Transcription
Snapchat comes out with new spectacles, and we take your audience questions. That's coming up right after this on a Big Technology Podcast Friday edition, recorded on Thursday.
Welcome to Big Technology Podcast Friday edition, where we break down the news in our traditional cool-headed and nuanced format. We're joined, as always, by Ron John Ry, who is here with us, not in studio live, uh, with the Big Technology AI Summit audience. Audience, let's hear you.
The way this is going to work is Ranjan and I will break down, uh, one story, and then we definitely welcome your questions, your prompts, your arguments with us. Uh, if you don't have anything, we have plenty to do, but, um, we'd love to have your participation. You can line up at either of the mics there, uh, to ask us a question.
Let's start with our top story this week. I promised myself when this, uh, summit was being planned that I would not be mean to Snapchat. However, Snapchat has left me with no choice. John, let's roll. Image C, please.
Uh, listeners, if you are listening on the podcast, you'll see what you're, what we're looking at at the audience here is an image of Evan Spiegel on CNBC wearing the latest Snap Specs. The headline is, "Snap Stock Falls After AR Specs Debut." Um, uh, almost 20 years since the launch of the iPhone, people are ready to think about computing differently, Spiegel said in an interview with CNBC. The, uh, the market reacted differently.
Um, Ranjan, let me just go to you quickly. Do you think that that, you know, Snapchat and Meta and all these other companies have been trying to build these AI devices of the future for years, and this is what we're looking at?
"This is what we're looking at." You kind of ruined my surprise. Can we go to D, please? I mean, I brought them. I had to bring them after sending Alex a photo. Is it time for us to finally accept that we're not going to have an AR device?
Interesting. So, so these, again, I got these in 2021. It's actually a very cool technology. Like, it's, no, I'm serious. Augmented reality. If you ever use Magic Leap in the 2010s, like being able to paint throughout your room and walk around that painting, being a being able to play games where you're chasing zombies. And my 7-year-old son actually is probably the only fan of Snap Spectacles in the world right now. He still loves using them. He also likes to watch YouTube on them, which is kind of amazing. But I think that form factor and the experience is amazing. Vision Pro has not quite captured it. I don't think what we just saw on Evan Spiegel's face is going to capture it. I think eventually, maybe Apple or someone will, but I don't think we're there yet. But I think we will be. I still am betting on AR eyeglasses of some sort.
Okay, I'm gonna go to questions in a moment if anyone has one. So, feel free to to stand up there if you want. Otherwise, we can keep doing this. Um, here's some of the social media reaction. Uh, does anyone, anyone that works at Snapchat have the guts to tell leadership that these things are ugly? That feeling when your glasses are so heavy they give you cauliflower ear. Snap is the best brand in the world when you're 16 and the worst brand when you're to be associated with when you're 21. Um, the people who actually buy $2,000 AI glasses aren't teenagers. If you think you really want to wear an always-on camera around in public, uh, it should have to look like this, with a picture of Evan Spiegel.
Um, let me make the case that this, it's over.
Good, cuz I'm going to take the other side. I think that the iPhone series that released that we just saw. So, does anyone here listen to Ron John on Fridays? Do we have listeners? All right. Okay. So, you'll know which direction this might go.
What's this guy been begging for for like since he came on the show the first time? Better Siri. Better Siri. I think they actually did it. Like the new Siri, if you look at the videos, looks terrific. And so maybe this idea of we have to wear the computing on our face is something that like kind of sounds good in concept, but model after model, it's not. And the AI device is the iPhone.
Okay. That's, I, I, that is an interesting direction to take it. I still think the form factor. Do, do any of the audience have like Meta Ray-Bands or any other device like that? I see a few. Like, you start to feel as you're walking around, as you're kind of interacting in the real world, stuff can happen that's not just maybe eventually Siri talking to you and using a traditional AI model to actually, you know, give you kind of information. So, I don't know. I'm still, I still think AR as a form factor via glasses is going to happen. I think, uh, you have Meta Ray-Bands, you enjoy them.
You know, I, I didn't want to say this publicly, but I have not used them. I, I, I, I mean, I have, but I don't. I use them for a bit. And like I said on our show recently, I was on a hike. It was cold. I was ready to get to the summit and put those glasses on and, uh, the battery started blinking red and I couldn't use them. I had to use my old phone. And let me say this, like, you know, they, they haven't taken off as a mainstream consumer device. And if you look at the stock of every single company that's pursuing them, it's not good. Snapchat, like we just said, is is struggling. Um, Meta, as we know, has its problems. Um, no one's looking at the these Ray-Bands to save Meta.
Well, no, but to me, the Apple Vision Pro is like the more direct correlated product versus.
You want to know what the best thing about the Vision Pro was? Find Vision Pro. Yeah. They put the person on Vision Pro on Siri and he fixed it. Mike Rockwell. Oh. So, I would not have guessed that the person who made the Vision Pro would be the one to fix Siri after all these years, but I guess if that's the case, that's exciting. Yeah.
Yeah. So, you're going to still, you're going to. Can you put those glasses on one more time?
Again, I was told backstage this might destroy my microphone, but I'm going to try. Do I look cool? No. No. No. No. I mean, even we were we were joking that Evan Spiegel is going to the Met Gala with his model wife. Like, this is like the coolest person in the world and how bad they made him look. That if it was like when Zuck wore Project Orion, no one really cared that much. But I think because Evan Spiegel is such a cool looking dude, that's why it looks so egregious. That's my take.
So, your, your answer on the way to make those things work is just be less handsome.
That's it. That's it. We'll, we'll write to Spiegel and let him know.
No questions. Okay. All right. Great. All right. Yeah. Don't be shy. Is it on? Yes, it is on. Hey guys. If you're willing, let us know who you are.
This is Serji Johal, actually. Um, industry analyst, flew from New York a day earlier to join you guys. So, welcome. Let's give him a welcome.
Thanks for ask question about, um, actually, it's an observation. And I want to get your take on this. Um, when companies have this gap between what people need today and what they're working on, which is like, in future, it can be two plus years out. So they lose that traction from the investors' point of view, as well as employees and and partners. So do you see that that's happening to Meta and others, like it happened to IBM when they were living in future with Watson X, for example? So, um, what's your take on that? Um, it can be B2C or B2B examples.
Okay, thank you for the question.
Yeah, no, that's a great question. I do think like if we're talking about kind of how the interface for how you interact with a computer. I have been begging for something else other than me holding my phone, looking at it, and we haven't really gotten anything for a long time. I mean, Humane tried with the pin. Um, I still think maybe some kind of pin is going to be around. Johnny Ives' pin at OpenAI. Maybe, maybe at some point.
Well, Greg, Greg Brockman is coming, so we'll.
Got to ask him about the, talk about the pin. But, but I think like being able to interact with all of this information now, being able to like process information so much more reliably with AI, just I don't want to have to keep looking at my phone and just looking at it on there. But even actually on the phone, I'm guessing do a lot of people here dictate more to their phone right now? Like that's completely changed. In the past, like I would have felt weird just talking to my phone, and now I'm constantly using WhisperFlow and just talking to whatever.
Tell a story about you and your wife.
I know this. Okay. I don't know if this is the most depressing thing or, and my wife is not here and hopefully won't kill me if this is being live-streamed right now, but.
No, we're going to broadcast this. So, I am constantly dictating to my computer, to my phone. And the other day, it was like Friday night. We had put our son to bed. We're both on our laptops, and I'm on one side of the couch dictating. And then I look over, and she's also has her laptop open and is kind of whispering to her computer, too. And I'm like, is this the future of tech? But it's a new computing interface. So, I'm happy about it.
Right. I look, I think the the gentleman brings up a great question, which is that things are moving so fast. How do you plan right now? And honestly, I don't know how you do it because every day there seems to be a new capability. Then the capability is taken off the table. Like Fable, for instance. I mean, the tweets about Fable where like people are adding Dave Sachs and they're like, please, I'll do anything for Fable back, just bring it back, and he won't bring it back. But it's just like, I don't understand how any company does that. And I think that actually would be a good topic for us to sort of get into on a future show.
Yep. Okay, let's go this way.
Hi, thank you for taking my question. Um, I was curious your views on in the next like five years as AR glasses evolve, whether like the chunky spectacles is the way to go or thinner glasses with like onboard compute, like either wireless to your iPhone or like the Vision Pro like cable down to the battery pack and compute. Well, it's a battery for a Vision Pro, but it could also have compute on board. So, I'm curious like the next five years, where you think consumers will gravitate towards.
No, it's a, it's a great question because if you ever use Magic Leap, there was like a.
Puck. Puck. That's what it was. My Here's my hot take. Anything, any device that requires a puck.
Not working. Well, how about this though?
What if the puck is your iPhone?
Oh. All right. Exactly. So, which gives Apple an opportunity that like, if the compute is taking place on the phone in your pocket, it allows you to be much slimmer from a power perspective. You don't want like a lightning cable connected to your face. But like, it's still, I think there is a, it makes me think Apple still has a good chance in this space because the iPhone can do all of the heavy lifting versus this thing on that is really heavy on your head.
Can I, can I ask, so what's your name?
I'm Kyle.
Kyle, so, uh, what do you want to use a, like, face computer for?
Oh, that's a good question. Um.
See, I told you Ron John, this stuff does not happen. No, no, no. Kyle's got something.
All right, let's give Kyle an opportunity here.
What do you think for?
I didn't mean to put you on the spot, but thank you for helping me prove my point. Uh, I think one cool thing would be like a shared, uh, like TV or something like, like imagine Vision Pro and you have just a shared, just like movie theater. You're on a plane with your family or something, and you just have like the shared experience, but it's just glasses. I like that. I like that. Like for me, one of the coolest things I always like, cuz, you know, as you get older, you move further away from your friends, and, uh, it would be cool to like be in the Vision Pro together.
Yeah. Sit, sit half court, watch the Knicks next to Timothy Chalamet, but we're just in the Vision Pro. But, you know what's interesting? Apple never advertised that as a social device. All the marketing was just you're sitting alone at home, and all you're doing is the Vision Pro. Nobody else exists.
The other big one. Sorry to interrupt. I would say the other big one for me is just having a lot of monitors around when I'm working. Like, I even though I have like an ultrawide or like three monitors, feel like sometimes I could have more. So just being able to like interact with AI to pull up the exact page I'm looking for out of, like, I'm one of those people that has like a thousand tabs. So just being able to pull up the thing and I just say, open up that tab, and it just pops up would be pretty cool.
Would 8,000 individual tabs in a giant planner space be better? Or I was going with this.
No, no, but I do agree like, that being able to do more, open scaled work and like look at different charts, and I think there's that still. And I know like I have friends who own the Vision Pro who use it for that.
Still. No, but did, did they have a nice time? All right, thank you, Kyle. Let's go here.
Hey, what's up? This is Sasha from Yo University, doing research on AI agents for finance. First of all, love you guys. Listening to you guys chat on my way to work has been my king. I think this is sentiment shared by not just me, but many people in the audience. So, thank you so much.
Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate that. And thank you for coming. All the. Did you fly in?
Uh, yes.
Oh my god. Thank you for coming. It's great to see you.
It's worth it. Um, and I appreciate your sharp line of, uh, reasoning and questioning. So, uh, what's your view on the meter benchmarks of how long the AI and AI agents can work independently being saturated? Are we at that point that, uh, of them being at infinite work number of hours working yet, or are we reaching that soon, and what is the world going to be looking like after we hit that infinite mark?
That is an excellent question. So, first of all, there is some controversy about the meter monitoring, but I think it's kind of directionally accurate, right? Like, I showed the meter chart at the very beginning of, of our event today, that like, you saw these models, they could not code autonomously for more than 30 minutes in 2023, and now they can code autonomously for the equivalent of 18 hours, right? Um, so what happens if they just kind of blow past that limit and then they can code all the time? Um, that is an excellent question. Do you have any thoughts?
So, I, I felt that with the go mode and automation mode, uh, it practically felt that they are already doing this autonomously forever. Right. Uh, I want them to send me reports. My prompt would be, if you find something interesting, send me an email. Yes. Then I, when I see it, I will come back and intervene. But it felt that for many tasks, it's already at that mark.
Yeah. No, a Perplexity computer will basically do that. Um, so that's, that's definitely something that's happening. But I'll just say one more thing, and then we'll go to Ron John. Um, Greg Brockman, who will be here later, has this like idea of a compute-powered economy, where like, you know, you sort of, once you get these bots working the way that you explained, you just, maybe he'll say this later, um, you just kind of throw them at any problem, and then they just kind of work autonomously through it. Now, we don't, we've never seen what the world looks like when you can do something like that, but I do think given the progress that we've seen with the models, you would imagine that something substantial will come at a certain point. So, uh, my day job, I work at a company, Writer. We're an enterprise AI company, and the, when, and the, the goal mode was asked about recently again, the idea that you just provide the goal, the agent will iteratively loop and keep doing work until it finds the right solution. In the real world, that is like the benchmarks versus the real world. I still think there's such a massive gap in terms of what does the data look like? What, what is the actual problem? Does the customer or the person actually understand the goal in a clear enough way that they're able to define it to kind of push that loop forward? So, I think it's an interesting. I think with a lot of AI, again, even around the benchmarking, like again, versus real-world understanding of how to use it, what's happening, and what's available for it to use. There's still a lot of, uh, work to be done. I mean, you, you can do these goal modes for like less complicated tasks. I like.
What have you goal-mode-ed?
Uh, so I worked with Perplexity Computer recently to, um, to try to like have it find a hotel discount for me.
No travel stories. I, I've been on a, this has been for like two years. Every time I remember, like Sundar, actually, it was, I don't know if people remember in 2019, my example.
Wait, no. Just saying. Why does everyone when they talk about agentic, talk about travel? I get.
Cuz travel is such a pain in the ass.
But it's, I don't. Okay, go on. Go on. I'm, I'm, I'm sheepish now.
No, no, no. Hotel discount. Hotel discount. I just looked at the hotel every hour, and when it dropped below a certain threshold, emailed me.
That was pretty good. Okay, that's a clear goal. I'll give you that as a clear goal.
This is. I respect your. I think you're right that we definitely need better examples than.
It's a pet peeve. It's just for some reason, every Apple, the original ridiculous Bella Ramsey commercials around Apple Intelligence, core, everything is flight booking. And again, like.
You have killed that Bella Ramsey commercial so often, they're going to the creative agency is just going to write to you at some point. And I love the Last of Us and I love Bella Ramsey, but those commercials still irked me. Yeah.
What happened in those commercials? Uh, one of them, she's sitting at someone that she can't remember who that person is, and in real time, asks Apple Intelligence, like, tell me about this person, my interactions, which again, is just such a weird thing. Like, I'm so much better than you that I don't know who you are, and I need to remember who you are and have AI tell me. But, and it didn't even come close to working with Apple Intelligence, so that was that was the worst one.
You know what would be good for that, actually?
What goal mode?
AR glasses. Oh, AR glasses. There's the real-world use case. Or the fact that that commercial was so bad, just again, proves my point that, okay, AR glasses aren't going to work. Okay. Sorry. Thank you so much for the question.
Thank you. And we'll go over here.
Oh, he was. Okay, fine. We'll go here. Okay. Um, hi. Um, hey Harris. Uh, I'm on the board of the Commonwealth Club here, and I, I run some, uh, programs for the club, and I have a small scenario planning consultancy. But here's my question that I think hasn't come up here. Um, what, what should we be concerned about in terms of using the AI models, them building a database on us, and then turning that into advertising? So the advertising potential revenue from some, you, from users, do you think the AI companies will ever go after that revenue or use that information for advertising purposes?
Oo, that's a good one. So, will, will AI's build an amazing, uh, sort of profile of you based off of all the personal data and then use that for ads? Most certainly.
So, someone left one of the companies and wrote about that in the New York Times about three months ago.
No, definitely. Yeah, that, that's coming. Um, I, I think that, um, advertising is obviously going to be one use where we're going to start to see some of the problematic stuff here. But actually, if you look at the ads that OpenAI gave you, it's sort of like more of a, and obviously they, they always come out with the high-touch brand, and then they will like get you on the direct response, like super targeted stuff, um, once they realize they can't make money on brand. Um, but like, it looks pretty good. Like, if you're, sorry to go with a travel example again, but if you're like researching travel on ChatGPT, like you can go into an advertising chat experience, and it will help you. But I, I think that like, we have never had technology ever that collecting this much information about us. Has anyone here, um, like talk to, like ChatGPT or Claude and say, can you psychoanalyze me?
If you're not, or give me any any insight about myself? Just like five of you. The rest of you have done it. Admit it. It's scary. And, and we're, and that's the like gated stuff, and we're giving this all this information to to companies, and it's a, a trust thing that we don't really know where it's going to go.
Yeah, I think it's interesting because again, OpenAI originally, ads are going to be a big part of the business. Now they've pivoted away from that a bit, but are still releasing ad products. At least Anthropic is not. I mean, I don't think they're going in that direction at all. Google and Gemini, obviously 100% will. And like, you probably will get a really good ad experience. I mean, the more it knows about you, the types of questions you're asking. But it is like, uh, you know, like thousands and tens of thousands of three to five-word Google searches are a lot different than entire thought partnership, therapy, like research exploration. These models will know everything about you, and it is, it's terrifying.
Have you done the psychoanalyze me prompt?
No, but I did. So, I use like Claude and ChatGPT, Gemini. I'll kind of go through the three of them and cycle around. So, it is funny. So I have asked, like, what do you know about me? Like, what would you ask back? And they all have very different kind of like, jagged, jarring aggregations of who I am. Like, I don't know, they're, uh, I, I, I don't have one that just knows me through and through.
I, I've done it.
I diversify my.
I've done it with ChatGPT.
Yeah. And then like, it will first give you an answer that's like, kind of sanitized, and then you say, go a little deeper, and then you say, get a little darker.
Oh dear.
I have not red-teamed, uh, ChatGPT. I challenge you all to give it a shot. Or don't go darker. Don't go darker. But if you really want to.
Okay. Thank you over here. And thank you for the question.
Let's move on. Let's move on. Yeah.
Thank you guys, and really appreciate all the work that you do on the podcast and YouTube. Uh, your conversations go so deep and still very broad. So, I really appreciate that.
Thank you. We appreciate it. You're, you're a listener or viewer?
Oh, yeah. All right. Both. Thank you so much.
Depends on where I am. Amazing. Appreciate it. Um, and, you know, my name is Sa. I'm an advisor for startups in the AI space. Um, and I've been in product management and go-to-market strategy. Um, my question for you, some somewhat related to the gentleman before, you know, there's a lot of coverage on agents and what agents can do, and, uh, a little bit about the governance and cost control. What I don't see a lot about, um, you know, is, you know, agents do drift, probably why we don't have better examples than travel. And, you know, over a period of time, they don't get better at that specific, uh, you know, understanding of the people and the business context and the operating model they're working in, um, and, you know, learn from it. And I was wondering, is there, is there a lot of conversation that you guys are seeing around, uh, the learning of, uh, or the learning layer in the agents, and is it too early, or, you know, um, for that to happen? And the conversation is mostly around governance and cost and access.
It's actually a good question for Ronjan.
Yeah. I, so again, like working in this all day, and thank you for the question. I, I think what's going to happen, and I'm already starting to see, is like six to twelve months ago, the approach was just jam as much information into whatever system you can. And we were kind of promised that it would just work, and AI is just going to, and like, there's, you know, you'd get this feeling that, oh, wait, a 100-page PDF, it actually could parse, and I can get information out of, but then when you're doing that at any kind of agentic scale, it doesn't. And I think already, like, how information gets chunked up and like distributed in different ways and context windows, everyone would see like, one million, uh, token context window, but we didn't really know what it meant. And now more and more, like, and I actually think this is going to be one of the most interesting, like professional opportunities and areas to be an expert in going forward is like being able to kind of, it's funny, like, it is as much art as science right now. But I think like the more you can start to grab a hold of how information flows through these agents and how you actually get it reliable, it's going to be a really, really interesting space. It's not, it's no one job right now.
Thank you.
Okay. Thank you for the question. All right, we have seven minutes, three questions. Let's see if we can keep the questions brief, and we'll keep the answers brief, and we'll get to everybody.
I'll try to be quick. Everyone, uh, big fan of the pod, by the way. Flew Chrisy. I'm one of the co-founders of a company called Virus Watcher. I'm here, uh, with my colleague. Flew in from Dallas. He flew in from Austin. Yes. A big fan.
We got a couple of Dallas folks here today.
Oh, who's Dallas? Shout out Dallas. There we go. Okay. Go, Matt.
Oh, yeah. We're big in Texas. Um, I'm going to go in a different direction, uh, with my question. Is, uh, I want to know, kind of, what y'all's thoughts, and honestly, if you can ask this kind of later on with Greg Brockman and others, um, what is the thought on using AI models and AI, you know, technology for biological intelligence, biosurveillance, and public health for emerging risk detection with infectious diseases? It's a very interesting project that we're working on. We have a lot of epidemiologists on our team. We were just at the UN two weeks ago with the World Health Organization, um, and trying to discuss these problems and how we can use the technology to, to kind of, uh, detect these things early on. So, I kind of want to get you guys' thoughts on that.
Can I ask you a question back, and if you could give a brief answer, that would be great?
Okay. Are you a believer in the bio-capabilities of these models, like Fable? Like, do you think Anthropic made the right decision by gating them?
Wait, bio-capabilities? Meaning you're talking about biological weapons? He's talking about like disease, correct? But I, I think that biological. His answer will give us insight into the.
I, I mean, I think it's a, it's a very touchy, you know, it's a, there's no right answer, I don't think. Um, but I do think it probably did more harm, uh, you know, than, you know, not allowing everyone to kind of take advantage of.
So, you're not, you're not basically worried that today's cutting-edge models could cause like new bio-threats?
No, I, I, I am. But I think there's also a lot of positive that can come out of it as well.
Let everybody use it though.
Yeah. I, I mean, I just, you know, it doesn't even have to be a Fable-style model. It can be, you can take a frontier model, distill a more, uh, custom model. Yeah. Safety, with, you know, safety standards involved. But sorry, I don't want to be too long. I just want to.
No, great question. Ronjan, in terms of the first part of it, I do think again, like, and it's one of the underappreciated things, and I feel in the AI industry, like disease prevention and scenario modeling around vir, like, we don't talk about that stuff enough, or whoever is trying to talk about it does not get listened to enough. So, I love the kind of work you're doing, and like those kind of stories would bring the AI industry a little bit better reputation, I think.
Yeah. No, I, I agree. You're thinking about biological weapons? Oh, I think that that, if, well, if you can do one, then you could certainly do the other. Am I what? I.
I don't know. I'm not. Is one like, but, okay.
I actually have no idea. Why are you giving me this all these problems here?
Uh, no, I, I, I hope that we can, and we. I know that's a very. No, no, no. We're going to speak with, we'll, we'll hopefully have some time to talk about health with Brockman.
Yeah, I would love. Yeah, if you can bring that up. Okay.
Okay. Thank you for the question over here.
Hi, uh, my name is Heidi. I'm your linking online friend. That's right. You messaged me yesterday. Yes. Uh, joining this, uh, event, see each other in person. Uh, my question about before you, with a different speaker, mentioned about China. So, I'm Chinese. I'm curious about why you think, uh, Chinese, uh, China is important business partnership with, uh, uh, USA, especially high-tech. Second question about, uh, ring. So, you mentioned a lot of RM larger language models. So, my question about Gemini, JDP, and Claude, and Anison, which one you prefer, think about it in future is more stronger, smarter in the future. Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you for the question.
Well, the question on China is, is, sorry, what's the question on China?
No, no, why you think, uh, it's important, uh, B relationship with USA. So, yeah, secure.
You know. All right, I will, I will take that question, and then Ranjan will answer which model he likes better. Um.
You know, I, I think that we're obviously in this competition. The US and China are in this competition, and there's like a lot of suspicion on both ends, and, um, you know, I've said in the past that like, it would be great if there was better cooperation between the two countries, and people have told me that I'm naive. Um, but I'm not going to, you know, lose that hope. I think that if, if, I mean, in some ways, competition's good, right? Because then you'll just have everybody striving to build the better thing. But, you know, we just talked about, uh, AI for health. If the countries were able to work together, maybe on specific initiatives, that would be much welcome. I, I think the most interesting part of like US versus, or US with China in terms of AI in the last few months, the conversation around moving towards DeepSeek and adding it into your agentic process, or adding Chinese models, did not exist in any conversation I was in 12 months ago, and now is in almost every conversation, at least as an option, because cost has become such a larger part of the conversation. So, I think, I think it's a good thing. I think the more integration there is overall across these systems, the better.
Yeah, but watch out for. The cat holding the hands with Dario and Sam is my favorite meme of the whole year. Okay, we have one minute left, but let's see if we can do it in a minute.
All right, I'll go through this quickly. Hi, Maria Sarah Roberts. I'm in business management consulting. My question is a little bit different. Um, as we are evolving into, or entering, or in a world already where endless possibilities are available, where and how do you see the evolution of the responsibilities that big tech companies have in supporting making this world better? Not the product and our engagement and how we interact with all the screens better, but rather like the real big problems that the world has. And not because they should, but because they can. So, how do you think about like the evolution of that as we step into this world?
I, I, I'll answer that. Or do you want to answer? Go ahead.
I just, we, we had a backstage, we had a long rant because I'd forgotten that Anthropic is a PBC, public benefit corporation, but I still think there is a responsibility. I don't actually see it happening in any kind of way because competition is so fierce now. I wish it would, but I don't see it happening. Yeah. I, um, that, that was a good answer. Come on. We have, we, I want to make people, make sure everybody gets gets to coffee. Oh, no. Screw it. I'll answer it. Um, so, so Jeff Bezos, so I think they have an obligation to do good for the world. And I don't know if, and I know people within the companies are, you know, are very serious about that. So they have their own side projects, but I think, you know, as a society, maybe we can't expect them to do it out of the goodness of their own hearts. Jeff Bezos was recently doing an interview, and he said, um, he said, I think what I do in the private sector is going to outweigh whatever I could do charitably. I disagree with that, and I think that that's just the mindset of a lot of people at the top of these companies. And so, like, everybody else needs to be aware of that and not count on it, even though it would be nice. So that's my perspective. All right. Uh, Ronjan, will you come back with us after the break and speak with Alex Stamos and I about whether, um, this Mythos and Fable stuff is material or marketing?
You know, I would love to.
You guys want to get a coffee break? You guys, thank you very much.