Azeem Azhar

It's super important.

We think back to the typewriter.

We're going back to the 1890s, 1920s, an awful lot, right?

But, you know, it was 25 years for the typewriter to make its way through.

And I think there was some other work by economics historians saying that companies, with the exception of the startups like Ford, didn't fully transition to electricity until one generation of managers retired, right?

And a new generation emerged.

And I guess,

What we see from other parts of history is that it's often about diffusion rather than direct innovation that we start to see broad-based benefits.

But of course, an anthropic Dario has said, it's all about a data center of Nobel Prize winners that we'll be able to deliver in a couple of years.

And one of the observations I would make, and respond how you like, I think most people I know would really struggle

to get the most out of Claude Opus 4.1, which you've just about to turn off because it's like, you know, a model that's a few months old, let alone 4.5.

And that perhaps the thing that turns it depends to we can do it, it is about a particular class of

skills or confidence or attitude that may cluster quite a lot in Silicon Valley, but is much, much less profuse in other parts of the world.

And I think it's that observation, which is, what is that tension between the exponential rate of improvement of these technologies, and they're not slowing down,

and what it actually takes to to diffuse them because my my observation is just these heart these more powerful models are in some senses harder for people to get the best out of i mean i i almost just like agree with agree agree with this this point just right right off the the bat that um

You had this number, 1% to 1.8% of annual productivity growth over the next decade, which is, on the one hand, it's impressive, right?

It's cumulative.

It's trillions of dollars, actually, by 2030, 2031.

If you were a betting man, would you...

expect to be surprised to the upside or the downside?