SED News: OpenClaw Goes Viral, Mistral’s Compute Play, and the Agent Arms Race

SED News is a monthly podcast from Software Engineering Daily where hosts Gregor Vand and Sean Falconer unpack the biggest stories shaping software engineering, Silicon Valley, and the broader tech industry. In this episode, they cover the viral rise of OpenClaw https://openclaw.ai/ and its founder’s move to OpenAI, OpenAI https://openai.com/’s exploration of ads inside ChatGPT https://openai.com/, and Alibaba https://www.alibaba.com/’s push into agent-powered commerce during Lunar New Year. They also discuss Mistral https://mistral.ai/’s acquisition of Koyeb https://www.koyeb.com/ to deepen its compute stack, the growing competition between ChatGPT, Claude https://use.ai/, andGemini https://gemini.google.com/, and what these moves signal about monetization, infrastructure, and control in the AI arms race. Gregor and Sean then dive deep into the rapid acceleration of agentic engineering. They examine how tools like Claude Code and Codex are compressing the idea-to-production cycle, what multi-agent orchestration means for software teams, whether the era of the “10x engineer” is ending, and how organizational structures may need to evolve as coding shifts from manual craft to supervised automation. Finally, they highlight standout threads from Hacker News, including reverse engineering a 1990 DOS classic, a 3D reimagining of flight tracking data, old-school practical film effects using cloud tanks, and the privacy-focused GrapheneOS mobile operating system. https://i0.wp.com/softwareengineeringdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Gregor-Vand.jpegGregor Vand is a security-focused technologist, having previously been a CTO across cybersecurity, cyber insurance and general software engineering companies. He is based in Singapore and can be found via his profile at vand.hk or on LinkedIn. https://i0.wp.com/softwareengineeringdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Rectangle-3-2.pngSean’s been an academic, startup founder, and Googler. He has published works covering a wide range of topics from AI to quantum computing. Currently, Sean is an AI Entrepreneur in Residence at Confluent where he works on AI strategy and thought leadership. You can connect with Sean on LinkedIn. Please click here to see the transcript of this episode. http://softwareengineeringdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/SED1912-News-March-2026.txt Sponsorship inquiries: [email protected] https://cms.megaphone.fm/organizations/619b680e-d813-11ea-9750-e7ecac406436/podcasts/e60108fe-e328-11ea-b2b6-1348249f900a/episodes/3913370a-bc44-11ed-ace6-8b1f96d82bba/[email protected] The post SED News: OpenClaw Goes Viral, Mistral’s Compute Play, and the Agent Arms Race https://softwareengineeringdaily.com/podcasts/sed-news-openclaw-goes-viral-mistrals-compute-play-and-the-agent-arms-race/ appeared first on Software Engineering Daily https://softwareengineeringdaily.com.

• 0:12Speaker 00

  Hello and welcome to SED News. As I'm sure many of you know, this is the different format of SE Daily, where we cover tech headlines, we go into a bigger topic in the middle, and then we look at some hacker news highlights towards the end. So as usual, it's myself, Gregor Vand, and we've got Sean Falconer as well.

• 0:33Speaker 01

  Everyone, hey Gregor.

• 0:34Speaker 00

  Hey, yeah, so we are recording this a little bit closer to our last one than maybe usual, but there's been no shortage of news. But as usual, yeah, I think we've also been doing a lot even in the last two to three weeks. So yeah, what have you been up to since we last chatted, Sean?

• 0:51Speaker 01

  Personally, I guess the big news on my end is I bought a new house.

• 0:54Speaker 00

  Oh, nice.

• 0:55Speaker 01

  So I'm trying to do all the things that you need to do to buy a house here, move while also simultaneously trying to keep my work life going and also my kids fed and showing up for school and stuff like that. So it's been a lot to balance, but it's exciting. And then I have upcoming travel off to Seattle and then Washington DC in a few weeks as well.

• 1:17Speaker 00

  Yeah, busy. Well, again, great that you can also be on SED News.

• 1:22Speaker 01

  I mean, this is of course priority number one. Who cares about those kids eating or not?

• 1:27Speaker 00

  Yeah, so I just need to delay signing of the house for a day so we can get SED News done.

• 1:32Speaker 01

  Exactly.

• 1:33Speaker 00

  Yeah, on my side, I was actually in Tokyo all of last week. So my work setup basically allows me to work from anywhere, which is very nice. But I mean, I do base myself in Singapore most of the year. But yeah, Tokyo, favorite city of mine. But yeah, I hadn't been in a couple of years. I was hoping to see maybe a little bit more tech advancements there. I guess what I mean by that is it still doesn't feel that when you're kind of using public services, technology has been thought about. It's always like an afterthought. For example, there's a high-speed train from the Narita Airport, which is the one

• 2:10Speaker 00

  That's further away actually from the city. So that's why they have a high speed train. And yet to get the ticket for the train, even if you like pre purchase it and you have a QR code, you still have to go up to a desk with a human and you still have that human scan and give you a physical paper ticket. Yeah, and like it doesn't seem, there's maybe a way around it if you are Japanese and can speak Japanese. But to me, walking into like what's supposed to be one of the most world's advanced cities. And like you can't even get on the train from the airport without going to like a physical ticket desk. That's what I mean. So, yeah.

• 2:46Speaker 01

  I mean, that seems surprising to me. Maybe somebody that's Japanese or speaks Japanese can let us know if there's a workaround to that. But it's been a long time since I've been in Japan, probably over fifteen years. And I remember at the time when I was there, actually it might have been, it's almost closer to twenty years. Like I was blown away by essentially what they had as pre smartphones, like people watching television on their phones on the train at that time. And I just, I'd never seen anything like that. I don't even know, I guess like iPhone was just getting launched in the US at that point. But it was very much like, I was a student, so I wasn't walking around with an iPhone. That was for the multi population. And I'm kind of curious like what.

• 3:27Speaker 00

  I have the same memories. Yeah. I mean, I didn't go to Japan when I was a kid. But seeing like, yeah, videos of people watching TV on their watches and cars had like TVs in them. Like way before they sort of came outside of Japan. But no, I mean, otherwise things still feel very, do feel quite sort of advanced there. Otherwise, I mean, the systems that they have running generally are very good. The train system, despite what I just said about the tickets, like train system is very good. And we did that little piece a while ago on the IC cards that they use there. And yeah, I've still got mine and very fast, very easy to use. They do still run a lot on cash as well, though. That's my other interesting, like they've definitely moved on since two years ago. But there's still quite a lot of cash only places.

• 4:11Speaker 00

  And like, I don't know, there's a very good system, I think, for like buying food, buying like ramen, which is the machine is actually outside the restaurant and you put your cash in. And then you select the meal and then it gives you a little ticket and then you go into the restaurant and you give your ticket to the chef. So like the chef doesn't have to handle the payments or anything like you've already kind of bought your meal. And then I've always thought that's a really cool system. It's not like that technology advanced. It's just like a vending machine that you put cash into and get a ticket out. But I think that's a very elegant way of solving that. And it stops the chef having to like, do anything, any administration. So.

• 4:48Speaker 01

  That's interesting.

• 4:49Speaker 00

  Final point, there was a great experience with Japan Airlines and there was a double side of A4 instructions on how to use their wifi. And it just made me think about Starlink whereas like, there are no instructions, you just connect to the wifi. So I just love this, like, someone had to put together double A4 pages for their wifi system.

• 5:08Speaker 01

  Yeah, that seems overly complicated. It's a little bit like, I don't know, have you had any experience like trying to set up a printer recently?

• 5:15Speaker 00

  Not recently, but yeah, I can.

• 5:16Speaker 01

  It hasn't changed. It's the same, like if you did it 30 years ago. I mean, maybe there's wifi now, but like, it's still a pain. Like, it's overly difficult to get a printer to just like, work.

• 5:26Speaker 00

  Yeah. There's a DX learning in there somewhere where it's just like two sides of A4 versus just connect. So let's hit the headlines. Unsurprisingly, we're going to be talking about OpenClaw. This has been obviously quite a whirlwind month for the founder, Peter Steinberger, an Austrian guy who had put together what is now known as OpenClaw. It was Claude Bott.

• 5:53Speaker 01

  Yeah, Claude Bott, but not spelt like Anthropic's Claude.

• 5:56Speaker 00

  No, but even so Claude or Anthropic took issue with that, which is then it changed to Molt Bott, I think. And then it's OpenClaw, like with sort of like lobster-y icon around that. But yeah, I guess the headline is that he's actually now joined OpenAI. So you had Anthropic telling him cease and desist on the name, and then you have OpenAI saying, hey, come join us. So yeah, what did you make of that, Sean?

• 6:20Speaker 01

  Yeah, I mean, for anybody that maybe really has had their head in the sand for the last few weeks, this really blew up, I think, in the last probably like month or so. But in terms of like what OpenClaw is, it's an open source, like self-hosted autonomous AI agent that runs on your local machine. That you allow it to interact directly with like your files, your applications, web services, whatever things that you want to grant it access to, you give it your API keys and so forth. And it acts like a 24/7 personal assistant, uses LLMs and skills to kind of automate these different tasks for managing your calendar, sending messages, writing code. It has hooks into being able to react, you know, have conversations over WhatsApp or teleport or whatever kind of messaging interface you want.

• 7:03Speaker 01

  So you could be on your phone and go tell OpenClaw to send an email or to go off and manage your calendar. I remember years ago, when I was just a young engineer out there, there was a guy that I worked with that kind of proposed this idea of using email as like a transport mechanism, where you could send in almost like a bash command over email. And then you would have like something that would listen to that and invoke the bash command. So it's like, oh, I want to know what files are on my computer at home. And you would just send it over email. And the idea was everyone knows how to use email, so let's just do that. And I was like, that's a cool idea, but this seems extremely dangerous to do. So we never ever did anything with it. But this is basically the agent version of that with crazy superpowers.

• 7:49Speaker 01

  So at the same time, I think enough people obviously found value in it that to actually like install it and use it. And I think it created so much buzz. And I think part of it's almost like you can't turn away from like an accident or something that you're watching, like a train wreck. Like it's doing a lot of things that everybody says like not to do when it comes to AI or like all the scary things.

• 8:11Speaker 00

  Just basically open this up to your local file system, basically.

• 8:14Speaker 01

  Yeah. So of course, like, security people freaked out about it. I'm sure, like, given your background, it was probably really scary. And then there was also, I think, some things where some of the API keys, people were able to like sniff out other people's API keys. And then on top of that, they launched Moltbook, which was a social media platform created specifically for AI agents, like interact and post and comment. And essentially, they use the language of like, humans can only observe. And that, I think, also plays into a lot of people's like fear around everything that's going on with AI. And there was a ton of stuff that caught the attention of everybody in the space, basically.

• 8:48Speaker 00

  There were sort of like articles on there, like, my human has asked me to write this, like, yeah, so it's sort of like watching a bunch of agents, computers, talk to each other is kind of what that was meant to be. And as you say, it was almost like. Knowing that that's going to really stir the pot a bit to have that kind of stuff.

• 9:05Speaker 01

  Yeah. Yeah. And then even like Peter, who had had a successful company in the past and basically came out of retirement because of everything that's going in AI and eventually led to this was he came out and he would say like, I pushed the prod without like reviewing the code, which again is like another thing that people have a lot of fear over. So I think all these things in combination really created a lot of fascination and discussion around it. But I think the outcome is like incredible. I certainly didn't see this, that he would sell this to OpenAI and now be at OpenAI and between, I think what he's getting cash wise and stock, is he the first sort of one person billion dollar company?

• 9:45Speaker 00

  Yeah, that's an interesting. We sort of ignored that topic for a while, but yeah, this could be that. Yeah, the push to prod without looking at it. Well, I can believe that because I should probably say disclosure, I work at Superbase. He used Superbase for the backend.

• 9:59Speaker 01

  Right, yes.

• 10:00Speaker 00

  And it did not turn on role level security. So as usual, Superbase got the rap for that. Why can we see a database, blah, blah, blah? And as our usual line on that is turn on our RLS. It's very simple. Just turn it on. So yeah, pushing to the prod without having reviewed anything. Yes, that's I guess what happens unfortunately. But I mean, great use of technology. I mean, I think we're going to get into why this over something like Claude or like Claude code, et cetera. But yeah, I think this has been a very interesting wake up for like how fast things can still move.

• 10:35Speaker 01

  Yeah, I think one of the things that it did as well is it kind of gives a glimpse into the future of where things are probably going to go. Like maybe en masse, people aren't going to use something like OpenClaw because of all the security concerns and so forth. But there is a subset of the population that found it valuable enough. And obviously it created a lot of intrigue. But someone's going to kind of crack the code on like, how do you take something like this, creating a personal assistant for people that can kind of manage their calendar and do all this kind of stuff for them and do it in like a safe way. Like that's going to probably come at some point. Someone's going to crack. That and that's probably part maybe that's partly why OpenAI is so interested in acquiring this and the talent as well.

• 11:18Speaker 01

  And if you can do that, that's a huge business that goes well beyond even what we're seeing in agentic engineering today.

• 11:24Speaker 00

  Yeah, definitely. So our next main headline does also relate to OpenAI, I guess, given OpenAI just sort of semi. I mean, just going back to open for a second. Yeah, although Peter has been sort of accurately hired into OpenAI. Yeah, they were at sort of pains to to point out that OpenClaw will be managed through a separate foundation. So, yeah, I think we're probably going to see a bit more of things like this where it doesn't look good for OpenAI to say they've sort of acquired OpenClaw, which is like some open source. They have to, yeah, work around that. I mean, obviously, they're going to benefit, I imagine, from the underlying technology somehow as well. But if they want to move that fast, they have to, I think, usually separate

• 12:07Speaker 00

  the code, the technology from the person pretty fast.

• 12:10Speaker 01

  Yep.

• 12:11Speaker 00

  So moving on to OpenAI again, but this is in a context of ads in chats or LM chats. So it's something that we'd kind of touched on, I think, like a few SED news ago, like, how is this all going to converge? If you looked at chatbots taking eyeball share away from Google especially. And like, then you have perplexity doing their browser thing, which I've not heard a lot about recently. So who knows where that's gone? Again, that was like a whole thing about eyeball share. And I think it's fair to say like ChatGPT is still the most widely used. I mean, I don't think in maybe our circles, I feel like Claude is.

• 12:51Speaker 01

  I think in the B to C space is probably the case, but I don't know the stats for sure.

• 12:56Speaker 00

  Yeah, exactly. But yeah, I feel like Claude maybe is seen as more the professional's choice, especially in tech these days.

• 13:02Speaker 01

  Yeah, certainly Gemini from Google is on the rise too.

• 13:04Speaker 00

  Yes, yeah.

• 13:05Speaker 01

  And then it's just there if you have the Google products.

• 13:08Speaker 00

  Yeah, but I don't often hear people going, oh, ChatGPT blew me away, especially not in like the work context. So, yeah, it seems more like that's just the one that most people have in their head. So that's kind of where they go to. And, yeah, they now seem. Be rolling out ads within the platform. And I think the TLDR of why is just money. I mean, of course it's money, but it's like, they are literally not running out of money exactly, but we've also covered this, that they've got all these commitments. And there were some funny things going on in the last couple of weeks where Nvidia is not going to invest something into OpenAI that they originally said they were, basically. And that then had a knock on effect to Oracle, because Oracle was going to be supplying the inference for that.

• 13:52Speaker 00

  And where this is going is that Oracle basically made a statement saying this doesn't affect us. And the fact that they even made a statement means it probably does affect them. Like, it's basically the commentary there. So why are we talking about this? Because money at OpenAI is a huge question mark. And it seems like ads is where they're going to plug the gap.

• 14:11Speaker 01

  I mean, I think this is something that we probably predicted at some point, but not to pat ourselves on the back too much. I think it's kind of like an obvious thing that probably a lot of people were predicting for at least one of these chat LLM services to eventually explore. And if you're in the B to C space, like classically, how do you monetize consumer? Especially when the value that you're providing is really about like eyeball capture. It could be a game, it can be social network, it can be search. All those things have been monetized largely through serving ads. So it makes sense to serve ads here. Now, the big thing is, and I think we also talked about this, is like, does this signal the end of the heyday of LLM powered chat?

• 14:53Speaker 01

  Because just like, we're in sort of this utopia world with video streaming at one point, when you could essentially go to Netflix years ago and Netflix had everything. You could just stream it, it was very cheap. And then all the providers of that IP eventually woke up and they're like, you know, why are we giving our IP to Netflix? We should go and create our own service. And then you ended up with now everybody, like you got Disney, you got Peacock, like everybody has a service. And to cover the breadth of it, you end up with like 10 of these things. And basically we're back to like cable television, except it's like on demand. So we're certainly out of the heyday of video streaming. And I wonder if this is the start of that for, at least from like a consumer's perspective. It's like, how do you get value out of the consumer?

• 15:35Speaker 01

  And I don't think charging consumers like a monthly fee is probably something that necessarily works. It's like, how do you control essentially the rate limit on that at a value of $10 a month or whatever? And token cost is going down, certainly. A speed of tokens and infrastructure costs are going down. But at the same time, there also need to generate money to invest in new infrastructure to train the next generation model, which is very, very expensive to do.

• 16:02Speaker 00

  Yeah, exactly. Yeah, I mean, on this subscription point, it's sort of been floated really that behind the scenes, Anthropic at least, they make their money on, or they can balance the books, shall we say, on enterprise. The enterprise is paying like fullback or even overwack, shall we say, for what they're using. And that basically subsidizes personal pro plans. Like a personal pro plan, there's no way that a sort of $20 a month is what it's actually costing them to run that. But like, that's the max, I think, that a consumer is probably willing to pay for if it's not linked directly to their employer, basically.

• 16:37Speaker 01

  Yeah, and I think one of the things I've heard, like Dario, the CEO of Anthropic, talked about this recently, was that at least in their world, like they actually make money from a particular model. But where the cost comes from is the investment in the next model. So while we're in this phase of really essentially like an arms race between these different companies to build the next generation and the best models, there's continual essentially infrastructure investments that you have to make. And until all that stabilizes in some fashion, or there's some other way of driving down costs there, you're going to always be in a situation where even if the current state of the model would make money in the long run,

• 17:19Speaker 01

  you're taking all that money and basically, and then some to reinvest in generating sort of the next generation.

• 17:24Speaker 00

  Yeah, and I think this is a huge open question at the moment. It's just like, where does the bucket load of investment, where does that start to sort of plateau so that it's a sustainable? Quote business model to produce, you know, because if you look at a similar version of this is just the chip manufacturing. Huge amounts of investment and always needing to like Moore's law, like always producing something that's faster, half the size, half the cost. But there were applications for that. There were very clear money driven applications, phones, laptops, this booming hardware, consumer hardware. So yeah, I think it's just like, where's the constant renewal?

• 18:04Speaker 00

  A consumer is not paying what a lot of people would pay practically per year for a new iPhone for a while. They're not paying that to any of these providers at the personal level. So yeah, this is kind of interesting. And like, if we look at the mechanics of these ads that are now coming in, so we've chat GPT charges 60 US dollars per thousand ad impressions. Are you familiar with, how does that line up with how Google used to charge or have you got any?

• 18:32Speaker 01

  I couldn't tell you really what they're, I mean, they charge on typically on like, you set a bunch of stuff around like budget CPC, your bidding and stuff like that. Some of it's kind of hidden from you because there is like a bidding thing that goes on and certain words cost more and so forth. But I don't know, I wouldn't be able to map that to what chat GPT is doing here. I did read that this sort of on par with, I think what Netflix had launched for ads and is more expensive than Meta, obviously.

• 18:59Speaker 00

  Yeah, interesting. The ad space is just simply an area I've never, never been part of. So I'm not sure either on the pure financials of that and don't just recurgitate somebody else's numbers. But yeah, that's an interesting, interesting 60 US for a thousand impressions. So if that's, yeah, sort of similar to Netflix, that's interesting.

• 19:15Speaker 01

  I mean, another move that OpenAI is trying to do, they're certainly trying to get into the B two B space more as well. And they've made a lot of, you know, investments there. And you might be able to get to a place from like a business perspective where you can kind of subsidize the consumer model a little bit. With the idea that if you have a lot of consumers using this, this also becomes the thing that they want to use in business where the business is willing to spend more money. Like I think Zoom was very successful with that model, for example.

• 19:42Speaker 00

  Yeah, yeah, that's a good reference. And yeah, a colleague of mine alerted me to the anthropic anti ads that we're running. So these were not ads within Claude, but you know, TV ads and I believe Super Bowl. Yeah, old school, Super Bowl. And it's sort of the format is like. You're talking to your mother and then suddenly an ad for sort of, do you want to go on a date with an older woman pops up. So they're also taking kind of the extreme end of where ads could go. But I think it paints exactly the picture that they wanted to paint. And as usual, it kind of always gives like Anthropic and Claude just always have this, I think, like cooler edge to the product and sort of, oh, we're in tune with the people sort of vibe versus

• 20:24Speaker 00

  the sort of Sam Altman open AI, like, we will tell you what you will use.

• 20:28Speaker 01

  Yeah, there's definitely feels like a cultural difference between the companies. And I think to me, I wrote a post on LinkedIn about this a couple of weeks ago, like, some ways Anthropic kind of reminds me of like the early days of Google, where they're collecting like a lot of, I mean, OpenAI is doing this as well, but like, I think it's obvious seems like a lot of very, very gifted, smart people are drawn to that company, maybe because of their culture or how, whatever it is. And they're really collecting a lot of this talent and that's talent pool and kind of giving them somewhat of an unstructured environment akin to like Google in the early days where it's not like overly processed. I think it's a relatively flat hierarchy and giving them the freedom to kind of just like move fast and

• 21:11Speaker 01

  experiment. And they seem to be thriving as a result of whatever it is. How far can they scale that? I don't know. I mean, that was something that eventually Google had to put a little bit more rigid control over and add more processes. But right now, it certainly seems like they're making a lot of smart decisions in terms of the investments they make from a product perspective, sort of their stance on trying around what's important for models and how they think about even security in this space.

• 21:38Speaker 00

  Yeah. And then just a sort of sidebar off this, what's happening over maybe in sort of this side of the world in Asia and obviously China has quite a few chatbots. And it is Lunar New Year as we're recording, year of the horse and not just the horse, but the firehorse. And completely separate topic, it seems to swept the internet this year. Like I keep hearing or having people say, you know, happy year of the firehorse, who would never have talked to me about Lunar New Year before. So I think it's like a TikTok thing, but Alibaba, so they've got their Qwen chatbot and they Obviously, Qwen models as well, but they decide to commit $430 million to offering free bubble tea and other items to users who ordered food through the Qwen chatbot.

• 22:21Speaker 00

  And that has actually driven more than 120 million orders through the six days. So I mean, that's a different way to approach. I mean, you can't, I don't know, maybe we'll see something similar, like where one of the providers says like, hey, if you use us to do a thing, you will get a physical good in return. But yeah, it feels like a slightly more like I see campaigns like this in Asia a lot more than I maybe do say in like in Europe or the US, but yeah.

• 22:47Speaker 01

  I definitely think like agentic commerce is where we're going with a lot of this stuff. People already use these tools to go and ask for advice on purchases that they're making. And then they go to some other place to go and make that purchase. But it doesn't, you know, it doesn't take that much foresight to figure out, okay, well, if we just connect the lines a little bit here. And there's been investments from Google in terms of standards around doing secure purchases through agents and so forth. So I think that's not that far away where this is sort of the default.

• 23:19Speaker 00

  Yeah, this is an interesting one because yeah, as this campaign was around, yeah, ordering food. So if you sort of play that through, okay, a user maybe hasn't realized or just hasn't tried to order food through the chatbot. And so, yeah, they offer this incentive. And then once the user's done it once, they're like, oh, this is possible. And you assume that maybe half at least are like, oh, this is actually nicer than going through my food apps. I mean, I can definitely see a world having just like stayed in Tokyo, stayed in a hotel. My wife and I call it hotel hell when we basically end up on hotels.com. And two hours later, one of us is still on it. And you know, we're like, are you making any progress? And it was interesting, I actually just quickly tried chat GPT today and said like, tell me some hotels in Tokyo.

• 24:02Speaker 00

  Cause I was almost trying to see if it was going to give me ads, but it did actually recommend one of the hotels that recommended was the one I stayed in. So I don't know, that kind of got me thinking like, maybe this is where I should be going in the future to avoid hotel hell. But obviously the whole booking process, I don't know, I'm still a bit old school, I feel. I just want to see the real actual booking. So moving on to our final headline, we have Mistral, so the French model provider, but now has Mistral Compute as well. But they've bought a company, I think you pronounce it Koyeb, so K O Y E B. And basically, Koyeb provides inference. And I think there's kind of two

• 24:43Speaker 00

  sides to the story here. One is that Koyeb provides inference and can like bolster the compute side of the Mistral model's compute. But then Koyeb also provides spinning out like databases or like containerized apps and this kind of thing. As I understand it, behind the scenes, that's actually Neon. So this is not Koyeb's own infra providing that. But I think it looks like that Mistral still sees huge value in that, even if it's based upon like you're two steps away from who's actually providing the infra. But we're seeing this a lot, I would say, like, we're seeing a lot now where, and this may be a topic for maybe next time, Sean, but where do people like Lovable go in the future if we're seeing people like

• 25:28Speaker 00

  Mistral probably move in this direction where from the model, you could spin up infra and like, i.e. end to end, create an app. I think we're going to be seeing a little bit of a step shift this year across all the players, I think, actually. Yeah.

• 25:42Speaker 01

  Yeah, I mean, I think that it seems like all the model providers are making steps to create more of a moat around their services by owning more of sort of the end to end pipeline, like making more of these things just sort of part of the model experience. Because if you just have a model, then it's kind of like, well, the switching cost is low. I can go with the best model or the one that's like the best balancing cost for whatever my workload happens to be. But if suddenly the model also has all these other things that own, maybe it holds on to important contextual data for my business or for me personally, or it makes it really easy for me to just like spin up agents and run them in cloud infrastructure and I don't have

• 26:24Speaker 01

  to go use some other application to do that, then why go somewhere else, right? You're creating essentially one experience that kind of serves your end to end. Purposes.

• 26:32Speaker 00

  Yeah, exactly. Yeah. So very kind of interesting. It's probably the first, I guess, pure acquisition we've seen in this space so far. A model provider outright buying the infra provider, if you like. I mean, lovable, we reported on lovable buying, the name evades me now, but you know, lovable being Swedish. They also bought a Swedish mall net. That's the company. They bought mall net who smaller outfit, three guys there. Whereas Kaya, I think is 13 and just has like clearly bigger customers and more sort of advanced offerings. So, so less of an aqua hire here, I think, and more of a like full rollout team and an infrastructure, which is super interesting.

• 27:13Speaker 00

  So the big topic, I mean, it kind of rolls off some of the things we've been talking about already. But, you know, we've just seen such an explosion of developments and advancements in the last like four to five months in agentic engineering, really. So obviously open claw has kind of brought things to a huge head on that one. But, you know, if we look at anthropics like Opus 4.6 and, you know, we've got GPT codex. Like basically it's even coming back into mainstream media like that coding is being disrupted, which I found quite amusing. Cause it's like, why, why suddenly are all these mainstream media?

• 27:55Speaker 00

  The reference I was, I was going to bring out was just my dad literally messaged me and said, like, have you seen this? And I'm like, why, this is so, why is my dad who retired, not in tech? Why is he suddenly reading things that are telling him that like coding is being disrupted? You know, I always look for these kind of like bellwethers or like canary in the coal mine kind of thing. Like, what is the thing that's suddenly making people wake up to this? And it does seem that agentic coding is why. Basically it's showing that it's not just ask code to be produced and code comes back. But suddenly all these other tasks are being completed in the background that is suddenly taking over developers like workflow completely, basically.

• 28:34Speaker 01

  Yeah, I mean, I think that there's probably a couple of things that have gone into this, but definitely feels like in the last four months, what the developer experience is has changed drastically. And I think that it's gotten to the point where the tools plus the models are so good that even the naysayers are starting to realize that this is like undeniable, what you can do with these things. Because when you were doing kind of like one shot, like you send a prompt to a model and you're just like, hey, generate this function for me or take this function and help me like optimize this stuff. Like, that's helpful, but I think you're seeing, you know, 20, 30% maybe efficiency improvements there or something like that.

• 29:14Speaker 01

  Whereas now with the agentic engineering, using things like Claude Code or using Cursor running Codex 5.3 from OpenAI or whatever it is, you're able to take like stuff that would typically, you know, might take you hours to do and do it one-shot prompt and they're just able to do it. It's really incredible having, you know, spent some time using these tools myself in the last few weeks. Like, I think it's purely there is some, you know, really a transformational shift that's happening. And then on top of that, so, you know, we went from sort of co-pilots in assistance where it's really like autocomplete, you know, you're kind of one-shot to now agentic engineering.

• 29:57Speaker 01

  And I think the evolution of that is now like these like Ralph Wiggam loops and Gastown and sort of multi-agent orchestration. And there's some debate over like how ready those are, but people who are really on the bleeding edge are doing that. And to use like Steve Yeg's language, it's like agents really take chat and basically put chat in the loop. And then these things like Ralph Wiggam, Gastown and so forth are putting like kind of agents of the loop where you have multiple agents running. And you see these people, you know, talking about their setups online where they're, they got like six Mac minis running and like on their desk all the time so they can spin up more instances of Claude Code so they can always have an agent running. And so I think that the combination of the model and the tools getting to the point

• 30:41Speaker 01

  where they're really good at managing contacts and then probably the explosion of the number of MCP servers that are available and things becoming more like easier for agents to sort of navigate. Clearly, there's, to me, there's just this transformational shift that's happening. And I think That puts the entire industry in a place where there's probably some uncomfortable questions we need to be kind of asking ourselves.

• 31:07Speaker 00

  So exactly, I mean, just to kind of, I guess, semi summarize to this point, the fact that models can use tools at all is already sort of quite a big step change and.

• 31:17Speaker 01

  And use them reliably.

• 31:18Speaker 00

  Yeah, exactly. And you and use them reliably. And I mean, it still depends kind of on your interface to that. Like, I've been pretty impressed with actually Notion AI recently, because it just has the the tooling and the access to, you know, files and Slack and all this kind of stuff. But so models, I mean, when we see models can use tools, you know, the the service that is built upon a a model effectively can use the tools. You then got, you know, multi-agent orchestration. So the fact you can sub agents working in parallel. And like, as you were kind of alluding to, like, we've got these frameworks like Gastown now, where like, you know, you have kind of like a lead agent effectively. And I love Gastown's way of like a mayor and you've got a which other people do they have? They have like, well, the other mayor, the town, regs, crew members. I mean, I think

• 32:02Speaker 00

  it's really cool. Just a great way to like, add a way for sort of people to kind of get their heads around what's going on. And then something I've noticed, just without any thinking of this previously, but you know, this idea of like context compaction, where, you know, AI can actually summarize basically his own memory and then can like, keep working on things without hitting limits, you know, like, we're beyond the stage, at least I feel, on any paid plan now, we're like on this out on the stage now, where you don't really, you very seldom hit like, oh, I've run the course of my conversation. It's like, you can always add to a chat that you had previously, and it's able to do things with that. And then, you know, you start up and say a new chat within, in my case, Claude.

• 32:44Speaker 00

  And I did get a bit of like, oh, that's scary, like moment when it's like, I'm asking something and it's like, and so based on this project to do with X that you're already working on, like, I was like, oh, no, it knows that it has all the context about me. So, I mean, it was good, but it was just a slightly strange moment when I was like, ah, it does reference back to these other things I've been working on. Okay, understood.

• 33:07Speaker 01

  Yeah, I think like one of the big things that we get out of this is, and maybe we're not 100% there, but I feel like it's certainly going in that way, is we're really compressing this like time from idea, from idea to at least like POC. And we'll get to the point where it's like, you're really compressing the timeline from idea to production as well, where essentially the cost of like experimenting, it becomes almost zero, other than like the token cost, but like I could just tell Quad to go do something in, you know, one shot or maybe a couple of shots, like it's actually able to like accomplish that thing. And I think the interesting thing from my perspective is

• 33:48Speaker 01

  if we are really taking this thing that, you know, historically has been an expensive part of being able to create like a product is the time it takes to write the actual code. And you could press that cycle. Now, some of that cost shifts to like testing and test harness and stuff. And I think over time, maybe that will also start to go away as they LMs are actually able to take over a lot of that work. You know, what does that do to an organization? Like, how do we have to think about, like, what is the more modern organizational structure? We've been kind of using roughly the same kind of organizational structure for like engineering, product teams, TPMs and stuff like that for probably 20 years. But in this world where you don't necessarily need like as deep a expertise in particular, like language or framework,

• 34:32Speaker 01

  and you can experiment more freely, do we need the same sort of ratio of PMed engineers that we've had previously? Do the lines between different technical roles start to blur drastically? Do you have front end and back end? Do you have people who are expertise? I think in many ways, like the deep expertise in particular technologies starts to lose some value when you can rely on the agent to do that. So then it's like, oh, well, you need sort of more broad expertise to understand architecturally how these things fit together. There's probably other things that come into play in terms of what the value of a person starts to transform into being, like the taste, how many ideas they can come up with, like what is that new choke point for a company?

• 35:14Speaker 01

  If it's not sort of the laborious task of writing the code?

• 35:18Speaker 00

  Yeah, exactly. And yeah, I think you'd mentioned like in passing around, are we seeing the, you know, the end of the 10x engineer, basically, you know, the 10x like asshole effectively.

• 35:29Speaker 01

  Yeah, like, I mean, we've all probably had, you know, worked on teams or been in companies where there's someone who's kind of like the jerky engineer or jerky expert, but people tolerate it because they have deep expertise in something like maybe they've been there for a long time and they're only person who understands like the full breadth of this code base or they really know the specific type of technology or something and people kind of put up with that. But if the models are really good at that, you know, does the 10x asshole essentially, does that role have a place in the modern AI forward company versus other types of skills that are maybe higher value, like interpersonal skills, driving alignment, you know, sort of the human component of it?

• 36:08Speaker 00

  And I mean, I think looking at the actual tooling that, you know, has changed to be, obviously, you talked quite a lot at the beginning about about OpenClaw, but part of the thing, the reason it's really then also jolted everyone, first of all, it's open source, you know, and it's not tied to one of the models specifically. And, you know, it's come out of like, as we call, effectively, one, one guy, okay, very talented guy, but, you know, one guy has been able to kind of put this thing together. And then I think it's, for whatever reason, it's shown a lot of people what they can actually do with agents that for some reason, like Claude and OpenAI weren't able to fully show, or maybe had sort of lulled people into a sense of, well, no,

• 36:51Speaker 00

  Claude and ChatGPT are for X, and that's, you know, quote, nothing to do with agents, which is obviously they're trying to shift the narrative on that. And but we've only kind of maybe seen that narrative shift very, very recently with Opus and Codex, basically. Is that kind of what you see as well?

• 37:07Speaker 01

  I think that's fair. And I think there's also been this. Now the shift that's happened where sort of the CLI and the desktop is becoming like the the housing using for the agent and then the agent has the ability to kind of reach out to these different systems, whether it's like local systems or could be things on the web and doing, you know, search or talking over MTP or whatever happens to be. And I think that's an interesting shift. I don't know that that's something that would have been obvious and will it stay or not? I don't know, but it seems like people are almost like more comfortable running these things within their local environment. And part of that probably has to be probably related to the fact that so much of this

• 37:47Speaker 01

  is kind of tied to specifically to agentic engineering. And even though so many things exist on the web, a lot of engineers still prefer like to run an IDE locally and have the code available to them locally. And I think, you know, Claude and some of these other agentic engineering tools have done a good job of mapping to that existing like way of working that engineers are used to where you can do these things, you know, within your local environment while still giving them sort of the power to touch all these different systems.

• 38:15Speaker 00

  So I mean, I think as you're kind of touching on in terms of where is engineering going, I mean, we almost touch on this at some point every month. I think I feel we always have to because there are just always these leaps each month and something is being questioned around what is it to be a software engineer now? But yeah, I mean, I do see that the jobs that are sticking around are the ones where, you know, someone has say like broad knowledge over something and it does require, you know, human judgment, interpersonal skills, you know, I think the interpersonal skills is an interesting one because there's still a lot that goes on in companies where, quite frankly, it is just people are not agreeing on something. And actually often it requires maybe a third

• 38:59Speaker 00

  person to come and kind of be the person to get the two experts to agree on how you're going to. Get a path forwards and I don't, at least I don't see almost like flipping a coin. I don't see that two experts are going to go, oh, we'll just let Open Claw decide for us or something like, you know, because, because then they'll say, oh, well, how are you prompting or how are your agents set up? And so how, how can we trust this? So there's always going to be, so long as a human is in the loop somewhere, which, which they very much are, there's always still going to be room for humans with engineering knowledge. But I think, yeah, perhaps more on the, the softer stuff, which is just a higher level judgment or negotiation effective, like negotiation being actually a big one as well.

• 39:40Speaker 01

  Yeah, I mean, I think that there's, engineering certainly isn't just about writing code. It's really about like solving problems and operating software systems and, you know, potentially operating those things at massive scale. And I don't think that just having an agent that can code for you necessarily takes away those, all those problems. I think the big question that, that people are sort of having right now is, do you need as many engineers doing this? If you, if you take sort of the coding piece of that off, off the plate, can you have, you know, one engineer that's now able to do, you know, what 10 people did before? I think that's kind of the big sort of uncomfortable question that everybody in, in the world of technology is kind of wrestling with. And it's just like, if you see past trends, like we had the industrial revolution,

• 40:24Speaker 01

  that made the labor involved with things like farming not as intense. So you didn't need as many farmers. It's not like farmers went away completely, but you could have essentially less of them doing more work. And that led to an explosion in growth of humans around the world and all kinds of other things. So there was like a ton of good things that came out of that. But obviously there's like this transitional period that's, you know, kind of uncomfortable and not great for everybody.

• 40:51Speaker 00

  Yeah, absolutely. So, yeah, I mean, I think, well, maybe kind of leave it there this week with the sort of main topic. So, and it was just, as we were saying, looking at what has happened in the last like three, four, five months that suddenly has caused, you know, the world to sort of declare that software engineering is over. Like, you know, within our own circles, we've already been posing that sort of slightly existential question of like, Are we now and where do we bring value? But you know, we can find the pockets that make sense. It's I think when the sort of world declares it and you know, stocks of SaaS companies are going down significantly because the reasoning was, oh, well, now that you have things like Codex, who needs a SaaS company?

• 41:34Speaker 00

  And I just found that such a classic kind of financier's way of looking at the world is like, oh, we've read this piece of news about Codex and suddenly a SaaS company has no value in it anymore. I mean, it's just, yeah, it's such a knee jerk reaction. Yeah.

• 41:47Speaker 01

  Yeah, I mean, there's so much more that goes into those SaaS companies than even just the code. The other thing too, that I think is interesting about this is in some ways, I think that these tools bring back the like hobbyist developer. Because now with like less time, you can create sort of one off compelling apps. There's almost like applications are ephemeral, like you can create sort of just try something. It doesn't work, or maybe you just create it for some, to solve some specific problem. You could spin that out without a lot of like cost and effort now. It's kind of like in the, you know, the eighties, there was less engineers, but a lot of people were hobbyists. They were interested in technology and they were building things. And you could actually build software that eventually sometimes got used by lots of people or games.

• 42:32Speaker 01

  They got used by lots of people as like a single individual. And I think we're now in a similar place, like OpenClaws is an example where, you know, he was able to create, basically one person create this system that was used by a bunch of different people, got a ton of attention. I think we'll see similar things start to come up more and more. There's also going to be more garbage and then more noise as well. So how do you break out the noise? But I think that's one of the really powerful things. I've certainly been doing a lot more of that kind of one off projects, things for my kids, all kinds of stuff. Because the cost of actually making that thing happen is so low.

• 43:08Speaker 00

  Yeah, for sure. And just kind of, you know, I think it got to a stage where, at least I found this, where if I was creating something more as a hobbyist, like the problem being that the level of like UIs, etc., is that if you want to show it to anyone, then just the expected level is always like just increasingly higher, you know, and friction barriers as low as possible, etc. So whilst we had, obviously just to plug Superbase, things like Superbase speeding up, things like getting a database up and running and some auth and that kind of stuff, so much was still slow, so slow before this came along. And, you know, you'd be still be presenting a very crappy looking, even just tailwind, etc. Still, someone would say, yeah,

• 43:50Speaker 00

  but that's just tailwinds. Like, why, why doesn't it look nicer? Or like, this is just a sort of hobbyist app. So yeah, it's interesting, the time decrease to produce something that people like take very seriously now, which is interesting. So, moving on to our final, usually best part of the show, Hacker News highlights. So, yeah, last time we only really had time for one, so we wanted to make sure we got a few more in this week. Yeah, I'll let you kick off, Sean. What's the first one that you wanted to?

• 44:19Speaker 01

  Yeah, so the first one that I pulled was this article called "Old School Visual Effects to Cloud Tank." I thought it was interesting. So he has a bunch of articles and blog posts about sort of movie special effects, and he rants a little bit about computer generated effects. And this particular post talks about how cloud tanks work, which I'd never heard of before. But certainly, these are, they're these large water tanks that used to be used to create atmospheric effects. So Close Encounters, Indiana Jones, like a lot of movies that were shot in like, back in the 80s by Steven Spielberg and stuff, use these, these big water tanks to create certain visual effects. And it goes into a lot of detail about like, how those things work and how they were constructed for these particular movies. So a really, really cool post.

• 45:04Speaker 00

  Oh, awesome. Cool. I'll check that out. I assume like we're talking sort of like a cloud tank. Like if you want to be showing like, oh, everything's very like misty in the jungle or something. I don't know. Is that kind of the idea?

• 45:14Speaker 01

  Yeah, exactly. So like Close Encounters, they used it to, I think, create some of the atmospheric effects around like when the aliens were arriving on Earth and things like that. So.

• 45:25Speaker 00

  Oh, awesome. Yeah, I love scenes like that. So cool. Okay. On my side, first one, it was called I Converted 2D Conventional Flight Tracking Into 3D. So user Kewonit, K E W O N I T. Thank you for posting that. So I'm already a Flight Radar 24 subscriber. I can't quite remember all the extra things you get when you subscribe at least at one level, but I live on a flight path in Singapore. So I find it really fun to just look out the window and be able to kind of see what flight that is that's coming in. I actually live on two flight paths. One is a military flight path and one is a civilian. So it's kind of fun. You've got a fighter jet coming in quite close to the, to my building, actually. And then you've got like civilian just slightly further away.

• 46:10Speaker 00

  And even when I'm in like Scotland, I like kind of, again, there are planes going from like Asia over to Europe because they kind of carve that arc over the top of the. So yeah, this is someone who has kind of put this into more of a 3D kind of model, which is kind of cool. So I just love when, it's nothing like massively revolutionary, but at the same time, no one else has done it to my understanding where you're actually just seeing a slightly nicer way of representing these planes and they kind of show roughly the trajectory and the direction they're taking. I think also it helps with, you know, you can pan, tilt, rotate, all that stuff. So you can actually see the altitude levels more clearly, which I think is also interesting because I think many people don't realize like you will quite

• 46:55Speaker 00

  often have like three planes stacked actually on top of each other, basically on the same flight path, but like 2,000 feet apart. 2,000 feet, maybe? Yeah, I probably, no, yeah, probably about 2,000 feet. So if you look like on some of the key flight paths, you've got like, yeah, three triple sevens like on top of each other. And it's true, but it's just that they have to take like different altitudes. But like these busy flight paths, that's just how they operate. So pretty cool.

• 47:20Speaker 01

  Very cool. Very cool.

• 47:22Speaker 00

  So yeah, obviously you can just plug in whichever airports nearest to you and it sort of zooms over there, but ultimately it's like a globe thing, I think. So thanks to the people that put that together. What was your next one, Sean?

• 47:33Speaker 01

  Yeah, so this was pretty cool. It's a guy reverse engineered Sid Myers Railroad Tycoon for DOS from 1990. So and he has a write up about it, but essentially he hit the memory, the game money limit, which I forget, it's some small integer value you can imagine from like a, you know, DOS from 1990. But in his kids also, they just wanted to be able to like build railroads. So he wanted to also make it like simpler for them to use it. So he did a full ground up pour of the game and dug through all the assembly and rebuilt it to run natively with modern graphics. I think one of the other things he wanted to do was like the original aspect ratio is like 320 by 240 or something like that.

• 48:15Speaker 01

  So he wanted to make it, you know, be able to be bigger. The article goes into a lot of these things that like he discovered from like 1990s engineering, which you had to do so much like optimization because you only had so many CPU cycles. You only had so much memory cycles or so much memory and stuff like that. So the game like uses overlays that overwrite code at runtime. There's a bunch of like frame buffer color tricks going on in there. He ended up fixing the money overflow bug. He made the rendering resolution independent. He removed some of the save limits and he added like a play alone mode all to it. Really cool feat of engineering, reverse engineering of this game from the early 90s.

• 48:55Speaker 00

  Nice. Has he been able to like release the code for that? Or is, does he?

• 49:00Speaker 01

  That's a good question. I didn't see that in the write up I saw about it, but.

• 49:03Speaker 00

  Yeah, because I'm just wondering, you probably maybe can't just for like copyright reasons and stuff.

• 49:07Speaker 01

  Yeah, well, I don't know. I mean, at this point, it's been, what, 37 years? So they do the copyright laws, they'll even apply.

• 49:15Speaker 00

  I feel video games is the one that there's always some weird thing going on where someone somewhere has the rights to it and won't respond or like just says no. And, you know, like GoldenEye being the obvious one, like GoldenEye from the Nintendo 64 has, cannot be re-released basically because three different companies technically own the rights to it and they won't agree on anything. So never happened, basically.

• 49:39Speaker 00

  Cool, but very, yeah, very cool. It almost feels like such an over-engineering just to fix a money bug, but I mean, that's great.

• 49:45Speaker 01

  I guess he really, really liked Railroad Tycoon.

• 49:49Speaker 00

  Yeah, my final one was just, I just actually, you just got very, a lot of points up, over a thousand, Graphene OS, so just, yeah, kind of plugging Graphene OS, I guess, which is kind of cool. It's currently, the only disappointing thing is it's only for Pixel phones right now. I run a nothing phone.

• 50:04Speaker 01

  That works for me.

• 50:05Speaker 00

  Yeah, yeah, so it's an open source OS, like effectively, instead of what you would get as your base Android. So it is based on Android, on the Android open source project, but it differs quite a lot apparently. And the big piece is security and much less tracking effectively. You know, Android these days is very, just baked with so much Google tracking in it. And so it's, they say it's distinguished by a hardening of the kernel and key components, which does make it less vulnerable to hacking, but actually also that it has Google Play services running in an isolated environment. So that sort of allows, you can use popular applications without having to grant like

• 50:46Speaker 00

  the broad permissions that they mostly ask for, and it's hard to reject. Permissions, at least on Android for me, they've got better. Like some will be auto-disabled if they're not being used and that kind of thing. But I think there's probably a lot more going on than we realize. And that's like why Graphene OS does kind of exist. So yeah, just thought that was kind of cool. Great to see still innovation in the, in the OS space and especially on mobile devices as well.

• 51:14Speaker 01

  Yeah, very cool.

• 51:15Speaker 00

  Yeah, so we're almost at time, I guess, but yeah, just, I don't know, looking ahead. Predictions, we always come back the next month and say, why didn't we, why didn't we think about how this could have played out? But yeah, if you had to pick something that you think we might be talking about. Next month, Sean, what would that be?

• 51:31Speaker 01

  I think there's going to be more sort of verticalized versions of things like Quad Code. Like, there's already been, like, they already launched CoWork for, like Anthropic. There's, uh, I think they did like some sort of financial services, like Quad for financial services. I'm just using Anthropic as an example, but I think that a lot of these companies are looking for other ways, I think, to bring this technology to the masses beyond just like engineering. I mean, the tricky part with, especially with some of the agent stuff is that engineering is set up well. I think for these environments to be successful, because there are so many things where it's kind of like a harsh environment. Like, there's ways of checking failure conditions.

• 52:13Speaker 01

  And we also have a lot of things set up to help undo actions. Like, you know, if you commit something and you don't like it, you can, well, you could branch on Git and then you can try something out in an isolated environment and so forth. Hard to do that in, I don't know, legal profession, for example. Like, so some of these things is like, how are you going to translate those things over? But I think that's where we're going to get it. I think we're going to have sort of more deep verticalization of some of this technology.

• 52:36Speaker 00

  Yeah, I mean, I think maybe mine's sort of similar, but yeah, I think just based on what we saw with the Koyeb acquisition. I think things are moving pretty fast here and I think we're going to see, yeah, someone, one of, you know, OpenAI, Anthropic. I'm trying to think who else, who else it could be, but yeah, come out with, with something more towards this idea of, you know, if you're using this for code, don't run that code somewhere else, like basically run it related to us. So again, like trying to take on some of the quote vibe code operators and, you know, I was talking to someone in DevRel last week and they were convinced that actually, like, a lot of the vibe code crew had sort of moved to Cursor, interestingly.

• 53:19Speaker 00

  So like Lovable was being seen as like not pro enough or something. And so Cursor was actually like where they were moving to. I can't substantiate that. I just think it's interesting that someone in DevRel, that's what they were seeing. But that would suggest that, like, everyone's moving a little bit upstream in terms of, like, someone that might have started with Lovable six months ago, actually. Is like, oh, that's, that's not enough for me now. I want to take something else. So yeah, that was kind of feed into this idea of like, does Claude code spin up a backend for you or something?

• 53:51Speaker 01

  Yep, makes sense.

• 53:52Speaker 00

  Cool. So yeah, we will catch up again next month. Yeah, I hope the house, are you moving this month as the next month as well? Or yeah?

• 54:00Speaker 01

  Well, we'll start the move and then be in there probably first week of March.

• 54:04Speaker 00

  Yeah, nice. All right. Well, that'll be the first one from first episode. I guess we do from that place. So, um, cool. See you there. Thanks everyone for joining. We'll catch you next time.

• 54:13Speaker 01

  Thanks, Aaron.