Speaker unverified: evaluation

Transcript context

…Which raises the question a Spanish team has been answering all year. What comes after agents? But it's striking to me that you said you don't even have workflows as kind of a mental model. That seems to be at odds, at least with this anthropic launch. So would you critique their launch? You think something's off about that mental model? Should I go like revert my upgrade skill migration to the workflows paradigm? Where do you really disagree with that direction? I'm happy also to hear a man on the side. I tell you my most production, like I tell you the product vision and we can also go deep on the workflows topic. By the way, I don't critique it. It's simply that the day that you start paying the tokens at that cost, you might not want to click that workflow button twice. So I tell you what happens. It's a mental model problem. Because if you think about workflows, you are constraining your thinking into a process. And the problem with that is that the business users that know how to make the task cannot translate their task into workflows. Because indeed, there is so much variability, there are no happy paths in knowledge job tasks. There are no happy paths. A happy path of I read a document and I put it in a database is not a happy path because the document can be in Spanish, in Chinese, a Colombian. It goes with a passport. Now the passport, it's not anymore like, imagine if you had to think on a workflow to validate 2 documents. You would say, no, it's easy. You read the document, you create a GSO on and then, but if you really want to make a workflow, which is what people think, you are constraining by yourself the capabilities of what these systems can do. So instead of talking about workflows, which is a process boxes with arrows with a lot of if-then-elses and some now magical boxes called AI agents that become black boxes that we're not sure if they will do the same thing twice, but we put them there as routers or as intelligent conditionals, no? Then we think more into the framework of delegation. Suppose that you want to automate or not automate, you want to stop managing your calendar. You have two ways. You can create a workflow, so good luck managing all day, or you can hire a human today, and you would delegate into that human. that. And delegation means that you expect that person to keep learning. You expect that person to be able to do new circumstances because it knows already how to behave from a general perspective. And you wouldn't have to say every day you open the e-mail and you click the button for it. And you do this. And then you put the label. You don't, that's a workflow. But this is not how we think. So the problem of workflow thinking is that it constrains what this technology can really do once you solve the problems of course, reliability and reproducibility and originations. When you solve that, the problem is that people is still constrained with chatbots and with this, if then else thinking that constrains the, no, you really can do this thing end to end. So that's why we challenge, not challenge, we literally ask, if you ask our customers, they will, they, we never ever say the word workflow, which I think that is one of the biggest things that we were able to achieve to scale this. Quick heads up on these last two. Our guests' audio wasn't coming through for a stretch. Prakash had codex pass the studio live without dropping the stream. So for parts of these, you'll hear me on a speakerphone backup. Both are developments I genuinely want more of. And they're both deeply human. First, the solo creative with a company in a box.…

Stored transcript either side of the excerpt. The highlighted words are the published quote; the surrounding text is unedited source, never generated.