Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

Proactive agent that thinks and acts like you. Multiplayer AI Brain for teams. Proper GUI for commanding 50 agents. all three. Sauna goes live today. First 2000 people, use access code LAUNCH for $80 of weekly(!) credits. Let’s explain. Multiplayer only works once the personal brain is powerful. So...

781,541 views • 2 months ago •via X (Twitter)

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Today, we are launching the first publicly available AI Scientist, via the FutureHouse Platform. Our AI Scientist agents can perform a wide variety of scientific tasks better than humans. By chaining them together, we've already started to discover new biology really fast. With the platform, we are bringing these capabilities to the wider community. Watch our long-form video, in the comments below, to learn more about how the platform works and how you can use it to make new discoveries, and go to our website or see the comments below to access the platform. We are releasing three superhuman AI Scientist agents today, each with their own specialization: A general-purpose agent (Crow); An agent to automate literature reviews (Falcon); and An agent to answer the question “Has anyone done X before” (Owl). We are also releasing an experimental agent, Phoenix, that has access to a wide variety of tools for planning experiments in chemistry. More on that below. The three literature search agents (Crow, Falcon, and Owl) have benchmarked superhuman performance. They also have access to a large corpus of full scientific texts, which means that you can ask them more detailed questions about experimental protocols and study limitations that general-purpose web search agents, which usually only have access to abstracts, might miss. Our agents also use a variety of factors to distinguish source quality, so that they don’t end up relying on low-quality papers or pop-science sources. Finally, and critically, we have an API, which is intended to allow researchers to integrate our agents into their workflows. Phoenix is an experimental project we put together recently just to demonstrate what can happen if you give the agents access to lots of scientific tools. It is not better than humans at planning experiments yet, and it makes a lot more mistakes than Crow, Falcon, or Owl. We want to see all the ways you can break it! The agents we are releasing today cannot yet do all (or even most!) aspects of scientific research autonomously. However, as we show in the video, you can already use them to generate and evaluate new hypotheses and plan new experiments way faster than before. Internally, we also have dedicated agents for data analysis, hypothesis generation, protein engineering, and more, and we plan to launch these on the platform in the coming months as well. Within a year or two, it is easy to imagine that the vast majority of desk work that scientists do today will be accelerated with the help of AI agents like the ones we are releasing today. The platform is currently free-to-use. Over time, depending on how people use it, we may implement pricing plans. If you want higher rate limits, especially for research projects, get in touch. Michael Skarlinski, Andrew White 🐦‍⬛, Tyler Nadolski, Remo Storni, James Braza, Ludovico Mitchener, Michaela Hinks, as well as Jason Carman and his team for making such fantastic videos of us!

Sam Rodriques

724,665 views • 1 year ago

Today we’re launching the first and only human-like AI agents in the world. Super Agents™ are the first agents with human‑level skills – they DM you, take @ mentions, send emails, manage docs, tasks, and more. Not just tools or API calls, but real skills fine‑tuned for how teams actually work. The first agents with 100% context – fully native in ClickUp and fully synced from other apps. Super Agents see your work the same way that humans do: tasks, docs, schedules, and conversations all in one place. The first agents that learn from human interactions automatically, without any setup or configuration – when you give feedback, they listen and improve how they work. The first agents with human‑level memory for custom agents – historical memory for every interaction, short-term working memory, and even long‑term memory stored in docs you can literally open, inspect, and edit. The first agents that are literally the same as users – our agentic user model is the same as our user data model. This gives you permissions and capabilities that you and your systems are already familiar with. The first infinite agent catalog – where anyone can create and customize agents in minutes, for literally any type of work imaginable. It's the most intuitive way to build agents on the planet. 95% of companies are failing in AI adoption. The reality is that AI isn't meant to be adopted, it's meant to be adapted – to you. Super Agents are automatically personalized to you and your company using proprietary state-of-the-art agent architecture, orchestration, and tooling. Today is the largest step forward we've ever made towards our mission of making people more productive. Maximize human productivity, with ClickUp Super Agents. Available NOW. For everyone.

Zeb Evans

320,554 views • 6 months ago

What does it actually mean to be AI native? There was no clear guide on the internet for how to become AI native so we built the definitive one (60 min masterclass): 1. An AI native org has 3 layers: people for strategy and taste, agents for execution, and a shared context layer that makes the entire company readable to agents. 2. AI eats the middle of your work. You used to spend 80% of your day on execution. Now agents do that. Your job is the bookends: deciding what to do and judging whether it's good enough. 3. Everyone is a manager now. Your output is the output of your agents. If your agents produce garbage, that's on you. You set them up wrong. 4. Using ChatGPT doesn't make you AI native. That's like having a website and calling yourself a tech company lol. 5. No AI native org without AI native people. Most companies skip straight to the tools. That's why it fails. If your people don't understand how to manage agents, the tech doesn't matter. 6. Making your company "readable" to agents is the real work. Every process, every decision, every piece of knowledge needs to exist in a format an agent can consume. Most companies are nowhere close. 7. Speed without signal is just expensive chaos. You need the system to move fast AND know if you're moving in the right direction. 8. The skill chain is how agents get good at your specific workflows. Skills build on skills. The more you invest in them, the more your company compounds. 9. The moat is the system. People managing agents, agents reading from rich context, the whole thing getting smarter every week. That compounds. Your competitor can copy your tools. They can't copy your system. Full episode with Theo Tabah from LCA on The Startup Ideas Podcast (SIP) 🧃. This is the stuff we normally keep internal but all the sauce is yours. Theo Tabah is the brains behind advising the world's biggest companies on AI and building AI products. Your fav CEO's first call for figuring out AI. You are in for a treat Become AI native in under 60 minutes Watch

GREG ISENBERG

83,806 views • 1 month ago

🔊 Elon Musk did a live phone interview earlier today with a guest host of the Sean Hannity radio program, discussing his latest SpaceX timelines. I only caught about the last 5 minutes of it: “The best way to expand compute is really in space. There’s a lot of room in space and if you look at the size of Earth relative to the sun or relative to the solar system, you realize just how tiny Earth is. We’re very, very tiny. We only receive about half a billionth of The Sun’s energy. So if you really think of Earth as being like a tiny dust mote in a vast darkness. So the way to expand compute— without, ya know, using up all the land on Earth— is to do so in space. And then you can do it without using up space for power & water on Earth. You can just do it in space, so… I think we will probably be launching our first AI satellites next year and then we will probably be able to do that, I think, at large scale in about two years. Yeah, well, I’ve always had the philosophy that everyone at the company should receive stock in the company so that they can participate in the upside of the company and it’s great for aligning incentives as well, so as the company prospers, then the people at the company— the employees — also prosper, so that’s just been, ya know, my philosophy from Day 1 is just to make sure everyone gets stock in the company, so there are, I think, several thousand people who’ve been – it’s not just one welder – it’s several thousand people who were, you know, working on the production line and started at the company relatively early… then probably their stock is worth over $1 million at this point “Yeah, so, Mars is much harder to get to than the moon and you can only travel to Mars roughly every two years. So Earth and Mars align such that you can travel to Mars only once every 26 months. So that makes it a lot harder than the moon where you can go to the moon pretty much anytime and it only takes a few days to get to the moon whereas it takes about six months to get to Mars. So that’s why we can do the moon faster than we can do Mars. But I think, probably, if things go well, we can probably send the first people to Mars in about five years, and then rapidly increase the cadence of sending people to Mars thereafter, so every two years we could dramatically increase the number of ships going to Mars and, ya know, hopefully in a 10 or 12 year timeframe we’ve sent thousands of people to Mars.”

James Stephenson

892,255 views • 7 days ago

Right now our experience of the internet is in jeopardy. More than half of our interactions online and onchain come from non-human actors who are not identifiable, not accountable, not verifiable. That means as we look toward a stablecoin payment and AI agent enabled future, how are we going to facilitate payments if we don't know who we're paying? How will applications, display advertising, recommendations work if the counterparty who's interacting with those interfaces and in those digital spaces can’t identify itself as agent or human, or specific human? Or for things like onchain incentives, how can we ensure that tokens and value are arriving at the right users if we cannot tell Sybil accounts and redundant addresses from unique human beings? So for all of these use cases and more, things that touch enterprise and government as well, which we can get into later, we have a very glaring need to bring a layer of identity and trust to the internet that was originally built as a system, a network to communicate amongst computers, but lacked an identity system to acknowledge their users. That's the problem that we are solving with Billions Network. How can we make it really easy for you and the agents who serve you to prove who you are, your traits and capabilities and qualifications, in any space, physical or digital? What that means is that today Billions Network is the first universal human and AI network built with mobile first verification, so you can prove who you are and your agents can prove who they are, starting with comfortable experiences on the devices you already own. So no proprietary hardware. We do not rely on centralized servers to collect user data. Rather, your information, the sensitive data that makes you you, stays securely on your device. And we use zero knowledge proofs as a way to prove traits about you, such as the fact that you're over the age of 21, without revealing that sensitive personal data, such as what your exact birth date is. Source: Billions CEO Evin McMullen evin speaking at House of Chimera Spaces Event Dec 3, 2025

Billions

30,867 views • 7 months ago

gm! If you missed yesterday's space, here is the clip that you can listen explaining why Agent NFTs are important and future of NFTs. Also here is the TL;DR Agentic NFTs as productive assets. An NFT can own an AI agent's shared memory, tools, websites, and products it has built. Selling the NFT transfers the entire business/agent state to the new owner. ERC-8257 for tool-gating. CodinCowboy and ryan is working on the standard where agents register tools on-chain and access is gated by NFT ownership. That component that tells an agent "you need this NFT to use this tool" creating a market for exclusive tools. Use case: anyone can publish a tool and restrict it (e.g., "only Normies agents can call this"), letting tool value flow back to the gating NFT. Normies community fit. Normies API has served ~500M requests in 3 months, with 100+ community-built tools/games. ERC-8257 will let them build gated games, rewards, and skills exclusively for Normie agent holders. Why Normies is "agent-ready"? - Because everything is fully on-chain, metadata, ERCs, binding transaction. So the project is highly composable. My take on this topic: So far holding an NFT giving access to community, discord and merch. What we are doing with Normies is to give access to a business, tools, skills that agents can use effectively and be part of the economy layer of agentic future. Imagine someone builds a tool that does really 100% successful trading and only gates that skill to Normie Agents, and at some point you will only need a Normie NFT which has binding with the agent and access all these skills, tools. Future is now, Normies are the builders.

serc

14,066 views • 1 month ago

Dr. Daniel Monti just revealed a potentially massive breakthrough in Parkinson’s disease treatment. And it’s much simpler than you think. He just published his third study on a molecule called N-acetylcysteine, or “NAC for short.” “This is a powerful antioxidant.” “It actually protects the liver.” “We know that it does a lot of different things, but the important thing for us is that it’s a precursor to something called glutathione.” “Glutathione protects the brain when there’s damage or oxidative stress and we lose it as we age.” “And when we get sick, we lose it even more.” “So we want to have a way to efficiently increase glutathione in the brain, particularly when we have a neurodegenerative disorder such as Parkinson’s disease.” “We hypothesized early on that giving infused N-acetylcysteine would increase glutathione and actually have a positive impact on Parkinson’s disease.” “We’ve published three studies on this and we look at brain scans in all of them.” “And what we’ve seen is that the N-acetylcysteine increases the efficiency of dopamine in the brain, which is the neurotransmitter or chemical that gets lost in Parkinson’s disease and causes all of those symptoms.” “Our most recent study shows that it improves the way the brain connects to itself or talks to itself the functional connectivity in the brain.” “To be in the study, you couldn’t have changes in your Parkinson's medications for a period of time.” “In both the control group and in the NAC group, people were on their Parkinson’s medications, but if they got the NAC, they did better.” “Their brain came alive in a way that wasn’t happening before.”

Jan Jekielek

170,003 views • 4 months ago

The most epic 13 minute AI rant I've heard in 2026 PS: My parent's heard this when I was playing it in the car and thought Jason ✨👾SaaStr.Ai✨ Lemkin went OFF like Stephen A Smith does on first take PPS: Full transcript below [17:00] Harry Stebbings: I I just wanted to ask Jason, if the people that we want are fundamentally different, the developers that we used to hire, we don't because AI writes the code for us. The marketers we don't want, the sales people we don't want—who who do we want genuinely? Like what is the attractive profile? Because your Anthropic’s and your OpenAIs are hiring, so so what are the people that we want in the companies of the future? [17:18] Jason Lemkin: Look, I know it sounds trite, but but the answer is simple. It's just the expression each year changes. We want folks that are genuinely AI fluent. It's pretty simple. Now you know, maybe last year we called them prompt engineers, right? That used to be a job. I don't know if you remember that actually used to be the hottest job on planet earth. Now no one needs a prompt engineer because it's pretty easy to prompt all these tools. That job died. Okay. Um and now we need go-to-market engineers. Um I think that job's going to die. We need—everyone needs so many forward deployed engineers. Like you can't hire enough forward deployed engineers. But uh you know um but Palantir just announced in whatever their their big their big event—they've gotten their deployment times down over 90% with forward deployed engineers. So that may become—so the this wave of disruption for the titles and the specificity, it's also exhaustingly accelerating. But it's really simple. You meet anyone for any role—sales, marketing, engineering, product, QA—they're they're either they're either they can't keep all of the ways they use AI to accelerate their job from spewing out of their mouth, or they're staring at you. It's there's nowhere in the middle. Like, and the person that comes in and says—it's it's it sounds Captain Obvious—but like, you know, you just had the whatever from Lovable, the the marketing head that was super popular on the show, right? She's just spewing AI-native insights into Lovable, right? It's not that complicated. You hire her, Elena, or whatever it is. You just hire her. It doesn't matter whether she's still in college or a junior or a senior or a middler, a left or right. And honestly, if you interview people, I would say of all even of the best startups I've invested in, maybe 30% of the management team meets this standard at best. 30%. Maybe less. And of the interviews I do in general, it's single-digit percents. It's just and in in that sense, it's the same as ever. Like you either lower the bar in hiring or you hire someone that's actually great. And someone that's actually great is so far ahead of you in how to apply to to employ the efficiencies of AI in their role, your jaw falls on the table. The difference is we used to need warm bodies. That's what's changing. We used to need warm bodies to answer the call, to do QA, to do code review, to to get the blue pixel to go from the upper left to the lower right. You laugh, but you need you literally needed to brute force this with humans. With AI, every day that goes by, the AI—you do not need brute force human beings on your team. And that's another reason they're shrinking. Why are all these new companies so efficient? They're just not brute forcing things with humans. They're just not. They're choosing not to. And so these team—all the brute forcers out there—everyone talks about how bloated teams got in 2021. I don't agree with that. I think they got as big as they needed to be when growth was high and you needed humans to do everything. All you look at these teams that that doubled—well if growth continued at 60% like the rate in early 2021 for 5 years or can help me do the math and every single thing a software company did required a human. You were understaffed by your 2021 headcount. You'd be sitting here in 2026. You every office in SoMa would be triple packed and you there wouldn't be enough humans to staff your company. It's just the world changed. [20:33] Harry Stebbings: Jason, you live on the bleeding edge. I think me and Rory see that and I think the world sees that when they hear you every week in terms of how you run SaaS. For all of the CEOs and execs who listen to the show, what would you advise them in terms of determining whether someone is AI fluent when they meet them for jobs, for talent? [20:51] Jason Lemkin: Here's I realized I was just asked this. I just did a review with a super fast startup growing just crossing 100 million and I was asked this question. And one of my favorite executives, I thought his answer was pretty dated and because he gave me an answer that was about 6 months old. The answer 6 months old is: "I look for folks in my team, I look for you know at what tools they play with." Okay, that was a great answer in like summer of 2025. Okay, I tried Lovable last week. Okay, the answer in 2026 is: "What commercial AI tool have you brought into your organization this month?" That's the test. Anyone that is on the bleeding edge that you would want to hire—now there are so many great products in the market. Okay, there is no excuse in any role to have not brought one tool a month into your organization. Okay, there—now there's going to be better and better tools and better and better products as the year goes on. What's the one you did? And you will see folks with their deer in the headlights to this question. What what sales tool? What marketing tool? What product tool? What engineering tool? What did you bring in? Why did you pick it? How does it working? Because if you're at remotely at the cutting edge, you're all over this. You're looking for the next agentic tools that will radically improve how you do business. This is—you think everyone thinks SaaS is at the bleeding edge, right? You know, you know, all we do is we're just looking for the tools and trying them. Okay? Okay, we're one year ahead of everybody else because we did the simplest thing in the world. Like we tried the tools early and we trained them. We trained them for a month. Okay, I'll give you—want hear a horrible example from this week? Super hot AI company valued at 6 billion. Okay, I'm not going to name it. Um, this week yesterday told us we had to quadruple what we spent on their product. Okay, their agent told us, right? And why did this happen? Okay. Well, at this $6 billion company, no one had trained the agent on its pricing properly. No one had tested it. They said, "Well, well, we've been in beta." And we said, "Well, when did the beta launch? A year ago." Okay, these are people asleep at at the wheel. You want somebody who the instant this comes up, they exactly know what the issue is. And "Hey, when I was at Lovable Replit, we trained the agent. This is how we did it. I brought in this tool. I brought in this tool that that Rory invested in last week. It solved all these issues." That's what you want to hear. And if they haven't brought in a tool in the last 30 days, at least deeply evaluated it. I don't really care whether they bought it, but gone so far down the funnel they can tell you—pick whatever tool: Fixie, Regie, GC, AIGC—I don't care how you went through it, you looked at it, you can tell me the eight ways it would improve the productivity of your business and three you didn't. Just don't hire that person because they're going to run your company to the ground. This is the job today. The job today is not to screw around on ChatGPT and to be a prompt engineer. The job today is to bring the best AI and agentic products into your organization and leverage all the hard work that the engineers have done building those products. That's your job. You don't have to screw around. You don't have to be a prompt engineer anymore. You have to be an agent deployment expert. A—this is the new job we're making up today. An Agentic Deployment Expert. That's your job from C-level to junior. Agentic Deployment Expert. Don't hire anybody else. You're going to regret it. They're going to stare at the camera. He's good. Stare at the camera. He's honorable. We could probably just I could slip away, get a coffee, and come back. No. And I I sound exasperated, Rory. And I—but the reason I am is I can just see I can see my best companies doing it. And I can see some companies I've invested in not doing it. And I want to cry. I just want to cry when they have no ADs on their team. I just—like you're flushing your years of your life down the toilet by not approaching your how you're building this company this way. [24:33] Rory: Yes. And at the risk of being positive, it's worth pointing out two things he didn't say. Well, something implicit why he said—Jason didn't do the only hire, you know, he didn't commit the um employment law, I think it's a civil penalty of saying only employ people below X who get the new new thing because he implicitly said anyone can do it provided you're willing to learn. And I think that's the big aha that's one of the positive statements to make here right? Look and I think it applies—I'm always wary of being "Hey, coming across, hey this this is the things that you all have to do." I think it applies to everyone including investors right? I mean I will say I have found that unless you're willing to invest the time learning these tools you actually shouldn't be investing in them. One of my partners Andy had this expression: "You know, if you decide you want to stop learning new things you probably should retire within 6 to 12 months and never write another check again." Maybe that's down to 3 to 6 months at this stage, right? And I think, you know, it's— [25:27] Harry Stebbings: Yeah, I actually I actually had a meeting with mine and Jason's biggest investor the other day and I—pretend he's not here—I said I think he's the most equipped investor for this generation of investing because I don't think anyone quite sits at the bleeding edge like he does on the investor side. [25:42] Harry Stebbings: Why in terms of using the equip stuff? Yeah. Yeah. In terms of using the stuff, understanding understanding bottlenecks, constraints. For sure. [25:51] Jason Lemkin: But can I just add one point? We can just cuz it's so important if it helps people. Okay, we are—and thank you Harry. We're going through these phases. Okay, and when AI started to blow up for real for us, uh call it early 2024, right? Maybe late '23, I wasn't equipped. It was too technical. I wasn't going to go in and figure out—I wasn't smart enough to figure out how to deal with a massively hallucinating LLM API and turn that and turn that into something magical. Kudos to investors and others that that got it in early '23, '22. I mean I remember I—I guess it was maybe SaaStr Annual '23. I was with David Sacks and I did a Q&A and I said, "How you thinking about AI at Craft?" He's like, "Well we're all in. We want 80% of '23 of investments to be AI." I'm like, "Great but like show me the show me the great ones in market." He's like, "They're all prototypes. We're all they're all they're all proof of concepts but we're all in anyway." That's where you kind of had to be in '23 if you weren't investing at like the LLM level. Okay, I wasn't smart enough. Then we went through this weird-ass prompt engineer era where like you you could torture these products to do something good, right? But you had to torture them. You had to like craft these crazy things that made no sense. Now we are in the era where mere ordinarily smart generalists can make these tools do magical things. And literally I go to these meetings and people be like, "I don't know how to like this is so scary. I don't know how to do this." And we show them our backends. Do you know how to do a workflow generator? Do you know how to do a a decision tree? Like we've been building these since software in the '90s. Okay, if you—I can show you all of our agents. The how they work is novel. They do have to be trained. You can't be lazy and have these agents work. But honestly, the the UI, the UX, the way we interact with them, it's just software. And so my point is: Pick yourself off the ground. This is your time now. If you felt lost in AI era, if you felt like you're behind, you don't understand what all these people are saying on X and Twitter and their Claude and and their and talking about all the 4.6 point Nano point and it's over—like you just it's not your world. This is your time. This is your time for the generalist that knows how to use software tools really really well. And I—this is my last point but it's so important. If ever in your recent life—and this is why you could be all you need to be is young at heart to Rory's point—if in the last three to five years you have successfully deployed a piece of enterprise software of any sort you yourself, not some agency you hired, but if you have deployed it, you can deploy any agentic tool. Any. And you can become the hero in your company and you can become the hero in your functional area. But I watch folks—I'm literally helping a company now that they're adding hundreds of sales folks this year with a new pre-IPO COO—he's not hasn't brought in a single tool, totally scared of it. Okay, it's not that hard. Did you use SalesLoft? Did you use Outreach? Did you use HubSpot? Do you know these tools? If you can deploy these tools, you can deploy a world-changing AI agent. And so this is the time for people like the folks that that were shut out of the AI revolution right now. The generalist folks that are not that know how to deploy software that don't even know how to build software. Like vibe coding for me was folks who knew how to build software, but you didn't have to be an engineer. Now, you just need to know how to deploy software to win with AI agents. That's all you need to know. So many people have these skills and they're petrified of AI. "How did you do that? How did you deploy an AI BDR?" Well, we bought a piece of software, we figured out how it worked for a day, we set it up in an afternoon, and then and then we did spend 30 months training it, which you didn't do with this old software because in the old days, we just had to manually upload all the data, right? And there was no training. The the only non-intuitive part is training these things. And it's it's it's just work. So that's why when I see folks on the management team not doing this, there's no excuse. You do not need to be technical to win with AI agents in Q2 of '26. You do not need to be even 1% technical. Not at all. So it's your time. Or you're going to get laid off. Or you're going to get laid off because you're not going to matter.

Arjun Mahadevan (Mr. LLC 🇺🇸)

37,524 views • 3 months ago