Speaker unverified: belief

Transcript context

…ll, one thing it does, it gives us a a huge uh bird's eyee view relative to uh where the broader industry is going, whether it's around infrastructure, whether it's around capital, whether it's around energy, but also you can imagine it could provide a home for for our products, right? So, it it doesn't need to be the home, but it certainly can be a home. Uh which is also a big, you know, a big help. Uh when we think about the verticals that SoftBank's involved with robotics, energy, data center infrastructure, and then you look at the products that ARM has, the only one we've announced so far is the ARM AGI CPU. You can start to connect the dots and say, gosh, there could be some very interesting opportunities that uh that could be an opportunity for ARM, which necessarily doesn't mean that we're getting into the broad merchant chip business. We could be just doing products simply back for for SoftBank. We're a couple years into um you know serious efforts in more uh generalized robotics at this point, right? If you compare it to like about a decade for um LLMs, there's increasingly interesting demo results from companies on generalization of task and environment, more robustness, maybe even in context learning, but not like widescale deployment quite yet. >> Um first, would you agree with that characterization? Yeah. >> What predictions do you have about the uh robotics market and um any opportunity for ARM there? >> Oh, well, broadly speaking, uh I think the whether it's humanoids or or dedicated uh machines to do certain level of tasks that can be retrained is going to be enormous, right? And the the robotics 1.0, zero, which is a purpose-built industry. Uh you had piece of mechanics designed to do a certain task and the software that was optimized for that task. If you had to a brand new automobile line came up or some different piece of equipment, if the robots weren't well suited for that, rip up the line, etc., etc. So, as as you can imagine, then the the barrier was was pretty high. getting to a world where the the robots can learn just based upon either being trained or what they see and then when you then combine that with can you design something mechanically general purpose enough that can take advantage of being reprogrammed and then when you layer on top of that the cost coming down you look at and say oh my gosh what what will it not be able to do so it's almost like something out of the Jetsons right where a lot of things will ultimately be done by robots uh construction, infrastructure, service, security. You know, right now you see a lot of stuff on Instagram or Tik Tok of Olympic races with robots, etc., etc. I don't think anyone's going to have any interest in watching a sports league of of robots. There may be an enthusiast class >> who who might be interested in that, but the the broader utility is going to be around uh a lot of human labor tasks um that will can ultimately easily be replaced by robots. There's no question. A lot of the hypothesis people have about the form factor of robotics tends to split into two or three camps. One of the camps is that they're going to be uh humanoid or roughly sort of the human ion. A lot of the hypothesis people have about the form factor of robotics tends to split into two or three camps. One of the camps is that they're going to be uh humanoid or roughly sort of the human footprint because so much of the physical world is already designed that way and the tooling is designed that way and so you can just slot robots right in. Others view it as there's going to be much more sort of specialized task specific form factors. Do you have a hypothesis on >> I think it's both. Yeah, I think it's both. There's a lot there there are a lot of jobs and work tasks that are optimized around >> a person being six feet tall and and having arms of a certain length, etc., etc. Uh but I think it'll be both you and and I think the the fact that they're going to have be smart and can learn and to answer your earlier question. ARM is going to be everywhere. Uh we are we have a tremendous amount of technology from a real-time sensing standpoint around microprocessors that will be out at the fingers. They can do perception and sensing. That's all going to be ARM based. uh today whether it's Nvidia or some of the work that Qualcomm does most of the brains the brains that you see in the humanoids those are all all running on ARM uh today so I think for us going going forward robot the robotic industry will be powered by ARM >> are you seeing any early indications I mean you have this great seat to your point where given the ubiquity of ARM and a lot of these different types of devices you can kind of see the future before others in terms of where adoption is happening or where shifts are happening from a technology perspective Are there specific pockets that you think will be most likely the early adopters of robotics that you're starting to see some signal from? >> I think it's still a little bit early because the business models have not been actually figured out. The co the cost of robots are so high, right? Because the cost of robots are so high, people buying the robots themselves. That's a that's a tough it's a tough model to sort of get people's heads around. Does it actually replace? So I think costs need to come down and the business model need to be need to be uh ultimately vetted because another robotic footprints tend to be things like automotive or um certain surgical robots or data or uh excuse me distribution centers right there's a few very sort of bespoke applications that I think are mostly robotic sales today and so that's why I was a little bit curious >> distribution centers for sure I mean that that can ultimately go completely automated right relative to and even to the ultimate to the delivery right uh and and you can question >> to me loosely speaking a a truck that has an autonomous is a robot of sorts. So around factory automation and delivery and distribution that will be one of the very first to be automated. No doubt >> there is increasing you know debate and uh very quickly like policy or EOS around supply chain controls and usage controls around both robotics um and chips and data centers right um sorry I'm going to throw export controls in there so four types of controls um all all uh all of these ply chain controls and usage controls around both robotics um and chips and data centers right um sorry I'm going to throw export controls in there so four types of controls um all all uh all of these controls are relevant for you and now um either in from your end customer perspective or as a rel relatively new entrant to, you know, we're going to own the end product and have a supply chain organization of your own. Like, um, what's your what's your stance on, you know, how uh how protectionist I I realize it's not an American company, but you do a lot of business here. Uh, how [clears throat] protectionist the US or the West should be about manufacturing of chips, creation of data centers, robotics, like what what are your overall stances here? So putting my American citizen hat on for a moment and ARM as you said is not a it's not an American company by our HQs in the UK but >> we have a lot of employee we have I wouldn't say half our employees maybe 30% are in the US I think 40% are in the UK and maybe 30% Asia. So we're a we're a global company but with a huge you know with a huge US uh footprint but as a as an American citizen >> and someone who grew up >> in semiconductors and uh I I remember in the 1980s uh when the US was the leader in semis and Japan Inc. uh started to really get very very aggressive in terms of memory pricing and essentially taking a lot of market share. the US started something called Semitech, you know, back in the day, which is really around how to refortify uh the American semic industry, which I thought at the time was was was the right move and there was a lot of energy around that. [snorts] Uh internet hit, SAS companies were all the were all the rage. People kind of forgot about semis being a strategically important uh asset. But I think it is critically important for the United States to have as much of that technology inside uh on our on US soil. And I would say the same thing to to UK lesser just because of the scale of the UK. But when you think about the the size of the US market uh the criticality of semiconductors to what the US does whether it's Intel, whether it's Micron, uh I think we need more US fabs. uh it's critical for national security. It's also critical for diversification of supply chain. Uh so I'm a I'm a big believer in terms of that as a strategy. I think it's really really critical. You know, as far as the export controls go and we're going to limit we're going to limit the chips because uh we don't want China to to win the race, you know, end quote. You know, my my personal view is that it's an infinite game. I believe first in terms of the race that there's not going to be a winner, the race is going to be over. But you could get to a situation where a lot of the critical technologies are not US-based. >> And that's not going to be a good thing, right? Because well, people say, well, you know, the cost will go down and and and goods are cheaper. But ultimately, and I'm a big believer of this, um, number one, for both national security reasons and economic, you want to be at the forefront of technology because it drives innovation, but it also drives…

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