[0:00:07] So moving on to AI, which is where you've obviously spent the bulk of your time since I saw you. We sat here three years ago, and as I was teasing you, but it's true, you were telling us what was coming, and we all thought you were being sort of like, you know, hyperbolic, I guess. You were dead serious. Why do you think, I mean, people knew that you were working on this, Google's working on this. Why do you think that ChatGPT and Dolly so surprised people?
[0:00:37] I genuinely don't know. I've reflected on it a lot. We had the model for ChatGPT in the API for like, I don't know, 10 months or something before we made ChatGPT. And I sort of thought someone was going to just build it or whatever and that enough people had played around with it. Definitely if you make a really good user experience on top of something, like one thing that I very deeply believed.
[0:01:11] Was the way people wanted to interact with these models was via dialogue. And we kept telling people this. We kept trying to convince people to build it. And people wouldn't quite do it. So we finally said, all right, we're just going to do it. But yeah, I think the pieces were there for a while. I think one of the reasons I think Dolly surprised people is if you asked five or seven years ago that kind of ironclad wisdom on AI. First, it comes for physical labor, truck driving, working in a factory.
[0:01:42] Then the sort of less demanding cognitive labor. Then the really demanding cognitive labor like computer programming. And then very last of all, or maybe never, because maybe it's like some deep human special sauce was creativity. And of course we can look now and say it really looks like it's going to go exactly the opposite direction. But I think that is not super intuitive. And so I can see why Dolly surprised people. But I genuinely felt
[0:02:13] Somewhat confused about why chat GPT did. One of the things we really believe is that the most responsible way to put this out in society is very gradually. And to get people, institutions, policymakers, get them familiar with it, thinking about the implications, feeling the technology, getting a sense for what it can do and can't do very early. Rather than drop a super powerful AGI in the world all at once. And so we put GPT-3 out.
[0:02:42] Almost three years ago. And then we put it into an API. I think it was maybe June of two and a half years ago. And the incremental update from that to ChatGPT I felt like should have been predictable. And I want to do more introspection on why I was sort of miscalibrated on that. So you had talked when you were here about releasing things in a responsible way.
[0:03:12] I guess what gave you the confidence to release what you have released already? Do you think we're ready for it? Are there enough guardrails in place? It seems like it. We have an internal process where we try to break things and study impacts. We use external auditors. We have external red teamers. We work with other labs and have safety organizations look at stuff. There are societal changes that...
[0:03:43] ChatGPT is going to cause or is causing. There's, I think, a big one going now about the impact of this on education, academic integrity, all of that. But starting these now where the stakes are still relatively low, rather than just put out what the whole industry will have in a few years with no time for society to update, I think would be bad. COVID did show us.
[0:04:10] For better or for worse, or at least me, that society can update to like massive changes sort of faster than I would have thought in many ways. But I still think like given the magnitude of the economic impact we expect here, more gradual is better. And so putting out a very weak and imperfect system like ChatGPT and then making it a little better this year, a little better later this year, a little better next year, that seems much better than the alternative.
[0:04:37] Can you comment on whether GPT-4 is coming out in the first quarter, first half of the year? It'll come out at some point when we are confident that we can do it safely and responsibly. I think in general, we are going to release technology much more slowly than people would like. We're going to sit on it for much longer than people would like. And eventually, people will be happy with our approach to this.
[0:05:08] But at the time, I realized people want the shiny toy, and it's frustrating. I totally get that. I saw a visual, and I don't know if it was accurate, but it showed GPT-3.5 versus, I guess, what GPT-4 is expected. I saw that thing on Twitter. Did you? Was that accurate? Complete bullshit. No. Okay, because that was a little bit scary. The GPT-4 rumor mill is like a ridiculous thing.
[0:05:32] I don't know where it all comes from. I don't know why people don't have better things to speculate on. I get a little bit of it. It's sort of fun, but that it's been going for six months at this volume. People are begging to be disappointed, and they will be. The hype is just like, we don't have an actual AGI, and I think that's sort of what is expected of us. Yeah, we're going to disappoint those people. Right, right. Well, I want to talk to you about how close that is. Another thing, a few years ago, you said, and this was...
[0:06:00] Funny, I thought. We were talking about revenue. This is before you announced your partnership with Microsoft. And you said, and I quote, basically, we made a soft promise to investors that once we built this generally intelligent system, we will ask it to figure out a way to generate an investment return. We all kind of laughed at this. And you said, it sounds like an episode of Silicon Valley. I know, but it is actually what I believe. Someone sent me that video a few weeks ago. I mean, in some sense, that's what's happening.
[0:06:30] We built a thing, deeply imperfect as it is. We couldn't figure out how to monetize it. You could talk to it. We put it out into the world via an API. And other people, by playing around with it, figured out all these things to do. So it was not quite the ask thing and it tells you how to monetize. But it hasn't gone totally the other direction either.
[0:06:58] We're not quite there yet. You obviously have figured out a way to make some revenue. You're licensing your models. Not much. We're very early. Right. So right now, licensing to startups. So you are early on, and people are sort of looking at the...
[0:07:17] The whole of what's happening out there. And they're saying, you've got Google, which could potentially release things this year. You have a lot of AI upstarts nipping at your heels. Are you worried about what you're building being commoditized and, I guess, driving the value zero? I mean, to some degree, I hope it is. The future I would like to see is where access to AI is super democratized.
[0:07:47] Where there are several AGIs in the world that can help allow for multiple viewpoints and not have any one get too powerful. And that the cost of intelligence and energy, because it gets commoditized, trends down and down and down. And the massive surplus there, access to the systems, eventually governance of the systems, benefits all of us.
[0:08:17] Yeah, I sort of hope that happens. I think competition is good. At least, you know, until we get to AGI, I like deeply believe in capitalism and competition to offer the best service at the lowest price. But that's not great from a business standpoint. We'll be fine. We'll be fine. I also find it interesting that you say differing viewpoints or these AGIs would have different viewpoints. I guess how? I mean, they're all being trained on like all the data that's available in the world. So how do we come up with differing viewpoints?
[0:08:51] What I think is going to have to happen is society will have to agree and set some laws on what an AGI can never do or what one of these systems should never do. And one of the cool things about the path of the technology tree that we're on, which is very different, like before we came along and it was sort of DeepMind having these games that were like...
[0:09:15] You know, having agents play each other and try to deceive each other and kill each other and all that, which I think could have gone in a bad direction. We now have these language models that can understand language. And so we can say, hey, you know, model, here's what we'd like you to do. Here are the values we'd like you to align to. And we don't have it working perfectly yet, but it works a little and it'll get better and better. And the world can say, all right, here are the rules. Here's the very broad bounds, very broad, like...
[0:09:44] Absolute rules of a system. But within that, people should be allowed very different things that they want their AI to do. And so if you want the super like, you know, never offend, safe for work model, you should get that. And if you want an edgier one that, you know, is sort of like creative and exploratory but says some stuff you like might not be comfortable with or some people might not be comfortable with, you should get that. And I think there will be many systems in the world that have different
[0:10:14] Settings of the values that they enforce. And really what I think, and this will take longer, is that you as a user should be able to write up a few pages of here's what I want. Here are my values. Here's how I want the AI to behave. And it reads it and thinks about it and acts exactly how you want. Because it should be your AI. And it should be there to serve you and do the things you believe in.
[0:10:40] That to me is much better than one system where like one tech company says, here are the rules. That's really interesting. So also when we sat down, it was right before your partnership with Microsoft. So when you say we're going to be okay, I wonder if... No, nothing about that. We're just going to build a fine business. Like even if the competitive pressure pushes the price that people will like pay token down.
[0:11:05] We're going to do fine. We also have this cap profit model, so we don't have this incentive to just capture all of the infinite dollars out there anyway. And to generate enough money for our equity structure, yeah, I believe we'll be fine. Well, I know you're not crazy about talking about deal making, so we won't. But can you talk a little bit about your partnership with Microsoft, I guess, how it's going and how they're using your tech? It's great. They're the only tech company out there that I think we...
[0:11:34] I'd be excited to partner with this deeply. I think Satya is an amazing CEO, but more than that human being and understands. So do Kevin Scott and Mikhail, who we work with closely as well, like understand the stakes of what AGI means and why we need to have all the weirdness we do in our structure and our agreement with them. And so I really feel like it's a very values aligned company. And there's some things they're very good at, like.
[0:12:01] Building very large supercomputers and the infrastructure we operate on and putting the technology into products. There's things we're very good at, like doing research. And it's been a great partnership. Can you comment on whether the reports are accurate, that it's going to be in Bing, in Office, or maybe it's already in those things? You are a very experienced and professional reporter. You know I can't comment on that. I know you know I can't comment on that. You know I know you know you can't comment on that. In the spirit of shortness of life and our precious time here, why do you ask?
[0:12:38] Sam. I'm genuinely curious. I need answers. Well, I mean, because you don't. Like, if you're asking a question you know I'm not going to answer. Well, I thought you might answer that one. No. No, okay. I know there's some things you don't answer, but I got to try. Another company's product plans I'm definitely not going to touch. Well, okay. Let me ask you about yours then. Do you, as you're packed with Microsoft, does it preclude you from building software and services? No, no. We build stuff. I mean, we just, as we talked about, ChatGPT, we have lots more cool stuff coming. Okay.
[0:13:04] And what about other partnerships other than with Microsoft also? Yeah, yeah. I mean, like again, in general, we are very much here to build AGI. And products and services are tactics and service of that, partnerships too. But important ones, and we really want to be useful to people. And I think if we just build this in a lab and don't figure out how to get out into the world, that's like somehow we're really falling short there.
[0:13:33] Well, I wondered what you made of the fact that Google has said to its employees, it's too imperfect, it could harm our reputation, we're not ready. I hope when they launch something anyway, you really hold them to that comment. I'll just leave it there. Okay, let me ask you this. What did you think...
[0:13:56] When they suspended that seven-year veteran of their responsible AI organization who thought that the chatbot that he was working on for them had become sentient. You know, I read, I remember reading a little bit about that, but not enough that I feel like I can comment. Like, I basically only remember the headline. I guess I thought at the time he sounded like a crackpot. And now that I've seen ChatGPT, I think...
[0:14:21] Maybe that's why you rushed out ChatGPT, because yours is amazing. And if theirs is also amazing, you know. I haven't seen theirs. I think they're like a competent org, so I would assume they have something good. But I don't know anything about it. So we talked earlier on about education. People are scared and excited. I was just telling you that my 13-year-old came home from school a couple of days ago, and his teacher was telling him.
[0:14:51] Not to be scared by AI, but you guys are going to have to sort of develop different skill sets in your lifetime that are valued. But there is a lot of concern. The New York public school system just restricted access to GPT, which is probably not as big a story as it sort of seemed from the headline. But what do you tell educators? What are misconceptions about what you're working on? How can you kind of allay their concerns? Look, I get it.
[0:15:18] I get why educators feel the way they feel about this. And probably this is just a preview of what we're going to see in a lot of other areas. I think this is just the new... We're going to try to do some things in the short term. And there may be ways we can help teachers be a little bit more likely to detect output, or anyone, output of a GPT-like system. But honestly, a determined person is going to get around them.
[0:15:50] And I don't think it'll be something society can or should rely on long term. We're just in a new world now. Generated text is something we all need to adapt to. And that's fine. We adapted to calculators and changed what we tested for in math classes, I imagine. This is a more extreme version of that, no doubt. But also the benefits of it are more extreme as well. We hear from teachers who are understandably very...
[0:16:19] I'm nervous about the impact of this on homework. We also hear a lot from teachers who are like, wow, this is like an unbelievable personal tutor for each kid. And I think that I have used it to learn things myself and found it like much more compelling than other ways I've learned things in the past. Like I would much rather have ChatGPT teach me about something than go read a textbook. So, you know, it's like an evolving world and we'll all adapt and I think be better off for it and we won't want to go back.
[0:16:48] Well, my 15-year-old son came home one day and was using it to understand some science concepts better, which I thought was really great. That's awesome. Yeah, but the same kid also was like, could I use this to write my papers? So I did want to ask about watermarking technologies and other techniques. So it sounds like you don't think it's... No, I think we will experiment with this. Other people will too. I think it is important for the transition, but I would caution policy.
[0:17:18] National policy, individual schools, or whatever, from relying on this. Because I don't, like, fundamentally, I think it's impossible to make it perfect. You'll think, you know, people will figure out how much of the text they have to change. There will be other things that modify the outputted text. I think it's good to pursue, and we will. But I think what's important to realize is, like, the playing field has shifted. And that's fine.
[0:17:47] There's good and bad, and we just figure out, like, rather than try to go back, we figure out the way forward. So even if you develop technologies that could be sort of rendered, like, irrelevant in a few months, essentially? I suspect. Yeah. I also wanted to ask, Anthropic, Arrival, I guess, founded by a former... Yeah, again, like, Arrival, in some sense, thinks super highly of those people, like, very, very talented, and...
[0:18:13] Multiple AGIs in the world, I think, is better than one. Sure. Well, what I was going to ask, and just for some background, it was founded by a former OpenAI VP of research who you, I think, met when he was at Google. But it is stressing an ethical layer as a kind of distinction from other players. And I just wondered if you think that systems should adopt kind of a common code of principles and also whether that should be regulated. Yeah.
[0:18:42] I mean, that was my earlier point. I think society should regulate what the kind of the wide bounds are. But then I think individual users should have a huge amount of liberty to decide how they want their experience and their interaction to go. So I think it is like a combination of society, you know, like we have, there are a few asterisks on the free speech rules. And society has decided like free speech, not quite absolute.
[0:19:12] I think society will also decide, like language models, not quite absolute. But there's a lot of speech that is legal that you find distasteful, that I find distasteful, that he finds distasteful. And we all probably have somewhat different definitions of that. And I think it is very important that that is left to the responsibility of individual users and groups, not one company, and that the government there govern and not dictate all of the rules.
[0:19:42] There are a lot of people here who I think want to ask you questions, and I know you can't stay forever. I wanted to ask one more question before I turn it over to the crowd. Video, is that coming? It will come. I wouldn't want to make a confident prediction about when. Obviously, people are interested in it. We'll try to do it. Other people will try to do it. It could be pretty soon. It's a legitimate research project, so it could be pretty soon. It could take a while.
[0:20:12] Let's see, who would like to ask Sam a question? Oh, great. Hold on. I got to run over here. Thank you. Hi, Fusion. When do you think there will be a commercial plant actually producing electricity economically? Yeah, I think by like 2028, pending good fortune with regulators, we could be plugging them into the grid. I think we'll do a really great demo well before that.
[0:20:52] Hopefully pretty soon. Hey Sam, thank you. What is your, and I don't know if you are allowed to answer this, but what is your best case scenario for AI and worst case? Or more pointedly, what would you like to see and what would you not like to see out of AI in the future? I mean, I think the best case is so unbelievably good that it's hard to... I think it's hard for me to even imagine. I can sort of think about what it's like when we make...
[0:21:35] More progress of discovering new knowledge with these systems than humanity has done so far, but in a year instead of 70,000. I can sort of imagine what it's like when we launch probes out to the whole universe and find out really everything going on out there. I can sort of imagine what it's like when we have just unbelievable abundance and systems that can sort of help us resolve.
[0:22:01] Deadlocks and improve all aspects of reality and kind of let us all live our best lives. But I can't quite. I think the good case is just so unbelievably good that you sound like a really crazy person to start talking about it. And the bad case, and I think this is important to say, is lights out for all of us. I'm more worried about an accidental misuse case in the short term.
[0:22:32] Where, you know, someone gets a super powerful, like it's not like the AI wakes up and decides to be evil. And I think all of the sort of traditional AI safety thinkers reveal a lot about, more about themselves than they mean to when they talk about what they think the AGI is going to be like. But I can see the accidental misuse case clearly. And that's super bad. So I think like, yeah, I think it's like impossible to overstate the importance of AI safety and alignment work.
[0:23:02] I would like to see much, much more happening. But I think it's more subtle than most people think. And that, you know, you hear a lot of people talk about AI capabilities and AI alignment as like orthogonal vectors. And, you know, you're bad if you're a capabilities researcher and you're good if you're an alignment researcher. It actually sounds very reasonable, but they're almost the same thing. Like deep learning is just going to like solve all of these problems. And so far, that's what the progress has been.
[0:23:31] Progress on capabilities is also what has let us make the systems safer and vice versa, surprisingly. And so I think none of the sort of soundbite easy answers work. Alfred Lin told me to ask you, and I was going to ask anyway, how far away do you think AGI is? He said, Sam, I'll probably tell you sooner than you thought. The closer we get, the harder time I have answering because I think that it's going to be much blurrier and much more of a gradual transition.
[0:24:10] Then people think. If you imagine like a two by two matrix of sort of short timelines until the AGI takeoff era begins and long timelines until it begins and then a slow takeoff or a fast takeoff. The world I think we're heading to and the safest world, the one I most hope for, is the short timeline, slow takeoff. But I think people are going to have hugely different opinions about when in there you kind of like declare victory on the AGI thing.
[0:24:44] Thank you, Sam. 30 seconds. First is when you spoke a few years ago, I was highly skeptical. And so you put me on notice. Felt like Netscape when I was a teenager. Thank you very much. The question I have is less science and technology and more geography, which is what's your take on San Francisco and Southern Valley? Because you referenced it earlier. Man, I love this city so much. And it is so sad.
[0:25:10] What the current state is. I do think it's somewhat come back to life after the pandemic. But yeah, when you walk down Market Street at night, or if I try to walk home and walk through the Tenderloin late, it's not great. And I think it's a real shame that we put up with treating people like this. And we continue to elect leaders who sort of don't think this is OK, but also don't fix the problem.
[0:25:42] I totally get how hard this is. I totally get how complicated this is. I also, I think unlike other tech people, will say that tech has some responsibility for it. But other cities manage to do better than this. It is a solvable problem. And to entirely blame tech companies who don't get to run the city, that doesn't feel good either. And I wish there could be a more collaborative partnership instead of all of the finger pointing.
[0:26:11] I am super long in-person work. I am super long the Bay Area. I'm super long California. I think we are probably going through some trying times. But I am hopeful we come out of the fire better for it. A little bit more about what you expected the reaction to chat GPT to be. And also, would you prefer that there wasn't so much hype? Is that potentially detrimental to the company and to what you're trying to do? Yeah. I would have expected...
[0:26:47] Maybe like one order of magnitude less of everything. Like one order of magnitude less of hype, one order of magnitude less of users. Yeah, I would have expected sort of one order of magnitude less on everything. And I think less hype is probably better, just as like a general rule. One of the sort of strange things about these technologies is they are impressive but not robust. And so you use them in a first demo.
[0:27:17] You kind of have this very impressive, like, wow, this is incredible and ready to go. You use them 100 times, you see the weaknesses. And so I think people can get a much, sort of a false impression of how good they are. However, that's all going to get better. The critics who point these problems out and say, well, this is why it's all fake news or whatever, are equally wrong. And so I think...
[0:27:45] It's good in the sense that people are updating to this, thinking hard about it and all of that. Can I ask, how do you use it? You know, when we were emailing back and forth, I thought, am I talking to Sam? I have occasionally used it to summarize super long emails, but I've never used it to write one. I actually summarize it for a lot. It's super good at that. I use it for translation. I use it to, like, learn things. Okay, great. Oh.
[0:28:23] So two quick questions. When people talk about your technologies being the end of Google, how do you unpack or how do you understand that? And then also your thoughts on UBI. Yeah, I think whenever someone talks about a technology being the end of some other giant company, it's usually wrong. I think people forget they get to make a counter move here. And they're pretty smart, pretty competent. But I do think there is a change for search that will...
[0:29:00] Probably come at some point. But not as dramatically as people think in the short term. My guess is that people are going to be using Google the same way people are using Google now for quite some time. And also Google, for whatever this whole code red thing is, is probably not going to change that dramatically, would be my guess. UBI. I think UBI is good and important, but very far from sufficient. I think it is a little part of the solution. I think it's great.
[0:29:31] As AGI participates more and more in the economy, I think we should distribute wealth and resources much more than we have. And that'll be important over time. But I don't think that's going to solve the problem. I don't think that's going to give people meaning. I don't think it means people are going to entirely stop trying to create and do new things and whatever else. So I sort of would consider it an enabling technology, but not a plan for society.
[0:30:00] Is that why your company, though, is a capped profit company? I mean, are you planning to take the proceeds that you're presuming you're going to make someday and you're going to give them back to society? Yeah, whether we do that just by, like, saying here's cash for everyone, totally possible, or whether we do that by saying, like, here is, you know, we're going to, like, invest all of this in a nonprofit that does a bunch of science because scientific progress is how we all make progress.
[0:30:28] Unsure, but yeah, we would like to operate for the good of society. And I think I'm like a big believer in sort of design a custom structure for whatever you're trying to do. And I think AGI is just like really different. And so the cap will turn out to be super important. Can I ask selfishly? So if UBI is only part of the solution and I've got teenagers and we all have jobs, what should we be preparing for? You know, as I said, my son's...
[0:30:56] Teacher was trying to prepare them, but of course you would maybe be better positioned to have some ideas on this. Resilience, adaptability, ability to learn new things quickly, creativity, although it'll be aided creativity. And aided learning things quickly. For sure. In some sense, before Google came along, there was a bunch of things that we learned. Memorizing facts was really important, and that changed.
[0:31:29] And now I think learning will change again and we'll probably adapt faster than we think. Okay, I think we have to let Sam go, but how about like two more questions? Thank you. Thank you so much. The future workplace for tech workers, you think it'll be out of the home, out of the office, what percent in each? I have, like, look, I think people are going to do.
[0:31:59] Different things. I don't think there will be one answer. And I think people will sort. The people who want fully in-person will do that. People who want fully remote will do that. I think a lot of people will do hybrid. I have always been a fan of going to the office a few days a week and work at home a day or two a week. YC was very much like being a YC partner was very much that way. OpenAI was that way before the pandemic. OpenAI is that way now. I personally am skeptical that fully remote is going to be.
[0:32:27] The thing that everyone does. And I think even the people who thought it was a really good idea are now sort of saying like, hmm, the next like 40 years sitting in my bedroom looking at a computer screen on Zoom, do I really want that? Am I really sure? With some skepticism. There are some people who do. What I think has been the hardest is companies who are the wrong kind of hybrid where it's not like, you know, these four days everyone's in, these two days everyone's home, whatever. But it's...
[0:32:57] Come in if you want, be at home if you want, and then you have half the people in the meeting in this little box on the screen, half the people in person. It's clearly a way better experience in person. The people that are not there do get left out. That, I think, is the hardest. But it's all going to continue to evolve, and people will sort into what they want. I would bet that many of the most important companies of this decade are still pretty heavily in person.
[0:33:26] Do you work for CBRE? No. So one of you, you guys want to wrestle for it? He has a YC shirt, so let's do him too after this one. Okay, great, great, great. Sure. So given your experience with OpenAI safety and the conversation around it, how do you think about safety in other AI fields like autonomous vehicles? Yeah, I think there's like a bunch of safety issues for...
[0:33:56] Any new technology and particularly any narrow vertical of AI. And we kind of have learned a lot in the past few decades of, or more than a few, past like seven or eight decades of technological progress about how to do really good safety engineering and safety systems management. And a lot of that about how we like learn how to build safe systems and safe processes will translate. Imperfect, there will be mistakes, but we know how to do that.
[0:34:26] I think the AGI safety stuff is really different personally and worthy of study as its own category. And because the stakes are so high and the irreversible situations are so easy to imagine, we do need to somehow treat that differently and figure out a new set of safety processes and standards. So you said right now is one of the best times to start a company. I found that counterintuitive. Maybe you can explain why and what companies...
[0:34:56] Should I tell my friends to go start? Because I have actually pretty few smart friends who are looking to do something. The only thing that I think is easy in a mega bubble is capital. So it was a great time to raise capital for a startup from, say, 2015 to end of 2021. But everything else was pretty hard. It was pretty hard to hire people.
[0:35:19] It was pretty hard to rise above the noise. It was pretty hard to do something that mattered without having thousands of competitors right away. And a lot of those startups that looked like they were doing well because of the same reason capital was cheap found that actually they were not able to build as much enduring value as they hoped. Now, raising capital is tough.
[0:35:45] It's still sort of reasonable, I think, at seed stages, but it certainly seems much tougher at later stages. But all the other stuff is much easier. You actually can concentrate talent. People are not constantly poached. You can rise above the noise threshold, whether that's with customers, the press, users, whatever. I would much rather have a hard time raising capital, but an easier time doing everything else than the other way around. So that's why I think it's a better time.
[0:36:16] In terms of what I would do now, I would probably go do AI for some vertical. It brought to mind this information story about Jasper that I thought was interesting. It's a customer of yours, a copywriting company relying on your AI language models, and now ChatGPT is so good that it's got to find a new reason for being, I think. Is that a danger for many startups? I guess, which ones, if so? I heard about this article, but I didn't read it.
[0:36:47] But if I understand that it was basically like the company was saying like, you know, we had built this thing on GPT-3 and now ChatGPT is available for free and that's causing us problems. Is that right? I think probably the wrong thing to do to make an AI startup. Well, let me say, I think the best thing you can do to make an AI startup is the same way that like a lot of other companies differentiate, which is to build like deep relationships with.
[0:37:23] Customers, a product they love, and some sort of moat that doesn't have to be technology and network effect or whatever. And I think a lot of companies in the AI space are doing exactly that. And you've got to plan that OpenAI's models are going to get better and better. We view ourselves more as a platform company, but we will do some, you know, like a business strategy I've always really respected is like the platform plus killer app together. And so we will probably do something to help.
[0:37:51] Show people what we think is possible. But I think you want to build a startup, and I think Jasper is going to do this or already is doing this, that has deep value on top of the fundamental language model, and we are a piece of enabling technology. Is there anybody knowing what you know or you think you see coming that should basically drop what they're doing right now because they're cooked? I'm sure if I had more time to think about it, I could come up with an answer.
[0:38:26] In general, I think there's going to be way, way more new value created. This is going to be a golden few years than people who should just stop what they're doing. I would not ignore it. I think you've got to embrace it big time. But I think the amount of value that's about to get created, we have not seen since the launch of the iPhone app store or something like that. It's incredible. This is going to be an amazing year, I'm sure. I'm so thankful to you. Thank you for having me. My gosh, Sam, thank you. For sure. It's awesome.