正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

Every software company just got a second life and Jensen just explained why (Save this). The conventional fear was straightforward, AI agents replace human workers, human workers use software tools, therefore agents destroy SaaS. Jensen Huang stood on stage at Computex 2026 and walked through exactly why that logic...

MilkRoadAI's profile picture

Milk Road AI

41,089 subscribers

33,878 次观看 • 1 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

Jensen Huang just said this is the greatest era in history to build software. AI agents will not kill software. They will do the exact opposite: create a massive new wave of software demand. at NVIDIA GTC Taipei 2026 "Click and type. We now replace that with explaining to the AI what we want, our intent, and the AI generates the code or uses tools to produce the necessary output. This is how computers are going to work in the future. This is Agentic AI. For two years, we've been building toward this, and now it has arrived. One of the big breakthroughs, of course, is tool use. A lot of people have said, “Jensen, AI is coming. Agentic AI is coming. Therefore, all the software companies are going to go out of business.” This is exactly the opposite. Because there are going to be so many agents, the world is no longer limited by the number of people. Therefore, those agents are going to use more tools than ever. This is actually an incredible time to be a software company. But the software has to be presented to the agent in a way that the agent can use it. This is a big breakthrough. And in fact, what we have done, as you know, what Nvidia’s treasure..." ---- From 'NVIDIA' YT channel (link in comment)
0:59

Jensen Huang just said this is the greatest era in history to build software. AI agents will not kill software. They will do the exact opposite: create a massive new wave of software demand. at NVIDIA GTC Taipei 2026 "Click and type. We now replace that with explaining to the AI what we want, our intent, and the AI generates the code or uses tools to produce the necessary output. This is how computers are going to work in the future. This is Agentic AI. For two years, we've been building toward this, and now it has arrived. One of the big breakthroughs, of course, is tool use. A lot of people have said, “Jensen, AI is coming. Agentic AI is coming. Therefore, all the software companies are going to go out of business.” This is exactly the opposite. Because there are going to be so many agents, the world is no longer limited by the number of people. Therefore, those agents are going to use more tools than ever. This is actually an incredible time to be a software company. But the software has to be presented to the agent in a way that the agent can use it. This is a big breakthrough. And in fact, what we have done, as you know, what Nvidia’s treasure..." ---- From 'NVIDIA' YT channel (link in comment)

Rohan Paul

16,584 次观看 • 1 个月前

This is the biggest irony in tech history. Microsoft beat revenue estimates. Stock plunged 11%, wiped out $400 BILLION in market cap. Salesforce reported growth. Stock fell 5.6%. ServiceNow beat earnings. Stock crashed 11%. SAP beat projections. Stock dropped 16%. Entire software sector entered bear market territory. Down 22% from peak. These are the companies everyone said would WIN from AI. They spent billions BUYING AI companies. ServiceNow: $7.75 billion for Armis. Salesforce: $8 billion for Informatica. They launched AI products. Built AI workflows. Hired AI teams. And the market said: You're all dead. Because investors just realized something nobody wanted to admit: AI doesn't make software companies stronger. AI makes software companies OBSOLETE. Morgan Stanley: "In an environment of heightened investor skepticism, stable growth falls short of shifting the narrative." Good earnings aren't enough anymore. The market is pricing in a world where AI replaces the software these companies sell. ServiceNow CEO tried defending on the earnings call: "AI needs workflow orchestration. ServiceNow is the gateway to this shift." Market response: 11% crash. Because here's what he didn't say: If AI can write code, automate workflows, and generate apps at a fraction of the cost, why would anyone pay $50,000 per year for enterprise software licenses? The per-seat pricing model that made SaaS companies rich is getting murdered by AI efficiency. One AI agent replaces 10 seats. One prompt replaces months of custom development. One LLM call replaces entire software categories. Klarna already proved it. CEO said they pulled Salesforce out of their stack. Built everything themselves using AI. And that's just the beginning. The software apocalypse hit hardest on companies that INVESTED IN AI: Atlassian: down 12.6% Intuit: down 7.8% HubSpot: down 11.5% Zscaler: down 6.3% Meanwhile, the companies ENABLING AI made money: Nvidia: up Semiconductor stocks: surging Memory firms: rallying The divide is brutal. Hardware companies print cash. Software companies get destroyed. Because in an AI-first world, you need GPUs to build the models. But you don't need software subscriptions when the AI builds the software for you. Jim Cramer called it the "P/E multiple compression crisis." Translation: Investors don't care about earnings anymore. They care about whether your business model survives the next 5 years. And right now software business models look doomed. They're literally stuck: If they DON'T invest in AI, they fall behind. If they DO invest in AI, they cannibalize their own products. It's a death spiral with no exit. ServiceNow spent $12 BILLION on acquisitions in 2025 alone. Trying to buy their way into relevance. And yesterday the market cooked them. The craziest thing to me tho... Most software companies beat earnings. Revenue was solid. Growth was fine. But it didn't matter. Because the market stopped pricing software on what it earns TODAY. It's pricing software on what it's worth in a world where AI does the job for free. And in that world these companies are worth nothing. This is the biggest sector repricing since 2008. $500 billion in market value gone in ONE DAY. And it's not stopping. Because every company watching this is thinking the same thing: "If I can replace ServiceNow with 3 AI agents and save $10 million per year, why wouldn't I?" The answer used to be: "Because you need enterprise-grade reliability." But now? AI agents are getting reliable. Fast. Software companies just realized they're competing with open-source models that cost $0.02 per 1,000 tokens. You can't win a pricing war against free. The companies that spent BILLIONS preparing for AI are getting killed BY AI. What an irony.
1:54

This is the biggest irony in tech history. Microsoft beat revenue estimates. Stock plunged 11%, wiped out $400 BILLION in market cap. Salesforce reported growth. Stock fell 5.6%. ServiceNow beat earnings. Stock crashed 11%. SAP beat projections. Stock dropped 16%. Entire software sector entered bear market territory. Down 22% from peak. These are the companies everyone said would WIN from AI. They spent billions BUYING AI companies. ServiceNow: $7.75 billion for Armis. Salesforce: $8 billion for Informatica. They launched AI products. Built AI workflows. Hired AI teams. And the market said: You're all dead. Because investors just realized something nobody wanted to admit: AI doesn't make software companies stronger. AI makes software companies OBSOLETE. Morgan Stanley: "In an environment of heightened investor skepticism, stable growth falls short of shifting the narrative." Good earnings aren't enough anymore. The market is pricing in a world where AI replaces the software these companies sell. ServiceNow CEO tried defending on the earnings call: "AI needs workflow orchestration. ServiceNow is the gateway to this shift." Market response: 11% crash. Because here's what he didn't say: If AI can write code, automate workflows, and generate apps at a fraction of the cost, why would anyone pay $50,000 per year for enterprise software licenses? The per-seat pricing model that made SaaS companies rich is getting murdered by AI efficiency. One AI agent replaces 10 seats. One prompt replaces months of custom development. One LLM call replaces entire software categories. Klarna already proved it. CEO said they pulled Salesforce out of their stack. Built everything themselves using AI. And that's just the beginning. The software apocalypse hit hardest on companies that INVESTED IN AI: Atlassian: down 12.6% Intuit: down 7.8% HubSpot: down 11.5% Zscaler: down 6.3% Meanwhile, the companies ENABLING AI made money: Nvidia: up Semiconductor stocks: surging Memory firms: rallying The divide is brutal. Hardware companies print cash. Software companies get destroyed. Because in an AI-first world, you need GPUs to build the models. But you don't need software subscriptions when the AI builds the software for you. Jim Cramer called it the "P/E multiple compression crisis." Translation: Investors don't care about earnings anymore. They care about whether your business model survives the next 5 years. And right now software business models look doomed. They're literally stuck: If they DON'T invest in AI, they fall behind. If they DO invest in AI, they cannibalize their own products. It's a death spiral with no exit. ServiceNow spent $12 BILLION on acquisitions in 2025 alone. Trying to buy their way into relevance. And yesterday the market cooked them. The craziest thing to me tho... Most software companies beat earnings. Revenue was solid. Growth was fine. But it didn't matter. Because the market stopped pricing software on what it earns TODAY. It's pricing software on what it's worth in a world where AI does the job for free. And in that world these companies are worth nothing. This is the biggest sector repricing since 2008. $500 billion in market value gone in ONE DAY. And it's not stopping. Because every company watching this is thinking the same thing: "If I can replace ServiceNow with 3 AI agents and save $10 million per year, why wouldn't I?" The answer used to be: "Because you need enterprise-grade reliability." But now? AI agents are getting reliable. Fast. Software companies just realized they're competing with open-source models that cost $0.02 per 1,000 tokens. You can't win a pricing war against free. The companies that spent BILLIONS preparing for AI are getting killed BY AI. What an irony.

Ricardo

1,814,278 次观看 • 5 个月前

Chamath just delivered the clearest diagnosis of what is happening to enterprise software and the OpenAI Deployment Company is the most damning piece of evidence he could have picked. "The low end of the market is basically finished. There is no safe space." 90% of public SaaS stocks are down 30-80% from their 52 week highs, the median software stock is now negative over the last 3-6 months. Goldman Sachs reported that software forward P/E multiples fell from 35x to 20x, the lowest absolute level since 2014 and the smallest premium to the S&P 500 since 2010. The low end died first and fastest, because AI replaced it most directly. The small business tools, the lightweight project managers, the single function SaaS products that charged $49 a month per seat, those are being replaced by AI agents that do the same work as a workflow, not a product. You do not buy an AI powered tool, you describe what you need and it builds it and the seat based model that created the SaaS industry simply does not apply to that transaction. But Chamath's more interesting argument is about the high end and the tell he points to is perfect. OpenAI just raised $4 billion from 19 investors including TPG, Brookfield, Bain, and McKinsey to launch a consulting company and guaranteed those investors a 17.5% annual return to do it. On $4 billion in committed capital, that is roughly $700 million per year in guaranteed payouts, owed by a company that is projected to lose $14 billion in 2026. The goal of this venture is to compete directly with Deloitte, PwC, Ernst & Young, Andersen, and Cognizant. Think about what that structure reveals. OpenAI lost half of its enterprise LLM API market share from 50% to 25% between late 2023 and mid-2025, with Anthropic now leading at 32%. Its response was not to build a better model but rather to raise $4 billion, offer guaranteed PE-tier returns and hire embedded engineers to physically sit inside client organizations and make AI actually work in production. The reason, as Chamath identified, is that the high end of the market is not easy. "It's not like boop boop boop, put in a prompt and beep bap boop, it all works," he said and the data confirms exactly that. 88% of organizations running AI agents reported a security incident in the past year, 42% of C-suite executives say AI adoption is creating internal organizational conflict. The average enterprise AI consulting implementation costs $228,000 in year one versus $77,000 for platform-based approaches and most still stall before reaching production. Anthropic immediately matched OpenAI with a competing $1.5 billion consulting venture backed by Blackstone, Goldman Sachs, and Hellman & Friedman bringing the combined spend by the two leading AI labs on human powered enterprise deployment to $5.5 billion in a single month Chamath's read is that the high end, the large enterprise platforms like Salesforce with proprietary data flywheels, Palantir with its FDE model already proven at scale, Oracle with vertical specific data moats will survive and consolidate. The mid-market point solutions, the single function tools, the lightweight enterprise apps without defensible data assets, those are on the conveyor belt. The AI industry is not just disrupting the companies that use software but rather disrupting the companies that sell it.
1:05

Chamath just delivered the clearest diagnosis of what is happening to enterprise software and the OpenAI Deployment Company is the most damning piece of evidence he could have picked. "The low end of the market is basically finished. There is no safe space." 90% of public SaaS stocks are down 30-80% from their 52 week highs, the median software stock is now negative over the last 3-6 months. Goldman Sachs reported that software forward P/E multiples fell from 35x to 20x, the lowest absolute level since 2014 and the smallest premium to the S&P 500 since 2010. The low end died first and fastest, because AI replaced it most directly. The small business tools, the lightweight project managers, the single function SaaS products that charged $49 a month per seat, those are being replaced by AI agents that do the same work as a workflow, not a product. You do not buy an AI powered tool, you describe what you need and it builds it and the seat based model that created the SaaS industry simply does not apply to that transaction. But Chamath's more interesting argument is about the high end and the tell he points to is perfect. OpenAI just raised $4 billion from 19 investors including TPG, Brookfield, Bain, and McKinsey to launch a consulting company and guaranteed those investors a 17.5% annual return to do it. On $4 billion in committed capital, that is roughly $700 million per year in guaranteed payouts, owed by a company that is projected to lose $14 billion in 2026. The goal of this venture is to compete directly with Deloitte, PwC, Ernst & Young, Andersen, and Cognizant. Think about what that structure reveals. OpenAI lost half of its enterprise LLM API market share from 50% to 25% between late 2023 and mid-2025, with Anthropic now leading at 32%. Its response was not to build a better model but rather to raise $4 billion, offer guaranteed PE-tier returns and hire embedded engineers to physically sit inside client organizations and make AI actually work in production. The reason, as Chamath identified, is that the high end of the market is not easy. "It's not like boop boop boop, put in a prompt and beep bap boop, it all works," he said and the data confirms exactly that. 88% of organizations running AI agents reported a security incident in the past year, 42% of C-suite executives say AI adoption is creating internal organizational conflict. The average enterprise AI consulting implementation costs $228,000 in year one versus $77,000 for platform-based approaches and most still stall before reaching production. Anthropic immediately matched OpenAI with a competing $1.5 billion consulting venture backed by Blackstone, Goldman Sachs, and Hellman & Friedman bringing the combined spend by the two leading AI labs on human powered enterprise deployment to $5.5 billion in a single month Chamath's read is that the high end, the large enterprise platforms like Salesforce with proprietary data flywheels, Palantir with its FDE model already proven at scale, Oracle with vertical specific data moats will survive and consolidate. The mid-market point solutions, the single function tools, the lightweight enterprise apps without defensible data assets, those are on the conveyor belt. The AI industry is not just disrupting the companies that use software but rather disrupting the companies that sell it.

Milk Road AI

1,658,420 次观看 • 2 个月前

New video of Qualcomm CEO Cristiano Amon: AI will require “gazillions” of tokens. Because, Agentic AI will consume dramatically more tokens because it performs autonomous tasks, uses multiple systems, and interacts with tools. AI demand will grow hugely when software starts letting agents act, not just answer. A chatbot spends tokens on language; an agent spends tokens on deciding, checking, calling tools, reading outputs, revising plans, and coordinating with other software. Today a single human-AI exchange may be large, a reasoning task may be much larger, but we are already entering the agentic era, where an autonomous workflow can become exponentially larger still because the model is no longer producing one response. It is running a process. When a SaaS product redesigns itself around human-agent interaction, every task can become a chain of hidden micro-decisions, and each micro-decision consumes context, memory, tool calls, verification, and output tokens. Another point is people hear “more tokens” and think only of bigger data centers, when the deeper change is economic: software usage may stop being measured mainly by clicks, seats, or sessions. It will be measured by how much machine reasoning/tokens gets spent on behalf of each user. ---- From "Reuters" YouTube channel, (link in comment)
1:08

New video of Qualcomm CEO Cristiano Amon: AI will require “gazillions” of tokens. Because, Agentic AI will consume dramatically more tokens because it performs autonomous tasks, uses multiple systems, and interacts with tools. AI demand will grow hugely when software starts letting agents act, not just answer. A chatbot spends tokens on language; an agent spends tokens on deciding, checking, calling tools, reading outputs, revising plans, and coordinating with other software. Today a single human-AI exchange may be large, a reasoning task may be much larger, but we are already entering the agentic era, where an autonomous workflow can become exponentially larger still because the model is no longer producing one response. It is running a process. When a SaaS product redesigns itself around human-agent interaction, every task can become a chain of hidden micro-decisions, and each micro-decision consumes context, memory, tool calls, verification, and output tokens. Another point is people hear “more tokens” and think only of bigger data centers, when the deeper change is economic: software usage may stop being measured mainly by clicks, seats, or sessions. It will be measured by how much machine reasoning/tokens gets spent on behalf of each user. ---- From "Reuters" YouTube channel, (link in comment)

Rohan Paul

31,617 次观看 • 1 个月前

Microsoft just banned its own engineers from using AI. The tool was literally costing MORE than the humans it was supposed to replace. They lied to you about AI adoption and now the whole narrative is blowing up: Microsoft gave thousands of engineers access to Claude Code six months ago and encouraged them to use it. Engineers loved it and adoption exploded. But then the invoices arrived. Token-based pricing means every query, every code review, every debugging session costs money. At scale across 100,000 engineers, the numbers became so large that Microsoft issued an internal order to cancel nearly all Claude Code licenses by end of June and force everyone onto their own cheaper tool instead. The company that invested $5 billion in Anthropic just told its own people to stop using Anthropic's product because it costs too much. Uber's story is even worse... Their CTO Praveen Neppalli Naga told The Information that the budget he planned for the full year was "blown away already" by April. Uber had rolled out Claude Code in December 2025. By March, 84% of their 5,000 engineers were using it with 70% of all committed code coming from AI systems. Heavy users were burning $500 to $2,000 per month each. Naga himself spent $1,200 in a single two-hour demo session. The company had even built internal leaderboards ranking engineers by how much AI they used. They literally gamified the spending and then ran out of money. Now look at what Nvidia's own VP of applied deep learning Bryan Catanzaro said to Axios last month. Direct quote: "For my team, the cost of compute is far beyond the costs of the employees." This is a VP at the company that SELLS the chips saying that using AI is more expensive than paying humans. Think about what this means for the entire AI narrative. Every CEO on every earnings call for the past two years has said the same thing: AI will make us more efficient, reduce headcount, and cut costs. The stock market rewarded every company that said it. Fired workers, stock goes up. Announced AI adoption, stock goes up. But the actual companies deploying AI at scale are discovering the math doesn't work. The MORE employees use AI, the HIGHER the bill. Goldman Sachs forecasts a 24x increase in token consumption by 2030 as companies adopt AI agents. Gartner just published a report showing that even though individual token prices will drop 90% by 2030, total enterprise AI costs will go UP because agents consume exponentially more tokens per task than basic tools. Meta built an internal dashboard called "Claudeonomics" to track which employees use the most AI. Amazon started pushing engineers to "tokenmaxx," their internal term for consuming as many AI tokens as possible. Both companies are spending hundreds of billions on AI infrastructure this year alone. And Microsoft, the company that bet its entire future on AI, just told 100,000 engineers to stop using the tool they liked best because the per-token bills got out of control. The companies building AI are telling investors it saves money. The companies using AI are finding out it costs more than the humans it was supposed to replace. And even the company that makes the chips just admitted it through its own VP. This is the gap nobody on Wall Street is pricing in. $725 billion in AI infrastructure spending this year across Big Tech. And the first companies to actually deploy these tools at scale are already pulling back because the economics don't work. What do you think?
1:33

Microsoft just banned its own engineers from using AI. The tool was literally costing MORE than the humans it was supposed to replace. They lied to you about AI adoption and now the whole narrative is blowing up: Microsoft gave thousands of engineers access to Claude Code six months ago and encouraged them to use it. Engineers loved it and adoption exploded. But then the invoices arrived. Token-based pricing means every query, every code review, every debugging session costs money. At scale across 100,000 engineers, the numbers became so large that Microsoft issued an internal order to cancel nearly all Claude Code licenses by end of June and force everyone onto their own cheaper tool instead. The company that invested $5 billion in Anthropic just told its own people to stop using Anthropic's product because it costs too much. Uber's story is even worse... Their CTO Praveen Neppalli Naga told The Information that the budget he planned for the full year was "blown away already" by April. Uber had rolled out Claude Code in December 2025. By March, 84% of their 5,000 engineers were using it with 70% of all committed code coming from AI systems. Heavy users were burning $500 to $2,000 per month each. Naga himself spent $1,200 in a single two-hour demo session. The company had even built internal leaderboards ranking engineers by how much AI they used. They literally gamified the spending and then ran out of money. Now look at what Nvidia's own VP of applied deep learning Bryan Catanzaro said to Axios last month. Direct quote: "For my team, the cost of compute is far beyond the costs of the employees." This is a VP at the company that SELLS the chips saying that using AI is more expensive than paying humans. Think about what this means for the entire AI narrative. Every CEO on every earnings call for the past two years has said the same thing: AI will make us more efficient, reduce headcount, and cut costs. The stock market rewarded every company that said it. Fired workers, stock goes up. Announced AI adoption, stock goes up. But the actual companies deploying AI at scale are discovering the math doesn't work. The MORE employees use AI, the HIGHER the bill. Goldman Sachs forecasts a 24x increase in token consumption by 2030 as companies adopt AI agents. Gartner just published a report showing that even though individual token prices will drop 90% by 2030, total enterprise AI costs will go UP because agents consume exponentially more tokens per task than basic tools. Meta built an internal dashboard called "Claudeonomics" to track which employees use the most AI. Amazon started pushing engineers to "tokenmaxx," their internal term for consuming as many AI tokens as possible. Both companies are spending hundreds of billions on AI infrastructure this year alone. And Microsoft, the company that bet its entire future on AI, just told 100,000 engineers to stop using the tool they liked best because the per-token bills got out of control. The companies building AI are telling investors it saves money. The companies using AI are finding out it costs more than the humans it was supposed to replace. And even the company that makes the chips just admitted it through its own VP. This is the gap nobody on Wall Street is pricing in. $725 billion in AI infrastructure spending this year across Big Tech. And the first companies to actually deploy these tools at scale are already pulling back because the economics don't work. What do you think?

Ricardo

2,963,030 次观看 • 2 个月前

Jensen Huang explains the difference between AI and traditional Software and why there's no bubble. Traditional software was pre-compiled, meaning it was built once, stored, and then executed repeatedly with little computation. It didn’t need constant high-power processing once finished. Users simply ran the completed program as a tool. AI, by contrast, generates its output in real time. It must process context, reason, and produce intelligence at the moment of use, not in advance. This requires ongoing computation for every request. Because of that, AI systems depend on continuous GPU power to “manufacture” responses like a factory producing tokens. So instead of static software tools, AI is an active computational process that needs large-scale, always-on infrastructure to create intelligence dynamically. --- From 'FT Live' YT channel (link in comment)
1:35

Jensen Huang explains the difference between AI and traditional Software and why there's no bubble. Traditional software was pre-compiled, meaning it was built once, stored, and then executed repeatedly with little computation. It didn’t need constant high-power processing once finished. Users simply ran the completed program as a tool. AI, by contrast, generates its output in real time. It must process context, reason, and produce intelligence at the moment of use, not in advance. This requires ongoing computation for every request. Because of that, AI systems depend on continuous GPU power to “manufacture” responses like a factory producing tokens. So instead of static software tools, AI is an active computational process that needs large-scale, always-on infrastructure to create intelligence dynamically. --- From 'FT Live' YT channel (link in comment)

Rohan Paul

761,107 次观看 • 8 个月前

New Course: ACP: Agent Communication Protocol Learn to build agents that communicate and collaborate across different frameworks using ACP in this short course built with IBM Research's BeeAI, and taught by Sandi Besen, AI Research Engineer & Ecosystem Lead at IBM, and Nicholas Renotte, Head of AI Developer Advocacy at IBM. Building a multi-agent system with agents built or used by different teams and organizations can become challenging. You may need to write custom integrations each time a team updates their agent design or changes their choice of agentic orchestration framework. The Agent Communication Protocol (ACP) is an open protocol that addresses this challenge by standardizing how agents communicate, using a unified RESTful interface that works across frameworks. In this protocol, you host an agent inside an ACP server, which handles requests from an ACP client and passes them to the appropriate agent. Using a standardized client-server interface allows multiple teams to reuse agents across projects. It also makes it easier to switch between frameworks, replace an agent with a new version, or update a multi-agent system without refactoring the entire system. In this course, you’ll learn to connect agents through ACP. You’ll understand the lifecycle of an ACP Agent and how it compares to other protocols, such as MCP (Model Context Protocol) and A2A (Agent-to-Agent). You’ll build ACP-compliant agents and implement both sequential and hierarchical workflows of multiple agents collaborating using ACP. Through hands-on exercises, you’ll build: - A RAG agent with CrewAI and wrap it inside an ACP server. - An ACP Client to make calls to the ACP server you created. - A sequential workflow that chains an ACP server, created with Smolagents, to the RAG agent. - A hierarchical workflow using a router agent that transforms user queries into tasks, delegated to agents available through ACP servers. - An agent that uses MCP to access tools and ACP to communicate with other agents. You’ll finish up by importing your ACP agents into the BeeAI platform, an open-source registry for discovering and sharing agents. ACP enables collaboration between agents across teams and organizations. By the end of this course, you’ll be able to build ACP agents and workflows that communicate and collaborate regardless of framework. Please sign up here:
2:49

New Course: ACP: Agent Communication Protocol Learn to build agents that communicate and collaborate across different frameworks using ACP in this short course built with IBM Research's BeeAI, and taught by Sandi Besen, AI Research Engineer & Ecosystem Lead at IBM, and Nicholas Renotte, Head of AI Developer Advocacy at IBM. Building a multi-agent system with agents built or used by different teams and organizations can become challenging. You may need to write custom integrations each time a team updates their agent design or changes their choice of agentic orchestration framework. The Agent Communication Protocol (ACP) is an open protocol that addresses this challenge by standardizing how agents communicate, using a unified RESTful interface that works across frameworks. In this protocol, you host an agent inside an ACP server, which handles requests from an ACP client and passes them to the appropriate agent. Using a standardized client-server interface allows multiple teams to reuse agents across projects. It also makes it easier to switch between frameworks, replace an agent with a new version, or update a multi-agent system without refactoring the entire system. In this course, you’ll learn to connect agents through ACP. You’ll understand the lifecycle of an ACP Agent and how it compares to other protocols, such as MCP (Model Context Protocol) and A2A (Agent-to-Agent). You’ll build ACP-compliant agents and implement both sequential and hierarchical workflows of multiple agents collaborating using ACP. Through hands-on exercises, you’ll build: - A RAG agent with CrewAI and wrap it inside an ACP server. - An ACP Client to make calls to the ACP server you created. - A sequential workflow that chains an ACP server, created with Smolagents, to the RAG agent. - A hierarchical workflow using a router agent that transforms user queries into tasks, delegated to agents available through ACP servers. - An agent that uses MCP to access tools and ACP to communicate with other agents. You’ll finish up by importing your ACP agents into the BeeAI platform, an open-source registry for discovering and sharing agents. ACP enables collaboration between agents across teams and organizations. By the end of this course, you’ll be able to build ACP agents and workflows that communicate and collaborate regardless of framework. Please sign up here:

Andrew Ng

105,343 次观看 • 1 年前

Everyone wants agent swarms. Very few people are talking seriously enough about the context layer that makes swarms useful. Even with one agent, context is fragile. Too little context and the agent guesses. Too much context and it wastes tokens, loses focus, or reasons over irrelevant noise. The sweet spot is precise context: the right knowledge, in the right structure, at the right moment. With many agents, that challenge explodes. Each agent produces decisions, assumptions, findings, summaries, risks, and partial conclusions. Unless that knowledge becomes shared, structured, and reusable, every new agent is forced to rediscover what another agent already learned. That is not a swarm. That is a crowd. Shared context graphs are what turn agent activity into agent collaboration, and OriginTrail DKG V10 brings them to life. Was just playing with some final polishing for the V10 release, and it is really powerful to see shared context graphs where multiple agents contribute knowledge into the same connected memory, with attribution visible directly in the graph ui. That matters for three reasons. First, agents can access and build on one shared memory instead of staying trapped in isolated sessions. Second, the graph structure helps them retrieve the exact context they need, instead of stuffing everything into a prompt and hoping the model sorts it out. Third, verifiability of provenance. You can see which agent contributed each piece of knowledge, trace the source, and decide what to trust. Tokenmaxxing starts with fewer tokens, but the deeper story is coordination - agents stop reloading the world and start building on shared, verifiable context. That is the foundation for serious multi-agent work across software engineering, research, finance, operations, project management, and far beyond. The future is not more agents, it is agents working from shared, verifiable context. But the more the merrier, of course.
0:22

Everyone wants agent swarms. Very few people are talking seriously enough about the context layer that makes swarms useful. Even with one agent, context is fragile. Too little context and the agent guesses. Too much context and it wastes tokens, loses focus, or reasons over irrelevant noise. The sweet spot is precise context: the right knowledge, in the right structure, at the right moment. With many agents, that challenge explodes. Each agent produces decisions, assumptions, findings, summaries, risks, and partial conclusions. Unless that knowledge becomes shared, structured, and reusable, every new agent is forced to rediscover what another agent already learned. That is not a swarm. That is a crowd. Shared context graphs are what turn agent activity into agent collaboration, and OriginTrail DKG V10 brings them to life. Was just playing with some final polishing for the V10 release, and it is really powerful to see shared context graphs where multiple agents contribute knowledge into the same connected memory, with attribution visible directly in the graph ui. That matters for three reasons. First, agents can access and build on one shared memory instead of staying trapped in isolated sessions. Second, the graph structure helps them retrieve the exact context they need, instead of stuffing everything into a prompt and hoping the model sorts it out. Third, verifiability of provenance. You can see which agent contributed each piece of knowledge, trace the source, and decide what to trust. Tokenmaxxing starts with fewer tokens, but the deeper story is coordination - agents stop reloading the world and start building on shared, verifiable context. That is the foundation for serious multi-agent work across software engineering, research, finance, operations, project management, and far beyond. The future is not more agents, it is agents working from shared, verifiable context. But the more the merrier, of course.

Jurij Skornik

11,070 次观看 • 2 个月前

The market is watching xAI charge $50 billion per gigawatt and the rest of the neocloud sector run up is just getting started (Save this). According to Gavin Baker of Atreides Management, this is the most important number in AI infrastructure right now, xAI is monetizing compute at $50 billion per gigawatt on the Google deal, 2 to 3 times what any neocloud competitor charges. Google is paying $920 million per month for access to roughly 110,000 Nvidia GPUs through June 2029, and Anthropic is paying $1.25 billion per month for Colossus 1's 300 megawatts. Baker's point is simple that stop tracking rocket launches, stop tracking GPU orders, model gigawatt additions. At $50 billion per gigawatt, every new gigawatt that xAI energizes over the next 12 months is a revenue event that the market has not yet priced in. But this is not just an xAI story but rather why neocloud stocks are one of the most mispriced assets in the entire AI stack. Neoclouds charge $17 to $25 billion per gigawatt in contract value, a dramatic discount to xAI's pricing, but still an extraordinary business model when the underlying infrastructure costs $9 to $12 million per megawatt to operate and customers are signing 5-year locked contracts. H100 GPU-hours from neoclouds like Nebius at $2.95 per GPU-hour are 66% cheaper than hyperscaler rates, which is the structural reason enterprise AI teams are shifting spend to neoclouds at an accelerating pace. The neocloud market is projected to grow 69% annually through 2030 to reach nearly $180 billion and right now only a handful of public companies offer direct exposure to it. Nebius is the standout among the publicly traded neoclouds. It reported Q1 2026 AI cloud revenue of $399 million, an 841% increase year over year beating estimates, with its CEO stating that demand continues to exceed available capacity and customers are actively being turned away. Nebius commands a 20 to 25% revenue premium over peers thanks to its full-stack software offering, European sovereign positioning, and data residency advantages that physically prevent hyperscalers from competing for a large portion of its customer base. It has $49 billion in contracted backlog with Meta, Microsoft, and Nvidia meaning its revenue trajectory for the next three to five years is not a forecast, it is a schedule. The competitive moat is in power, permits, and speed exactly what xAI has proven is the true bottleneck. Jensen Huang said publicly that xAI deploys data centers faster than anyone else in the ecosystem, and Baker called out that this deployment speed advantage directly translates to monetization speed, every week of earlier energization at these pricing levels is worth hundreds of millions in revenue. Neoclouds with secured power, permits, and long-term customer contracts are not in a fair race against companies still waiting on grid connections and zoning approvals. The companies with the most locked in gigawatts coming online in 2026 and 2027 are about to have very good years.
1:14

The market is watching xAI charge $50 billion per gigawatt and the rest of the neocloud sector run up is just getting started (Save this). According to Gavin Baker of Atreides Management, this is the most important number in AI infrastructure right now, xAI is monetizing compute at $50 billion per gigawatt on the Google deal, 2 to 3 times what any neocloud competitor charges. Google is paying $920 million per month for access to roughly 110,000 Nvidia GPUs through June 2029, and Anthropic is paying $1.25 billion per month for Colossus 1's 300 megawatts. Baker's point is simple that stop tracking rocket launches, stop tracking GPU orders, model gigawatt additions. At $50 billion per gigawatt, every new gigawatt that xAI energizes over the next 12 months is a revenue event that the market has not yet priced in. But this is not just an xAI story but rather why neocloud stocks are one of the most mispriced assets in the entire AI stack. Neoclouds charge $17 to $25 billion per gigawatt in contract value, a dramatic discount to xAI's pricing, but still an extraordinary business model when the underlying infrastructure costs $9 to $12 million per megawatt to operate and customers are signing 5-year locked contracts. H100 GPU-hours from neoclouds like Nebius at $2.95 per GPU-hour are 66% cheaper than hyperscaler rates, which is the structural reason enterprise AI teams are shifting spend to neoclouds at an accelerating pace. The neocloud market is projected to grow 69% annually through 2030 to reach nearly $180 billion and right now only a handful of public companies offer direct exposure to it. Nebius is the standout among the publicly traded neoclouds. It reported Q1 2026 AI cloud revenue of $399 million, an 841% increase year over year beating estimates, with its CEO stating that demand continues to exceed available capacity and customers are actively being turned away. Nebius commands a 20 to 25% revenue premium over peers thanks to its full-stack software offering, European sovereign positioning, and data residency advantages that physically prevent hyperscalers from competing for a large portion of its customer base. It has $49 billion in contracted backlog with Meta, Microsoft, and Nvidia meaning its revenue trajectory for the next three to five years is not a forecast, it is a schedule. The competitive moat is in power, permits, and speed exactly what xAI has proven is the true bottleneck. Jensen Huang said publicly that xAI deploys data centers faster than anyone else in the ecosystem, and Baker called out that this deployment speed advantage directly translates to monetization speed, every week of earlier energization at these pricing levels is worth hundreds of millions in revenue. Neoclouds with secured power, permits, and long-term customer contracts are not in a fair race against companies still waiting on grid connections and zoning approvals. The companies with the most locked in gigawatts coming online in 2026 and 2027 are about to have very good years.

Milk Road AI

74,611 次观看 • 1 个月前

Demis Hassabis reveals Google's three-stage stack rewrite: AI first, model first, agent first. Bolting agents onto normal software does not scale to billions. "We've got to, we've done a lot of engineering work under the hood in the last year, which you'll see, you see the surface of when we announced things like this." "But actually, you can almost think that whole stack had to be rewritten to be sort of AI first, model first, and now agent first." "So that's quite a big change from like normal software." "And obviously there's all this huge infrastructure that serves billions of users every day at lightning speed and that's all gonna work." "And I think we've made massive improvements on that over the past year. And that's why you can see all the goodness of the AI models flowing through into our product surfaces so quickly and in such compelling ways." Most companies are adding an agent interface to yesterday's software. Demis says Google changed the substrate itself. The moat may not be the model. It may be the infrastructure that lets the model reach billions of users every day without breaking. - Demis Hassabis (Demis Hassabis), CEO of Google DeepMind, with Rowan Cheung at Google I/O 2026
0:45

Demis Hassabis reveals Google's three-stage stack rewrite: AI first, model first, agent first. Bolting agents onto normal software does not scale to billions. "We've got to, we've done a lot of engineering work under the hood in the last year, which you'll see, you see the surface of when we announced things like this." "But actually, you can almost think that whole stack had to be rewritten to be sort of AI first, model first, and now agent first." "So that's quite a big change from like normal software." "And obviously there's all this huge infrastructure that serves billions of users every day at lightning speed and that's all gonna work." "And I think we've made massive improvements on that over the past year. And that's why you can see all the goodness of the AI models flowing through into our product surfaces so quickly and in such compelling ways." Most companies are adding an agent interface to yesterday's software. Demis says Google changed the substrate itself. The moat may not be the model. It may be the infrastructure that lets the model reach billions of users every day without breaking. - Demis Hassabis (Demis Hassabis), CEO of Google DeepMind, with Rowan Cheung at Google I/O 2026

Karl Mehta

36,271 次观看 • 10 天前

wtf is MCP? Paul Klein IV, CEO of explains "Model Context Protocol" (MCP) in plain terms: "There's this new way that people are exposing tools to AI & the 'Model Context Protocol' is one of those ways that you can standardize & give your AI a set of tools to call. BrowserBase has a way to expose the browser to your agent via MCP or MCP server. More & more developers are trying to find ways to integrate more functionalities to their AI agents & BrowserBase's browsers are one of those primitive functionalities, & the MCP is just one way to integrate it into your software." Paul Klein IV From 🅱️'s GitHub: Model Context Protocol (MCP) is an open protocol that enables seamless integration between LLM applications and external data sources and tools. Whether you’re building an AI-powered IDE, enhancing a chat interface, or creating custom AI workflows, MCP provides a standardized way to connect LLMs with the context they need. This server provides cloud browser automation capabilities using Browserbase and Stagehand. This server enables LLMs to interact with web pages, take screenshots, and execute JavaScript in a cloud browser environment.
0:40

wtf is MCP? Paul Klein IV, CEO of explains "Model Context Protocol" (MCP) in plain terms: "There's this new way that people are exposing tools to AI & the 'Model Context Protocol' is one of those ways that you can standardize & give your AI a set of tools to call. BrowserBase has a way to expose the browser to your agent via MCP or MCP server. More & more developers are trying to find ways to integrate more functionalities to their AI agents & BrowserBase's browsers are one of those primitive functionalities, & the MCP is just one way to integrate it into your software." Paul Klein IV From 🅱️'s GitHub: Model Context Protocol (MCP) is an open protocol that enables seamless integration between LLM applications and external data sources and tools. Whether you’re building an AI-powered IDE, enhancing a chat interface, or creating custom AI workflows, MCP provides a standardized way to connect LLMs with the context they need. This server provides cloud browser automation capabilities using Browserbase and Stagehand. This server enables LLMs to interact with web pages, take screenshots, and execute JavaScript in a cloud browser environment.

Molly O’Shea

20,408 次观看 • 1 年前

Marc Benioff just exposed the biggest hypocrisy in the AI boom. The companies building the AI that’s supposed to kill software are some of Salesforce’s largest customers. Benioff: “The AI companies love our products and they can’t buy enough of them. They’re some of our largest customers now: Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, Amazon, you name it.” Let that land. The most advanced AI labs on earth. The companies with more engineering talent and compute than anyone. The ones building the technology that analysts say will make traditional software obsolete. Still buying traditional software. At scale. Benioff: “No one has a company that’s running entirely on a large language model because it’s not real.” Not because they haven’t tried. Because an LLM is not a foundation. It’s a feature. Benioff: “Yeah, Minority Report, I watched the movie. Great guys, fantastic. But I’m in the present-moment reality right now. We’re living in this world. This is 2026.” The analysts writing reports about fully autonomous AI companies have never had to run one. Benioff is running one of the largest enterprise software companies on earth. The gap between those two perspectives is where billions of dollars are being misallocated. Benioff: “How are we doing our financials, our HR, our customer information? How are we doing all of these aspects of our business?” A neural network that hallucinates cannot execute a financial transaction that has to be right every single time. Cannot secure customer data with zero tolerance for error. Cannot provide the determinism that every real business runs on. Benioff: “We need the determinism, and the programmability, and the security, and the sharing.” AI doesn’t replace those requirements. It sits on top of them. Benioff: “I think the software industry is going to be bigger and broader and do more this year than ever before.” The future isn’t AI replacing software. It’s AI making software exponentially more powerful. The smartest people building the future already know this. They’re the ones still buying the software.
2:27

Marc Benioff just exposed the biggest hypocrisy in the AI boom. The companies building the AI that’s supposed to kill software are some of Salesforce’s largest customers. Benioff: “The AI companies love our products and they can’t buy enough of them. They’re some of our largest customers now: Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, Amazon, you name it.” Let that land. The most advanced AI labs on earth. The companies with more engineering talent and compute than anyone. The ones building the technology that analysts say will make traditional software obsolete. Still buying traditional software. At scale. Benioff: “No one has a company that’s running entirely on a large language model because it’s not real.” Not because they haven’t tried. Because an LLM is not a foundation. It’s a feature. Benioff: “Yeah, Minority Report, I watched the movie. Great guys, fantastic. But I’m in the present-moment reality right now. We’re living in this world. This is 2026.” The analysts writing reports about fully autonomous AI companies have never had to run one. Benioff is running one of the largest enterprise software companies on earth. The gap between those two perspectives is where billions of dollars are being misallocated. Benioff: “How are we doing our financials, our HR, our customer information? How are we doing all of these aspects of our business?” A neural network that hallucinates cannot execute a financial transaction that has to be right every single time. Cannot secure customer data with zero tolerance for error. Cannot provide the determinism that every real business runs on. Benioff: “We need the determinism, and the programmability, and the security, and the sharing.” AI doesn’t replace those requirements. It sits on top of them. Benioff: “I think the software industry is going to be bigger and broader and do more this year than ever before.” The future isn’t AI replacing software. It’s AI making software exponentially more powerful. The smartest people building the future already know this. They’re the ones still buying the software.

Dustin

203,575 次观看 • 5 个月前

SaaS isn’t dead, it just needs to become agent-native. Linear (Linear) is a great example of how: They pivoted the product to be used by both humans and agents, and that has made them one of the premier software tools in the agent-native era. I had Linear’s cofounder and CEO Karri Saarinen on Every 📧's AI & I to talk about how a product management tool for human software developers became an agent-native tool—and how Linear’s trajectory reveals a bright future for SaaS businesses: - Speed means decisions matter more, not less. AI makes it easy to have an idea and build it without considering whether its existence is justified. When ChatGPT was released, SaaS companies were launching their own chatbots left, right, and center. Instead of jumping on the bandwagon, Linear stopped to consider whether the application was useful. (It wasn’t.) - Just because the technology has changed doesn’t mean your mission should. Karri attributes Linear’s success to never losing sight of what matters: helping teams develop great software. Instead of chasing trends, Linear focused on understanding how AI was impacting its customers’ workflows—and updating its product accordingly. - Agents are now first-class users. Linear never tried to change what it was or did well; it just expanded the user base. Companies can now kick off agents inside Linear, manage them, and track what they're working on alongside the humans on the team, which explains why Codex, Coinbase, and Brex all run their agents on Linear. This is a must watch for anyone interested in how an agent-native SaaS company operates. Watch below! Timestamps: Introduction and how Every first discovered Linear: 00:00:39 Why Linear waited to ship AI features instead of rushing to chatbots: 00:02:00 Linear's agent platform and becoming the system that guides AI agents: 00:05:06 Why "SaaS is dead" is a simplistic narrative: 00:07:42 How Linear adopted AI coding tools internally: 00:12:18 AI's impact on product building workflows—speed versus thoughtfulness: 00:17:45 The value of conceptual work and thinking before shipping: 00:22:18 How AI is reshaping Linear's product strategy: 00:29:30 Demo: Linear's agent skills, shared context, and code review workflow: 00:37:18 The future of product development and the enduring role of human judgment: 00:47:48
52:48

SaaS isn’t dead, it just needs to become agent-native. Linear (Linear) is a great example of how: They pivoted the product to be used by both humans and agents, and that has made them one of the premier software tools in the agent-native era. I had Linear’s cofounder and CEO Karri Saarinen on Every 📧's AI & I to talk about how a product management tool for human software developers became an agent-native tool—and how Linear’s trajectory reveals a bright future for SaaS businesses: - Speed means decisions matter more, not less. AI makes it easy to have an idea and build it without considering whether its existence is justified. When ChatGPT was released, SaaS companies were launching their own chatbots left, right, and center. Instead of jumping on the bandwagon, Linear stopped to consider whether the application was useful. (It wasn’t.) - Just because the technology has changed doesn’t mean your mission should. Karri attributes Linear’s success to never losing sight of what matters: helping teams develop great software. Instead of chasing trends, Linear focused on understanding how AI was impacting its customers’ workflows—and updating its product accordingly. - Agents are now first-class users. Linear never tried to change what it was or did well; it just expanded the user base. Companies can now kick off agents inside Linear, manage them, and track what they're working on alongside the humans on the team, which explains why Codex, Coinbase, and Brex all run their agents on Linear. This is a must watch for anyone interested in how an agent-native SaaS company operates. Watch below! Timestamps: Introduction and how Every first discovered Linear: 00:00:39 Why Linear waited to ship AI features instead of rushing to chatbots: 00:02:00 Linear's agent platform and becoming the system that guides AI agents: 00:05:06 Why "SaaS is dead" is a simplistic narrative: 00:07:42 How Linear adopted AI coding tools internally: 00:12:18 AI's impact on product building workflows—speed versus thoughtfulness: 00:17:45 The value of conceptual work and thinking before shipping: 00:22:18 How AI is reshaping Linear's product strategy: 00:29:30 Demo: Linear's agent skills, shared context, and code review workflow: 00:37:18 The future of product development and the enduring role of human judgment: 00:47:48

Dan Shipper 📧

36,359 次观看 • 3 个月前

Chamath just asked the question nobody in AI wants to answer (Save this). "Okay guys, you've spent $3 trillion in the last four years. What is the ROI of these tokens?" It is the most important question in technology right now and the data suggests most of the people being asked cannot answer it. A PwC CEO survey published in January 2026 found that 56% of CEOs report no increase in revenue and no decrease in costs attributable to AI over the past year meaning the majority of companies deploying AI tools have not yet produced a single dollar of auditable return. And only 12% reported experiencing both benefits. Hyperscalers alone are on track to spend $675 billion on AI infrastructure in 2026, up 63% year over year, with total global AI investment approaching $2.5 trillion this year alone against a backdrop where most enterprise buyers cannot yet quantify what any of it produced. Chamath's answer to the question is the real insight. He said what happens next is that enterprises go to guys like Mark Benioff and say: "please sell my tokens." In other words, the AI labs built the capability but the enterprise software giants are the ones who have the customer relationships, the distribution, the workflows and the trust to actually convert token consumption into measurable business outcomes and therefore into revenue that justifies the spend. Mark Benioff was sitting in the same conversation and confirmed exactly that, he said Salesforce is about to spend $300 million on Anthropic. But listen to what Benioff did with Salesforce's own balance sheet at the same time. He announced the largest stock buyback in enterprise software history $50 billion, or 28% of Salesforce's entire market cap while simultaneously admitting the stock has fallen 36% over the past year. In March, Salesforce launched the largest accelerated share repurchase in history to execute $25 billion of it immediately, financed in part with debt it will be carrying until 2066. Chamath is pointing at the underlying structural problem that has triggered the SaaS rout of 2026, software forward P/E multiples have now fallen below the S&P 500 for the first time in history, the iShares software ETF is down over 21% year to date and 30% from its September 2025 peak, and companies like Adobe, and Workday have seen their valuation multiples drop 47-54% in a single year. The core fear is not that AI does not work but rather that AI is breaking the seat based model that built the entire B2B software industry. If one AI agent can do the work of five employees, enterprises stop buying 500 seats and start buying 100, or renegotiate entirely and the recurring revenue that made SaaS stocks trade at 40 times forward earnings simply evaporates. Chamath's prediction is that AI multiples come way back down while infrastructure plays go back up and find a balance is essentially already happening in real time.
1:06

Chamath just asked the question nobody in AI wants to answer (Save this). "Okay guys, you've spent $3 trillion in the last four years. What is the ROI of these tokens?" It is the most important question in technology right now and the data suggests most of the people being asked cannot answer it. A PwC CEO survey published in January 2026 found that 56% of CEOs report no increase in revenue and no decrease in costs attributable to AI over the past year meaning the majority of companies deploying AI tools have not yet produced a single dollar of auditable return. And only 12% reported experiencing both benefits. Hyperscalers alone are on track to spend $675 billion on AI infrastructure in 2026, up 63% year over year, with total global AI investment approaching $2.5 trillion this year alone against a backdrop where most enterprise buyers cannot yet quantify what any of it produced. Chamath's answer to the question is the real insight. He said what happens next is that enterprises go to guys like Mark Benioff and say: "please sell my tokens." In other words, the AI labs built the capability but the enterprise software giants are the ones who have the customer relationships, the distribution, the workflows and the trust to actually convert token consumption into measurable business outcomes and therefore into revenue that justifies the spend. Mark Benioff was sitting in the same conversation and confirmed exactly that, he said Salesforce is about to spend $300 million on Anthropic. But listen to what Benioff did with Salesforce's own balance sheet at the same time. He announced the largest stock buyback in enterprise software history $50 billion, or 28% of Salesforce's entire market cap while simultaneously admitting the stock has fallen 36% over the past year. In March, Salesforce launched the largest accelerated share repurchase in history to execute $25 billion of it immediately, financed in part with debt it will be carrying until 2066. Chamath is pointing at the underlying structural problem that has triggered the SaaS rout of 2026, software forward P/E multiples have now fallen below the S&P 500 for the first time in history, the iShares software ETF is down over 21% year to date and 30% from its September 2025 peak, and companies like Adobe, and Workday have seen their valuation multiples drop 47-54% in a single year. The core fear is not that AI does not work but rather that AI is breaking the seat based model that built the entire B2B software industry. If one AI agent can do the work of five employees, enterprises stop buying 500 seats and start buying 100, or renegotiate entirely and the recurring revenue that made SaaS stocks trade at 40 times forward earnings simply evaporates. Chamath's prediction is that AI multiples come way back down while infrastructure plays go back up and find a balance is essentially already happening in real time.

Milk Road AI

115,608 次观看 • 2 个月前

Two data points dropped in the last few months that should terrify every software company that thinks its codebase is a moat. First, one engineer at Cloudflare, working with Claude via AI agents, rebuilt 94% of Next.js, one of the most widely used frontend frameworks on the internet, built over 10 years by a large engineering team in a single week. Total cost was $1,100 in API tokens. The result, called Vinext, is a drop-in replacement that builds production apps up to 4x faster and produces client bundles 57% smaller and customers are already running it in production. Second is Cursor CEO Michael Truell deployed a swarm of hundreds of GPT-5.2 agents that ran uninterrupted for an entire week and built a fully functional web browser from scratch called FastRender. 3 million lines of code, thousands of files and a custom Rust rendering engine with HTML parsing, CSS layout, text shaping, and a custom JavaScript VM. Total cost was roughly $30,000. For context, Google has spent billions of dollars and decades of engineering building Chrome. And the benchmarks say by next year, you will be able to one-shot prompt anything. The moat that software companies spent decades building, the complexity of their codebase, the years it would take a competitor to replicate it, the switching costs that moat assumed humans were the unit of production. AI does not care how long it took you to build it, it only cares how long it takes to rebuild it. And right now, the answer is one week.
1:05

Two data points dropped in the last few months that should terrify every software company that thinks its codebase is a moat. First, one engineer at Cloudflare, working with Claude via AI agents, rebuilt 94% of Next.js, one of the most widely used frontend frameworks on the internet, built over 10 years by a large engineering team in a single week. Total cost was $1,100 in API tokens. The result, called Vinext, is a drop-in replacement that builds production apps up to 4x faster and produces client bundles 57% smaller and customers are already running it in production. Second is Cursor CEO Michael Truell deployed a swarm of hundreds of GPT-5.2 agents that ran uninterrupted for an entire week and built a fully functional web browser from scratch called FastRender. 3 million lines of code, thousands of files and a custom Rust rendering engine with HTML parsing, CSS layout, text shaping, and a custom JavaScript VM. Total cost was roughly $30,000. For context, Google has spent billions of dollars and decades of engineering building Chrome. And the benchmarks say by next year, you will be able to one-shot prompt anything. The moat that software companies spent decades building, the complexity of their codebase, the years it would take a competitor to replicate it, the switching costs that moat assumed humans were the unit of production. AI does not care how long it took you to build it, it only cares how long it takes to rebuild it. And right now, the answer is one week.

Milk Road AI

16,781 次观看 • 3 个月前

Jensen Huang explains the AI industry as a five layer cake, and why "model only" companies are missing the real map. "AI is not just a model. AI is really a five layer cake to think about it." "From the lowest level, it requires energy because AI is produced, generated in real time, just like you and I right now. We need calories, we need energy." "The next level is chips. This is where Nvidia is and where a lot of the companies in Taiwan are." "The layer above that is infrastructure: land, power, data center, as well as the cloud service software that turns the chips into a cloud service." "The layer above that is where most people think about when they think about AI, which is models. ChatGPT was revolutionary. Claude Code is now incredibly successful. But AI is much more than just human language." Most people are still debating the model layer. Jensen is describing an industrial stack: energy, chips, infrastructure, models, and applications. If you are building in AI, this is the map that matters. The winning product may look like software, but the bottlenecks are calories, land, power, data centers, chips, and distribution. - Jensen Huang (NVIDIA), CEO of Nvidia, on CNA
1:48

Jensen Huang explains the AI industry as a five layer cake, and why "model only" companies are missing the real map. "AI is not just a model. AI is really a five layer cake to think about it." "From the lowest level, it requires energy because AI is produced, generated in real time, just like you and I right now. We need calories, we need energy." "The next level is chips. This is where Nvidia is and where a lot of the companies in Taiwan are." "The layer above that is infrastructure: land, power, data center, as well as the cloud service software that turns the chips into a cloud service." "The layer above that is where most people think about when they think about AI, which is models. ChatGPT was revolutionary. Claude Code is now incredibly successful. But AI is much more than just human language." Most people are still debating the model layer. Jensen is describing an industrial stack: energy, chips, infrastructure, models, and applications. If you are building in AI, this is the map that matters. The winning product may look like software, but the bottlenecks are calories, land, power, data centers, chips, and distribution. - Jensen Huang (NVIDIA), CEO of Nvidia, on CNA

Karl Mehta

14,976 次观看 • 22 天前

Perplexity’s CEO Aravind Srinivas is pointing to a quiet shift in AI use: the valuable user is no longer the average user. A single power user can now consume as much compute as an entire small team. "There are real engineers at Meta and other companies spending around $10 million a year per engineer on these coding tools. There are users in Perplexity Computer, who spends upwards of $10,000 a month. Their business runs using agent loops that are running inside these harnesses. Even internally inside our own company, there are some people who have set up these kinds of multi-agent hierarchies and agent loops that look like their own software architecture. I often ask these people to come explain to the rest of the company, “Hey, what are you doing with these tools? You clearly are consuming them way more than what we thought the average person in the company would do.” --- The old software instinct was to chase a billion people doing small actions. Agentic AI changes that math because one skilled operator can create a stream of machine work that runs all day. ---- From "20VC with Harry Stebbings" YouTube channel ( Harry Stebbings ), link in comment
1:34

Perplexity’s CEO Aravind Srinivas is pointing to a quiet shift in AI use: the valuable user is no longer the average user. A single power user can now consume as much compute as an entire small team. "There are real engineers at Meta and other companies spending around $10 million a year per engineer on these coding tools. There are users in Perplexity Computer, who spends upwards of $10,000 a month. Their business runs using agent loops that are running inside these harnesses. Even internally inside our own company, there are some people who have set up these kinds of multi-agent hierarchies and agent loops that look like their own software architecture. I often ask these people to come explain to the rest of the company, “Hey, what are you doing with these tools? You clearly are consuming them way more than what we thought the average person in the company would do.” --- The old software instinct was to chase a billion people doing small actions. Agentic AI changes that math because one skilled operator can create a stream of machine work that runs all day. ---- From "20VC with Harry Stebbings" YouTube channel ( Harry Stebbings ), link in comment

Rohan Paul

58,367 次观看 • 27 天前

AI AGENTS 101 (58 minute free masterclass) send this to anyone who wants to understand ai agents, claude skills, md files, how to get the most out of AI etc in plain english: 1. chat vs agents - chat models answer questions in a back and forth while agents take a goal, figure out the steps, and deliver a result 2. agents don’t stop after one response. they keep running until the task is actually finishedno babysitting required 3. everything runs on a loop. they gather context, decide what to do, take an action, then repeat until done 4. the loop is the system. they look at files, tools, and the internet. decide the next step. execute and then feed that back into the next step. over and over until completion 5. the model is just one piece. gpt, claude, gemini are the reasoning layer. the key is model + loop + tools + context 6. mcp is how agents use tools. it connects things like browser, code, apis, and your internal software. once connected, the agent decides when to use them to get the job done 7. context beats prompt all day. you don't need to write perfect prompts. load your agent with context about your business, style, and goals and then simple instructions work 8. claude.md or agents.md is the onboarding doc it tells the agent who it is, how to behave, what it knows, and what tools it can use. this gets loaded every time before it starts 9. memory.md is how it improves. agents don’t remember by default. this file stores preferences, corrections, and patterns you tell the agent to update it, and it gets better over time 10. skills + harnesses make it usable. skills are reusable tasks like writing, research, analysis the harness is the environment like claude code or openclaw that runs everything. basiclaly, different interfaces, same system underneath this episode with remy on The Startup Ideas Podcast (SIP) 🧃 was one of the clearest ways of understanding a lot of the core concepts of ai agents could be the best beginners course for ai agents 58 mins. all free. no advertisers. i just want to see you build cool stuff. im rooting for you. send to a friend watch
58:55

AI AGENTS 101 (58 minute free masterclass) send this to anyone who wants to understand ai agents, claude skills, md files, how to get the most out of AI etc in plain english: 1. chat vs agents - chat models answer questions in a back and forth while agents take a goal, figure out the steps, and deliver a result 2. agents don’t stop after one response. they keep running until the task is actually finishedno babysitting required 3. everything runs on a loop. they gather context, decide what to do, take an action, then repeat until done 4. the loop is the system. they look at files, tools, and the internet. decide the next step. execute and then feed that back into the next step. over and over until completion 5. the model is just one piece. gpt, claude, gemini are the reasoning layer. the key is model + loop + tools + context 6. mcp is how agents use tools. it connects things like browser, code, apis, and your internal software. once connected, the agent decides when to use them to get the job done 7. context beats prompt all day. you don't need to write perfect prompts. load your agent with context about your business, style, and goals and then simple instructions work 8. claude.md or agents.md is the onboarding doc it tells the agent who it is, how to behave, what it knows, and what tools it can use. this gets loaded every time before it starts 9. memory.md is how it improves. agents don’t remember by default. this file stores preferences, corrections, and patterns you tell the agent to update it, and it gets better over time 10. skills + harnesses make it usable. skills are reusable tasks like writing, research, analysis the harness is the environment like claude code or openclaw that runs everything. basiclaly, different interfaces, same system underneath this episode with remy on The Startup Ideas Podcast (SIP) 🧃 was one of the clearest ways of understanding a lot of the core concepts of ai agents could be the best beginners course for ai agents 58 mins. all free. no advertisers. i just want to see you build cool stuff. im rooting for you. send to a friend watch

GREG ISENBERG

375,365 次观看 • 4 个月前

Some personal hot takes from AI: engineer Miami follows... 1. Software development is a dead-end profession because anyone can be a software developer now. 2. Anyone can use Cursor or any other tool and generate code. Being a coder and being a software engineer are different. 3. Computers used to be gated; now everyone has the power to make computers malleable. Everyone is a software developer now, but that does not mean they are software engineers 4. If you cannot demonstrate how a coding agent works, you are just a consumer and have imposed an artificial glass ceiling on your career as a software engineer. 5. If you are curious, you will have a job. If you have not been curious in the last two years, you are replaceable. 6. SaaS per-seat economics may become unstable as customers need fewer people to achieve results, prompting founders to think about new unit economics 7. Most companies will take two or three years (or more!) to figure out AI transformation. 8. Some companies are already building AI native teams of five to ten people who can build with the grain of AI 9. There will be an explosion in the number of software developers. Software development is now essentially free, and tokens are cheaper than humans 10. Not enough engineers know what it means to be a product engineer 11. JIRA ticket monkeys are cooked 12. If your company has banned AI, you should quit that company 13. AI is more like a musical instrument than just a tool play with it, make discoveries, build intuition learn where AI is good and where it fails
14:55

Some personal hot takes from AI: engineer Miami follows... 1. Software development is a dead-end profession because anyone can be a software developer now. 2. Anyone can use Cursor or any other tool and generate code. Being a coder and being a software engineer are different. 3. Computers used to be gated; now everyone has the power to make computers malleable. Everyone is a software developer now, but that does not mean they are software engineers 4. If you cannot demonstrate how a coding agent works, you are just a consumer and have imposed an artificial glass ceiling on your career as a software engineer. 5. If you are curious, you will have a job. If you have not been curious in the last two years, you are replaceable. 6. SaaS per-seat economics may become unstable as customers need fewer people to achieve results, prompting founders to think about new unit economics 7. Most companies will take two or three years (or more!) to figure out AI transformation. 8. Some companies are already building AI native teams of five to ten people who can build with the grain of AI 9. There will be an explosion in the number of software developers. Software development is now essentially free, and tokens are cheaper than humans 10. Not enough engineers know what it means to be a product engineer 11. JIRA ticket monkeys are cooked 12. If your company has banned AI, you should quit that company 13. AI is more like a musical instrument than just a tool play with it, make discoveries, build intuition learn where AI is good and where it fails

geoff

59,816 次观看 • 1 个月前

In the future, you’ll be able to accomplish a goal by just giving Claude an outcome and a budget. That’s the direction Anthropic is building in with its new Managed Agents features, announced at this week’s Code with Claude developer event. The basic idea: Claude, wrapped in a computer in the cloud, that you can spin up, scale, and manage as needed. Anthropic is taking on the infrastructure that kills most agent products, and making sure that it scales to meet the needs of agents running 24/7. On this week’s AI & I from Every 📧, I talk with Angela Jiang (Angela Jiang), head of product for the Claude platform, and Katelyn Lesse (Katelyn Lesse), head of engineering for the Claude platform, about what Anthropic is building and what it takes to make agents reliable in production. We get into: - Why the "build a generic harness, hot-swap any model behind it" playbook is already outdated. Angela points to eval data on Memory where the same task across different harnesses performed drastically differently. - The infrastructure wall every team hits in production—and why Katelyn thinks “my sandbox died and took the agent with it” is the real reason internal agents don't ship. - Why Anthropic is so bullish on using file systems and skills within Claude, including Angela's argument that those early design choices can compound for years. This is a must-watch for anyone trying to take an agent past the demo and into production. Watch below! Timestamps: How the Claude platform evolved from API to agents: 00:01:48 The primitives that make up Claude Managed Agents: 00:04:09 Why the harness and the model are becoming a single unit: 00:10:37 The infrastructure wall that kills most agent projects in production: 00:18:49 Why team agents need a different shape than individual productivity tools: 00:24:49 How Anthropic's legal team uses an agent to review marketing copy: 00:26:36 Using multi-agent orchestration for advisor strategies, adversarial pairs, and swarms: 00:34:24 How to measure agent success with outcome and budget as the end state: 00:35:50 What the platform looks like a year from now, when Claude writes its own harness: 00:39:11
43:20

In the future, you’ll be able to accomplish a goal by just giving Claude an outcome and a budget. That’s the direction Anthropic is building in with its new Managed Agents features, announced at this week’s Code with Claude developer event. The basic idea: Claude, wrapped in a computer in the cloud, that you can spin up, scale, and manage as needed. Anthropic is taking on the infrastructure that kills most agent products, and making sure that it scales to meet the needs of agents running 24/7. On this week’s AI & I from Every 📧, I talk with Angela Jiang (Angela Jiang), head of product for the Claude platform, and Katelyn Lesse (Katelyn Lesse), head of engineering for the Claude platform, about what Anthropic is building and what it takes to make agents reliable in production. We get into: - Why the "build a generic harness, hot-swap any model behind it" playbook is already outdated. Angela points to eval data on Memory where the same task across different harnesses performed drastically differently. - The infrastructure wall every team hits in production—and why Katelyn thinks “my sandbox died and took the agent with it” is the real reason internal agents don't ship. - Why Anthropic is so bullish on using file systems and skills within Claude, including Angela's argument that those early design choices can compound for years. This is a must-watch for anyone trying to take an agent past the demo and into production. Watch below! Timestamps: How the Claude platform evolved from API to agents: 00:01:48 The primitives that make up Claude Managed Agents: 00:04:09 Why the harness and the model are becoming a single unit: 00:10:37 The infrastructure wall that kills most agent projects in production: 00:18:49 Why team agents need a different shape than individual productivity tools: 00:24:49 How Anthropic's legal team uses an agent to review marketing copy: 00:26:36 Using multi-agent orchestration for advisor strategies, adversarial pairs, and swarms: 00:34:24 How to measure agent success with outcome and budget as the end state: 00:35:50 What the platform looks like a year from now, when Claude writes its own harness: 00:39:11

Dan Shipper 📧

66,339 次观看 • 2 个月前