Ryan Petersen

Yeah, I tend to I tend to believe that's true. I think the customers that we sell into at 8090 are largely large enterprises as well. So not dissimilar to Aaron's customer base. What I would say is that what they are encountering is the trough of disillusionment. And I don't know if, Aaron, you're seeing this as well, but every single CIO ran around

signing up some sort of AI product, in large part because their CEO would say to them, hey, what's your AI strategy? And the reason the CEO asked them that is that at some point, somebody on the board said, what are we doing about AI? So that's the bullshit cascade that we went through in the last two years. And I think what has happened now is people have spent billions and billions of dollars.

signing up some sort of AI product, in large part because their CEO would say to them, hey, what's your AI strategy? And the reason the CEO asked them that is that at some point, somebody on the board said, what are we doing about AI? So that's the bullshit cascade that we went through in the last two years. And I think what has happened now is people have spent billions and billions of dollars.

I think you can see it in the revenue traction of the AI companies. But I think where we are today is that there are some real technical complexities that have not been solved. I'll give you an example. We have a lot of customers in regulated industries, which is to say that if you make a mistake, you will get fined or you will get shut down.

I think you can see it in the revenue traction of the AI companies. But I think where we are today is that there are some real technical complexities that have not been solved. I'll give you an example. We have a lot of customers in regulated industries, which is to say that if you make a mistake, you will get fined or you will get shut down.

Life sciences, healthcare, financial services are three examples. People still don't seem to appreciate that when you replace software that is deterministic with software that is probabilistic, meaning software that somebody wrote for you, do A, then do B, then do C, with an LLM that can hallucinate, you'll have errors.

Life sciences, healthcare, financial services are three examples. People still don't seem to appreciate that when you replace software that is deterministic with software that is probabilistic, meaning software that somebody wrote for you, do A, then do B, then do C, with an LLM that can hallucinate, you'll have errors.

So what used to be a throwaway thing, which is quality assurance and QA, right? Unit testing, integration testing, is now the only thing that matters. Why? Because if you're a financial services institution and you're supposed to do KYC and it borks and now all of a sudden you send a wire somewhere in Syria, guess what? You're in trouble.

So what used to be a throwaway thing, which is quality assurance and QA, right? Unit testing, integration testing, is now the only thing that matters. Why? Because if you're a financial services institution and you're supposed to do KYC and it borks and now all of a sudden you send a wire somewhere in Syria, guess what? You're in trouble.

If you're a healthcare company and you're supposed to do some clinical diagnosis to send out a drug on time and you don't do that because the model hallucinates, That's a real problem. And I'm guaranteeing you, we have not seen the class action lawsuits that will come when those errors will eventually be made. They're guaranteed to be made. We just don't know the scope and the scale of them.

If you're a healthcare company and you're supposed to do some clinical diagnosis to send out a drug on time and you don't do that because the model hallucinates, That's a real problem. And I'm guaranteeing you, we have not seen the class action lawsuits that will come when those errors will eventually be made. They're guaranteed to be made. We just don't know the scope and the scale of them.

So that's why I'm sort of of this posture where I think we've sold in a ton of promise. I think the reality is much more tactical. It's a little bit more banal. I think we're sorting through the exact use cases where you can put guardrails around these error rates where it's okay and tolerable. Like Brian will probably tell you, there's some number of phone calls that just sound totally fakocked

So that's why I'm sort of of this posture where I think we've sold in a ton of promise. I think the reality is much more tactical. It's a little bit more banal. I think we're sorting through the exact use cases where you can put guardrails around these error rates where it's okay and tolerable. Like Brian will probably tell you, there's some number of phone calls that just sound totally fakocked

But he's okay with that. Because the broader thing is okay.

But he's okay with that. Because the broader thing is okay.

Sorry, I meant your truck drivers. But my point just is that I think agents are real. But I think that we are far away from that because we're still at the phase of how do you build reliable software in production for an enterprise versus the toy apps that you see on the internet, which is like, let me vibe code something. I think these things are worlds apart still.

Sorry, I meant your truck drivers. But my point just is that I think agents are real. But I think that we are far away from that because we're still at the phase of how do you build reliable software in production for an enterprise versus the toy apps that you see on the internet, which is like, let me vibe code something. I think these things are worlds apart still.

No, it works. It just doesn't work.

No, it works. It just doesn't work.

Let me say it differently, Sachs. I think we have not yet figured out how to move the budgets from experimentation to mainline production, meaning where large chunks of the US economy are comfortable enough to with the ways in which hallucinations are managed such that they will replace legacy deterministic code with this new probabilistic model-generated code, meaning model-enabled code.