Daniel Dines

Why we are focusing on the doom day scenario when actually we live in one of the best world possible when it's the rate of unemployment is the lowest in, I don't know, ever maybe.

You underestimate the inertia of corporations, honestly. Even with RPA, our RPA technology, it's pretty good. And it's not fully penetrated. Not at all. It's all about inertia.

You underestimate the inertia of corporations, honestly. Even with RPA, our RPA technology, it's pretty good. And it's not fully penetrated. Not at all. It's all about inertia.

You underestimate the inertia of corporations, honestly. Even with RPA, our RPA technology, it's pretty good. And it's not fully penetrated. Not at all. It's all about inertia.

I would say it's probably less than 10%, 20% penetrated. But the rest is, it's not an easy technology to deploy. You need to put an entire program behind RPA. It's kind of the same with the Gen TKI. It's not that suddenly you'll have an agent that sits next to you and you show, you do this and this, and then you just go and they will run the job. No, it's not.

I would say it's probably less than 10%, 20% penetrated. But the rest is, it's not an easy technology to deploy. You need to put an entire program behind RPA. It's kind of the same with the Gen TKI. It's not that suddenly you'll have an agent that sits next to you and you show, you do this and this, and then you just go and they will run the job. No, it's not.

I would say it's probably less than 10%, 20% penetrated. But the rest is, it's not an easy technology to deploy. You need to put an entire program behind RPA. It's kind of the same with the Gen TKI. It's not that suddenly you'll have an agent that sits next to you and you show, you do this and this, and then you just go and they will run the job. No, it's not.

It's going to take next five, 10 years with the current state-of-the-art LLMs. It's going to take next five to 10 years to get to very wide scale deployment of agentic plus automation. If LLMs, of course, will go to AGI.

It's going to take next five, 10 years with the current state-of-the-art LLMs. It's going to take next five to 10 years to get to very wide scale deployment of agentic plus automation. If LLMs, of course, will go to AGI.

It's going to take next five, 10 years with the current state-of-the-art LLMs. It's going to take next five to 10 years to get to very wide scale deployment of agentic plus automation. If LLMs, of course, will go to AGI.

I have, yeah. Look, my definition of AGI, it's a bit different than their definition of AGI. So AGI for enterprises would be when I have an LLM that has the capabilities of a guy with an average IQ like 120 points, but predictably. Not 180 in some fancy math jobs and 60 into other type of jobs. Predictably. This is AGI. When we will get there, the jobs landscape will change completely.

I have, yeah. Look, my definition of AGI, it's a bit different than their definition of AGI. So AGI for enterprises would be when I have an LLM that has the capabilities of a guy with an average IQ like 120 points, but predictably. Not 180 in some fancy math jobs and 60 into other type of jobs. Predictably. This is AGI. When we will get there, the jobs landscape will change completely.

I have, yeah. Look, my definition of AGI, it's a bit different than their definition of AGI. So AGI for enterprises would be when I have an LLM that has the capabilities of a guy with an average IQ like 120 points, but predictably. Not 180 in some fancy math jobs and 60 into other type of jobs. Predictably. This is AGI. When we will get there, the jobs landscape will change completely.

And it's not about RPA or automation. I think it's a lot. Every industry will be subject for a big change. I also believe that we need a new giant leap in order to get there. I don't believe that actual LLMs reason in the sense that I expect a guy with 120 IQ reason. It's a stochastic engine in the end. There is a big argument. Is the intelligence purely stochastic or it's something else?

And it's not about RPA or automation. I think it's a lot. Every industry will be subject for a big change. I also believe that we need a new giant leap in order to get there. I don't believe that actual LLMs reason in the sense that I expect a guy with 120 IQ reason. It's a stochastic engine in the end. There is a big argument. Is the intelligence purely stochastic or it's something else?

And it's not about RPA or automation. I think it's a lot. Every industry will be subject for a big change. I also believe that we need a new giant leap in order to get there. I don't believe that actual LLMs reason in the sense that I expect a guy with 120 IQ reason. It's a stochastic engine in the end. There is a big argument. Is the intelligence purely stochastic or it's something else?

I believe there is something else. Why? I am stupid compared to LLMs in many tasks, but I am much better than LLMs in so many others. Why LLMs make logical mistakes that I cannot do, while can solve some problems like math, Olympia problems that I don't have any chance to do? Why? This question has to be answered. It shows me that actually the essence is different.

I believe there is something else. Why? I am stupid compared to LLMs in many tasks, but I am much better than LLMs in so many others. Why LLMs make logical mistakes that I cannot do, while can solve some problems like math, Olympia problems that I don't have any chance to do? Why? This question has to be answered. It shows me that actually the essence is different.

I believe there is something else. Why? I am stupid compared to LLMs in many tasks, but I am much better than LLMs in so many others. Why LLMs make logical mistakes that I cannot do, while can solve some problems like math, Olympia problems that I don't have any chance to do? Why? This question has to be answered. It shows me that actually the essence is different.

It's a different type of intelligence. But that intelligence is not equipped to work in the context of business operations where you need reliability.