20VC: Cerebras CEO on Why Raise $1BN and Delay the IPO | NVIDIA Showing Signs They Are Worried About Growth | Concentration of Value in Mag7: Will the AI Train Come to a Halt | Can the US Supply the Energy for AI with Andrew Feldman

27:13And that's on all of us. I think we have an obligation to deliver drugs that are more efficacious, to deliver better health care, to make aging less painful, make the looking after of aged parents or sick parents. You go through society's ills and woes if we are going to consume this amount of power, the burden is on us to deliver value for it. If we use it and don't do that, then it's not a gain for society. Do you think that's controllable? You know, creating Ghibli or Ghibli images, I get it wrong, isn't particularly value inducing, but it churns a huge amount of compute and energy. Can we control that?

27:50That's like... It's a very hard question. And I, you know, I'm one voice in this. The problem with markets is that they do a lot of things that aren't productive in order to get one that is very productive. Ghibli may or may not have been net societally gain, but maybe the technology that is used in Ghibli is used for x-ray crystallography and later is fundamental to finding major scientific breakthroughs. I mean, that's the messiness. At any given point in time, right, you can point to in a thousand poppy strategy, which is what a market is, right? A market has a lot of bad ideas to get a few good ones.

28:28That's your business. Your business is investing behind a lot of big ideas, most of which fail. And the market is that writ large. And so in that environment, you can always point to, oh, that was a dipshit investment, Harry. Why'd you invest with them? I mean, they blew up. You can always say that after the fact. Look at that. They're using a ton of energy for that. That's not useful. Let's see. And so I think the answer is we need to be sure that at a societal level where we use government dollars, where we use tax breaks, where we use permitting breaks. We are sure that we're giving these to disproportionately to projects that matter to society.

29:06Do you think Trump's done more to help or to hurt the US AI effort? I think it's confusing. On net, it's probably more to help. The Biden administration was misguided and afraid. The Trump administration, I think to his credit, they surrounded himself with some smart people in the AI space. On net, it's been positive. When you look at what is required in terms of energy, is nuclear unavoidable or the sole solution to be the providing force of energy for this next generation of AI? No, it's not unavoidable. It's a very reasonable decision for countries that don't have lots of alternatives. You know, Canada has more falling water than anywhere else on earth.

29:48The opportunity for Canada to develop the cheapest power on earth is mind-boggling. There is cheap power in lots of places. But in order for countries that wish to and don't have the natural resources of Finland that has geothermal or Iceland that has geothermal, Canada that has falling water, nuclear is a very reasonable and cost-effective strategy, especially over a several-decade view. What worries you most today, Andrew? I do think of this idea that to consume the resources we're consuming, we have to be sure that we produce some extraordinary outcomes. I worry that the opportunity is so big that as a community, we're running sort of helter skelter at it, that actually sometimes instead of running where you trip and fall and graze your knee and chip a tooth, if you stopped and thought and marched, you might get further over a 30 or 60 or 90 day period.

30:44Do you worry about the concentration of value in Mag7? They now make up more of the S &P than they pretty much ever have done in history. And that concentration of value is very real. If AI hits a speed bump in any way, the market could derail significantly. And the multiplier effect of that is felt by everyone. Right. I think the risk there is not that they consume that much, that they are that much value. That's not the risk. I think they're that much value because we believe the future economy will reward that. I think the issue is that people then think the S &P is a safe investment or a safer investment than it might be.

31:24The risk is the mismatch in the mental model people have. Risk comes in financial markets where people fundamentally underestimate risk. When risk is priced properly, then what happens is your outcomes are not surprising. If people continue to think the S &P is sort of an index of the global economy, and it's not, it's 30 % or 50 % seven companies, then they're exposed to sector risk that they weren't signing up for. They thought they were diversified. And in fact, they're heavily dependent on a very narrow sector. And that's a risk. That seems to me to be a challenge in the new world order. And all the advice that sort of the pundits give, you know, a diversified portfolio, when the world changes and that portfolio is not, you keep holding it and it's not diversified anymore because of consolidation, then there's real risk.

32:21Do you think the risk is priced properly when you look at NVIDIA at four and a half trillion? I think they've proven themselves to be the greatest company in the first quarter of the 21st century. They've proven themselves to be extraordinary company in the first quarter of the century. And I don't know if four trillion is right, but I think a very big number, maybe it's too low, is right because of what they've achieved. When we look at, we said before about the insatiable demand that we cannot predict or anticipate, what are the bottlenecks today in your mind? again we had jonathan at grok on and he was like actually you know i had someone come and demand five times the supply that i have in total that was from one customer supply is mine how do you think about the bottlenecks that we have to reach the insatiable demand that you mentioned i think if you go back to planning if you've got customers demanding 5x that your capacity i mean probably didn't get your planning right right oh you probably should have should have planned better I think there are bottlenecks at every level that are real and meaningful.

33:21I think the first one is expertise. We have fundamental limitations in AI expertise. We're not making enough AI practitioners. We're not making enough data scientists who understand data pipelines. Our universities aren't minting enough. Our challenges in the U.S. with immigration don't help that. We have historically sucked the best and the brightest, first on J1s to come to our schools and then to H1s to stay. If that is not our policy, we need to make them. If the government decides that that is not the way they want to build a workforce, instead they want to build it out of people who live here, we need to do a better job of training those people.

33:58We need to do a better job of teaching them in K-12. We need to do a better job of educating them in our universities in order to make the number of engineers we need to meet this demand. That's a bottleneck. And it's why the best and the brightest are getting such extraordinary compensation. Is the war for talent completely out of control? You're seeing your zucks of the world spend hundreds of millions on one person. Do you think that's a blown up anomaly or do you see the war for talent being unprecedented? There are engineers who have skills that no number of other engineers working together can achieve.

34:31There are scientists who do, who have ideas and who have brains that are, can't be replicated by lots of other talented people working together. ought they to be paid more than world-class soccer players i have no idea maybe maybe not i mean inherently yes from an economic rationale standpoint yes the value generated from a chief scientist at open ai if they add 50 billion dollars of enterprise value to pay them a billion dollars is worth it that's what we have to think about i mean we've paid charlie sheen two and a half million dollars an episode for two and a half men i'm pretty sure that there are lots of people whose net productivity to society is above that.

35:10And he still spends it all. I just saw the show, was it Netflix or Prime? What a sad story of somebody who was so self-destructive and so talented. But should we be paying soccer players or basketball players? I have no idea. And I don't spend a minute worrying about whether we're paying extraordinary people too much. No company ever went bankrupt by paying extraordinary people too much. If you want to go bankrupt, pay mediocre people too much. That's how you mess up. Nobody's ever struggled by paying truly extraordinary people too much. What's the other bottleneck? You said expertise is one. TSMC can't build fabs fast enough.

35:46The truth is that these are both for TSMC and Samsung. These fabs are the most amazing manufacturing plants on the planet. These are$30 billion,$50 billion factories. Their ability to build them quickly enough is very much limited. That in turn limits and keeps the supply below where it would like to be of chips, not just our chips or NVIDIA chips, but everybody's chips, below where it might otherwise be. Keeps the cost up. Right now, there's a shortage of data center capacity. There's a huge amount of investment that has gone into that. There's a lot of words. But where are these gigawatt facilities that everybody's been talking about?

36:27Everybody's committing to them. Where are they? Well, they're not up yet. How long does that take? You know, somebody like for Elon, who's the fastest in the world and maybe the best at building plants and large construction projects, it takes six months, eight months. And for the rest of the world, it takes a year and a half, maybe longer. Are we investing enough in data center builder? I mean, it is one of the most insanely hot categories now in terms of investment properties. I'm coming from like a pure Wall Street mindset. Like every Wall Street guy wants to be in data centers. It has a structure that they really understand, right?

37:02It looks like a bond to them. It looks like a piece of real estate. You get a tenant, they pay rent every month. You can loan against that. You get an investment grade tenant that's basically a bond. It has the advantage of falling into a category or a pattern that is really well understood in the debt market and in the capital markets. And that's an advantage. CoreWeave and some of their sort of financial engineering and innovations there help the world see that. Like many things, lots of people will enter, the smart will make money, the less sophisticated will lose money. Building data centers is not for everyone.

37:41How will you lose money building data centers? I think if the best can build them for 8 million a megawatt, and you're spending 12 or 14, that's how you lose money. You lose money because it begins as, can you get access to low-cost power? It then continues to, once you have access, can you get permitting? Does that take long, or do you have real access that gets you fast permitting? Once it becomes a construction project, can you keep control of your costs? Once it's finished, can you keep good tenants in it? The ways to lose money in property are large and many. There's no free lunch there either.

38:12When you are trying to go unbelievably quickly, it's harder and harder to be disciplined and not make mistakes. To what extent is it important to be fully horizontal? We hear about Zuck wanting the data center build out to be just immense in terms of size and scale. To what extent does it need to be horizontal versus vertical? It is completely unclear. The most successful two companies to date, OpenAI and Anthropic, neither are vertical. OpenAI used Azure, 100 % infrastructure for years. And Anthropic has used a combination of AWS and Google. And so neither are vertically integrated to date. Now, whether that's the right strategy going forward, whether they'd make those decisions again, but it's clear that it's not the only strategy, that there are plenty of working models where you are not fully integrated from chip through system, through data center, through software, all the way to the top.

39:07Again, sorry to cite it, but it's kind of handy having just done it. Jonathan said that you would definitely have OpenAI and Anthropic build out their own chips, because then they would have control of their own destiny. Do you think OpenAI and Anthropic build their own chips so they don't have self-reliance on NVIDIA in the way that they do today? I think that there is a long history of software companies failing to build chips. The list is very large. Whether OpenAI can do it, whether they can do it through partnership with other vendors, with Broadcom, with smaller, more innovative companies is an open question.

39:42Companies at the size of Microsoft have been unable to deliver chips. There are plenty of examples, as you look across the Fang group, where chips were tried. I mean, probably the most successful is Google. And they're 10 years in. Modern software does not fit well in a chip-making framework. Weekly sprints don't work well on two-year-long projects. Move fast, break things often is not the way you think in the chip world. The way you think in the chip world is measure twice before you cut once because your bugs cost you six months and tens of millions of dollars. It's a very different mentality.

40:16And where there's been success, it has frequently been acquired. Apple got into the chip business through buying PA Semi. Amazon got into the chip business through acquiring Annapurna. Google acquired the talent from a collection of companies and then set it in a BU that was aside and under somebody who had enormous respect in the organization and OARS and had a 10 or 15 year view. These are things that have been challenging in many companies. Chip building is an MBA nightmare. air. Your analysis that says Intel had, you know, between 2000 and 2010, some of the world's leading architects, the world's leading fabs, and proved completely unable to build a working cell phone part.

41:00And you ask yourself why they had everything they needed. And you know, you do an MBA chart, and it's like, it's impenetrable. And the answer is, this is really hard. Very small sort of mental model differences produce tremendously different results. How did every leader miss the largest largest compute market in the first part of the 21st century? How did AMD miss it? How did ARM win it? All the leaders missed it. And then you say, all right, maybe there's something in the guts here that I don't understand, right? You got to really get in there. And it's not on a PowerPoint. It's not in a two by two.

41:35It's not at some sort of consultant level. It is deep in the DNA of the small number of people who can build these things. You know, we are lucky at Cerebris. We've got one of the top six or eight teams in the world. Other startups don't. What does that market look like, do you think, in 10 years' time? I know 10 years is a huge amount of time given where we're at. But in 10 years' time, is it a monopoly market with one taking 90 %? Is it like cloud? Which part of the chip market? Are we talking about AI Silicon or we're talking about Silicon in general? I would say Silicon in general. Yeah, absolutely not.

42:11One takes 90%. Even at Intel's strength, they had dominance in x86 and zero market share on the cell phone and almost no share in the switching market. Broadcom had dominance in the switching silicon market, which is a form of processor in silicon, and no share in x86 or other forms of compute. Yeah, it will not all accrue to one or two companies. Andrew, how do you think about the importance of margin today as a business as Cerebris? I think the reason we were able to raise at a higher valuation and from better investors and more money is because we had them. And others who were out looking for money had negative margins.

42:55As you prepare for being a credible public company, people do look at your margins. That's a really important part of moving from being an idea to being a real company. What are NVIDIA's margins today? Extraordinary. Some of the highest in history for a hardware company. How do you think about that? Is that just pricing power which they are taking advantage of? Absolutely. I mean, the short answer is, why does it make sense for AWS to build a training part? Well, because they want to get rid of the 78 % gross margin that NVIDIA is charging. It might be, on the high-end chips, 85%. People don't like that historically.

43:33Historically, people sort of put that in the back of the mind and they remember it. When Intel stumbled, the number of people who came out of the woodwork to kick them when they were down was extraordinary. And it was sort of years of pent up frustration when the giant stumbles. We've seen that again and again. Speaking of that giant stumbling and being built, do you think sovereignty will be a big enough reason why incumbents are built? We have like Mistral, a model provider in Europe, and kind of sovereignty is their core play. Do you believe that is a sufficient enough core play to be a giant?

44:05Well, I think right now, sovereignty plus the fact that we deliver their inference through the fastest hardware on earth makes their product, the Le Chat product, really compelling. They're using their advantages to compete. There were in Europe too few AI labs that are doing interesting work. They sort of looked around and sort of used strategic advantage. You know, we want to be the Europe's leader. You know, played that card really well. hats off to them and then they raised at a huge valuation a final one just in terms of geography deep seek obviously had that moment and it kind of solidified the concerns around china how do you feel about china today as a pressing concern towards the u.s in terms of the race towards agi between the two do you hate the way that it's posited as like china versus the u.s the ai race how do you feel about that i think it benefits neither the position we're in the arms race certainly didn't help either the US or Russia in the 80s and 90s.

45:06We both spent money we wish on weapons we wish would have been spent on infrastructure, people or other things. We will be much stronger if we can find ways to peacefully engage. Before these issues, we knew the guys at Didi and ByteDance and Ali and Baidu extremely well. They're talented engineers trying to build cool stuff. I think our governments are at loggerheads, and that's a problem. We had a huge opportunity in 2019 to do a deal in China, and I decided to pass because I didn't think it was the right thing to do. Long before the Department of Commerce limited exports to China, I didn't think it was right.

45:44And I was concerned about how the technology would be used. The realpolitik right now is that they're better at making drones, they're better at making robots, their government has an extraordinarily aggressive policy in AI. For years, they backstopped their venture groups, right? So if you lost money in an AI company, the government would make you whole. Imagine that, Harry. Imagine how much money you could make if the government of the UK offset some of your losses from AI companies that didn't work out. You know, we have real work to do in the US. What work do you have to do that you haven't done?

46:17What would you like to see I think China thought long and hard about their power infrastructure. Their form of government allowed them to plan strategically. Our decentralized form of government has left us with sort of a patchwork of power infrastructures. Even if the federal government wants to support you, their local regulations, like at the city and county level of towns, that can interfere with a project and set a project back billions of dollars. I mean, Samsung built a fab in Texas, and they had to change the design of a fab because of a local fire ordinance. And the US government worked for years to get deployment of billions of dollars in Texas.

46:57And a local fire ordinance set them back eight months, 10 months, and caused them to redesign the fab. That's a problem that we have to sort of collectively work through. We have the premier universities, historically drawn talent from around the world. If you look at the great CEOs in our industry, Janssen, Hawk Tan, Lisa, I mean, you go down the list at Sundar, at Microsoft, they came and their parents came. We gotta take that really seriously. You don't buy the whole, well, actually a load of people actually just abused H1s and we'll just move to O1s, which people were using anyway. And the average salary for an H1 was$120 ,000.

47:35It's a good thing. And people will just use O1s. I am sure that in every government program, there's abuse. Was there more abuse in the H-1 than in other areas? I don't think so. Having the best and the brightest come to your universities, and once they benefit from sort of our great institutions, to want to stay and contribute, first with a J-1, which is a student visa, and then enter the H-1B lottery through the approved process to get a green card and become citizens and this is how my parents did it right i think it's one way to bring an extraordinary amount of talented people to the u.s is there anything else you change you said the power infrastructure and the permitting around it our infrastructure ends up at the local level which is not necessarily where big ideas and sort of strategy is well knitted together we have starved our universities of compute if you want to do interesting training work at a university very hard to get enough compute to do that.

48:36We're just not set up for that. Those are two dimensions. I think the Trump administration's done a good job in generally relaxing some of the regulations that were painful. Andrew, I want to do a quick fire with you. So I'm going to pummel you with quick questions and you've got to give me your immediate thoughts. That's hard because I only have long answers, Harry. So what do you believe that most around you disbelieve? We will have peace in the Middle East in our lifetimes. Why do you believe that? Having visited, spent time now in the UAE, in Saudi, in Qatar, I think the returns to moderation, the economic gains, someone said, we're too busy to hate right now, we're too busy building.

49:17Those have been writ large so clearly in the UAE with the rise of Dubai and the UAE in return for making peace with Israel, in return for a more moderate position. I really believe that that is the path to the future. How much of your revenues are from the UAE? I think in the S1, it says maybe the first half of 24. We haven't published others, but a lot, 75, 80%. I mean this in the nicest way. Do you not have to say nice things about it then? That's a fair question. No, I went there to do business as a Jewish guy before we had any business done, right? What I found surprised me. And we don't do much in Saudi.

50:01And I think they're making great strides. And we don't do anything in Qatar right now. I think they're making great strides. It may well sort of be colored by the fact that I spend time in Abu Dhabi, and I spend time in Dubai, and I spend time in Riyadh, and I spend time in Doha. Sure, it's colored by those things. But I think... Why are your revenues concentrated there? Is it just because they're like more willing to embrace innovation, new relationships, new vanders? They bought so much they consumed. And you know, the data I gave you was through the first half of 24. They play such big orders, they consumed our manufacturing capacity.

50:36They are building at such an extraordinary rate that through the first half of 24, they consumed an enormous amount of our manufacturing capacity. Did their orders exceed your expectations of their orders? I think their orders exceeded everybody's expectations. You can be a professional salesperson in Silicon Valley for 20 or 30 years and not see a$500 million order. You can go around the valley right now and talk to VPs of sales or EVPs of sales at dozens of public companies who've never seen an order of that size. They were bold and they were early. And, you know, when we started doing business with G42, nobody heard of them.

51:12Everybody in the world heard of them. Do you think that was a resource planning mistake from you? I mean that nicely. They're all mistakes in retrospect. If we hadn't won them and we had the resources for it, that would have been a resource planning mistake. I mean, I'm in the business of making big bets and making lots of mistakes, Harry. What's the biggest bet you've made with Cerebris that didn't work out? My bets here have been pretty good. To go to wafer scale, solve a problem that nobody had previously solved. Gene Amdahl, one of the fathers of our field, failed. IBM failed. TI failed. Everybody's failed at this.

51:46We had a period of about 15 months between about 2017 and early 2019 where we couldn't make one. And we were running a burn of about$6 million a month,$7 million a month. And we stayed with it and our board stayed with it. The result was - Did you have signs that it would work? Yeah, we did. And we weren't running around like chickens without our heads. We were going through engineering process. Each failure was, you know, we did a full FA, a failure analysis. Each time we fixed the cause, we did another one, didn't work, did another one, didn't work. And each time we got a little better. And we got better and better and better.

52:25Then we solved it. The first one that worked, the founders were in a tiny little lab that was a converted conference room that for cooling, we had the windows open and we'd blown a hole in the wall so we could get external, a chiller outside and poured in. And then when we had it running, the founders stood there together and stared at the box running, which is about as interesting as watching paint dry. And we stood there and we couldn't believe it. It was like, we have just solved a problem that for 75 years, the smartest people in our industry had been unable to solve. And we stood there for like half an hour.

52:57And it was one of the highlights of my career. Pretty cool. All right, I'll give it to you. So that was a big, big bet. That was... Fair enough. The six, seven million a month burn. I'm like, all right, fair. I'm almost picturing like angels singing and it's like tears coming down your face. You know what? It felt like that. And it was, you know, the brainchild of my co-founders. It was their invention. It was a physical manifestation of their ideas. Where are people investing today where they will completely lose their shirt? The silicon industry is not place for 25-year-old CEOs, no matter how smart you are.

53:35The returns to having built parts before in what we do are enormous. The number of different relationships that are necessary. You need a relationship with the fab. You need a relationship with the EDA toolmaker. You need backend design engineers. You need logic design engineers. You need IP relationships with IP providers. It has been an extremely difficult road for young CEOs. On the other hand, young CEOs in many of the markets you invest in have done extraordinarily well, particularly where they look like their customer. The reason that the entire social networking world was built by young founders is they were building a product for their friends.

54:17And that is an advantage. The reason that AI startups who are doing tools for other students, for coders, are young is because they understand the needs and demands of their target customer base extraordinarily well. That's an area where people are going to get clobbered, is to take a mentality that said it's enough to be smart in this field to build a good chip. That has historically not been the case, that there are real returns to having done 15 or 20 of these in the past. Where are people not investing enough where they should be investing more? There are this collection of extremely unsexy things that are causing tremendous pain across the industry.

54:59Data cleaning, your data pipeline. These things are, you know, nobody puts on their LinkedIn data pipeline expert. And yet, these are some extraordinarily valuable cats. Nobody leads with a leader in the cleaning and tokenization of data. And these are extraordinarily important roles. Many AI projects fail on those fronts, have nothing to do with the AI. They fail because the data was a disaster. They fail because everything except the AI was a failure. That's an area that profoundly under-invested in. What do you think the data provision market looks like? We see Surge, McCaw, Invisible, Turing, Handshake moving into it more and more.

55:42What does that market look like in five years? All of them are above 100 million ARR. What the fuck happens there, Andrew? I don't know. That is a very curious market. Why is it curious? Well, scale sort of pioneered it. Turing was in a different market completely and pivoted to it and found great success in it. There are these collections of others. I think clearly the provisioning of value-added, tagged, or evaluated data is really important. whether it's durable, whether we get machines that do it every bit as well as people, is a question that's really hard to answer right now. That's why it's curious, is that clearly it's important now.

56:21And the question is, will it clearly be important in three years? That's a question I don't know the answer to. Maybe it could go either way. What's your craziest prediction in terms of how AI reshapes the future in five years? For example, Jonathan said, hey, I think AI will create massive labor shortages. It will create so many jobs for so many people that we will have massive labor shortages. In five years, absolutely wrong. I think economic dislocation isn't resolved in very short periods of time. That might be true in 15 years, but in the three to five year time frame, I certainly don't believe that will be the case.

56:59The adoption of AI or the diffusion of AI into the economy, it will nibble its way in. Let's ask this question. Alpha-fold solved one of the hardest problems in chemistry, a problem that had been open for years. Name a drug that's resulted from it. Not one. Now, I believe there will be, but Alpha-fold's four years old now. This was a massive breakthrough for which the inventors were given Nobel Prizes. Where's the drug? Show me the medical benefit. It will get there. It will be important. Continuations of the model will have fundamental impact. But where are the X-ray crystallographers who are displaced because of it?

57:35That was what x-ray crystallographers were doing only physically. They're not out of work. In fact, there's more demand for them. I think it will have really interesting effects on the way we educate children. And that's an interest of mine. You know, we've sort of been educating children the same way since Alexander the Great was tutored by Aristotle, right? And it was sort of like, get a smart person, they're older, they stand behind you, they tell you what to do, read, you read it, you talk to them about it, they correct your paper. This form of instruction has been sort of unchanged. Maybe YouTube changed it a little bit in that you had different instructors.

58:14But imagine a system where, for example, you made a set of mistakes in your math work. The result wasn't read on a paper. Oh, look, you got it wrong here. But they compared the type of mistakes you made to the type of mistakes thousands of other students made and said that for this group of mistakes, we have found that the following workbook is extremely effective at remedying this hole in their thinking. Imagine that. Nobody does it. Nobody differentiates and modifies the training based on the type of error the students are making. And that's exactly what you ought to do. So I think the way we teach will change a great deal.

58:51What it means to be entry level in a company will change a great deal. Because what entry level has generally meant in consulting firms, at investment banks, has been doing shit work. In particular, being really good at spreadsheets and writing summaries of other people's research. AI will be better at that. That will change a great deal. I mean, I always thought that was a terrible way to spend an extraordinary year. You're 22 through 24 years. You are coming out of top schools. There's so much to be learned. There's so much you can contribute. But to do huge hours doing spreadsheets, I think there's vastly more productive thinking those students, those young people are capable of and more learning that they can do and therefore be vastly more productive in the following years.

59:40And I think AI will change that. Final one for you, Andrew. What would you do if you knew you wouldn't fail or couldn't fail? I guess I don't, I've never thought of that. I look at it the other way, is that every day I go to battle with Goliath. Every day, every dollar we sell is a dollar that if we didn't work at it, if we didn't think, if we didn't invent, if we weren't 10 times better, would default to NVIDIA. And before I competed with NVIDIA, I competed with Cisco. 15 years and every dollar that we sold there, if we didn't build better product, if we weren't more aggressive, if we weren't more creative, would have defaulted to the market share leader.

1:00:19And I think for me, in my career, I take great pride in facing every day, the most wicked curve, the curveball pitcher, for your cricket example, you know, the scariest spin bowler, the scariest a speed bowler. I enjoy that. That is something that in a quiet moment, you sit back and say that I'm competing with every disadvantage against the absolute best in the world every single day at work. And I love that. And what's more, everybody's betting against me, except a very small group of people who you named, who stood up early on and said, you know, maybe he can beat them. That's the life I've chosen and the career I love.

1:00:59That is such a good end as well. You know, I do, obviously many shows there are some ends we're like oh we can't end like that that is like a depressing end that's a fantastic end i so appreciate that i so appreciate you you know you're my go-to when i'm trying to understand what the fuck's going on and so thank you so much for explaining this to me today dude well i'm happy to to jump on my view of your linkedin post by the way is there there are two exactly two things i've read in my life that feel like they understand what entrepreneurship is. And the first is Ben Horowitz's book, The Hard Thing About Hard Things.

1:01:34And the other is your tweets and your LinkedIn posts. They have the feel of what my life is, this notion that somehow you can achieve greatness, you can build something extraordinary by working 38 hours a week and having work-life balance. That is mind-boggling to me. It's not true in any part of life. And your willingness to jump in and say, no, That's not how it's done, guys. You can have a great life. You can do many really good things, and there are lots of paths to happiness. But the path to build something new out of nothing and make it great isn't part-time work. It isn't 30, 40, 50 hours a week.

1:02:11It's every waking minute. And of course, there are costs. You know, it's probably true for world-class athletes, too, if you listen to what Ronaldo talks about. I mean, he worries about everything he puts in his body. He trains every single day. They work on rest, right? Rest isn't rest. Rest is something you work on so your body rejuvenates faster. This isn't 30 hours a week or 40 hours. These guys are the best in the world at everything. But before we dive into the show today, I love seeing the team come together to make this show happen. What I don't love is trying to keep track of all the information, the data, and the projects that we're working on across dozens of platforms, products, and tools.

1:02:50That's why we use Coda, the all-in-one collaborative workspace that's helped 50 ,000 teams all over the world get on the same page. Offering the flexibility of docs with the structure of spreadsheets, Coda facilitates deeper teamwork and quicker creativity, and their turnkey AI solution, the intelligence of Coda Brain, is a game changer. Powered by Grammarly, Coda is entering a new phase of innovation and expansion, aiming to redefine productivity for the AI era. Whether you're a startup looking to organize the chaos while staying nimble or an enterprise organization looking for better alignment, Coda matches your working style.

1:03:27Its seamless workspace connects to hundreds of your favorite tools, including Salesforce, Jira, Asana, and Figma, helping your teams transform their rituals and do more faster. Head over to coda.io slash 20VC right now and get six months off the team plan for startups for free. That's Coda, C-O-D-A dot I-O slash 20VC and get six months off the team plan for free, Coda dot I-O slash 20VC. And talking about trust, today customers expect it faster than ever. And that's why over 10 ,000 global companies trust Vanta. Vanta automates up to 90 % of the work for in-demand compliance standards like SOC 2, ISO 27001, and more, using smart AI to centralise workflows, manage risk, and get you audit ready in weeks, not months.

1:04:21So you can stop chasing paperwork and start closing deals. And a new IDC report found that Vanta customers achieve$535 ,000 per year in benefits. That's insane. And the platform pays for itself in three months. I had no idea about these. Whether you're growing fast or just getting started, Vanta connects you with trusted auditors and experts, support to help you build trust with customers. Get$1 ,000 off your first year at vanta.com forward slash 20VC. That's vanta.com forward slash 20VC. You have now arrived at your destination.