Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Technology's daily show (formerly the Technology Brothers Podcast). Streaming live on X and YouTube from 11 - 2 PM PST Monday - Friday. Available on X, Apple, Spotify, and YouTube.
What's going on over there, Jordi? You got you got caught lacking?
Speaker 2:I was publishing an essay.
Speaker 1:You were publishing an essay. It's live on X now. You can go listen to it. You can also subscribe at tbpn.com. Our Substack will email you every morning with the TBPN newsletter and, you know, 500 words from me or Jordy.
Speaker 1:It's a lot of fun. Go check it out. The thing that got Jordy to learn to type was this video, this launch video. You were like, I gotta write an essay. I gotta learn.
Speaker 1:I gotta lock in. I gotta learn how to write because
Speaker 2:I gotta respond.
Speaker 1:This is this is, it's it's enraged me. Were you enraged?
Speaker 2:I wasn't enraged. I try not to let the Internet make me mad.
Speaker 1:Okay. But they were trying to enrage you and were
Speaker 3:trying they
Speaker 1:were rage fading me. You angry. I'd love to watch the Chad IDE BrainRot code editor video. First, I wanna see I wanna see the video for myself. Let's play it.
Speaker 1:K. So he's got some Newport cigarettes. He's packing, pulls out a cigarette.
Speaker 2:With the Stanford.
Speaker 1:Lights it up. He's got the cutoff.
Speaker 2:Stanford cutoffs.
Speaker 1:What is this music that's playing? He's got the the guitar in the background. And what is he playing? Some sort of plink plink? This is steak.
Speaker 1:Oh, this is steak. Okay. So this is gambling. So he's gambling.
Speaker 2:And He's gambling in the IDE.
Speaker 1:So I assume I assume that means he's won something or other. I I actually don't know what the stake UI looks like. Okay. So he's done.
Speaker 3:Yeah. There's
Speaker 1:Winning. He he has won the the gambling session with stake, and now he's back in his ID. And he writes a prompt, and he says test the code. And it pulls up some sort of mobile game that it's playing. Do you do you know This is
Speaker 3:Clash Royale?
Speaker 1:This is Clash Royale. Okay.
Speaker 2:Have you played? I have
Speaker 3:played, in middle school.
Speaker 2:Yeah. So I'll start by saying I think the video is funny. Okay. And I'm sure the founders are smart. For for a low budget launch video, I think they did well.
Speaker 2:They broke through.
Speaker 1:That is a very low budget launch video. That that literally cost nothing.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Okay. So I think that's great. And I'm not and I and I wanna be clear that I'm not bearish Yeah. On the founders
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:At all. But yesterday, YC announced Chad IDE, aka the BrainRot code editor. Chad is an AI code editor that allows you to gamble, watch TikTok, and use dating apps while you work on coding tasks. Their launch rightfully got a lot of attention. On one hand, it's funny.
Speaker 2:On the other hand, what are we doing here, and why does this belong in the official YC account? To understand Chad IDE, Cluely, icon, friend, and the new class of Gen Z startups, you have to understand the online environment that these founders grew up in. If you grew up on the Internet and you studied how and why certain people would regularly go viral, you know that making people mad has and always will be an effective way to get attention. The feedback loop is simple. You make something that makes people angry, and people comment, share, and dunk.
Speaker 2:And because feeds are optimized to show posts with high engagement the most, you get a lot of reach. Rage baiting for commercial purposes, in my view, pioneered by course bros. People like Tai Lopez realized that making the masses mad was an effective way to drive course sales. You could flaunt Lamborghinis, make a bunch of people angry, and as long as a handful of people found their way into their course, it was a viable repeatable strategy. Historically on x, rage baiting was a marketing strategy, not a product strategy.
Speaker 2:Accounts like sweaty startup aka Nick Huber frequently post things to get an angry reaction in the subsequent reach. But behind the scenes, Nick has always been running a pretty normal commercial real estate fund. In 2025, rage baiting has become a product strategy. Cluely started as an app for cheating on coding interviews. Chad IDE's only known differentiation from the other 100 AI native IDE's is that you can gamble and swipe on dating apps in it.
Speaker 2:It's becoming clear that while rage bait might occasionally work as a marketing strategy, it really should not be employed as a product strategy. Running a successful VC backed company requires you to build a coalition of people that want to see you win. Getting media, investors, talent, and customers on your side is not an easy task. Rage baiting, whether at the marketing level or product level, is the most effective way to get people who could be potential investors, customers, or team members to actively prey on your downfall. YC has long provided some of the most durable, high quality, generalizable advice for startups, and I believe that it has had a tremendously positive impact on the companies that go through YC and even those that don't.
Speaker 2:Launch now, make something people want, do things that don't scale, ignore your competitors are just some some of those. So as someone who believes that YC is one of the most important and influential institutions in tech, I believe it might be time to include this in their list of essential start up advice. Rage baiting is for losers. But I do think it's notable that rage bait has moved from kind of a fringe marketing strategy to a marketing strategy within tech to now living at the product level. And I just don't think that's gonna create a lot of enduring value for the companies that pursue that strategy.
Speaker 1:Yes. So the reaction to this was very negative, and I think there's a few it it really has to be a better layer of the stack.
Speaker 2:It ends up it ends up it ends up impacting the brands of the firms that fund these ideas.
Speaker 1:Of course. The most important thing in your piece that I liked was this idea that there is rage bait marketing, doing a stunt, doing something a little bit crazy, but then delivering a quality product is separate from making the product itself rage baity. And so I think a lot of people, when they saw this video, they wanted they they were wondering, what does the product actually do? Because all you've told me is that you created an April fool's joke, and Google's been doing April fool's jokes for years. The question for me and the question I had for Tyler was, what's actually under the hood at Chad IDE?
Speaker 1:The company is not called Chad IDE. It's called Clad Labs. The steel man here is that, hey. IDEs are boring. You gotta do something funny.
Speaker 1:Film a funny video. Create a fake product, but then have something under the hood that is actually real, that does actually advance the conversation, and is maybe something that a real product
Speaker 2:try to sign up That might need a code. I think this would have been a brilliant kind of, like, stunt
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:If they did it as a stunt, and it wasn't core to the brand that they're building. It wasn't core to the product.
Speaker 1:If it was April fool and and Michael Truell at Cursor or Scott Wu with Windsurf were like, we're doing we're doing a brain rod version of the IDE. Everyone would be like, that's hilarious. Okay. Now back to using Windsurf and Cursor. Right?
Speaker 3:Yeah. So so I I go to the website. You can't download it yet because it's still in beta. You need you need a code. Mhmm.
Speaker 3:I DM'd the founders, but they didn't get back to me. Mhmm. The the company is not Chad Labs. It's Clad Labs. Yes.
Speaker 3:This, like, it's the Chad IDE, but, like, this is obviously a marketing stunt. I I I kind of disagree.
Speaker 1:Yeah. But can you get a product from Clad Labs? Like, Google would come out with a joke, you know, pigeon based algorithm or something like that. That would be out or, like, Google Translate for animals would be at, like, animals.googletranslate.com that day. But Google Translate would still work.
Speaker 1:So, like, walk me through the Clad Labs product. Like, what is their core product outside of the stunt?
Speaker 3:When you go to the download page, there's options like which brain rot do you want. Yes. And it's like, you know, steak or like Minecraft parkour or whatever. And then there's an option that says, I don't want brain rot.
Speaker 4:Okay.
Speaker 3:There's obviously a product here. This is a marketing stunt. I, like, believe that.
Speaker 1:Okay. Met a very successful founder who said, I chose fund blank, because they gave me credibility when I needed it. Now the fund backs everything, including the dumbest ideas I've ever seen. I don't think the next wave of founders will pick them. The credibility they had is gone.
Speaker 1:And I was thinking about how AUM weighted brain rot or a AUM weighted slop is not an excuse for slop and and and controversial investments. If you put 1% of your fund into something that is just going to go all over the Internet and be like, we are the most degenerate. We're the craziest. We're the most insane. We're the most fraudulent, like, in your face company, even if it's only 1% of your fund.
Speaker 1:You're not gonna be able to say, no. No. No. 9% of my investments are just, like, you know, trying to cure cancer genuinely or, like, actually trying to improve developer productivity or, like, 99% of my investments are just reasonable down the fairway, like good businesses. I took a flyer.
Speaker 1:1% is a little bit crazy. Well, if that 1% gets a thousand times more views than your enterprise SaaS portfolio, like, you're gonna be known as the slot fund. So, like, you need to be careful about that. Yeah.
Speaker 2:You know, one of YC's challenges as an institution is that they can only accept something like I think it's, like, less than one isn't it less than 1%
Speaker 1:Oh,
Speaker 2:yeah. Location. So super small, you know, very very low acceptance rate. Yeah. And so if you're a founder that applied with an idea that you think is, you know, world positive, and then you see them announcing this kind of stuff Mhmm.
Speaker 2:Those founders are gonna be even more frustrated.
Speaker 1:Mhmm. Yes.
Speaker 3:Say that I have some new way to do, you know, agents Yes. In my editor.
Speaker 1:Yes.
Speaker 3:Right? And it's, like, it actually works way better than Cursor. It's way better than Windsurf. It's better than everything else. And I applied to YC with this Mhmm.
Speaker 3:Thing. Okay. There's, like, probably, what, like, 10 other YC companies that are like, literally YC companies in the same batch doing similar, you know, coding editor stuff. Sure. How do I differentiate myself?
Speaker 3:I feel like this is, like, fairly reasonable. Okay. We get some users that are think it's, like, funny to gamble in their IDE, and then they realize, like, oh, this is actually a pretty useful feature.
Speaker 2:Mhmm.
Speaker 3:Jordy, if if you were in YC and you had a coding editor company, how do you, like, recommend, like, instead of doing stuff like this, how do you how do they differentiate that?
Speaker 2:Back to what I said, which was which was separate out the rage from the core product and have it be, like, a marketing stunt. I I still think you could have gotten the same amount of attention. Then people would go in and they'd be like, wait. This is actually a really cool
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 3:But I I novel approach. We know for sure that they're not doing that.
Speaker 1:Like, there is no real product here. And that's the and that's what Jordy's risk is is that they haven't built anything behind the scenes. It's all marketing. It's all stunt. The product you're making is to help people gamble, and gambling is bad.
Speaker 1:And so if you are anti gambling, you are anti this product that they built, and they and they now they have the opportunity to say, no. No. No. Like, the here's the real thing, and they haven't done that yet. It would have been so easy if at that end of that video, been like, that's what people feel like Gen Z entrepreneurs built.
Speaker 3:Yeah.
Speaker 1:But we didn't wanna do that. So we actually built this, go down the road right now.
Speaker 3:But I'm not gonna I I wanna try the I don't wanna gamble, but I wanna see it actually, like, in the ID. I that's, like, funny.
Speaker 2:Tips to apply at YC batch winner 2026. And I think I think Sharav is an is an literal is a literal child. Tips of time. What'd say?
Speaker 5:First tip, you should have some clear goals in front. Like, what you should do after funding, and you should have at least
Speaker 1:I can barely hear this but Okay. We can pause it. But the reason
Speaker 2:the reason I included this is because I think there's a lot of people like Sharav and tons of young people that look to YC as whatever YC is promoting Yes. They approve. And so I just I wanna avoid a scenario where Sharavs of the world think that they need to raid rage bait in order to break out in this industry. It's not the reality. You can just build a great product.
Speaker 2:You can get let that speak for itself. You can find ways to market it along the way. Albie, who is a 14 year old applying for YC went extremely viral earlier this week, got 3,600,000 views. Wow. 14 year old founder.
Speaker 6:I'm Albie. I'm 14, and I'm based in Sydney, Australia. I've been building
Speaker 1:things ever since
Speaker 6:I was six or seven. Bruh. Don't get the joke.
Speaker 1:Really good editing.
Speaker 6:Well, I've been building things ever since I was nine. First writing code code camps, then building Roblox games, and even launching a soccer gear brand when I was 12. We do. Have a field.
Speaker 1:We gotta hire this
Speaker 6:guy ahead of us. Where teams learn the real world skills that school forgot, like entrepreneurship, coding, AI, content creation, etcetera. Instead of boring textbooks, you level up, earn XP, and unlock challenges as you go. All while learning from top founders, creators, innovators, and other young people doing amazing things. I started Finkel because school wasn't teaching me or my friends how to actually build, create, or launch
Speaker 2:Teddy says my default reply to high schoolers hitting me up for VC funding is put me on the phone with your parents.
Speaker 1:You're supposed to just turn on the webcam and basically just talk for one minute. That's how you apply to YC.
Speaker 2:One shot it.
Speaker 1:Yeah. You're supposed to just one shot it. No editing because they don't want it to turn into, oh, to apply to YC, you spend two weeks doing an edited video. They're like, no. Work on your product, and then the marketing is, like, the last little cherry on top.
Speaker 1:Like, that's always been the YC mantra. And that's a little bit of, like, this Cloudlabs thing. Although the weird thing is, like, the video, I love the video. It's funny, and it's cheap, and it's clearly just, like, a bit, and they did it, and it was two seconds. But then it feels like like they
Speaker 2:didn't products.
Speaker 1:They didn't they didn't give me the payoff of like, oh, okay. You guys are funny, and you're working on something cool and interesting and hard. Ev Randall, who's coming on the show on Friday, went on Harry Stebbing's show 20 VC, is putting the timeline in turmoil over some comments about other funds.
Speaker 4:I don't think two seconds. Ravi or Hamant or even Ben and Mark at this point, I don't think that they can go to LPs, one of those legs of the stool, and say, hey. This this basket of funds that we're making you invest pari passu across, we're gonna get you five x net on that. I don't think they can say that they at least can't say that with a straight face. And if you look at the recent return data, I think it suggests that.
Speaker 4:So I think they'll be able to make an immense amount of money on an absolute basis, but I think a lot of these LPs are in the business to make or in venture to make high money on money returns. Like, they had PE for the low return stuff, and they probably get better liquidity from PE. They're here for the high money on money returns. And this is one of the reasons why I'm extremely excited about Benchmark's competitive position in today's market because we can go to LPs. We can say, hey.
Speaker 4:We're shooting for higher five than five x net. We have the historical track record to back it up, and we have the fund sizes to back it up as well. I mean, you had Miles from Carnegie Mellon come on here and do the awesome math and the very clear math of, hey. Do you know how hard it is to return Forex net on $8,000,000,000, $10,000,000,000? It is immensely hard, and it's it it, like, defies the laws of physics.
Speaker 4:So I think there's a difference between, are they going to make a ton of money, and are they gonna produce the returns that LPs really want this asset class to produce? Two very, very different things. But for now, the, like, the the rubber is like, the rubber won't meet the road because as you mentioned, there's just so much global demand from LPs for exposure to private technology, and they are happy to take lower returns. And so I don't think there's any end in sight. But I think on a relative basis between all of these different constituents and all these different GPs, there's a huge, huge delta and a huge differentiation between who can actually produce venture like returns.
Speaker 1:Boo. He's not AGI pilled. Boo. 10 x. You're you're gonna 10 x the fund.
Speaker 1:Just 10 x it again. Just 10 x it again. 10 x again. The fund.
Speaker 4:Raise it
Speaker 2:to All
Speaker 1:within a bucks. Fund and 10 x Just 10 x it, and we're gonna 10 x it again. No.
Speaker 2:Obviously That was on a little bit of damage control
Speaker 1:this morning. Control. Wait. Wait. I so I wanna hear what what what exactly did he say the first line?
Speaker 1:He says, they cannot go to LPs and say with a straight face that they can do five x net. Can we play the actual clip? Because I feel like that's not quite right. What do
Speaker 4:you say? I don't think rather you're Hamant or even Ben and Mark at this point, I don't think that they can go to LPs, one of those legs of the stool
Speaker 2:Said I don't
Speaker 4:think can go to LPs. Basket of funds that we're making you invest pari passu across Yeah. We're gonna get you five x net on that.
Speaker 1:We're gonna
Speaker 4:get you five x net.
Speaker 1:Yeah. Because maybe they can go with a straight face and say, we're gonna get you six x net.
Speaker 2:Part of the the reality is I don't think no fund manager can really go to LPs, you can you can share that you you believe there's a chance we'll get a five x net. But isn't it like
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:99% of funds just don't come anywhere close to that.
Speaker 1:I think the broader point that he's making is something along the lines of, like I I saw some other post about, like, there will be fortunes made just by getting, getting retail investors and the broader capital that's out there in the world into the private Mag seven, the OpenAI's, the Anthropix, the SpaceX's, the Andorals. There's a whole host of companies. There is a world where where you set up a fund that has lower return expectations, but also lower risk, and it's a great deal and LPs love it. I don't know that it's that hot of a take, but, it certainly certainly put the timeline in turmoil. Part of
Speaker 2:it is that Benchmark's feeling feeling pretty good right now. If you look at their 2020 fund, they have for four. They have fireworks. What's the other one? They have a bunch of, like, multi 10 baggers Yeah.
Speaker 2:At this point in that fund. So they're feeling pretty good about going to LPs and saying, look. We still got it. Yeah. Still cook it.
Speaker 1:To be clear, I slash we love working with our friends at all of these funds, and this part was not meant as a slight slash commentary on the on their quality as investors, just POV on fund strategies and the unique value prop of benchmark. I think it's I think it's a fair fair tweet, but it's it's amazing because everyone is coming out and just trash.
Speaker 2:Part of what made it feel super personal is that Harry tagged Ravi Robbie
Speaker 1:Totally. Totally. Totally.
Speaker 2:And Ben. Yeah.
Speaker 1:We we we act we actively try to avoid, like, tagging people if someone is talking trash about someone else or, like, subtweeting them. We don't really try and, like, handhold into drama Since my former colleagues at a sixteen z are RIAs and thus cannot legally comment on what they can slash cannot say with a straight face to LPs, this sounds a lot like what crappy board members say when as an outside observer, they have zero clue what actually happens day to day in the business. Ev thinks he understands Andreessen's business, but in fact, he does not understand Andreessen's business. But I wanna know, like, what is the misunderstanding? Because the steel man, the bull case on the Andreessen strategy is that Ev is Ev is making the claim that they will make more money dollars total dollars because they're they're investing out of a bigger fund size.
Speaker 1:They don't need to go and say we're gonna five x it, it's a different pool of LPs.
Speaker 2:Also, part of part of, like, the major appeal of investing in a 16 z is that you pretty much know that you're gonna get in every important company. That's my point of view. I'm not an LP, but Mhmm. I I happily would be. And it's because you know you're gonna get some exposure to pretty much every important company, not necessarily always super early, but at some point in the company's life cycle, it's very likely that they will take a meaningful check from a 16 z.
Speaker 1:What does Ev say? He says, I think smaller constrained funds can produce higher returns in venture. Quote, this must be a shitty board member. Don't work with him. Incredible non sequitur.
Speaker 1:Thanks, Scott.
Speaker 2:Meanwhile, over on x, people are saying, calling me unk. They're saying I'm a boomer
Speaker 1:Oh, yeah?
Speaker 2:For my, for my post, which I think is fair. But, again, there's more nuance.
Speaker 1:During the Clearly heyday, I would imagine that 80% of the team's hours were spent on marketing and 20% were spent on on product, maybe. Now I think it's flipped. And I think that's very bullish. Think that's good. But Tyler, you had a rebuttal?
Speaker 3:This seems very different from like, you see the the the gambling on your credit card statements or whatever, like, from other accelerators. Like, this feels very different. Like, this is, like, the marketing like, I I I think people kind of tend to group all of this stuff together where it's, like, like, Gruengan was talking about yesterday where it's, like, some of these are, like, immoral companies that you could say.
Speaker 6:Sure.
Speaker 3:I think this feels different than that.
Speaker 1:What if the whole if the whole product is and this is all we've this is all we've seen. A Versus code fork with minimal autocomplete, It they're always, you know, a year or two or five behind Cursor and Windsurf. And, yes, it has the ability to add Tinder and stake and sports betting in it. And, like, that the product that they are telling us they're building is what they're building, and they stay with it for five years. Like, what do you say then?
Speaker 3:Yeah. Then that's not good. Okay.
Speaker 1:Dwarkash Patel, Dylan Patel sat down with Sachin Adela, and they got an exclusive tour of Fairwater 2, the most the most powerful AI data center in the world.
Speaker 3:Maybe this is wrong, but I I think Colossus 2 will be bigger. It's just, currently, it's not big. Like, this is the current
Speaker 1:Current biggest.
Speaker 3:It's the current biggest.
Speaker 1:Okay. Okay. You had a you had a chance to actually sit down and watch this whole interview, before we started the show. Yeah. Can you give me some takeaways?
Speaker 1:Where should people are there any time stamps that we should pull up? Are there any takeaways that people should know before they go and watch it?
Speaker 3:It was pretty enlightening. I I usually think of Satya as being very, non AGI pilled. Mhmm. And I think this was a bit of an update. So there's there's a bunch of reasons for this.
Speaker 3:Think so. So early on, he, like, in the very I think this was one of the first questions. He's like, what is AI? AI is basically two things. This is Satya saying this.
Speaker 3:There's cognitive, like, enhancement.
Speaker 6:Mhmm.
Speaker 3:So this is, like, your, like, tools or this is your auto complete. This is your Copilot? Yeah. Copilot, stuff like this. And then there's, like, the guardian angel.
Speaker 3:And this is, like, the the very AGI pill where the I mean, it's, like, kind of lording over everything. And and so he he he actually does, like, say these two things are, like, very possible. Mhmm. Okay. So so the next thing, he's talking about kind of how he thinks about pricing structures of AI broadly.
Speaker 3:So there's this this kind of conflict between subscription models and usage model of of pricing. I think he's broadly more kind of focused on, at least in the in the short term, on the subscription kind of thing. Right? Throughout the interview, he he he keeps emphasizing the point that, like, Microsoft is a hyperscaler. And so that means, like, a bunch of things.
Speaker 3:That means that they're gonna keep supporting multiple models. It means that they are going to like, that they want to prioritize the kind of long tail of, like, high margin users. Compare that to Oracle
Speaker 1:Mhmm.
Speaker 3:Who you can think of Oracle as basically
Speaker 2:Prioritizing one potentially low margin Yeah.
Speaker 3:Exactly. Power users. You're giving bare metal, essentially, to one customer Mhmm. OpenAI. All the big hyperscalers have their own chip play.
Speaker 3:Right? There's training, there's TPUs. OpenAI is doing their own chip. And Microsoft does have their own chip. The actual production is, like, way behind everyone else.
Speaker 3:Yeah. And then Satya basically brings up that, like, Microsoft has IP to everything OpenAI has except for consumer hardware.
Speaker 2:Mhmm. Satya signaled that he's open to buying, capacity from Neo Clouds, like Oracle, Nebius, Lambda, Iron, and Scale.
Speaker 1:Isn't he already doing that?
Speaker 2:To fill the yeah. He is. But but he he semi analysis has a concept called, like, the pause, which is like, basically a gap of, like, this, like, insane period of demand that you're trying to meet that demand.
Speaker 1:Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 2:And Satya actually says specifically, you're right you're rightfully calling out the pause in the interview.
Speaker 1:Interesting.
Speaker 3:The, like, chip question is also, like, very important because, you can think of it like, if you build a bunch of data centers right now Mhmm. They need they have very specific, like, power requirements that are directly based on the chip. Like, if you're building based off the h 100 chip, that's different than if you're building a data center based off g b two hundreds. Mhmm. And it's like, they're you can't really it's not, like, fungible.
Speaker 3:Like, you can't just trade one out for another. So that that's another one of the reasons why you don't wanna basically have insane build out right now because you think well, you don't think you know that chips are gonna get much better.
Speaker 1:Sure. Especially with like ASICs. Right?
Speaker 3:Yeah. Exactly. And NVIDIA is like, constantly, they're saying, we got this next chip coming out.
Speaker 1:Yep. Yep.
Speaker 3:Yep. You wanna build up your data center with those chips because otherwise, they're gonna depreciate and you're gonna have these basically data centers in, like, five years that, like, are using, you know, the old gen chips or or two generations back.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Anything on depreciation? He gives, like,
Speaker 3:two reasons how you can justify data centers. Right? Because you think of data center basically depreciating in, like, five years or the chips, which is a big part of the the cost. There's basically two ways to, like, justify the actual build out. One of them is, basically, you can think of, like, research as just being, like, r and d spend.
Speaker 3:And the other is just, like, everything has to be, like, super demand driven. Mhmm. So that's also why he's not it's, like, again, in comparison to Oracle. Oracle is basically you maybe you could say that they're kind of skating to where the puck is going Mhmm. Or trying to figure that out and then doing a bunch of dead, etcetera.
Speaker 3:And then Microsoft, Satya is saying, no. Where is demand right now? How do we fulfill that demand? Yeah. Basically, exactly.
Speaker 3:If we're not fully built up, then we can, you know, lease from the, you know, Neo Clouds.
Speaker 1:Yeah. Makes sense.
Speaker 3:Okay. One last thing. Dorakesh asked Satya, like, does he buy basically the revenue growth of, like, when OpenAI or Anthropix says they're gonna be, like, 70, a 100,000,000,000 in, like, three years? Mhmm. He's like, well, you know, they have to justify their fundraise somehow.
Speaker 3:And then he basically doesn't say much else besides that.
Speaker 1:Wow. Satya. Absolute I love him. He's the best.
Speaker 3:Another thing that I was I was surprised to hear is that Satya's he made a big point of saying that, like, there is a super intelligence lab within Microsoft. They're gonna be training their own models.
Speaker 2:That's why I've always felt like the dynamic between OpenAI and Microsoft is so interesting because OpenAI just has massive ambitions in the enterprise. They wanna create Sam, you know, alluded to a AI native Slack recently. Microsoft has Teams. Imagine those It's gonna be
Speaker 1:AI native.
Speaker 2:You can imagine, OpenAI having, like, word processing Yeah. Excel like product. You know, you can imagine them ultimately competing on, like, every single layer, including at the eventually at the cloud layer.
Speaker 1:Have you ever done illegal drugs, Tyler? Answer the question. Answer the question.
Speaker 2:Good answer.
Speaker 1:Who's your favorite host? Me or Jordy. Answer the question. Answer the question.
Speaker 3:I'm my favorite host.
Speaker 1:Woah. Taking shots. An emotional and expressive robot to reshape our attachment to set to technology. Is this a CGI vibe real, or is this a real product?
Speaker 3:I don't it's pretty cool. I don't know.
Speaker 1:It's weird. It's It just feels cool.
Speaker 3:It's very cool thing to have. There was,
Speaker 1:Put a speaker on it.
Speaker 3:I I'm, like, 90% sure it's real. There was a, Apple research paper that came out, like, I don't know, six months ago. Sure. And it was all about, like, expressive robots.
Speaker 1:Sure.
Speaker 3:And they had a bunch of, like, demos and stuff on how they could build this stuff.
Speaker 1:Wow. Okay. This is this is very cool. I I have been, delight baited. I have not been rage baited by this.
Speaker 1:Brigetti, what an opportunity. Ka ching. Buy IBM. What?
Speaker 2:I I What's that even mean?
Speaker 1:Kramer posts, like, a crazy amount. I mean, he's got 2,300,000 followers. He's posting, like, every half hour.
Speaker 2:Like, that's our show for today. I do not tolerate Kramer slander. Yeah. No. No.
Speaker 2:I think he
Speaker 1:He's he's entertaining. He's insightful. He's controversial. He's a total package. We love Kramer here.
Speaker 1:I took delivery of a beautiful shiny new h w four Tesla Model x today. I like this hardware for. He cares about the chip inside that thing. His dad doesn't care about what the light bar on the front is or the door handles or whether the doors go up. He Carpathi cares about the the GPU inside.
Speaker 1:So I immediately took it out for an FSD test drive a bit like I used to do almost daily for five years. Basically, I'm amazed. It drives really, really well, really smooth, confident, noticeably better than what I'm used to on h w three, my previous car, and Elon's eons and and and eons ahead of the version I remember driving up Highway 280 on my first day at Tesla nine years ago where I had to intervene every time the road mildly curved or sloped on city streets. The car casually handled a number of tricky scenarios that I remember losing sleep over just a few years ago. It negotiated incoming cars in tight lanes.
Speaker 1:It gracefully went around construction and temporary in lane stationary cars. It correctly timed tricky left turns with incoming traffic from both sides. It's a glowing review glowing review of, of Tesla self driving from the man who basically invented it and started the whole started the whole process.
Speaker 2:We also missed it, but, OpenAI released GPT 5.1, rolling out to all users this week. ChatGPT is officially in its Fiji phase now if you're wondering why the upgrade doesn't come with benchmarks. Have fun.
Speaker 1:Podcasts and Spotify.
Speaker 2:Subscribe to
Speaker 1:your email at TBPN dot com, and we'll see you tomorrow. Goodbye.