Speaker unverified: commitment

Transcript context

…Yeah. I guess my statement with the dream is dying depends on exactly what you think it’s going to be doing. Like Claude Code is a general model that can do a lot of things, but it depends a lot on integrations and other things. I bet Claude Code could do a fairly good job of doing your email, and the hardest part is figuring out how to give it information and how to get it to be able to send your emails and stuff like this. But I think it goes back to what is the “one model to rule everything” ethos, which is just like a thing in the cloud that handles your entire digital life and is way smarter than everybody. So it’s an interesting leap of faith to go from Claude Code becomes that—which, in some ways, there are some avenues for that—but I do think that the rhetoric of the industry is a little bit different. I think the immediate thing we will feel next as a normal person using LLMs will probably be related to something trivial, like making figures. Right now LLMs are terrible at making figures. Is it because we are getting served the cheap models with less inference compute than behind the scenes? Maybe with some cranks we can already get better figures, but if you ask today to draw a flowchart of X, Y, Z, it’s most of the time terrible. And it is kind of a very simple task for a human. I think it’s almost easier sometimes to draw something than to write something. Yeah, the multimodal understanding does feel like something that is odd, that it’s not better solved.…

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