Speaker 1: What's going on?
Speaker 2: Everybody?
Speaker 1: Welcome to another episode of Adventures in DevOps. Warren joining
Speaker 1: me again. I keep making you feel like the new guy.
Speaker 1: But it's been like, what a year.
Speaker 2: Now, almost that long, and I've got my I got
Speaker 2: my back prepared. It was a recent well I don't
Speaker 2: want to spoil my pick, so I'm not going to
Speaker 2: say what it is. But the conclusion is that AI
Speaker 2: may be making us stupid. The truth is that AI
Speaker 2: has a huge decrease on our critical thinking or how
Speaker 2: much we're utilizing it and not necessarily training that skill,
Speaker 2: and this could be the beginning of the downfall of humanity.
Speaker 3: And that's all I'm gonna say.
Speaker 4: I don't know. I sort of take like issue with
Speaker 4: that because I remember hearing the same thing, like my
Speaker 4: teacher is telling me all about spell check, like, oh,
Speaker 4: you're not going to have a computer in your pocket,
Speaker 4: you need to get over this dyslexia thing. And as
Speaker 4: it turns out, I do have a computer in my pocket,
Speaker 4: and no, I still do not know it as well.
Speaker 4: We're fine. The skill set se ball, but so it's
Speaker 4: gonna be okay everybody.
Speaker 2: The same thing happened with calculators as well. But I'll
Speaker 2: say more about that at the end of the episode.
Speaker 1: Right on, Hi, Jillian, welcome. Hello, all right, this is
Speaker 1: going to be a cool conversation. Joining us today, we
Speaker 1: have the founder and CEO of Warp the Warp Terminal,
Speaker 1: Zach Lloyd. Zach, welcome, I'm excited to be here.
Speaker 3: Thanks for having me.
Speaker 1: I'm excited to have you on here. And just to
Speaker 1: pick your brain about this because I first saw the
Speaker 1: Warp Terminal. It's been several years now, so you've been
Speaker 1: working on this for a while, and it was just like,
Speaker 1: at first, it was so confusing to me because I
Speaker 1: was like, wait, this isn't what my terminals supposed to do.
Speaker 1: It's it's like offering up stuff like how do I
Speaker 1: trust this?
Speaker 2: So before we dig into that.
Speaker 1: Tell us tell our listeners a little bit about warp
Speaker 1: and and what it does.
Speaker 5: And yeah, so Warp it's a reimagination of the terminal.
Speaker 5: You can use it like a regular terminal, so you
Speaker 5: drop it in and use it in place of I
Speaker 5: don't know whatever you're currently using, if you're a mac
Speaker 5: I term or just the stock terminal app. The idea
Speaker 5: behind it is that it has a much more sort
Speaker 5: of user friendly user experience, so you know, basic stuff
Speaker 5: like the mouths works, for instance, but it's also increasingly
Speaker 5: it's about being intelligent, and so when you use WARP,
Speaker 5: the main distinguishing thing these days is that you don't
Speaker 5: have to enter command, so you can just instruct the
Speaker 5: terminal in English, tell it what you wanted to do,
Speaker 5: and it will sort of solve your problem for you
Speaker 5: by translating your wishes into commands using AI, and it
Speaker 5: looks up whatever context it needs and kind of guide
Speaker 5: you through whatever task you're doing, whether it's a coding
Speaker 5: task or a DevOps task or setting up a new project.
Speaker 5: So it's a totally different way of using the command
Speaker 5: line that I think it's like pretty fun to use
Speaker 5: and definitely more powerful than your standard terminal. And like
Speaker 5: we're kind of having an internal debate at this point
Speaker 5: about whether or not it's even right to call it
Speaker 5: a terminal because it's so fundamentally different from what you
Speaker 5: know that people expect when they use a terminal, but
Speaker 5: it does work. It's like I think a really really
Speaker 5: nice to use terminal as well.
Speaker 1: Yeah, for sure, Like the terminal features are definitely all
Speaker 1: right there and ready to go, and then it just keeps.
Speaker 1: I think it's really a cool way to get used
Speaker 1: to it is just drop it in as your replacement terminal,
Speaker 1: and then you can start picking and choosing like all
Speaker 1: of these other things that it has as you, as
Speaker 1: you get comfortable with it.
Speaker 4: I want to say I really like that it uses
Speaker 4: the mouse because I have like a bit of a
Speaker 4: horror story of trying to get somebody set up with them,
Speaker 4: and I felt like very proud of myself, like oh
Speaker 4: look I got the scientist using them, and then they
Speaker 4: were like, great, how do I use a mouse? And
Speaker 4: I was like, oh no, So I think I think
Speaker 4: that's a nice feature.
Speaker 5: The other thing that it will help you do is
Speaker 5: figure out how to quit them if you end up VIM.
Speaker 4: It's not what we're trying to do here.
Speaker 5: Which is what it's one of our most popular features
Speaker 5: is you could ask the AI I had to quit them.
Speaker 3: It's very funny because people people do end up in
Speaker 3: there and they're like, what, oh.
Speaker 4: You mean, like quit the application?
Speaker 3: Not like I quit the application yet, not.
Speaker 4: Like quit the addiction. Okay, No, people love them.
Speaker 1: Now that's a twelve step program for that ward it is.
Speaker 4: They need a new one. They need twenty steps.
Speaker 1: Cool, So, how long have you been building WARPD.
Speaker 5: We've been at it for a while, so started the
Speaker 5: company started during COVID SO twenty like the middle of
Speaker 5: twenty twenty, and we first launched something publicly in twenty
Speaker 5: twenty one. And it's just sort of evolved from something
Speaker 5: where the main value initially was, hey, let's make this
Speaker 5: tool a little bit easier to use and like fix
Speaker 5: some of the UX into something that as much richer
Speaker 5: it is, especially when chat chupt came out, and we
Speaker 5: were even doing some AI stuff before that.
Speaker 3: But they've been working on it for a while now.
Speaker 1: Right on what's the what's the thought process that goes
Speaker 1: into figuring out how to integrate AI into this?
Speaker 3: Yeah, so we went through a bunch of different stages.
Speaker 5: So the first, the first sort of stage of AI
Speaker 5: and warp was essentially like translate English into a command
Speaker 5: so you could bring up this little thing and it
Speaker 5: actually predated chatchupt. Use something called codex, which was a
Speaker 5: I think an open AI like coding API, and you
Speaker 5: could be like, you know, search my files for this
Speaker 5: specific term and it might generate like a fine command
Speaker 5: or a rep command, something like that, and it's very
Speaker 5: much like one to one English to command translation.
Speaker 3: The next thing that we did was when chat chikut.
Speaker 5: Came out, we did what I think a lot of
Speaker 5: apps did at that time, which was like put a
Speaker 5: chat panel into warp and so you could have a
Speaker 5: sort of chat panel on the side where you know,
Speaker 5: you could ask coding questions. You could be like, how
Speaker 5: do I set up you know, a new Python repo
Speaker 5: with these dependencies, and we give it to you as
Speaker 5: a chat and then it's sort of like a copy
Speaker 5: paste type experience where you would take what was in
Speaker 5: the chat and move it into the terminal And that
Speaker 5: was cool, but kind of I would say, like limited
Speaker 5: extra utility compared.
Speaker 3: To just like doing it in chat GPT.
Speaker 5: The biggest change that we made was basically the idea
Speaker 5: that the terminal input where people type commands also could
Speaker 5: be used directly as a conversational input to work with
Speaker 5: an AI, and that the AI itself would end up
Speaker 5: in like sort of intersperse in the terminal session.
Speaker 3: And we call this agent mode.
Speaker 5: And so in this world, it's not just that you
Speaker 5: chat with it, it's that you tell it what to do,
Speaker 5: and it's able on its own to invoke commands to
Speaker 5: kind of like gather the context that it needs help
Speaker 5: you do a thing. So, for instance, if I was like,
Speaker 5: go back to that same example, like help me set
Speaker 5: up a Python repo with these dependencies, instead of doing
Speaker 5: it in a chat panel, which we got rid of,
Speaker 5: you just type that into the terminal input and we.
Speaker 3: Detect that you're typing English and not a command.
Speaker 5: And when you hit enter, it follows up and says like, okay,
Speaker 5: like what directory do you want this saying? And you
Speaker 5: tell it what directory and then it will say it'll
Speaker 5: make the directory for you, It'll CD into it, create
Speaker 5: the gitripo, it'll do all the pip install, it will
Speaker 5: even generate the initial scaffolding of the code.
Speaker 3: If it hits an error, it can debug its own error.
Speaker 5: And all of this is happening within your terminal session.
Speaker 5: And so you know, you get to a point where
Speaker 5: it's like you're actually driving the terminal a little bit
Speaker 5: more in English than you are in commands, and it's
Speaker 5: it's kind of crazy how it's changing how people use
Speaker 5: the terminal. Like I was just looking at this yesterday,
Speaker 5: like in warp. Now like a quarter of what is
Speaker 5: going on in the terminal sessions is actually just English
Speaker 5: and AI generating commands.
Speaker 3: And not people typing CD and LS anymore.
Speaker 5: So that was the sort of evolution, so from a
Speaker 5: very bolt on thing to something where it's like the
Speaker 5: actual fundamental experience of how you use the tools has
Speaker 5: changed a bunch.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so you're completely changing the interaction there. Instead of
Speaker 1: saying how do I just saying go do it.
Speaker 5: Exactly exactly, And that actually takes like developers don't necessarily
Speaker 5: think to do that. They're very much in the like, okay,
Speaker 5: let me google this, let me go to stack overflow
Speaker 5: type of mindset, and it's a totally new behavior if
Speaker 5: you're a developer to just be like I'm just going
Speaker 5: to tell the computer what to do. It's a little
Speaker 5: bit scary because like, what's your terminal and it's like
Speaker 5: now the computer is just like doing stuff in your terminal.
Speaker 5: But I do think that's the future of how development, DevOps,
Speaker 5: whatever you're doing is developer.
Speaker 3: It's going to move from this.
Speaker 5: Like let me run a bunch of queries or let
Speaker 5: me like open up a bunch of files and hand
Speaker 5: out of things, to a world where you're just sort
Speaker 5: of like, hey, let me actually tell my smart AI
Speaker 5: whatever you want to call it, assistant agent whatever, to
Speaker 5: start me on this task.
Speaker 3: And the you know, the.
Speaker 5: The agent will loop me in get more info, you know,
Speaker 5: you know, leverage me when there's ambiguity resolve. But it's
Speaker 5: like it's like going to be an imperative I'm telling
Speaker 5: it what to do way of working. And like the
Speaker 5: cool thing about the terminal for doing that is like
Speaker 5: that's kind of what the terminal is set up for.
Speaker 5: If you think about it, it's like the terminal is
Speaker 5: set up for users to tell the computer what to do.
Speaker 5: It's just that we're like upping the level of abstraction
Speaker 5: from you telling it in terms of like grap and
Speaker 5: fine and cdnls to telling it at the level of
Speaker 5: like a.
Speaker 3: Task what you wanted to do. And so that's like the.
Speaker 5: Vision that we're building towards right on.
Speaker 1: I think it's a really great analogy, you know, because
Speaker 1: we've seen that in other areas of software development, where
Speaker 1: you just keep abstracting things away more and more, yep,
Speaker 1: and coding at a higher level. But this is one
Speaker 1: of the few projects where you're actually doing that outside
Speaker 1: of doing it at the like the task level. Rather
Speaker 1: than at the coding level.
Speaker 5: Correct, and like we are so you can you can
Speaker 5: code and warp. I don't know if did you all
Speaker 5: see the cloud code? Have you played with that at all?
Speaker 4: I have a little Yeah, so cloud code.
Speaker 5: Is super interesting from our perspective because it's it's uh,
Speaker 5: it's all terminal based, and it's all this imperative like
Speaker 5: you run a terminal program, you tell the you tell
Speaker 5: cloud code like, hey, you know, make this change for me,
Speaker 5: and it skips the file editor and id entirely to
Speaker 5: do coding stuff. And so we're also we have very
Speaker 5: similar feature in Warp. It's not it's access that you
Speaker 5: don't run a program within the terminal, You just tell
Speaker 5: the terminal what to do. But I think it's interesting
Speaker 5: in terms of like the types of tasks that you
Speaker 5: can do and if you even look at like have
Speaker 5: you all used Cursor and Windsurf those types of apps
Speaker 5: do any coding?
Speaker 1: Yeah a little bit.
Speaker 5: So yeah in those apps, Like the sort of initial
Speaker 5: feature that was like the magic feature and this is
Speaker 5: true forgetting Copilot two, was like it will do great
Speaker 5: code completions for you, So it gives you this goes
Speaker 5: to text as you're typing and it sort of completes
Speaker 5: your thought. And the sort of thing that they're building
Speaker 5: out now is also it's much more like a chat
Speaker 5: panel within those apps, where you can tell the computer
Speaker 5: what to do and it generates code dips, and they're
Speaker 5: creating something that looks an awful lot like a terminal interaction, but.
Speaker 3: Within the code editor.
Speaker 5: And so I do think there's this general shift that's
Speaker 5: going on for coding, and I think it's also going
Speaker 5: to really impact people who are doing production DevOps basically
Speaker 5: any type of interaction with systems where you just sort
Speaker 5: of start by telling the computer what to do somehow.
Speaker 5: So it's pretty neat, pretty neat to see.
Speaker 4: So I really like this because I spend a lot
Speaker 4: of my days trying to convince biologists that, like, you
Speaker 4: need to be able to use the terminal at least
Speaker 4: a little bit, and it's always touch a tough sell
Speaker 4: because being like, well I'll go over here and take
Speaker 4: this Linux class is like not not what they want
Speaker 4: to be doing. Let's say, so just being able to
Speaker 4: say why not, just in English and it will at
Speaker 4: least get you to the directory and install your Python
Speaker 4: environment and do this kind of stuff is just so
Speaker 4: much nicer than what I've been doing in the past,
Speaker 4: and I do I like this. This is great.
Speaker 5: Yeah, I mean it's it's the other cool thing for
Speaker 5: people who who are it's not their natural environment, let's say,
Speaker 5: and like they have to use it.
Speaker 3: Is that.
Speaker 5: As you use warp to do this stuff, that teaches you.
Speaker 5: So it doesn't just like off the skate, like at
Speaker 5: least for now. The way it does it is like
Speaker 5: you type in like, hey, I want to create this project,
Speaker 5: and it says something back to you like, Okay, here
Speaker 5: are the commands that need to be run in order
Speaker 5: to create this project. Are you cool if I run
Speaker 5: these commands? And so to warn to your earlier points
Speaker 5: like is this just making this all like kind of
Speaker 5: dumber and not knowing how to do anything? It's possible,
Speaker 5: But there is also an aspect of like it's kind
Speaker 5: of like working with like the smart person on your
Speaker 5: team who can show you how to do things, and like,
Speaker 5: you know, hopefully you pick it up because it is
Speaker 5: it is in some ways faster if you know what
Speaker 5: you're doing, just type the commands. And I think in general,
Speaker 5: like I don't think it's a great outcome if everyone
Speaker 5: who's doing development or working in the terminal doesn't know
Speaker 5: what the hell is going on, because inevitably you're going
Speaker 5: to get to some point where you kind of need
Speaker 5: to know in order to fix something. And so you
Speaker 5: know that the hope is that this doesn't make people
Speaker 5: like dumb, or this makes people more proficient, but there is,
Speaker 5: like I think there's a risk for sure.
Speaker 2: There's there's actually two things that this reminds me of
Speaker 2: a lot. And the first one is a long time ago,
Speaker 2: and I don't know how well it's maintained, but there
Speaker 2: was a program that you could install into your terminal
Speaker 2: called fuck.
Speaker 3: Yeah no, No, we've partnered with that exactly.
Speaker 2: You've never you've never seen this before. Something that actually
Speaker 2: happens sort of often is that a command line program
Speaker 2: you run will tell you sort of what you did
Speaker 2: wrong in a way like did you mean this, And
Speaker 2: instead of having to like retype the command and fix
Speaker 2: the problem, you could just type fuck and it would
Speaker 2: read the output and then do that thing. And that's
Speaker 2: the first one. So you haven't seen that, Like I
Speaker 2: highly recommend at least, you know, checking that out. And
Speaker 2: the other one is this thing that totally changed how
Speaker 2: I use the terminal for doing software development, for interacting
Speaker 2: with GIT repositories. Is there's actually a get configuration that
Speaker 2: you can set up to automatically fix typos. So if
Speaker 2: you type something wrong, it will swap the letters around
Speaker 2: and be like, oh, okay, you probably meant this with
Speaker 2: a ninety nine percent accuracy, and then just do that
Speaker 2: command anyway. And you can also set a time out,
Speaker 2: like you know, if you accidentally type something and it's
Speaker 2: gonna start deleting all of your code base, you can
Speaker 2: be like, oh, wait, no, I don't want you to
Speaker 2: do that. But that actually brings me to a question
Speaker 2: I want to ask, which is I see more and
Speaker 2: more of these pieces of software I'll call them agents
Speaker 2: that are interacting with your operating system directly, and for me,
Speaker 2: like I'm super risk goverse, like I don't. I want
Speaker 2: to keep every LM or non thinking creature in its
Speaker 2: own private box where it can't accidentally delete like my
Speaker 2: entire operating system, because that's what I thought I wanted
Speaker 2: to know.
Speaker 5: It's just like, might trust the agent with myself? Yeah,
Speaker 5: go ahead, point I think, yeah.
Speaker 3: Like, so how do you how to manage this is
Speaker 3: the question?
Speaker 2: Or yeah, I mean, it's just it's almost like I
Speaker 2: would want to run like two computers side by side
Speaker 2: one of them. I mean, I already am really concerned
Speaker 2: about running external software on my machine from Ali like
Speaker 2: a malicious standpoint. Very rarely is it will break my
Speaker 2: operating system. I don't remember the last time it happened.
Speaker 2: It was probably when I was using Windows, like over
Speaker 2: a decade ago.
Speaker 5: Uh.
Speaker 2: But when it comes to LMS and things that, like
Speaker 2: I know from firsthand experience, sometimes it's like there's a
Speaker 2: non zero chance that it just figures out the wrong
Speaker 2: thing to do. And and like that's the sort of
Speaker 2: thing that I almost want a sandbox as much as possible,
Speaker 2: and I feel like we're not getting closer to that
Speaker 2: because our operating systems aren't don't allow it as much.
Speaker 5: So it's a great point. I mean, you have a
Speaker 5: couple of choices. If let's say you're using warps, so
Speaker 5: one you can just turn this stuff off, like if
Speaker 5: you're just like I don't trust that, I don't want it.
Speaker 3: So that's fair.
Speaker 5: There's one there's like a toggle that just says AI
Speaker 5: off and like that's it. You're back to, like you know,
Speaker 5: you're in control. There's also like a sort of like
Speaker 5: you can control the level of autonomy it has. So
Speaker 5: the the one of the levels that you could have
Speaker 5: is just like it can't do anything on its own,
Speaker 5: so it can suggest commands, so you can then manually
Speaker 5: approve anything it suggests. There's a level up from that,
Speaker 5: which is like you can kind of provide like an
Speaker 5: allow list and denial list. It could be like, oh,
Speaker 5: it's fine, it can run CAT, it can run less,
Speaker 5: can't run r M. You can go a level up
Speaker 5: from I feel like I wanted to be able to
Speaker 5: run read only commands and let let an LLM determine
Speaker 5: what it thinks as a read only command, which it's
Speaker 5: pretty damn good at but not perfect. Like if you
Speaker 5: had some crazy like piped thing or like hero doc
Speaker 5: or something like that, it might it might get confused,
Speaker 5: but it's pretty good.
Speaker 3: Or you could be like you know, like yellow, like.
Speaker 5: Like I just wanna it's not that big of a
Speaker 5: deal if that messes up my like get ripo or whatever,
Speaker 5: and I'm gonna let it run. And then the other
Speaker 5: thing that we're working on that we don't have yet
Speaker 5: but I think is really important in this world of
Speaker 5: like more autonomy is is what's the fastest way to
Speaker 5: like spin up.
Speaker 3: A sandbox where.
Speaker 5: You know your whatever state you want it working on
Speaker 5: is replicated and it can just go to work there
Speaker 5: without without you losing any sleep. That's gonna do something irreparable.
Speaker 5: I think like an undue functionality is super interesting too.
Speaker 5: It's not like trivial to do that in the terminal.
Speaker 5: Like the terminal is a stateful place where you know,
Speaker 5: kid deal.
Speaker 3: Files and there's no like undo.
Speaker 5: Uh so you kind of got to figure out, like
Speaker 5: like sandbox is try of the safest. But we're we're
Speaker 5: we're aware of this issue and it makes it makes sense.
Speaker 5: A surprising number of people don't give a ship. I
Speaker 5: will say, like they're just like this thing is just magic,
Speaker 5: and like I just it makes me so much faster
Speaker 5: and makes makes my life so much more fun that
Speaker 5: I don't really care.
Speaker 3: But it's a totally fair point. I wouldn't. Like they're
Speaker 3: not using this in NASA.
Speaker 2: And I'm like, you know, well, I think I think
Speaker 2: you you really yeah, not yet right, but probably Honestly,
Speaker 2: I have some theories there, but I think if I
Speaker 2: say them will definitely get canceled. So Uh, yeah, I
Speaker 2: think that's sort of the problem. And I think this
Speaker 2: is again I don't want to spoil my pick, but
Speaker 2: realistically it's that a large majority of the population falls
Speaker 2: into this area of maybe they have concerned, but they're uh,
Speaker 2: they're apathetic to actually turning off whatever. The source of
Speaker 2: the potential problem is there's not a good way to
Speaker 2: moderate AI from outside or l MS from outside the
Speaker 2: black box. You It's really like all or nothing in
Speaker 2: a lot of ways, and most people are not going
Speaker 2: to turn it off because they still perceive some huge
Speaker 2: amount of value from from utilizing them. And so you know,
Speaker 2: I'm not going to turn off the future. I'm just
Speaker 2: going to be really scared now what it's going to
Speaker 2: do when I'm not okay.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, I think that that's right.
Speaker 5: And people obviously have a strong predisposition to do whatever
Speaker 5: you said the default too.
Speaker 3: It might not even like know what the heck is
Speaker 3: going on, but I don't know.
Speaker 5: Developers are maybe a little different, Like I feel like
Speaker 5: if anyone's gonna go tweak the knobs, it's gonna be
Speaker 5: like you know, except I don't.
Speaker 2: I don't think so. I think everyone has their their
Speaker 2: depth where there feel comfortable controlling and when if there's
Speaker 2: if they're comfortable pulling an LLLM to solving part of
Speaker 2: their job or part of what they're doing, it's probably
Speaker 2: in an area they don't care about, and so they're
Speaker 2: probably not going to. I think another aspect here is
Speaker 2: I have a very close friend that went away on
Speaker 2: vacation and they're the person who was cat sitting for
Speaker 2: them left some plastic on the stove which was induction
Speaker 2: but and it was totally fine, it was off, but
Speaker 2: one of the cats managed to turn the stove on
Speaker 2: and actually melted the plastic. Yeah, And so this is
Speaker 2: really funny though, because there there was no LM in
Speaker 2: there right the cat, the cat was fine, the cat,
Speaker 2: the cats were fine. The thing is like, I really
Speaker 2: do fear at some point like there is gonna be
Speaker 2: in someone's gonna put an LM in my in my stove.
Speaker 2: It's going to happen at some point, and I don't
Speaker 2: think we can avoid that future. And I do fear
Speaker 2: that it will just turn on one day when I'm
Speaker 2: not here and start doing things where like I have
Speaker 2: no I have no need for that, and I don't
Speaker 2: I'm not not thrilled about this future, but it's coming.
Speaker 5: Kelsey I Tewer had this good tweet which was he
Speaker 5: was like, I'm actively at the point where I will
Speaker 5: pay more to not have a smart appliance. So I
Speaker 5: was pretty much like, I get it, Like I don't
Speaker 5: need like my refrigerator having Wi.
Speaker 3: Fi or whatever. That makes sense on the on the
Speaker 3: MLM side, for if you're a developer.
Speaker 5: This might not be a popular opinion, but but I
Speaker 5: think you're not really going to have a choice as
Speaker 5: a developer if you want to continue being a productive
Speaker 5: developer on whether or not you.
Speaker 3: Adopt this technology.
Speaker 5: It's kind of like being like, oh, I only want
Speaker 5: to work in assembler. I'm not going to use like
Speaker 5: a high level language. Like that's not a viable choice
Speaker 5: going forward. The I think what you're gonna have to
Speaker 5: do is developer if you want to be like product
Speaker 5: is like, learn how to use all this stuff and
Speaker 5: learn how to use it in a safe and productive way.
Speaker 3: Is that unpopular?
Speaker 2: Let's have a fight. No, let's let's let's go around.
Speaker 2: You know, Jillian, what do you think greed disagree?
Speaker 4: I think so, Like I'm pretty judgmental over development over
Speaker 4: developers that don't use a debugger, so like I can
Speaker 4: see this kind of being just the next, the next
Speaker 4: sort of iteration and that process. Yeah, because I don't
Speaker 4: know developers are I think at some point, like everybody's
Speaker 4: kind of drawn to development because everybody has I like
Speaker 4: to learn new things, disease, and like writing code is
Speaker 4: really good for that, and then at some point you
Speaker 4: get really tired of it, and so then AI is
Speaker 4: really good for that like process when you're like, all right,
Speaker 4: I'm sick of having to learn the new things. Just
Speaker 4: I just want for the AI to tell me what
Speaker 4: to do and then there we are. So I'm gonna
Speaker 4: go with mostly yes, except that I feel like I
Speaker 4: might get some angry responses on the Internet for that,
Speaker 4: so I'll give like a little bit.
Speaker 5: Like there is a fear and understandable fear that developers
Speaker 5: have this is going to replace them.
Speaker 3: I don't think that's even remotely true.
Speaker 5: There's also like a thing that I've noticed, which is
Speaker 5: that a lot of like the more experienced, really strong
Speaker 5: developers on our team and who I've worked with, like
Speaker 5: they kind of get the least value out of it
Speaker 5: initially and are most likely to be like, oh, this
Speaker 5: is a stupid suggestion from this thing like or it's
Speaker 5: like creating bad code.
Speaker 3: And so they have like a kind of anti take
Speaker 3: on it, but.
Speaker 5: Eventually people get to a sort of moment with it
Speaker 5: where they're like, oh shit, this actually makes my life
Speaker 5: a lot easier and does some of the stuff that
Speaker 5: I find super annoying. And they, I think the proper
Speaker 5: outlook to have towards it is like, this is like
Speaker 5: another tool that I can use, just like if I
Speaker 5: like master like said and grap like, I'm like awesome
Speaker 5: as a developer.
Speaker 3: I think if you could figure out how to effectively
Speaker 3: use the l I think it just makes you better.
Speaker 3: I think that's like the right for now, the right
Speaker 3: way to look at war. What do you think?
Speaker 2: Well, I have the opposite controversial opinion, so you know,
Speaker 2: I was maybe thinking about keeping my mouth shut. So
Speaker 2: I have this perspective that it definitely replaces inexperienced engineers.
Speaker 2: And so the problem with that is, and I think
Speaker 2: this is where the fear comes from, is that lms
Speaker 2: do not replace inexperienced engineers. People think that elms will
Speaker 2: replace in experienced engineers and do that anyway, And I
Speaker 2: think we're already starting to see that happening. And the
Speaker 2: problem with that is you're paying money for these tools
Speaker 2: and you're not training your organization's people on leveling up
Speaker 2: their skills in these areas and will become more and
Speaker 2: more dependent on them and definitely move away from it.
Speaker 2: Now on the productivity side, I still think it's way
Speaker 2: it costs way too much. I think there has to
Speaker 2: be magnitudes cost reduction in general eating answers before this
Speaker 2: becomes of high value.
Speaker 4: Mean like monetary costs.
Speaker 2: Like the monetary environmental et cetera. It's still like, uh,
Speaker 2: none of the AI companies are making money like the
Speaker 2: ones that are pumping out AI. You know, Open AI.
Speaker 2: I'm sure whatever.
Speaker 3: We know.
Speaker 2: Anthropics not making money. We know whatever they are, they're zero,
Speaker 2: Like it's negative negative billions of dollars per year on this.
Speaker 2: So you know, that's not sustainable model from a society standpoint.
Speaker 2: There's gonna have to be something to change. Either these
Speaker 2: tools will completely go away or the costs will have
Speaker 2: to come down. I think the last thing is that
Speaker 2: we find from a productivity standpoint, at least for me
Speaker 2: and the myself and the companies that I work with,
Speaker 2: is that the bottleneck isn't doing more work or specifically
Speaker 2: writing out code or pushing that out, so the tools
Speaker 2: don't solve the needs that we have. It's okay for
Speaker 2: us to still be slow in this way or not
Speaker 2: be productive in this way, because that's not where our
Speaker 2: bottle that gets.
Speaker 5: I disagree with almost everything you just said, but I'm gonna.
Speaker 3: Like it's interesting.
Speaker 5: It's it's interesting to have this, uh, this discussion because
Speaker 5: I'm so in the like AI bubble of like like
Speaker 5: Silicon Valley people and like AI tech companies and like,
Speaker 5: like the main contention that I hear amongst these, like
Speaker 5: the people I talked about on the investing said on
Speaker 5: the other A company side is like how quickly are
Speaker 5: we're getting to a g I? And Warren is coming
Speaker 5: in hot with being like these things are not even.
Speaker 2: Valuable, They're not it's not even AI. Like I hate
Speaker 2: this term that like we we there's these companies are
Speaker 2: lying to the masses of people saying we have AI.
Speaker 2: All we have is transformer architecture which is able to
Speaker 2: utilize you know, create l MS, and they will always
Speaker 2: hallucinate And that's the ridiculous thing. Like I'm waiting for
Speaker 2: someone to say, how is open AI going to recoup
Speaker 2: the billions of dollars they are losing every single year?
Speaker 2: Like where does that? Where does that change? Because money
Speaker 2: will run out at some point?
Speaker 3: Oh well, well you want to go or do you
Speaker 3: want that?
Speaker 1: I'm going to jump in real quick. Then we can
Speaker 1: come back to that. I this is good. I think
Speaker 1: I tend to agree with you, Zach, that there's going
Speaker 1: to be people who are resistant to AI. And I
Speaker 1: think the primary place I've seen this is people who
Speaker 1: really are They're really passionate and invested in their chosen language.
Speaker 4: You know.
Speaker 1: I think if we look at the category of people
Speaker 1: who will argue Go versus Rust, and they've pinned, they've
Speaker 1: pinned their career on I'm a Rust developer or I'm
Speaker 1: a Go developer, and and so they'll try something like
Speaker 1: AI or or any of those related tools and say, oh,
Speaker 1: well it got this wrong. That's clearly why I'm I'm
Speaker 1: not going to rely on this thing because it got
Speaker 1: this one thing wrong. And you'll get a lot of
Speaker 1: resistance from those people.
Speaker 3: I think the.
Speaker 4: AI is like another tool. I mean, I guess more
Speaker 4: than what you're saying with like all the money being
Speaker 4: spent in the environmental cost That is very valid. But
Speaker 4: from the tool perspective, it's like I'm already so dependent
Speaker 4: upon tools like without dictation software, pie Charm and VIM,
Speaker 4: I'm completely useless. I have like zero utility to anybody
Speaker 4: anywhere at any time, like in a professional context, anyways
Speaker 4: that I am, you know. I mean I do have
Speaker 4: kids occasionally, I'm useful in like a human context, but
Speaker 4: like from from a professional standpoint, if I don't have
Speaker 4: those things, I'm not going to get any work done.
Speaker 4: And so AI has just become like another tool for
Speaker 4: me to use. And so I just see it from
Speaker 4: that perspective. From the money perspective, like I don't know,
Speaker 4: but humanity is a bunch of money on a bunch
Speaker 4: of things that we don't recoup an investment from. Like
Speaker 4: it's just the money never actually runs out. We don't
Speaker 4: have a gold standard anymore, Like there's there's always there,
Speaker 4: Like it's an arbitrary concept. There's always money.
Speaker 1: As long as the printer companies keep making printers that
Speaker 1: print the money.
Speaker 4: I mean, isn't that kind of what we're doing at
Speaker 4: this point? Though? Like isn't that what the governments of
Speaker 4: the world have sort of decided or doing well.
Speaker 2: There's a secondary problem here, actually, which is that the
Speaker 2: energy consumption is too high. Like even shave off the
Speaker 2: environmental impacts, the energy cost is so high that people
Speaker 2: are now starting to have their lives affected by having
Speaker 2: spotty continuous energy flow into their own appliances in there
Speaker 2: and their house lights and stoves, ovens, whatever. And that's
Speaker 2: happening near data centers where increased energy usage is required
Speaker 2: to run LM. So I think that problem is likely
Speaker 2: to get worse even if the money doesn't run out.
Speaker 1: But if you had a smart refrigerator, it could address
Speaker 1: for that exactly.
Speaker 4: If the things are smart, you know, then then what
Speaker 4: do you even need the energy for? Now, We're fine.
Speaker 2: I like the perspective. I mean, it is a tool,
Speaker 2: for sure, And I think the thing that I see
Speaker 2: is that it used to be the fact you could
Speaker 2: type into Google and get a website that helped you
Speaker 2: answer the question you have. And you can't even do
Speaker 2: that anymore because at least that search engine has become
Speaker 2: utterly worthless, and so you need a replacement for that.
Speaker 2: And I think it's worse from a accuracy standpoint than
Speaker 2: Google at its best, but it's for sure better than
Speaker 2: Google now, and I think that's a worthwhile trade off
Speaker 2: that you have to change if you're still using Google,
Speaker 2: or you're still believe that your one true programming language
Speaker 2: is the only one for the future. I think that's
Speaker 2: just the mindset which doesn't make sense.
Speaker 1: So, Zach, you wanted to come back and answer or
Speaker 1: respond to the money issue.
Speaker 5: I can't speak to the energy stuff. I can't speak
Speaker 5: to just like it's valuable. So for for developers paying
Speaker 5: twenty to forty bucks a month for AI in their
Speaker 5: core tools, if you just think of how much development
Speaker 5: time costs you have to save I don't know, twenty
Speaker 5: minutes or something for that to be a worthwhile thing.
Speaker 3: And that threshold has.
Speaker 5: Been crossed a long time ago in my opinion, just
Speaker 5: from using these as a user of these tools, the
Speaker 5: amount of like time that they save me, it's like
Speaker 5: a no brainer trade off. I don't know if anyone
Speaker 5: on the back end of this is making money yet
Speaker 5: I do know WARP like we have a positive margin
Speaker 5: when people pay us for AI, and so it could
Speaker 5: be that the model companies or the hyperscalers are just
Speaker 5: taking a huge loss on warp's profit. But it you know,
Speaker 5: from like just pure economics, people find the value, they
Speaker 5: pay for it, they stick with it like a surprise
Speaker 5: and higher like we don't have very high churn on it.
Speaker 5: And so I have to believe that just from that
Speaker 5: and from like actually using it, that there's a ton
Speaker 5: of value. It's certainly true that these things are not infallible.
Speaker 5: And like, I guess you could debate from like a
Speaker 5: philosophical perspective whether or not they're intelligent. Actually think they
Speaker 5: they they have some level of like intelligence. Now it's
Speaker 5: not like it doesn't quite work the same way that
Speaker 5: human intelligence works, but they're able to, like I don't know,
Speaker 5: they're able to do things that up until a couple
Speaker 5: of years ago you would only say a human could do.
Speaker 5: So there's it's I personally am like super excited by
Speaker 5: the progress, Like I was a like I studied a
Speaker 5: bunch of philosophy. I have a philosophy degree in addition
Speaker 5: to a CS background. I think it's like absolutely fascinating
Speaker 5: what it says about what intelligence means. It's not, like
Speaker 5: you said, it's not perfect human intelligence, but it's something
Speaker 5: and it's like I think it's a it's a pretty
Speaker 5: awesome technological advance.
Speaker 3: So I'm more pro AI, more bullish.
Speaker 5: I think Warren's a little bit more on the skeptic side.
Speaker 5: That's all.
Speaker 3: I think.
Speaker 2: I can't assign the word intelligence to it yet, and
Speaker 2: because because of the architecture that it's utilizing, it's just
Speaker 2: a probabilistic word predictor. And I think we need a
Speaker 2: different architecture other than the Transform architecture to actually reach
Speaker 2: anything that would be fair to call AI in any capacity.
Speaker 2: I do want to jump into how you're utilizing it
Speaker 2: though at WARP sure are you are you running your
Speaker 2: own foundational models or are you passing queries to something
Speaker 2: configurable for like I can put in open AI apike
Speaker 2: or anthropic apike, what's going on there?
Speaker 3: You can pick your model.
Speaker 5: So we we support the anthropic models, the open A models,
Speaker 5: Google's models, We support you as hosted version of deep
Speaker 5: seek models.
Speaker 3: Even some of the open source models.
Speaker 5: You you can't go directly to them because our server
Speaker 5: has like a whole bunch of logic on, like the
Speaker 5: prompt engineering and sort of different agents for different types
Speaker 5: of tasks, so there's like a logic layer between them.
Speaker 5: But the basic the basic intelligence underlying the AI and
Speaker 5: war currently is.
Speaker 3: The foundation models.
Speaker 5: There's a chance at some point that we'll get a
Speaker 5: little bit more into the like make a model to
Speaker 5: protict your command type business, but currently we're we find
Speaker 5: that the best thing for our users is to sort
Speaker 5: of use the like we're not going to spend billion
Speaker 5: dollars on you know, GPUs or whatever and trade models
Speaker 5: right now.
Speaker 1: That would probably change profitability statement you just made earlier.
Speaker 3: Yeah, well, so I would say, like we are at
Speaker 3: the application layer.
Speaker 5: If you look at this as like application layer, model layer,
Speaker 5: hyperscalar worth the application.
Speaker 2: There, No, it makes makes sense. I mean, but in
Speaker 2: in that way, the model providers are definitely subsidizing the
Speaker 2: profitability because they're taking huge losses. I mean, I don't
Speaker 2: know who's making money from there.
Speaker 3: It's just a question of like where's the value going
Speaker 3: this whole thing, like the you know, the other thing.
Speaker 5: Like, so the model providers, I think, like the big
Speaker 5: question mark to me.
Speaker 3: Is like open source models and like if you have open.
Speaker 5: Source models, especially ones that are like comparable quality, if
Speaker 5: like like open AI and anthropies of the world can't
Speaker 5: maintain like a like a real lead in quality or
Speaker 5: latency or something like that. How does how does the
Speaker 5: world work in that? And so the open source alternative
Speaker 5: where you run it yourself, uh and you don't have
Speaker 5: to pay the sort of margin to open AI is.
Speaker 3: Super interesting to me.
Speaker 5: I think that the one place that there's definitely going
Speaker 5: to be someone's gonna make money.
Speaker 3: It's just on like serving these models.
Speaker 5: So I feel like, for better or worse, if you're
Speaker 5: Amazon and ANWS you know, g Cloud, Azure or whatever,
Speaker 5: they're gonna make money because someone needs to serve these models.
Speaker 5: And the local versions, which is I think another interesting
Speaker 5: thing to consider are at least currently they're not at
Speaker 5: the they're not at it's not really practical to like
Speaker 5: get the same level of power from like downloading you know, Lama.
Speaker 5: But that's another thing I'm looking at is like maybe
Speaker 5: it's just local models that totally disintermediate the need for these.
Speaker 3: Like huge API based cloud models.
Speaker 2: Who know, no, I mean, you're you're onto something really
Speaker 2: there because the like you, it would cost you way
Speaker 2: more than the price that you would pay to the
Speaker 2: model providers to utilize their llms if you tried to
Speaker 2: run the open source models locally on hardware that you
Speaker 2: know is comparable and gets you speed and accuracy precision
Speaker 2: in order to utilize that.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 4: Yeah, we should talk about WARP some more and like
Speaker 4: its features about whatever. I like, speak into the terminal
Speaker 4: my commands so that I don't have.
Speaker 3: To do it. So we added this feature. It's super cool.
Speaker 3: If you're using WARP.
Speaker 5: You can hold the function key or you can configure it, uh,
Speaker 5: and you can.
Speaker 3: Talk to your terminal. It's magic.
Speaker 5: You can you can just tell it what you want
Speaker 5: to do. We uh, it translates it into English and
Speaker 5: then it runs it and so it's it's pretty star
Speaker 5: trek y from like a user experience standpoint.
Speaker 3: So yeah, that's that is something that we wanted.
Speaker 4: Saving the people from the repetitive stress injuries like this
Speaker 4: is what I.
Speaker 3: Why should people have to do anything?
Speaker 2: Like I know what Gillian's waiting for that she wants
Speaker 2: the brain interface device.
Speaker 3: Exactly what I want.
Speaker 4: I think.
Speaker 3: I think it would be a really good WARP.
Speaker 5: I'm getting the sense that that WARF is actually very
Speaker 5: well suited to Jillian's work force.
Speaker 4: It really is, Like, especially since you just said the
Speaker 4: speech thing, because I'm getting older and I can't type
Speaker 4: so much so like I very specifically need the speech.
Speaker 3: Thing, and why should you have to say it?
Speaker 4: I know I shouldn't. That reminds me of like an
Speaker 4: episode kind of person here.
Speaker 1: It reminds me of an episode of The Simpsons where
Speaker 1: Homer's in the hospital and the guy in the bed
Speaker 1: next to him is on a breathing machine and He's like, hey,
Speaker 1: how come that guy gets someone to breathe for him
Speaker 1: and I'm over here doing it by myself.
Speaker 2: See, I thought you were going to bring up the
Speaker 2: episode where he tried to get to three hundred pounds
Speaker 2: so he could be classified with a disability use a
Speaker 2: wand to dial.
Speaker 4: That must be an old episode, like that must that
Speaker 4: must be a real old episode.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that was when it was still good.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Doctor Nick's food philosophy was if you rub a newspaper
Speaker 1: on the food and the newspaper turns clear, it's good
Speaker 1: to eat.
Speaker 5: I mean, one of my I'm pretty lazy, and like
Speaker 5: I'm not like ashamed to be lazy when especially when
Speaker 5: it comes to when it comes to development.
Speaker 3: I don't want to have to.
Speaker 5: Do more work than I have to do to ship
Speaker 5: something that's useful. So like my like what I care
Speaker 5: about as a developer. Like again, there's different kinds of developers,
Speaker 5: but to me, I'm like all in it for the
Speaker 5: I want to build something cool.
Speaker 3: I want to ship it out to people.
Speaker 5: I want to be proud that I built it that
Speaker 5: I want it to work really really well. And I
Speaker 5: want to do that with like the minimal possible effort
Speaker 5: and the extent that I have to put effort into it.
Speaker 5: I want it to be effort that goes towards thinking
Speaker 5: about how it ought to work. And I don't want
Speaker 5: to spend effort on like annoying shit in the terminal,
Speaker 5: Like that's like the last place that I want my
Speaker 5: limited brain cycles to go. I don't want to spend
Speaker 5: effort either on like changing function signatures in my files.
Speaker 5: I just I know what I want it to be,
Speaker 5: and I want like to get from A to B
Speaker 5: as quick as possible. And so yeah, it's the extent
Speaker 5: that something like AI and I think WARP for the
Speaker 5: terminal especially like makes it so I can be like
Speaker 5: a little bit lazier.
Speaker 3: Again, this isn't like the advertising I put on our
Speaker 3: home page or whatever, but I think it's like I
Speaker 3: should have a.
Speaker 4: Valuable things advertising it's great.
Speaker 5: And like, honestly, like a lot of the best developers
Speaker 5: I've worked with in my career just kind of all
Speaker 5: about that, like, don't make me spend my brain cycles
Speaker 5: on like tedious shit and toil. And so I feel
Speaker 5: pretty good about trying to eliminate that stuff for developers
Speaker 5: so that you can do the more fun stuff, because
Speaker 5: the really fun stuff.
Speaker 3: Is like it's like, to me, at least, it's like,
Speaker 3: how should the product work?
Speaker 5: And then it's like, how do I architect this thing
Speaker 5: so that I can make the product work the way
Speaker 5: that I want?
Speaker 3: And then the least fun thing is.
Speaker 5: Like the like typing in the like words in the
Speaker 5: text editor or the terminal to do that.
Speaker 3: I don't know if everyone's in the same way.
Speaker 2: No, I think I gore onto something.
Speaker 1: We was going to say it, yeah, No, I was
Speaker 1: going to say, it's much more exciting to work on
Speaker 1: how the application works than how to center this fucking div.
Speaker 3: Right that vertically.
Speaker 2: Under the vertically on the page. That's that, that's the key. Vertically,
Speaker 2: you know, horizontally you just use flexbox, no problem. I think, well,
Speaker 2: you know, there's an interesting thing here, because I feel
Speaker 2: like if if we take this to the natural conclusion,
Speaker 2: it's probably like the managing directors who will then be
Speaker 2: responsible for building the product by communicating with the AI
Speaker 2: that we technology that we have available and not needing
Speaker 2: so called technology department in any of our companies anymore.
Speaker 5: So that's like a horrible outcome to me. I think
Speaker 5: it's product managers making software. I mean, arguably that's what's happening. Yeah,
Speaker 5: I mean argue that's what's happening right now. There's just
Speaker 5: a couple of you know, people in their way that
Speaker 5: are telling them that they can't have it exactly what
Speaker 5: they want. That's interesting, That's well, I think that's that's
Speaker 5: not how it works at work, Like I could be
Speaker 5: at work to some places. But so at work, for instance,
Speaker 5: we build something and we may be again we may
Speaker 5: be different than other places.
Speaker 3: It's primarily engineers who are driving the product direction. Now
Speaker 3: we're working on a product that is used by we use.
Speaker 5: We're the customer, we're the audience, and so we have
Speaker 5: this awesome virtuous feedback loop of like we build it,
Speaker 5: we use it, we like something, we don't like something,
Speaker 5: and so we drive a lot of it.
Speaker 3: I don't want to change that at all, Like, actually,
Speaker 3: I think that's not a good thing to change.
Speaker 4: And so.
Speaker 5: I also just I don't think as bolish as I
Speaker 5: am on AI. I don't think that we are close
Speaker 5: to the point where you can build something meaningful without
Speaker 5: having some technical knowledge. And if anything like again this
Speaker 5: is probably is not the prevailing wisdom. But it's like
Speaker 5: I think you need to be more technical to be
Speaker 5: able to sort of guide and correct and be the
Speaker 5: like the tech lead for an AI. And it's if
Speaker 5: you are a aspiring developer these days, I would say,
Speaker 5: like learn the shit better, like learn the fundamentals to
Speaker 5: see us better, because if you want to effectively produce
Speaker 5: software in a world where you have someone who's like
Speaker 5: pretty smart but also kind of like a savant and
Speaker 5: like dominant a bunch of ways, you need to know what.
Speaker 3: The heck is going on for when you hit a wall.
Speaker 5: And so I think, you know, I don't think we're
Speaker 5: close to a world where it's like MBA is building
Speaker 5: all of our software no fins to nbas.
Speaker 3: Nbas are great, but like I feel like it's you're
Speaker 3: gonna need people.
Speaker 5: Who are experts in order to effectively use this tool to.
Speaker 3: Get its pact capacity.
Speaker 5: And I do think like Wren, I don't know your
Speaker 5: point out, Like if you're really junior and you don't learn,
Speaker 5: if all you do is say maybe like you've only
Speaker 5: learned how to build web apps, I do you feel
Speaker 5: like you're like a little bit at risk. Like my
Speaker 5: advice to those people would be like up level your
Speaker 5: CS skills.
Speaker 3: But I don't see a world anytime soon.
Speaker 5: Where if you're in a professional software development setting, that
Speaker 5: developers are going away.
Speaker 3: I sincerely hope not.
Speaker 2: I mean, I'm screwed if I think it's the de
Speaker 2: leap there that's problematic. It's that we know you need
Speaker 2: the skills in order to utilize LMS effectively. Like you're
Speaker 2: not going to be able to just job off your
Speaker 2: entire brain to this vehicle and have it go at
Speaker 2: full speed without thinking. It really does require critical thinking
Speaker 2: to interact with it effectively. And then that's what you're saying.
Speaker 2: And I think the problem is, Yeah, I think part
Speaker 2: of the problem is that some companies believe that that's
Speaker 2: not necessarily the case, that you can delegate this out
Speaker 2: to an LM and have it.
Speaker 5: Some companies are just buying the hype that we don't
Speaker 5: need to hire developers anymore.
Speaker 2: I and there are companies out there that are, like,
Speaker 2: you know, we are an agentic building thing. There is
Speaker 2: like the software developer Devin or whatever. Sure, yeah, so
Speaker 2: I mean, and I think what I'm saying is, I
Speaker 2: know those can't work.
Speaker 5: But I think that's those companies will find out when
Speaker 5: they try to replace their development with Devan.
Speaker 6: Yeah.
Speaker 2: I don't like building dev is Devin building Devin because
Speaker 2: I don't. I don't think he is or they are
Speaker 2: doing it that. Yeah. But I think the bigger problem
Speaker 2: is that the leap from hey, I'm someone who doesn't
Speaker 2: have technical capabilities to I want a job utilizing technical capabilities.
Speaker 2: That gap is growing and harder to get into it
Speaker 2: now because the technology available for us interact with is
Speaker 2: much more complicated than it was five years ago, ten
Speaker 2: years ago, twenty years ago, and the skills that you
Speaker 2: get from even training a little bit, like teaching yourself
Speaker 2: skilling up skilling even a little bit, is much further
Speaker 2: away from what companies are looking for. At least that's
Speaker 2: my perspective that I think I'm seeing. And I think
Speaker 2: the LMS are contributing to that gap.
Speaker 3: I'm sure like, Okay.
Speaker 5: So say you're a company and you're spending one hundreds
Speaker 5: of million dollars on software developers. I'm sure you're like, God,
Speaker 5: I would like to spend less money and have equal output.
Speaker 5: And you could be like, Okay, I'm going to hire
Speaker 5: AI software engineers the DEFN example, And I've tried Devan
Speaker 5: and it's a neat vision. Devin, I don't want to
Speaker 5: I'm not gonna shoot on Devon. It didn't work that
Speaker 5: well for us. I know they're improving it, but it doesn't.
Speaker 5: It's like that model today does not work. Will that
Speaker 5: model work in five ten years?
Speaker 3: I don't know. I'm still skeptical. I think any company
Speaker 3: that finds that they want to improve their.
Speaker 5: Cost efficiency on the software side by placing their developers
Speaker 5: is going to be in a I think it's just
Speaker 5: they're going to find that they don't get the ROI
Speaker 5: on that, and that the better ROI right now is
Speaker 5: to empower your developers and like give them tools that
Speaker 5: let them be more productive.
Speaker 3: I'm saying this. I'm obviously super biased.
Speaker 5: I run a developer tools company where I'm building something
Speaker 5: where the mission is empowered developers. But I truly believe
Speaker 5: that that's like the right way to approach this. And
Speaker 5: you know, it's like companies will try whatever they're going
Speaker 5: to try, but I think that they're going to stick
Speaker 5: with something that actually gives them the result. I don't
Speaker 5: think that they're like the economic incentives are such that
Speaker 5: like if JP Morgan replaced all their developers with AI
Speaker 5: software engineers and then like all their bank and transactions.
Speaker 3: Failed, they'd be like, this is not the right move.
Speaker 5: And so I do think that there's like back pressure
Speaker 5: on doing something that actually works.
Speaker 1: I think that's a great model, and I encourage them
Speaker 1: to do that, and then when it blows up, I
Speaker 1: want them to get over to my website where I
Speaker 1: have my consulting rates listed.
Speaker 3: Exactly they're gonna need. They're going to need some smart people.
Speaker 2: We actually went on smart people still, Yeah, I mean
Speaker 2: for sure, for sure, I mean we actually went We
Speaker 2: actually did a deep dive in this area in our
Speaker 2: episode on the Develops report from from from Dora in
Speaker 2: twenty twenty four. Okay, where like the I don't know
Speaker 2: if you've read it, but the actual results was like
Speaker 2: the value that lms were providing to organizations was suspect
Speaker 2: like it was. It wasn't significantly different than where they
Speaker 2: had been before. It was very difficult for organizations to
Speaker 2: justify that the value to the bottom line or the
Speaker 2: value to the products that were being delivered. I think
Speaker 2: the interesting thing was the one thing I did say
Speaker 2: is that people were happier with using the LMS, but
Speaker 2: it didn't actually reduce toil and it didn't didn't reduce
Speaker 2: the amount of time spent doing things that they didn't like,
Speaker 2: which is interesting. I think it gives the most value
Speaker 2: to people who are positive optimistic about AI. So if
Speaker 2: you like AI, you should use this.
Speaker 3: I can tell you experience from WARP.
Speaker 5: So so there's the way we think about users coming
Speaker 5: into WARP. There's some users who are coming into WARP
Speaker 5: because they're like I love AI.
Speaker 3: They're like, I want I love this new technology.
Speaker 5: I want to like use it in all my tools,
Speaker 5: And those are great users for us, Like they come
Speaker 5: in they're like, holy shit, I can I can use.
Speaker 3: A terminal in this totally new way. That is not
Speaker 3: the majority users.
Speaker 5: So the majority user for us is what I would
Speaker 5: call like an AI neutral like developer who might be like, Okay,
Speaker 5: I'm open to this, but it's like there's a lot
Speaker 5: of hype, I have a bunch of inherent skepticism. And
Speaker 5: for those users, the challenge for us is to get
Speaker 5: them to actually see the value of the AI and
Speaker 5: like actually use it. And so the the way that
Speaker 5: we've like figured out how to do that is that
Speaker 5: it's very similar to that tool that you mentioned earlier,
Speaker 5: the fuck and so like the like when you have
Speaker 5: an error in the in warp and it's like, oh shit,
Speaker 5: like I'm missing this. I don't know if I'm a
Speaker 5: lot to sware on this podcast, but I'm missing this.
Speaker 3: Uh, you know Python dependency.
Speaker 5: We show something where it's like, hey, we can fix
Speaker 5: this for you, and like all you have to do
Speaker 5: is say command enter and we fix it for you.
Speaker 5: And then that's like a like a conversion moment. And
Speaker 5: so like, I guess my point here is like kind
Speaker 5: of piggyback them off. Your point is like there's some
Speaker 5: people who are just like into this and like they're
Speaker 5: gonna love it, and maybe they're they love it even
Speaker 5: if it isn't really helping them and they're just like
Speaker 5: messing around with LMS all day. But I do think,
Speaker 5: based on our experience converting people who don't inherently want
Speaker 5: to use this technology that there there must be value
Speaker 5: because we have, like I said, we have a lot
Speaker 5: of people paying us for something that that like, and
Speaker 5: I don't think that people are just going to pay
Speaker 5: us for something that I'll find valuable.
Speaker 3: Sure, and a lot of them were not AI enthusiasts
Speaker 3: to start.
Speaker 5: There are people who tell us like, oh shit, like
Speaker 5: this thing just saved me hours and I love that.
Speaker 3: So that's like the you know, my kind of counter
Speaker 3: to what you're saying.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm really curious, you said, so the commands are
Speaker 2: going through this proxy layer that you're you're hosting and
Speaker 2: before interacting with the model prior. So I don't know
Speaker 2: if if you can share, but maybe there's some interesting
Speaker 2: metrics or data that you've been able to collect based
Speaker 2: off of what people are looking for, what has been searched,
Speaker 2: what sorts of problems are being fixed, anything in this area.
Speaker 5: Yeah, so we have a group of like alpha testers
Speaker 5: who give us like data collection access essentially, and so
Speaker 5: really common use cases where we're helping people are the
Speaker 5: like install dependencies, the like.
Speaker 3: Get my get is messed up, Like I did something.
Speaker 3: I mean some weird get state and I need to
Speaker 3: get out of it.
Speaker 5: We are increasingly fixing compiler errors for people, so intrest
Speaker 5: of like simple compiler errors and the air log isn't
Speaker 5: the terminal we fix.
Speaker 3: We get people who.
Speaker 5: A lot of like Kubernetes, Docker Helm, like those types
Speaker 5: of issues where there's very heavy command line usage and
Speaker 5: kind of you know, pretty complex commands that you need
Speaker 5: to do.
Speaker 3: Is another really popular area.
Speaker 5: We do things where we write scripts for people to
Speaker 5: automate things that they're doing over and over again, and
Speaker 5: so you know, it's it's a mix. I would say,
Speaker 5: like though, really like prime use cases for us to
Speaker 5: start are things that are pretty terminal oriented. And then
Speaker 5: increasingly as people realize you can fix coding stuff and work,
Speaker 5: and we guide them into that the coding stuff matters
Speaker 5: a bunch too.
Speaker 3: Because just like developer spend a lot of time writing code.
Speaker 1: I think one of the things that that doesn't really
Speaker 1: get highlighted enough is that there actually is a pretty
Speaker 1: steep learning curve to using these AI tools. I think
Speaker 1: there's an expectation that oh, it's AI, I just go
Speaker 1: in and it's going to make my life magical, but
Speaker 1: really my experience with it has been learning how bad
Speaker 1: I actually suck at communication? And that was the first job. Yeah,
Speaker 1: Like that was my first job, is to figure out
Speaker 1: how to communicate.
Speaker 3: It's weird.
Speaker 5: It's turning every programmer into someone who needs to know
Speaker 5: how to write, which is like kind of a crazy skill.
Speaker 3: But like, yeah, the quality of what you get.
Speaker 5: Out of these llms is highly dependent upon how good
Speaker 5: you are prompting them, how good you are at providing
Speaker 5: them with the right context to.
Speaker 3: Answer your question. And if you Yeah, who would have thought.
Speaker 5: That, like being really good at like writing English would
Speaker 5: have been like the core thing.
Speaker 3: But I guess, I guess like people engineers write design docs.
Speaker 3: It's not that different from that skill.
Speaker 5: It's a real behavior change and it's a real skill,
Speaker 5: and I think that I think it's a great observation.
Speaker 3: Agree.
Speaker 2: I mean, I know, I went to university specifically to
Speaker 2: study engineering so that I wouldn't have to read and
Speaker 2: write words. And now my life I pretty much just
Speaker 2: write a lot of blog posts, knowledge based articles, you know,
Speaker 2: chat with lms, like it's every single day, like there
Speaker 2: are it's just words. It's just words. That's that's my
Speaker 2: whole life now.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, I think it's worth elaborating on though, just
Speaker 1: just like that's one of the reasons I'm being more
Speaker 1: pushing people more into AI. It's like, yeah, I know,
Speaker 1: you get it. You tried it, it made a mistake,
Speaker 1: and you're ready to write it off. But I really
Speaker 1: need you to stick with this and learn how to
Speaker 1: use it, because by putting that time and effort in now,
Speaker 1: you're going to figure these skills out and learn how
Speaker 1: to make it productive. And then as the technology self improved,
Speaker 1: you're going to start getting to take exponential benefits of that,
Speaker 1: and so you and your career are going to be
Speaker 1: way way ahead of everyone that you're sitting with now
Speaker 1: who says, oh AI sucks five years from now.
Speaker 5: I believe I'm one hundred percent with you that that's
Speaker 5: like that's the smart approach. Is like, yeah, I think
Speaker 5: it's like the tool analogy is the right analogy right
Speaker 5: right now, where it's like you can't get mad at
Speaker 5: them if.
Speaker 4: You, like I didn't learn, I can't get mad.
Speaker 3: But it's like it's like counter productive.
Speaker 5: And I think if you've remove the hype for a
Speaker 5: second and just think of it as like it's a
Speaker 5: computer program that you're using it's like, yeah, you got
Speaker 5: to learn how to use it, and like, you know,
Speaker 5: what is it like R T F M, Like I
Speaker 5: kind of hate that, but it's a it's like learn
Speaker 5: how to learn how to use it. If you want
Speaker 5: to get the most out of it, is one hundred
Speaker 5: percent right and if you are if you think of
Speaker 5: it instead as like a dumb coworker you don't want
Speaker 5: to associate with. But that dumb coworker is like someone
Speaker 5: who's on your well, I don't know where I'm going
Speaker 5: with this.
Speaker 3: Think of it as a tool that you got to
Speaker 3: get the most out of.
Speaker 2: I think I think you're onto something there really important
Speaker 2: because I think one of the things that a lot
Speaker 2: of the elms we see out there, and I think
Speaker 2: this is where some of the value is definitely lost.
Speaker 2: They don't do a great job of teaching you how
Speaker 2: to be an effective prompt engineer, like how to actually
Speaker 2: create communication with the tool, to Will's point, and I
Speaker 2: think part of it is because those same companies have
Speaker 2: no idea how their own thing works, so they can't
Speaker 2: actually give good recommendations. But I think they do figure
Speaker 2: it out over time, because there are communities that pop
Speaker 2: up that are discussing this and then they bring that
Speaker 2: knowledge back in where you know, we see examples where
Speaker 2: like the Dalli model that open ai has is the
Speaker 2: prompt is being mutated by their one or whatever based
Speaker 2: on what the user inputs, because it's just nonsensical and
Speaker 2: needs to be mutated. And like those instructions, it would
Speaker 2: be great to be exposed. And I just feel like
Speaker 2: these tools don't do this good of a job. But
Speaker 2: you work on the application layer, and so I feel
Speaker 2: like you're providing a much better experience for teaching people
Speaker 2: how to utilize the tool effectively because you have to
Speaker 2: because you're actually selling a real.
Speaker 5: Product, right right, No, No, And it's like it's a thing
Speaker 5: that we're constantly thinking through, Like we have a feature
Speaker 5: that is suggested prompts essentially where you know, if there's
Speaker 5: a like the most common use case again is like
Speaker 5: an error error resolution, but well, based on the error
Speaker 5: that we see, we will suggest to prompt. And the
Speaker 5: prompt probably is a little bit more than just like
Speaker 5: fix this, which is what a person might write. It
Speaker 5: is probably like fix this russer that is caused by
Speaker 5: incorrect mutability, And like you provide, we do everything we
Speaker 5: can to make it the minimum amount of work, and
Speaker 5: also to show the user like, hey, here's what we're
Speaker 5: actually telling the model, so that if you want to
Speaker 5: do this on your own next time, without like Warth
Speaker 5: doing it, you can do it.
Speaker 3: So that that that's it's a key skill, like totally
Speaker 3: ride of it. That's something that matters.
Speaker 4: I think this kind of shows my bias because like
Speaker 4: forcing the developers to have to communicate properly, I just
Speaker 4: don't see that as a problem. I'm like, this is
Speaker 4: a good thing. This should be a feature, not a butt.
Speaker 2: Well, okay, maybe I'll put this into perspective, Jillian in
Speaker 2: a different way. It's communicating correctly is a subjective perspective
Speaker 2: based off of the people involved in that collaboration. When
Speaker 2: you're communicating with a second person, you know there's a
Speaker 2: culture involved there, your values involved, the definitions of words
Speaker 2: that you grew up with, all these things in that
Speaker 2: and when you're using an LM, you don't like it's
Speaker 2: challenging to figure out what its culture is, how it
Speaker 2: responds to certain things, and so you have to learn
Speaker 2: that tool. So I think there's a difference between like
Speaker 2: you're not becoming a better communicator. You're becoming a better
Speaker 2: communicator with that thing. And I think is it the
Speaker 2: good thing to force people to do, I mean communicating
Speaker 2: with other human beings that you work with, Yes, for sure.
Speaker 2: Forcing them to learn how to use, you know, end
Speaker 2: tools out there that all are slightly different, have individual
Speaker 2: mindsets or cultures or whatever. The corpus and material you
Speaker 2: know that I think is open for challenge and debate.
Speaker 4: But I just see this as like a people living
Speaker 4: in society kind of issue. Like when I was a kid,
Speaker 4: my dad was like, you're going to take a typing
Speaker 4: class because that wasn't just an automatic thing back then,
Speaker 4: you guys all right, like this was this was a
Speaker 4: while ago, And I kind of just see AI as
Speaker 4: sort of like I think it's it's very like pivotal,
Speaker 4: it's paradigm shifting, but it's it's another iteration of that.
Speaker 4: It's another tool that we're adding on that people are
Speaker 4: going to learn how to use that everybody's going to
Speaker 4: have to use, just like I don't know, like now,
Speaker 4: my kid's just I did not have the option to
Speaker 4: sign them up for a typing class or not. It's
Speaker 4: just part of their curriculum that they are just doing.
Speaker 1: I think you should put them in a typing class.
Speaker 1: No no, no, no, like an old school with the old
Speaker 1: with the old man, just to screw with them.
Speaker 2: See you know here here I have I have, I
Speaker 2: have good parable here because when I was in the
Speaker 2: fifth grade, I think I was in a typing class
Speaker 2: in my school was provided a public school. You got
Speaker 2: a type in class, and I learned a S D
Speaker 2: F J K L semi over and over again for
Speaker 2: for a year. And realistically I don't use quirdy. Actually
Speaker 2: I find it to be a lackluster, subpar keyboard layout.
Speaker 2: And so I was taught, you know, something that took
Speaker 2: me many months to unlearn so I could be more
Speaker 2: effective on my keyboard use. I'm a I'm actually I'm
Speaker 2: a prog. I'mer Devorak fan. But I have used Linux
Speaker 2: to uh configure like all of the almost all the
Speaker 2: keys so that the the third the third level not
Speaker 2: shift and control about the special al gr key to
Speaker 2: give me other things that are beneficial for programming and
Speaker 2: German and Greek and Roman, and however I want to
Speaker 2: utilize them.
Speaker 4: Sounds like a lot of work.
Speaker 2: Well, this is the thing is we're talking about productivity
Speaker 2: and optimizing your flow. And I find that I type,
Speaker 2: you know, you with an umloud or a with an umloud,
Speaker 2: or a dollar sign or the euro sign frequently, and
Speaker 2: so I want an easy way to type those. I
Speaker 2: don't want to google euro sign and then copy and
Speaker 2: paste that somewhere. You know, it's like on your on
Speaker 2: your phone. Isn't there an emoji key where you can
Speaker 2: hit emoji and then find the emoji you want? I mean,
Speaker 2: I I see the LMS a sort of similar tool
Speaker 2: from that perspective, Right, you're you're hot, You're hot keying
Speaker 2: over to your warp uh terminal to you know, type
Speaker 2: those things out and get the answer rather than having
Speaker 2: to search on the internet.
Speaker 4: Yeah, but if it's what you're doing, it's what you're doing,
Speaker 4: and there should be like a productive way to, you know,
Speaker 4: to accomquish the goal.
Speaker 2: Look, my five my keyboard layout is open source, it's available.
Speaker 1: And do you have blank key caps?
Speaker 2: To Warren, no, I am, so this is not the
Speaker 2: episode where we talk about my keyboard.
Speaker 4: I think it's becoming that board.
Speaker 2: I took a Quirity keyboard. It's the Logitech. I don't
Speaker 2: even remember what number it is like K four hundred
Speaker 2: or something. It says on here somewhere. I have no
Speaker 2: idea what it is. It's their silent version, the one
Speaker 2: that makes the least amount of sound possible, because I
Speaker 2: care about noise more than anything else. And then I
Speaker 2: just moved the keys everywhere I could. And this thing
Speaker 2: you'll find out about keyboards that are not designing this.
Speaker 2: The F key and the J key are have a
Speaker 2: different form factor than all the other keys on the keyboard,
Speaker 2: so you can't swap them around. I don't know why
Speaker 2: they do this, just to piss you off a parent,
Speaker 2: you know, it's like these two keys are going to
Speaker 2: be different. I don't know why, but they are. And
Speaker 2: so all the keys on my keyboard are in different
Speaker 2: spots except for the F and the J they're exactly
Speaker 2: where they started on the cordy.
Speaker 5: I think it's because that's like home based, right, Like
Speaker 5: they're like you want like a tactle wave finding out
Speaker 5: where those are.
Speaker 2: But it's the key cap form factor, not like the
Speaker 2: key itself. So it's like, I don't know. The only
Speaker 2: the only justication that I can figure out is that
Speaker 2: if you took all the keys off the keyboard and
Speaker 2: you're like, oh, where do I put them back? I
Speaker 2: don't know, Oh, these two have a different form. Maybe
Speaker 2: the F and the jay goes there, and then I
Speaker 2: can figure out where the other ones go. And I'm like,
Speaker 2: that's a pretty suspect. But it's like every keyboard I've
Speaker 2: seen has this problem.
Speaker 3: I got a mechanical keyboard once and.
Speaker 5: My wife made me stop using. She's just like, that
Speaker 5: is the most absolutely obnoxious, annoying sounding thing that you like,
Speaker 5: put that away. I don't know want to see that again.
Speaker 5: I was like, no, that's cool, Like it's like I
Speaker 5: love the feel of it. And she's like it's like,
Speaker 5: you know, it's like really, lad, Yeah.
Speaker 4: I've removed those from my kids Christmas book. She's not
Speaker 4: there anymore. I'm not doing this.
Speaker 3: See.
Speaker 2: I know that that would not work for me because
Speaker 2: I'm a very angry typer sometimes, like my wife. My
Speaker 2: wife can figure out like what application I'm using in
Speaker 2: what I'm doing, but based off of how angrily I'm
Speaker 2: typing on the keyboard, like when I'm typing a blog
Speaker 2: post or writing a message in slack somewhere or an email,
Speaker 2: it sounds different to her, and so I think it's like,
Speaker 2: how how angry I am?
Speaker 4: You know?
Speaker 2: When I'm in an email.
Speaker 3: It's the exact same thing.
Speaker 5: If my wife can be like, don't send that, take
Speaker 5: a breath, don't don't send like I can, I'm like like,
Speaker 5: and she's like, no, take it fre either don't don't
Speaker 5: And it's the thing actually is like as a manager,
Speaker 5: I try to remind myself of of like, don't don't
Speaker 5: know angry slacks, no angry emails.
Speaker 1: Oh no, he's typing the manifest Get in the car,
Speaker 1: kid's get in the car.
Speaker 4: So maybe, like you know, doesn't Google have like a
Speaker 4: like a drunk email detection. Maybe what we need is
Speaker 4: for the keyboard to have like an angry no what
Speaker 4: We're gonna wait, We're gonna wait fifteen minutes and then
Speaker 4: we're gonna revisit this and see if you would still
Speaker 4: like to send it.
Speaker 2: Look, I feel like, Julian, you haven't tried searching hard enough.
Speaker 2: I'm sure there's some extension out there for your browser
Speaker 2: which runs some sort of LM in the background and
Speaker 2: determines whether your your email has some sort of angry
Speaker 2: tone to it, and well, we'll prevent you from from
Speaker 2: sending an email if it contains though no there is.
Speaker 4: If you use like pro writing aid, it will detect
Speaker 4: the tone of your email and maybe course correct you
Speaker 4: a little bit. And I do I do have that. Yeah, you.
Speaker 1: Hit sand and it comes back and says I didn't
Speaker 1: send this. But I feel like it's a good time
Speaker 1: to talk about your feelings. What's the source of this
Speaker 1: anger for you?
Speaker 4: Let's get to the bottom of these issues. Speaking of
Speaker 4: which I think we need to get back to WARP
Speaker 4: because I have specific questions and more like more future requests.
Speaker 1: Bring it on.
Speaker 4: The point of having the app people on the show
Speaker 4: is that I can be like, if I use this,
Speaker 4: I have things that I want. All right, Like that.
Speaker 3: Tell me what can I do for you?
Speaker 4: So I saw that there's like WARP workflows, and I'm wondering,
Speaker 4: can I do those in reverse? Like I can? Can
Speaker 4: I go through and figure something out and then be like,
Speaker 4: all right, Warp, I'm stupid and I don't remember anything
Speaker 4: that I just did, but I'm probably gonna have to
Speaker 4: do this again. So I would like for you to
Speaker 4: go through my history, figure out what I did, and
Speaker 4: just go put it in like a markdown file or
Speaker 4: some notes or something as opposed to like history doing proactively.
Speaker 3: It's a great idea. We don't quite have that.
Speaker 5: We have the ability to take command that you've already
Speaker 5: run and turn into workflow, just so folks know what
Speaker 5: a workflow is. A workflow is a it's kind of
Speaker 5: like an alias, but it's like a templated command. And
Speaker 5: so if you have like a complicated thing you're doing
Speaker 5: a doctor or like what's your workflow for like cherry
Speaker 5: picking something into a release, you can make it one
Speaker 5: of these templated commands, and then we actually make it
Speaker 5: so it's shareable, which I think is kind of like
Speaker 5: the killer value of it. And so if you're working
Speaker 5: on a development team, you can build up a library
Speaker 5: of these things.
Speaker 3: That you can use in different situations. So if you're
Speaker 3: like an.
Speaker 5: SRI team, it's like, Okay, what are all the commands
Speaker 5: that I need to be able to run the middle
Speaker 5: of a firefight. You can have that and they're all
Speaker 5: sort of in a common library that you have directly
Speaker 5: within warp. We don't have the feature yet of like
Speaker 5: intelligently make these for me from a session, but that's
Speaker 5: a super smart feature. We do have a thing that
Speaker 5: we're haven't launched, but our experimenting with which is like
Speaker 5: essentially like run the output of your command through an
Speaker 5: LLLM and have it summarize for you and pick out
Speaker 5: the interesting and important parts.
Speaker 3: But I like your ideagulian of like figure out what
Speaker 3: I did, record for me so I can do it
Speaker 3: again smart.
Speaker 2: So I found that some people have sworn by this
Speaker 2: ring a chat context session at the end, just tell
Speaker 2: it to like echo back at you what you did,
Speaker 2: like say what did I do? And then when it's done,
Speaker 2: then say, okay, now I want you to take that
Speaker 2: and write a document for me that includes that information
Speaker 2: so that the next time I have this problem, I
Speaker 2: can go and reference that. And with WARP you can say, okay,
Speaker 2: now turn that into a templated command.
Speaker 5: You can totally you could totally do that today and
Speaker 5: WARP the one piece of it that's not like we
Speaker 5: don't tie the loop of turning it into this specific
Speaker 5: like executable thing that is a workflow.
Speaker 3: But you know, we also have like a notebook concept
Speaker 3: and WARP.
Speaker 5: So you could be like, hey, LLM and WARP summarize
Speaker 5: everything I did, turn into a notebook, extract the relevant
Speaker 5: commands for me, but it's not quite as.
Speaker 3: Seamless I think as it could be for Jillian. It's
Speaker 3: a good idea.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I'd really like to be able to have different
Speaker 4: I don't know if it's sessions or context, but I
Speaker 4: suppose one of those where I can say, I don't know.
Speaker 4: I mean, I suppose for me it would be like
Speaker 4: client dependent or contact dependent, or even like tell me
Speaker 4: which environment I'm in, which version of terraform I'm using,
Speaker 4: like you know, all that kind of for sure, like
Speaker 4: it's here, it's it's right here. Yeah, well, yeah, so
Speaker 4: that's what I want.
Speaker 3: Yeah, we don't like. I think that's a super interesting idea.
Speaker 5: I mean, you can you can use warpflort anything about
Speaker 5: your environment today, so you could be like what toolchain
Speaker 5: am I using?
Speaker 3: What are my environment variables? Like what? Uh? Anything?
Speaker 5: You can ask about your history and so you can
Speaker 5: get some of that today, but you can't quick get
Speaker 5: we don't have like packaged episode. When you start a
Speaker 5: new session you can get all that stuff, which would
Speaker 5: be cool.
Speaker 4: Well, I would if we're taking peach requests, I would
Speaker 4: like that.
Speaker 3: I'm gonna I'm gonna force everyone on our team to.
Speaker 2: Listen to this, Well, well, you should probably wait until
Speaker 2: the episode drops and then use uh you know, an
Speaker 2: I'll m to summarize the episode and extract the future
Speaker 2: requests from it, and we can do.
Speaker 3: It that way.
Speaker 5: Or I think there's been so much interesting discussion about
Speaker 5: like philosophy, AI and hear that make them all listen
Speaker 5: to it.
Speaker 3: I don't think. I don't think it's distilled. Summarized version
Speaker 3: is going to do a justice.
Speaker 2: Oh, I totally agree we need human Warren.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm gonna put them in a dark room and
Speaker 1: play it back to half speed.
Speaker 2: I don't listen to content any slower than like to
Speaker 2: these days. Before we get on another tangent, I have
Speaker 2: this feeling that we should move off onto onto picks.
Speaker 1: For that, it's probably a good part, good point, good time,
Speaker 1: good words, look at me, work in my words.
Speaker 2: Well then well why don't you go first?
Speaker 1: Right on? Okay, So I'm I have a couple of
Speaker 1: picks today. One I'm blaming you Warren and Matt from
Speaker 1: last week because I got the book Dungeon Crawler Carl,
Speaker 1: and I hate how much I like this book. It's
Speaker 1: just it's dumb and it's funny and it's entertaining, and
Speaker 1: it's engaging, and it's sucked way too much of my
Speaker 1: time last week. So Dungeon Crawler Carl, I can't even
Speaker 1: remember who the author is. Do you remember Warren?
Speaker 6: No?
Speaker 3: I didn't wrack it up.
Speaker 1: Yeah, just google Dungeon Crawler Carl. It's a stupidly fun book,
Speaker 1: very entertaining.
Speaker 2: If you're listening to this episode, the link will be
Speaker 2: included with the podcast, just you know, down below it,
Speaker 2: so you don't even have to google.
Speaker 3: I just click the link right.
Speaker 1: And then the other pick I'm gonna recommend is if
Speaker 1: you haven't Zach you mentioned this earlier, if you haven't
Speaker 1: gone to your favorite AI tool and just started a
Speaker 1: chat about philosophy with it, I highly recommend that. And
Speaker 1: that's going to be my pick for the week because
Speaker 1: it's just it's so much fun to do. And Laurren,
Speaker 1: I know you said that AI is not intelligent, but
Speaker 1: neither are some of the people I hang out with.
Speaker 1: So chatting with AI about philosophy seems to be working
Speaker 1: out quite well because it's just a really cool perspective
Speaker 1: of some of the stuff that it has and some
Speaker 1: of the insights it has to offer, and I've used
Speaker 1: it for setting goals as well and challenge me challenging
Speaker 1: me on those goals, and it's been pretty insightful for that.
Speaker 1: So I think that's one good way to start working
Speaker 1: with AI. And those are my picks. So Jillian, what
Speaker 1: about you? What'd you bring this week?
Speaker 4: I'm going to keep going with the self promotion until
Speaker 4: I'm back up to the lifestyle with which I've become
Speaker 4: a custom And if you go to my website, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 4: that's right, uh dabbleopdevops dot com slash AI. I have
Speaker 4: a data discovery tool for mostly for data science companies.
Speaker 4: If you're not a data science company like I don't,
Speaker 4: I don't like even really know how to talk to you,
Speaker 4: so maybe just ignore this portion. But the idea is
Speaker 4: that you get your data, you load it into the LM,
Speaker 4: and then you can start asking you questions. It kind
Speaker 4: of acts like a maybe like a junior grad student.
Speaker 4: You don't want to like completely trust what it says,
Speaker 4: but it gives you a very good first draft. I'm
Speaker 4: adding the PubMed interface so you can go search medical
Speaker 4: literature and say, like, okay, get me all the papers
Speaker 4: back on this disease or this protein or this drug interaction,
Speaker 4: you know, whatever the things are. Load that into the LM.
Speaker 4: Start asking you questions. I've got a couple different data
Speaker 4: sets open targets, a couple single cell data sets. I
Speaker 4: want to add a couple of transcripts data sets, even
Speaker 4: though those might be out of vogue, because they're still cool,
Speaker 4: you guys, Okay, they're still cool. So anyways, cool things
Speaker 4: are being added to the platform. Anybody wants it, mostly
Speaker 4: in the biotech space. Again, if you're not biotech, I don't.
Speaker 4: I don't really, I don't even know why you're listening
Speaker 4: to me, Like, just tune me out.
Speaker 2: It's fine, don't. Don't reduce your you know, your TAM
Speaker 2: your total adjustable market here. You know, if you don't
Speaker 2: understand what Gillian's saying, maybe you should go to the
Speaker 2: website anyway and see if you can figure out a
Speaker 2: use case for yourself.
Speaker 4: That's true, you could. I do have some companies that
Speaker 4: use it just for meeting notes. They there you go
Speaker 4: like Otter record all of their meetings and then Otter
Speaker 4: kind of gives them, like, you know, the different summaries
Speaker 4: and images and things like that. It's pretty cool. And
Speaker 4: then you can feed that into the LM and have
Speaker 4: sort of like a just a history of meetings, so
Speaker 4: then you don't have this, didn't we have a meeting
Speaker 4: about this? Didn't somebody make a database like wasn't wasn't
Speaker 4: there a thing? Wasn't there a person we can talk
Speaker 4: to here? You could just go and query it and
Speaker 4: then and then it will tell you. Sometimes it gives
Speaker 4: you the answer you want, and sometimes it's like, no,
Speaker 4: that conversation never happened. You're hallucinating now, but you know,
Speaker 4: like it's it's either one, it's one or the other. Well,
Speaker 4: there's a.
Speaker 1: Big overlap between bioh hackers and software engineers as well,
Speaker 1: so that they may find that interesting.
Speaker 4: Yeah, they could put all the literature and data in
Speaker 4: there around biohacking that I'm not I'm not totally familiar with,
Speaker 4: although I am very much looking forward to having like
Speaker 4: bionic limbs. That would be great, Like that would that
Speaker 4: would just be.
Speaker 2: Amazing for me, because because you want you want it
Speaker 2: that you don't have to think about moving your limbs anymore.
Speaker 2: You want something else to do it for you, right, No.
Speaker 4: I just want limbs that work at this point, Like
Speaker 4: that would be nice that's that's like just on a
Speaker 4: mechanical level, like that's what I need. And then you know,
Speaker 4: and then on that note, we're kind of talking about
Speaker 4: like philosophy of AI and so on, you know, and
Speaker 4: we can kind of argue about the tools, but from
Speaker 4: an accessibility viewpoint, AI is really great and doing some
Speaker 4: really great things. You know, like I have some issues
Speaker 4: with typing as I age out of this career field.
Speaker 4: You know, I have some like low vision people in
Speaker 4: the family that AI is very helpful for them being
Speaker 4: able to dictate, being able. You know, there's like there
Speaker 4: is of a lot of cool accessibility things that can
Speaker 4: be done with AI, and I do always kind of
Speaker 4: like to give a little bit of a shout out
Speaker 4: to that because I do think it's like all of
Speaker 4: that is pretty great. You know, Like I have somebody
Speaker 4: who's low vision who can now listen to audiobooks and
Speaker 4: you know, I'm basically like kind of still go through
Speaker 4: the Internet just with voice, and I think that's pretty cool.
Speaker 4: So I don't know, that's it.
Speaker 3: That's my picks, alrighty.
Speaker 2: Then, so for my pick this week, I primed it
Speaker 2: at the beginning. It's this Microsoft backed research paper that
Speaker 2: came out of Carnegie mellon the impact of Generative AI
Speaker 2: on Critical thinking, and I think it's just absolutely fantastic
Speaker 2: paper about the correlations between utilizing AI tools and developing
Speaker 2: critical thinking processes and expanding in usage of that sort
Speaker 2: of brain muscle. And I think some people have misinterpreted
Speaker 2: the paper as Microsoft paper on AI is making us stupid,
Speaker 2: But I think the one thing that really does come
Speaker 2: out of it is that if you have low confidence
Speaker 2: in an LM doing the right thing, you will be
Speaker 2: able to get much better answers out than if you
Speaker 2: have high confidence in the current tools that we have,
Speaker 2: because the current tools are transformer networks that hallucinate, and
Speaker 2: if you just assume that it gives you the right answer,
Speaker 2: like your calculator, you are going to stop developing the
Speaker 2: muscle of challenging where you got the information from and
Speaker 2: trying to understand it. I will say that this leads
Speaker 2: me to a great interview question. I know that interviewing
Speaker 2: candidates today can be challenging because they may be using
Speaker 2: lms to answer your questions, and for me, I think
Speaker 2: that naturally you can just ask them, hey, are you
Speaker 2: like how much confidence do you have in the LMS
Speaker 2: that you use to produce the right answers. The more
Speaker 2: confident they are, the more likely you know they're not
Speaker 2: using critical thinking to challenge what comes out of them
Speaker 2: and could be a useful litmus test for what sort
Speaker 2: of person you're hiring into your organization.
Speaker 1: Right hunh, And so by are you phrasing the question
Speaker 1: that way? Just presuming that they are using AI to
Speaker 1: make them more comfortable with admitting that they are trying
Speaker 1: to hide it?
Speaker 2: Well, I think realistically part of our interviews now should
Speaker 2: be dedicated to solving problems that don't rely on using LMS,
Speaker 2: or problems that can use LLMS to be solved better,
Speaker 2: and then asking them to use lms and which LMS
Speaker 2: they're utilizing to solve the problem and how they're going
Speaker 2: about it, because I think where you know you're trying
Speaker 2: to hide this perspective from yourself, you're lying to yourself
Speaker 2: if you believe that they you don't want to pull
Speaker 2: these tools into your company to utilize in some fashion
Speaker 2: and that people aren't utilizing them irrelevant if you give
Speaker 2: them a take home assignment for your company that takes
Speaker 2: four hours or eight hours, some of them are going
Speaker 2: to utilize tools, And I don't think it says a
Speaker 2: lot on the type of person based on whether they
Speaker 2: utilize the tools, but it does say something about them
Speaker 2: about how they're utilizing them or what their expectations are
Speaker 2: on how they utilize those tools.
Speaker 1: Cool, all right, Zach? What'd you bring for?
Speaker 3: Pick? I have a tool that I like. Why not?
Speaker 5: So it's a tool called Granola, and it's a it's
Speaker 5: a note taker.
Speaker 3: It's a meeting note taker, you say, I.
Speaker 5: But the thing that I like about it compared to
Speaker 5: all the other ones that I've tried using, is that
Speaker 5: you don't end up with like a little like black
Speaker 5: box in your zoom for the note taker. The note
Speaker 5: taker works just off of your computer audio. Oh so
Speaker 5: there's no like this is weird?
Speaker 3: Who is this? Like Zach's note taker thing? Joining the meeting?
Speaker 3: And it it not? Is it takes notes. It doesn't
Speaker 3: like the default way that it takes notes isn't by transcription.
Speaker 3: It's by.
Speaker 5: Like semantically summarizing and giving you the key points.
Speaker 4: Of what happened in the meaning.
Speaker 6: So I don't like taking mening notes. So this is
Speaker 6: a cool thing. It's called pole. That's one thing. A
Speaker 6: second thing I'm reading a book. It's pretty nerdy. I
Speaker 6: don't know why I'm reading it.
Speaker 5: It's called A it's like a travel Guys in the
Speaker 5: Middle Ages, and it's all it's like a it's a
Speaker 5: history book, and it's all about like from like you know,
Speaker 5: the year like eleven hundred to fifteen hundred, how did
Speaker 5: people travel, Like what was it like for them to
Speaker 5: take a vacation.
Speaker 3: They weren't really taking vacations.
Speaker 5: They were like primarily going on pilgrimages or at least
Speaker 5: that's like what the written record survives.
Speaker 3: And it takes you all over Europe.
Speaker 5: The Middle East and like the Near East, and like
Speaker 5: I'm not through it yet, so I don't totally know where.
Speaker 3: But to me, it's what I like about it from a.
Speaker 5: History perspective is that it's just about like it's about
Speaker 5: a like relatable experience, not about like a series of
Speaker 5: historical events.
Speaker 3: It's not about historical leaders.
Speaker 5: It's about, like, say, you having to be living in
Speaker 5: the year thirteen hundred, what the heck were you doing?
Speaker 3: How did you pack? How did you travel? Where did
Speaker 3: you stay? Like what were the inns? Like? What were
Speaker 3: you trying to go? Sight see? At I don't know
Speaker 3: why I like it so much, but it's it's like
Speaker 3: I really like it.
Speaker 5: It's like a puts me in a very different mindset
Speaker 5: from like how we're living today, So.
Speaker 1: That's super cool. It's like National Lampoon's Middle Ages vacation.
Speaker 5: Yeah, except I guess it didn't seem like very funny
Speaker 5: to be traveling then.
Speaker 3: It was a lot of like very serious.
Speaker 5: You got to get to this religious site, like like
Speaker 5: you got to see these relics, like people were really
Speaker 5: wanting to see a bunch of you know, historic felts
Speaker 5: or at least that's what the written record, uh survives,
Speaker 5: and that's where the history comes from.
Speaker 3: So that's pretty cool.
Speaker 4: I used to really like all those, like the the
Speaker 4: diary type books, like their fiction, but they're sort of
Speaker 4: written as diaries of like the kids that would do
Speaker 4: the Oregon Trail and travel across the United States, and
Speaker 4: and they're they're from like other places as well too,
Speaker 4: So you have people coming to Plymouth Rock and doing
Speaker 4: the Oregon Trail and just the sort of Yeah, in general,
Speaker 4: people go in different places, like across history. It used
Speaker 4: to be a lot harder. You used to have to
Speaker 4: worry about more things than like if the gas station
Speaker 4: have your preferred chicken tenders or like whatever you know.
Speaker 2: Yeah, there's so many questions, Jill Anne.
Speaker 1: Awesome, Zach, thank you for joining us. This has been
Speaker 1: a super entertaining episode.
Speaker 4: Yeah, this has been fun.
Speaker 3: Yeah that was great.
Speaker 5: I was super interesting conversation and like, uh it was Yeah,
Speaker 5: that's fine.
Speaker 3: Really appreciate you all having me on here.
Speaker 1: For sure. I'm gonna challenge Jillian to go download Warp
Speaker 1: try it out, and then invite you back on the
Speaker 1: show for a head to head rematch.
Speaker 4: Voice like that's the one thing I really want. So
Speaker 4: there we go.
Speaker 5: It's a I don't know if it has it's at
Speaker 5: warp dot dev is where you get it, and it's
Speaker 5: now available Mac, Linux, and Windows, so all platforms right on.
Speaker 1: Cool cool, Well, thanks everyone, Zach, thank you again, Warren, Jillian,
Speaker 1: thank you, and we'll see everyone next week.