Ep4. Tesla FSD 12, Imitation Learning Models, The Open vs. Closed AI Model Battle, Delaware’s anti Elon ruling, & a Market Update

27:57And that's the direction that Tesla still has some engineering intervention along the way. But I think they're, I think the engineering team working on this at Tesla is about one tenth the size of the team's cruise control. Well, I mean, that gets back to, you know, this simplicity point, right? Like this approach is removes so much complexity that you should be able to do it with less people. And the fact that you can have something better with less people is is really powerful. So, you know, we talked a little bit about how models, you know, these open source models are, you know, are driving a lot of the improvements at Tesla.

28:39You know, we seem to get model improvements and model updates every day, Bill, you know, maybe I just go through a few of the recent ones. And, and, you know, I want to, I want to explore this open versus close. But, you know, last week we heard about Gemini 1 .5 has a huge expanded context window. You know, and Gemini 1 .5 about a, you know, chat GPT -4 level, then yesterday we get clawed three announcements. Their best model, Opus, is just a little bit better than chat GPT -4. But I think the significant thing there and we have a, we have a slide on this is just, you know, really about the cost breakthrough that, you know, their sonnet level model can do workloads at, you know, a fraction of the price of chat GPT -4, even though it's performing ad or near that quality.

29:29And then we have, you know, those models were trained on a mixture, I think of H100 in prior version of Nvidia chips. The first H100 only trained models, I think, will be Lama 3 and chat GPT -5. So we're hearing rumors that both of those models are going to come out in the major lie time frame. With respect to Lama 3 that was trained on Meta's H100 cluster, rumors are that it has clawed three like performance, which is pretty extraordinary if you're thinking about a fully open -source model. And then chat GPT -5, which we hear is done. And they're simply in kind of their post -training, safety, guard rails, their normal post -training work.

30:18We hear that's going to launch sometime in May versus June. And because that one was trained on H100s, we hear it is like a 2X improvement versus chat GPT -4. But then we hear all the rest of the frontier models are kind of in this holding pattern. Because they're waiting for the B100s to get launched to this Q3, Q4 out of Nvidia, which probably means the next iteration of the frontier models will come out in Q2 of next year, Q2 of 25. That's after chat GPT -5. So Bill, if you go through this bedrock page on AWS, if you just scroll through, you see the Amazon is offering all these different models.

30:58I mean, you can run your workloads on Lama, on Mistral, on Claude, etc. Snowflake today just announced a deal with Mistral. And they're going to have Lama as well. I imagine Databricks will, you know, Microsoft, you can use Lama or you can use Mistral or OpenAI. So where do you think all of this goes in terms of the models that will actually get used by enterprises and consumers in practice? Yes. So I have a lot of different thoughts. My first one, you know, when this new anthropic thing came out and they list all the different math tests and science tests and PG, they're all listed in the same thing.

31:37I wonder if they're racing up a hill. But they're all racing up the same hill. Yeah, there's the thing. Because they're all running these same comparative tests and they're all releasing this data. And I would, I don't know if any of them are creating the type of differentiation that's going to lead to one of them becoming the wholesale winner versus the other. Right. And is this type of micro optimization, you know, in a way that's going to matter to people or to the users? And it's not clear to me. I mean, I see some developers get way more excited about the pricing at the low end of those three choices than they do about the performance of the top end.

32:22So that's one thing. The second thing on my mind, I don't have a lot of logic to put around this. It's more of an intuition. I wonder if these companies can simultaneously try and compete with Google to be this consumer app that you're going to rely on to get you information. So you could call that Wikipedia on steroids, you know, Google search read defined whatever market you want to call that and simultaneously be great at enterprise models. And I just don't know if they can do both. I really don't. And maybe that'll get to the third thing, which is more the essence of your question. Like, what am I hearing about and seeing about when it comes to companies that are actually utilizing these things?

33:06You know, the Tesla example was interesting because, you know, they start with these bedrock components that are open source. And one thing that happened in the past 20 years, it happened very slowly, but we definitely got there. CIOs at large companies, they used to be an IBM shop or an Oracle shop or a Microsoft shop. Like that was their platform. They slowly got to the place where most of the best CIOs were open source first. And so for any new project, they start, you know, these would be skeptical of open source and it's flipped completely the other way. Like, oh, is there an open source choice we can use?

33:42And the reason is they don't want, there's more competition and two, they don't want to get stuck on anything. And so when I look at what I see going on in the startup world, they might start with one of these, you know, really well -known service models that's proprietary, but the minute they start thinking about production, they become very cost focused. And on the inference side, and they'll play these things off of one another and they'll run a whole bunch of different ones. I saw one startup that it moved between four different platforms. And I just think that that competition is very different than the competition to compete with Google on this consumer thing.

34:19And I'll give you another example. Like, like I was talking to somebody, if you had a legal application you wanted to use, you'd be better off with a smaller model that had been trained on a bunch of legal data. It wouldn't need some of the training of this overall LM. And it might be way cheaper to have something that's very proprietary, or not proprietary, but very focused from a vertical standpoint. And you could imagine that in a whole bunch of different verticals. So it just strikes me that this on the B2B side, this stuff's getting cut up and into a bunch of different pieces, where a bunch of different parties could be more competitive.

35:00And where those components are most likely to be open source first. Yes. Yes. I mean, you're causing me to think a couple of different things. One, I've said in the past, if I was Sam Altman running OpenAI, I think I might rename the company chat GPT and just focused on the multi trillion dollar opportunity to replace Google. Because I think winning at both beating Google at consumer and beating Microsoft at enterprise, Andy wants to beat Nvidia at building chips. Those are three big battle fronts. And if I think about the road to a AI, building memory, building all this thing that's going to differentiate you in the consumer competition, that just seems best aligned with who they are, what they're doing.

35:49I mean, chat GPT has become the verb in the age of AI. They replace Google at the start. Nobody's saying we're barting something. They're saying we're chat GPT and something. So I think that they have a leg up there. When I look at the competition in enterprise, I think Anthropic was up at the Morgan Stanley conference this morning. And they said, they're hiring their sales force went from two people last year to 25 this year. Think of the tens of thousands of sales people at Microsoft and Amazon, etc. that you got to go compete with. Now, of course, they're also partnering with Amazon. But when you think about that, these guys, there's going to be all this margin stacking bill.

36:31So Amazon's got to get paid and Anthropics got to get paid and Nvidia's got to get paid. Now, if you use an open source model, you can pull one of those pieces of the margin stacking out. Right. So now this is just Microsoft getting paid using llama, llama three or llama two. They don't have to pay for the use of that model. And Nvidia gets paid. So I think in the competitive dynamics of an open marketplace, right, that that enterprise game is going to be tough for two different reasons for these model businesses. Number one, Zuckerberg is going to drive the price. Right. He's going to give away frontier -esque models on the cheap.

37:09Okay. And that's going to be highly disruptive to your ability to stack margin. If I'm a CIO of JP Morgan or some other, you know, large institution, do I really want to pay a lot for that model? I'd rather have the benefit of open, right? Because then I can, you know, move my data around a little bit more fluidly. I get the benefit, the safety benefits of an open source model. And I'm not sending my data to open AI. I'm not sending my data to some of these places. That's a huge point you just made. It is in addition to everything we said, which is a lot of the big companies have concerns about their data being co -mingled or uploaded even at all into these proprietary models.

37:52And so it's not it's it's it's not just I think the challenge for them in enterprise is not just how do I build an enterprise fleet to go compete with the largest hyper -scaler in the world who are great enterprise businesses and you got to compete with data breaks, and snowflake, etc. But I think the second thing is just, you know, there is this bias, this tendency that you say has evolved over a couple decades of open versus closed, which then, you know, brings me a little bit to this, you know, the wait, wait, wait, there's one more element that I think that's important to for everyone to understand.

38:25One of the reasons open source is so powerful is because it because it can be replicated for free, you end up with just so much more experimentation. So it turns out right now there are multiple startups who believe they have an opportunity hosting open source models. So they're propping up Lama 3 or Mistraw as a server provider competing with Amazon. But they're going to tune into a little different way. They're going to play with it a different way. So you're the number of places you can go by one of these open source models delivered as a service is you have multiple choices. It's been proliferate and that creates optionality.

39:05There's just so much more experimentation that's going to happen. On top of the data privacy problem, the pricing stuff you talked about. So there's a lot of different elements that make me think that the open source component models are going to be way more successful in the enterprise and it's a really tough thing to compete with. Now go ahead. It kind of brings into stark relief a big debate that erupted this week, certainly on the Twitter's with Elon's lawsuit that he filed. And part of that was about this not for profit to for profit conversion. That's to me a little bit less interesting.

39:48Don't want to talk a lot about that. But it blew the doors wide open on this open versus closed debate. And the potential that exists here for regulatory capture. Nobody's more thoughtful about this topic than you. I think I saw somebody tweet this two by two matrix. It says dividing every conversation up between Mark and Benode and Elon and Sam. But we saw a lot of a very sharp opinions expressed. So help us think about the risk of regulatory capture and why this moment is so important. Yeah. And I happen to mention this when I did my regulatory capture speech at the all -in conference. I mentioned very briefly when I showed a picture of Sam Altman that I was worried that they were attempting to use fear mongering about doom or ism and AI to build regulation that would be particularly beneficial to the proprietary models.

40:58And then after that there were rumors that people at some of the big model companies were going around saying we should kill open source or we should make it illegal or we should get the government to block it. And Benode started basically saying that literally like yes we should block open source. And that became very concerning to me. I think it obviously became concerning to Mark and Drieson as well. And for me the biggest reason that it's concerning is because I think it could become a precedent where all companies would try and eliminate open source. And there's a good reason why. I mean we just talked about it's a hell of a fucking competitor.

41:39Like I wouldn't want to go up against it. But it's also really amazing for the world. It's great for startups. It's amazing for innovation. It's great for worldwide prosperity. Think about Tesla. We just talked about all this open source that they're using. Yeah. Yeah. So it's the last thing I would want to see happen. But we do live in this world where where these pieces exist. And I would urge people to read. We'll put a link in a political article that shows the amount of lobbying that has been done on behalf of the large proprietary models. And I don't think you'll find literally the only thing that comes close perhaps and people will think I'm being outlandish.

42:21But is SBF who was also lobbying at this kind of level. But this political article shows they have three or four different super PACs. They're putting people, they're literally inserting people onto the staffs as a different congressman and senators to try and influence the outcome here. I think we may be escaped this. Like I think the open source models are so prolific right now that maybe we've gotten past it. And I also think their competitiveness has shown that there's a reason why they would want to stop them. I think at the time they started, maybe that wasn't clear. But I think it's remarkably clear right now.

43:03I also don't believe in the Dumerism scenario. Someone who I admire quite a bit, Steve Pinker posted a link to this article by Michael Totten where he goes through, I think in a very sophisticated way, the different arguments. And I would urge people maybe to read that on their own. But yeah, I don't, I don't, for me, if you want to spread the Dumerism, let's get people to tell that story that aren't running billion dollar companies that are taking hundreds of millions out and giving it to their employees. I mean, there's a level of bias that's obvious here. And so I'd rather listen to a Dumerism argument from someone who's not standing to gain from regulation.

43:50Yeah, I mean, I think you saw this tweet from Martin Casado that was in response to Venaud comparing open source, would you use open source for the Manhattan project? Which really kind of opened up this box even more. What's your way in a little bit here? Just if you're in Washington and you're hearing these things like, we can't allow these types of models to be used on things like this. We saw India's now requiring approval to release models. That also was I think a scary development for people in the open source community. But again, just reinforce like, why should we not be worried about open source AI models?

44:43How do they send us to their place? In the in the in the Totten article of Pinker uses an analogy that I just love, which he says, like, you could spread a Dumerism argument that a self -driving car would just go 200 miles an hour and run over everybody. But he says, if you look at the evolution of self -driving cars, they're getting safer and safer and safer. It's not we don't program the AI to give them this singular purpose that overrides all the other things they've been taught and then they go crazy. Like, that's not what's happening. That's not how the technology works. That's not how we use the technology.

45:24I think the whole article is great, but I think, you know, and look, I also think Pinker is a really smart human. He's also one of the biggest outspoken proponents of nuclear, which is another topic that I think has been widely misconstrued. Anyway, I'm a more of an optimist about technology. These kind of Dumerism things go way back to the Luddites, hence the definition of the word, right, and ever since then. And someone else tweeted, like, you know, it'd be like telling the farmer, you know, look out for the tractor, like it's going to ruin, you know, it's just not how our world evolves. Well, the reason I think this is so important is because, you know, the competition that's going to come from these models, all the evidence suggests that it moves us to a better place, but not worse place.

46:18However, during these moments, right, where, you know, you do have a new thing and it does sound scary. And then you have all these people coming to Washington saying, Hey, we can't allow all this experimentation. We can allow these open source models. What I worry about is that that can actually win the day like it has in India. But, you know, I was in Washington last week talking to leadership in both the House and the Senate about, you know, a program near and dear to me called Invest America. But the conversation about AI came up with many senators and many senior leadership folks in the House.

46:53And one of them said to me when he was asking about AI, I, you know, I said I was worried about, you know, excessive government oversight getting persuaded, particularly as it relates to open source models. And he, he said, don't worry. He said, you know, we add Sam out, Sam Altman out here and we know what he's up to. And I thought that was, you know, and he ended by saying, we need competition. Like the way we stay ahead of China is we need competition. So that was highly encouraging to me, you know, from a senior member. It's interesting. That's so great to hear. And I think, you know, this China thing comes up all the time.

47:30Like the one thing that would cause us to get way behind China is if we played without open source and they had it like us. Like, and the other thing I would just say is, you know, many academics I talked to are like, I have way more trust in open source where I can get in and see and analyze what's going on. And, you know, the other side of this, because we talked about LLM or, you know, AI competing both in the B2B side and the B2C side. On the consumer side, you know, the Gemini release from Google, I think is proof of the type of, you know, the Google Gemini model was much more similar to something autocratic that you might equate with a communist society.

48:16Like it's intentionally limiting the information you can have and painting it in a very specific way. And so, yeah, I'm more afraid of the project. Yeah, they're effectively imposing a world view by massaging the kernel here in ways that we understand. It's a black box influencing our opinions. And, you know, I just find it ironic in this moment time that, you know, the person putting the most dollars up against the open source is somebody we were critical of, you know, the Washington was pretty critical of a couple years ago, which is Zuckerberg. And, you know, the fact of the matter is you need to have a million H -100s.

48:53He's going to have, you know, hundreds of thousands of B -100s. You need somebody who has a business model that can fund this level of frontier magic on these open source models. And the good news it appears we have it. Yeah. That's awesome. I'm thrilled you heard that. Yeah, no, the, there was another interesting case over the course of last couple of weeks that I know you and I. By the way, I actually one last thing on this because I just recalled a conversation I was having with the Senator. Like, let's assume, let's assume that you, you, you, you, you do merisms right and you have to be worried about this.

49:32What are the odds? What are the odds that our government could put together a piece of effective legislation that would actually solve the problem? Right. Right. It's slow. Well, I mean, I think the cost, you know, the cost to society is certainly greater when you look at, you know, kind of the tail risk of it. But again, you know, how the node frames it? What, what, what I get worried about? I have no problem, you know, in, in him having an active defense and wanting to do everything in open AI's best interests. You know, I just don't want to see us attack technological progress, right? Which open, which open source obviously contributes to en route to that, right?

50:16Just compete against them heads up and win heads up like that's fine. But let's not try to try to, you know, cap the other guys by taking their knees out before they even get started. So, you know, back, back to what I was saying, you know, speaking of government's role in business, you know, a couple of weeks ago, state of Delaware, the chance record, you know, this judge, Kathleen McCormick, she, you know, pretty shockingly struck down Elan's 2018 pay package. Remember, the company was on the verge of bankruptcy. They basically cut a pay package with him where he took nothing if the company didn't improve.

50:50But if the company hit certain targets, he would get paid out, you know, 1 % tranches of options, I think over 12 tranches, which because the company, right, had this extraordinary turnaround, you know, he achieved his goals. So now she's kind of Monday morning quarterbacking, she's looking back and she says his pay package is unfathomable. And she said the board never asked the $55 billion question bill. Was it even necessary to pay him this to retain him and to achieve the company's goals? So of course, this can be a kill appeal to the Delaware Supreme Court and it will be. But, you know, in response to this Elan, and I think many others just said, hold on a second here, what the hell just happened?

51:35You know, the state of Delaware has had this historical advantage in corporate law because of its predictability. And its predictability wasn't because of the code, but it was because the judiciary, right, there was a lot of precedent in the state of Delaware. And this seemed to turn that totally on its head. He said he was going to move, you know, incorporation to the state of Texas. You know, we're starting to see, you know, other companies follow suit and other people talking about this. So what was your reaction, you know, you know, seen, you know, something that was, I think most of us thought was highly unlikely and pretty shocking.

52:10Yeah, well, first of all, I think it's super important for everyone to pay attention to this. I don't, I don't actually think it's just an outlier event. I think it's so unprecedented in Delaware's history that it really marks a moment for everyone to pay attention. And there's a couple of things I would pay attention to. One day to point you, you left out, which came up recently is the lawyers that pursued this case are asking for five or six billion dollars in payment. And it turns out when you bring a derivative suit in the in in Delaware. There have been cases where people ask for a percent and the judge gets to kind of decide that and, you know, if you step back and look, the this is a victimless crime.

52:57And I think that's the thing that makes Delaware look like a kangaroo court here. The everyone knows the lawyer grabs someone that only had nine shares. And those nine shares went way up, but it's kind of silly because it's so small anyway. So how could how could a client with nine shares lead to a multi billion dollar award to a lawyer? And that's only true. If you've created a a a bounty hunter system, you know, a bureaucratic bounty hunter system, there's something California called Pagga that's kind of evolved this way. And and if that's the new norm in Delaware, that's that's really, really concerning.

53:39The other thing that's that's different here is the stock went way way up. So I think we've all become accustomed to when stock mitigators, you know, grab a handful of shareholders and bring a shareholder to lawsuit and we're like, oh, yeah, unfortunately, that's become a way of life. But, but to attack companies that go way up, you know, I, I would two things. One, I would offer this pay package. I looked at it in detail to any CEO I work with. And I think they would all turn it down because there was no, there's no cash, no guarantee. And the first trunch was a two X of the stock. So like that's fantastic.

54:21I think the biggest problem with compensation packages and you may, may tackle that some other day is a misalignment with shareholders where where people are getting paid when the stock doesn't move. That's RSUs do. And here, by the way, that's the standard in corporate America. We have this grift where people make a ton of money and the stock doesn't do anything. Look at the pay package for Mary Barat at GM. So the first trunch here was if the stock doubled. And I would offer that to anyone. I would also say, if any other CEO took a package like this, I would in a public company. I would be very encouraged to consider buying a lot of it.

55:00So it's, it may be like one of the most, you know, shareholder aligned incentive packages ever, which is exactly what you would think Delaware courts would be looking after. And I assess as well, which is hold on, hold on, they're subject. But so it's, I think it's just really bad. And it does show a new side of Delaware, you know, one that they haven't shown before. And so I think everyone has to pay attention. Right. No, I mean, it's shocking. And if you, you know, I was a corporate lawyer in my, my first life, as you know, if you actually go and look at the, the actual corporate law code in the state of Delaware, right, it's almost word for word, the same as Texas, the same as California and so on.

55:53The point here is it's not that Delaware has code, you know, a legal code around, around corporations that's so much different than every other state. What has set it apart? Is it has way more legal precedent, way more trials that have occurred and judges who have interpreted that in a way that is very shareholder aligned, shareholder friendly. So the big, I think, and they're known for letter of the law. So correct. And so here we have a moment. And the reason it's so shocking is because it's at odds with all of the precedent that people had come to expect. So I think there are going to be left out, we left out they had 70 % shareholder approval.

56:34I mean, and there was a low pro high low probability event that happened to happen. And you can't look at that after the fact and say, oh, it was obvious. This was going to happen. You know, right. I think I think that, you know, if this is, if this stands, so I imagine corporations right now are in holding patterns, right? Elon is moving, you know, reincorporating in Texas. I think a lot of other corporations will stay pending the Delaware Supreme Court appeals ruling. Yeah. Right. If they overturn, overturn this, this judge is ruling, then I think you may be back to the status quo in the state of Delaware.

57:12But if they uphold the ruling and deny, I mean, I think Elon said, despite all the goodness that's occurred, saving the company from bankruptcy, this means he effectively gets paid zero for the last five years. I mean, it's such an outlandish outcome. So if it gets, if it gets upheld, I expect you're going to see significant flight from the state of Delaware by people, people reaccorporate in these other states that, you know, frankly, are pretty friendly as well. Brad, I just thought of something. So if it's upheld, and if these lawyers are paid anything as a percentage, anything other than maybe just their hourly fee.

57:50So if those two things happen, I would make the argument that every company in Delaware has to move to a different doma style because they could be sued in a future derivative lawsuit for the risk they've taken by staying in Delaware. Oh my god. Oh my god. You're so right. You are so right. Oh my drop on that. They, they, you know, so now on the boards that I sit on, I have to warn them that if they stay in the state of Delaware, then they're knowingly and negligently taking on this incremental risk. Absolutely. Oh wow. You know, let's just wrap with this, a quick market check. You know, one of the things I like to do is be responsive to the feedback we get.

58:38A lot of people, you know, loved, you know, kind of some of the charts we had put up on kind of the market check on the on the last show. So, you know, we get asked about this all the time. We set on the prior pod, you know, prices have run a lot this year. And the background noise around macro, you know, has not improved. Arguably it's getting a little worse. Influency's running a little hotter. You know, rates are not expected to come down as much. So I, so I just a quick check on the multiples. Of companies that we really care about. Microsoft Amazon Apple, Meta, Google, and Nvidia. And I just want to walk through this really quick.

59:16So this is a chart that just shows the multiples between March of 21 and March of 24, right? And so if we look at, let's start with Meta, you know, you can look at that time. Their multiples gone from about 20 times earnings to about 23 times earnings, right? So it's a little bit higher. Take a look at Google, you know, it's multiples come from, has gone from about 25 earnings to now down to just below 20 times earnings. Now this is to be expected. I mean, we've been having this debate about whether or not, you know, Google search share is going to go down and the impact that that will have. And so, you know, this is just the market's voting machine at a moment time saying, hey, we hear that debate and we're a little bit more worried about those future cash flows than we were in March of 21, which makes a lot of sense to me.

1:00:04If you look at Apple, it, to, on that one, I mean, the Jim and I released the world's looking at you with this lens. And then you release this thing that, and then you trip, I mean, they basically trip, right? And, and, and we know the trip because they've apologized for tripping. And so, it's just not good. Like, it's not confidence inspiring. Well, and now you're, you're seeing the drum beats starting, you know, you and I are getting the text, the emails, the drum beats are out, whether Sundar is going to, you know, you know, make it past this moment in time. I mean, listen, I think boards have one job.

1:00:43Higher, fire, the CEO, who leads the company forward, can they execute against the plan? And I think that if I was on the board of Google, that's the question I'd be asking at this moment time. Not as a good human being, not as a smart product guy, not as a good technologist, not what's happened over the course of the next last 10 years. But at this moment time, do we have any risk of innovators dilemma? And is this the team? Is this the CEO who can lead us through what is likely to be a tricky moment? Just to finish it off, Apple's multiple is a little bit lower, right? That also makes sense to me.

1:01:17You see what's happening in China, you know, some, some concerns about their, you know, they get $20 billion a year from Google, you know, like what, what happens to that? In the case of Microsoft, they're multiple is a little higher. But, you know, again, these multiples are all in the range. And then the final two, you know, Apple's multiple, or I mean, Amazon's multiple is actually quite a bit lower, you know, here. And so that's interesting to me. I actually think the retail business is doing better. I actually think the cloud business is doing better. And now that stock looks cheaper to me.

1:01:49And then in video, of course, is the one that everybody's talking about. And this goes back to where we started the show. I mean, if you look at Nvidia's multiple to start the year bill, you know, so hover there right above December 23. It's multiple was at, you know, like a five, 10 year low, right? But why? Because earnings exploded last year from five bucks to 25, you know, bucks. It's, it's multiple is obviously come up here a little bit at the start of the year. But you can see it's well below some of its historical really frothy multiples. But I think the question in my mind, and we're big and share video shareholders, like in other people's minds is, you know, is this earnings trained durable for Nvidia, right?

1:02:33Are these revenues durable? Have we pulled forward this training data? We showed that chart a couple weeks ago that we think the future build, build out of compute and super compute of B100s of everything is longer and wider than people think. And then the interesting thing like when you see that note out of Klarna last week bill and what they were able to achieve, this is the, this is really the question. At the end of the day, our companies and consumers getting massive benefits out of the models and inference that's running on these chips. And you know, if the answer is no, then all of these stocks are going lower.

1:03:09If the answer is yes, then they they probably have a lot of room to run. But that's the quick, you know, maybe we'll do this, you know, at the end of each of them, do a quick market check. But why don't we leave it there? It's good seeing you. Next time, get back out here. Let's do this together again. All right. Take it easy.

1:03:38As a reminder to everybody, just our opinions, not investment advice.