Gaurav Misra

And people might even be willing to pay more for that type of guarantee or just like the reps that it's licensed. And then I think besides that, it really just comes down to like how much of the use case we'll be able to cover. And that's the big question. Okay, we're at 5% today, but is the limit 100%? Is it 75%? Is it 50%? Where does this stop?

And people might even be willing to pay more for that type of guarantee or just like the reps that it's licensed. And then I think besides that, it really just comes down to like how much of the use case we'll be able to cover. And that's the big question. Okay, we're at 5% today, but is the limit 100%? Is it 75%? Is it 50%? Where does this stop?

My guess is we can go all the way to 100% or at least very close to just because it's a solved problem. We know that this is solvable. And I think if we can get there, I think a lot is going to change about how video workloads work in the world.

My guess is we can go all the way to 100% or at least very close to just because it's a solved problem. We know that this is solvable. And I think if we can get there, I think a lot is going to change about how video workloads work in the world.

I actually think that that applies to the text side too. Even on text, we already have created... Essentially, what is a tool for intelligence? It's like intelligence in a box. Intelligence you can just apply onto something to solve a bounded problem. So whether that's coding now, think of it in the coding context. I think as Dwight was saying, engineers are smart people.

I actually think that that applies to the text side too. Even on text, we already have created... Essentially, what is a tool for intelligence? It's like intelligence in a box. Intelligence you can just apply onto something to solve a bounded problem. So whether that's coding now, think of it in the coding context. I think as Dwight was saying, engineers are smart people.

Does that mean we need AGI to solve coding? Not necessarily, because... Essentially, what it's doing really is just translating. Think of how computers evolved over time. We used to literally do the punch card thing. Then we were writing assembly language. Who knows that anymore? Then we were doing C++, right? Exactly.

Does that mean we need AGI to solve coding? Not necessarily, because... Essentially, what it's doing really is just translating. Think of how computers evolved over time. We used to literally do the punch card thing. Then we were writing assembly language. Who knows that anymore? Then we were doing C++, right? Exactly.

Yeah. Then we were writing C++. And then there's these higher level languages like Python coming to the modern era.

Yeah. Then we were writing C++. And then there's these higher level languages like Python coming to the modern era.

perfect yeah and then we're kind of just saying like hey the new programming language is english that's not a crazy job it's actually a very bounded problem it's a problem of like inventing a new programming language essentially like a programming language that is even more understandable to people because they already know it it's a language that we already know intelligence is a special case

perfect yeah and then we're kind of just saying like hey the new programming language is english that's not a crazy job it's actually a very bounded problem it's a problem of like inventing a new programming language essentially like a programming language that is even more understandable to people because they already know it it's a language that we already know intelligence is a special case

Exactly. Like the general intelligence idea of, oh, we're like creating consciousness. Oh, it's like a thing that's going to exist, go around, do things, like have its own thoughts and have its own like dreams and hopes and stuff. And maybe it'll start a company at some point.

Exactly. Like the general intelligence idea of, oh, we're like creating consciousness. Oh, it's like a thing that's going to exist, go around, do things, like have its own thoughts and have its own like dreams and hopes and stuff. And maybe it'll start a company at some point.

That's a whole different mission than like solving intelligence in a box, which essentially already exists and it's getting better and better.

That's a whole different mission than like solving intelligence in a box, which essentially already exists and it's getting better and better.

The way we think about it for our business specifically is that there is a bounded cost that actually solves this problem. That bounded cost is probably in the hundreds of millions of dollars, but it actually gets us to a solution. It gets us to something that, hey, this is actually reasonably good at generating anything that a CGI studio might be able to do.

The way we think about it for our business specifically is that there is a bounded cost that actually solves this problem. That bounded cost is probably in the hundreds of millions of dollars, but it actually gets us to a solution. It gets us to something that, hey, this is actually reasonably good at generating anything that a CGI studio might be able to do.

And that is the level that we need to be at. Now, will that evolve? Yes, it will need to fine-tune it. But fine-tuning is... generally cheap. It's actually not even close to as expensive as like training a foundation model from scratch. And yeah, new data will come in, which we already have a flywheel we're building for. And it's going to be massive amounts of data.

And that is the level that we need to be at. Now, will that evolve? Yes, it will need to fine-tune it. But fine-tuning is... generally cheap. It's actually not even close to as expensive as like training a foundation model from scratch. And yeah, new data will come in, which we already have a flywheel we're building for. And it's going to be massive amounts of data.