thing? I find it only known. That's right. He was using, yeah, he was using, he was building his own sensor fusion algorithms. He was processing them on modern, you know, commercial style graphics, hard hardware, using his game programming experience. Anyway, the point is, it was called Armadillo, Armadillo Aerospace, that's right. And the thing, and yeah, they were doing vertical take off and landing long before SpaceX was, was, was, was, I mean, doing anything. Yeah. No, before it existed, for sure. That's right. And so, but anyway, the, the point is, he, he, I, he ended up becoming the CTO of Oculus VR, I managed to poach him away from it, but after he left, he went to work on AI actually even before I did. And so he started, he started his own company to work on, on, on, on AGI. And, and I said, why, why are you, why are you doing this? You know, the odds of you succeeding and to be clear, I still believe AI was going somewhere, but he said, I'm going to start a company that's just going all in on the end state. Like, I'm not trying to incrementally get there, it's just all in on AGI. And the point that he made was Palmer, even if I've got a 1% chance of succeeding, which maybe is an overestimation, but suppose I have a 1% chance of succeeding, it's suppose that I could pull it off, the, the, the, the, the, the risk adjusted, outcome kind of demands that I do it. And that was how I felt about defense. If there was a 1% chance that I could help solve this problem, then it was one that would be massively impactful to work on versus, let's say, starting another gaming company, getting into space launch, you know, building a car company, that, that which it, all of the billionaires, they end up doing the same thing. You don't have enough people getting into defense or, or putting on a bat suit. It's just, it's just cars and rockets and, and they just go in circles like that for, for, for, for. So, you know, when I interviewed you on the, on the Munchatt's podcast last time, you mentioned that you're a part of a billionaires boys club chat. Yeah, yeah. Yeah. Are they working on anything worthwhile at this point? I mean, that gave them shit for saying, like, God, you got all this capital, solve the world's biggest problems. I think the B boys are doing a lot better now than we were a few years ago. Okay. They're stepping up. And then for people, the thing we're talking about is I was giving a lot of people a hard time, especially some retired B boys. And I was telling, what are you, what are you doing? You have, because money is one of the resources they have. But one of the resources people don't talk about, especially for the retired B boys, is that they have credibility, which would allow them to gather people around them, teams around them, and capital. Like, they could, and it's just sitting there unutilized if they're doing nothing. They have the credibility in that people trust them as a leader to be able to lead an organization like that. They, they, they could have the same ideas and the same words as somebody who's equally smart or smarter, and they'll still do better for that. And so my point is you, you have a responsibility not only as someone who's, who's got a lot of capital yourself, but who's got this underutilized resource of the ability to do more, if you're not doing that, then, then, then, then, are you really, like, what, what are you even doing? Yeah. Anyone can sit on a boat. Few people can start another multi-billion dollar company that does something that doesn't matter. Yeah. The truth is, most of them, I think a lot of people have gotten itch to solve some of these problems that are out there. -We've got. -No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, I think a lot of people have gotten itch to solve some of these problems that are out there. -I don't have a problem with B-boys who don't do enough. Some people they mistake what I say. Like, "Oh, Palmer wants other billionaires to work on defense or energy or biology." Like, my point is not that people need to distract themselves by doing more things. A lot of people can only do one thing. You know, and that was what I did for a long time. What I hate is the people who are not doing anything. That is like a repulsive to me. -So maybe message to the audience. You get to join the B-boys Slack group or whatever this is. Telegram, if you're doing something new and differentiated. -The group actually got shut down, and we've been talking about, now we need to do a B-boys 2.0. But I think people post-- -There may be some B-girls as well. -I think people posted the wrong memes a few too many times. -Well, there was a time where there were no B-girls, and then there was this business insider article whining about it. And the reality is, like, it's just me and some guys. It's not like there's-- this isn't like the Illuminati conference. You know, it's like, they're like, "Oh, there's a group, but no women have been invited." It's not that no women have been invited. It's just like me and some of my boys. But actually, there was a girl in it by the end, so we need to restart that group. -So you're in Facebook commercials now? -Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. -So you met a VR as out. How does it compare against your vision of what you wanted to achieve? Is it-- yeah. -Look, it does a lot of the things that-- it's not exactly what I would make, where I, the guy who's waving the magic wand and-- -You got lots of magic wand, you played. -You've been in the cat, but look, the new MetaVR glasses are a lot closer in a lot of ways. So I've long been a believer that you need to decouple the compute and the battery from the head. You should not be at that end. And I'm not even saying the head totally, it's more of the front. So a before Oculus Quest, so Oculus Quest was the last thing that I worked on before they fired me. And the prototypes at the time were a prototype series code named Santa Cruz. And we were actually showing that publicly before they fired me. And Santa Cruz had the battery and compute on the back of the head. And then the light, you know, the part on the soft tissue on the front of your head was kept as light as possible. And then at some point after they got rid of me, they jammed it all into one big giant lump in the front. And they ruined the ergonomics. They forgot why you need a top strap. But, you know, it bothers-- -You serve them right. -It bothers me most. Look, it bothers me mostly at this point, because the Oculus Rift CV1, which was the first modern consumer VR headset, it got the ergonomics more or less perfect in 2016. And, you know, we were showing it off in 2015. And literally, nobody has done as good as it. And it's been over a decade. Every single person screws it up, even Apple. And I just-- I can't comprehend it. How could it be that the ergonomic design led by a 19-year-old kid with no experience is better than anything that anyone has come up with since? Anyway, the new men of your glasses are the closest thing. And they're very lightweight. They've offboarded the compute. They've offboarded the batteries. They have really high quality pass-through. It has a feature that I invented for CV1 called transformo fabric, which they do not call it. They're basically using fabric, a soft flexible, black light absorbing mat fabric. To one minimize reflections, but to basically seal the cavity between and around the lenses That means that you can move them and fabric just stretches to meet where the lenses are for different interpupillary distances Rather than having like sliding mechanical interfaces and plastic and they brought transform of fabric back for the first time since my my era So I'm a huge fan and you know It's a third of the price of Apple's product and somewhat higher higher pixel density I think that's pretty extraordinary. Oh and and one eighth the wait amazing pretty good Let's close on close on this. We've got you know 1500 entrepreneurs moonshot Visionaries and tens of thousands watching on the live stream What's your advice? What you know, what did you learn in high school that made you succeed at the speed you did? We were talking about this on the plane. I was really lucky to I guess maybe not lucky. I did it But you are lucky. That's right. I started an online community called mod retro when I was 14 or 15 It was an internet forum for people who were modifying vintage game consoles and computers building handheld units improving the performance in a variety of ways. We had a few thousand active members and And a whole team of volunteer moderators and administrators with with me me at me at the top of it for some reason and I learned a lot of valuable lessons about how you can build an organization how you market an organization How you get people to believe in what you're doing? I learned a lot about dealing with the types of Problems you deal with when you're running a company, you know with humans. Well, I mean you'll do you it's tail as old as time You've got two people. They're both brilliant. They're both very good at what they do And they hate each other and they disagree over something you need to somehow mediate the conflict or Separate them in a way that allows you to get the value that it allows both of them to contribute value to the greater project But not have them hate you not have them loose faith in the broader thing But also you not not kill each other sometimes that means you need to reconcile things between the two Sometimes it means that you need to put one guy over here and one guy over here And sometimes you make sure that they don't know that that's what you're doing as you do it That's just I'm not saying that's the key to running a successful business is the management of the two assholes problem, but it's Yeah, and once you make it a three-body problem now But it's that and a hundred things like it that I learned running mod retro that I was able to take into starting Anoculus to carry forward into what I'm doing in my other companies and that's why I'm a strong believer that the kids Should should should get a job and I also had a job starting was 14 So I learned how the real world worked too, but I saw I'm a huge fan of people doing things at a scale that's larger than just Themselves in other words don't just do a project do a project with someone else do a project with other people Build in the open learn the good parts of that the bad parts of that it's been extremely useful to me and as building changed in the age of AI Would advice do you have again? You know we've been saying on the pod for a while now, you know forget about grad school You know even college is a maybe you didn't go to college You know in high schoolers should what find a purpose they care about and use AI to go and code it What's your your closing advice here on that? You know one of the reasons I have not been as upset as some people about No, that's funny. There's something on the screen. It's telling us to not talk about Just wanted to make sure you saw that I did we're not going to talk about don't think about All right, great, great The There's there's a lot of people who who love their craft and they love what they do and and they are rightfully morning the end of for example coding things by hand top to bottom start to finish as anything but like a craft endeavor And I and I understand that it's the same way that a lot of artists felt when the camera was invented They they wind and complained about how it ruined art and it made it so that anybody could push a button and you know These things are always painful for the people who are masters of their craft I already got screwed in that way a long time ago when you're a founder you don't get to actually work in any of the tech anyway All the other people get to have all the fun and so you know I like electrical engineering. I like optical engineering. I like mechanical engineering I don't get to do any of it because the job of a founder is to higher people to to displace them and and and to do what they thought they could do or what they like They do like doing better the job I've said many times to people if you want to work on technology Work for somebody else if you want to work on non-stop bullshit start a company So what I would say to people is AI does it actually change the bullshit part of the job very much You're still on the hook legally. You're still on the hook for all the interpersonal stuff and you could you could delegate some of it But at the end of the day, it's your call. It's your decision. It's the same thing for fundraising It's the same thing for general product architecture and when people make the wrong decisions It's your choice as to when you need to overrule them over ride them replace them I don't see AI replacing that part of it anytime soon Not because it couldn't but because the gains everywhere else are so much larger that I think we've got a good 10 years of speed running All of the other parts of the business before they before they cover that so look AI changes a lot But I'm telling you there's a lot of people you're in for a rude awakening if you are like a hobbyist coder or a hobbyist engineer And you think you're going to start a company and you think you're going to be doing all that stuff. No You're going to learn a hard lesson Being a founder was always like AI took your job. It's just that other people took it