Build 2026 Podcast: Satya Nadella, Sarah Guo and Elad Gil from No Priors, and Swyx from Latent Space

Please welcome, SWIX, Saragawa, Alad Gill, and Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Microsoft, Satya Nadella.

Hello, what's up? I'm so excited to be here. Welcome to a crossover episode of No Priors in Lane Space with Satya Nadella. Congratulations on an amazing... and

Lanespace with Satya Nadella. Congratulations on an amazing build. No, thank you so much. And

it's great to be with both of you. I listen to both of you or both the podcasts all the time. It's great to be on it. Thank you so much. So you're just talking about these amazing announcements from across the Microsoft estate all

much. So you're just talking about these amazing announcements from across the Microsoft estate all morning for I think three hours. What's the most important reflection or takeaway you have?

I'd say there are perhaps the biggest one for me is The biggest one for me is, let's sort of conceptualize this more as an ecosystem play as opposed to a single model or even a single platform, right? I mean, at least for me, having grown

up at Microsoft, having seen whatever, four major platform shifts, I sort of fall into that camp where a platform is defined by fundamentally its ability to create more value about the platform versus what's captured in the platform.

And so if you view what's happening right now, I think this morning's keynote was, how can any company, whether it's an AI native company or a traditional enterprise company, participate as a first class participant where they can point to AI they created, right? It's not that they don't use other

people's AI. Of course they will. But to me, what's the path?

people's AI. Of course they will. But to me, what's the path?

What's the recipe? How do I do it? What does a stack look like? What

does the tooling look like? What is valuable? How do you do that? That's it.

That's sort of our job to do. Ecosystem strategy is very complicated, right? Because you end up building certain components, partnering for certain components, supporting them. You just announced this big suite of models. Tell us a little bit about

them. You just announced this big suite of models. Tell us a little bit about the training strategy for Microsoft. the training strategy for Microsoft?

Yeah, so the thing that we wanted to do with the MAI models was to build, and as Mustafa talked about, first of all, a great lineage, right? Starting

with pre -training, with very good data quality, doing all the ablations, making sure, because in some sense it's become even harder to build a clean lineage model, just because there's so much stuff out there So much stuff out there that you truly need to ablate out to be able to have a fantastic pre -trained model. In fact, that's one of the challenges of

a lot of the open -weight models is they look great on one benchmark or two, but they're not great on practice. So that's why, in fact, even in our FDEs are pretty gone really excited about these MAI models, because how the heck can a small 5B model hill climb? And it goes back a

little bit to and it goes back a little bit to what I think is ultimately the key thing to do which is try to pursue finding that cognitive core so to me starting with a clean lineage then creating that ability for companies to be able to use this right not just as a

generalist but to create their own specialist by building this hill climbing scaffold around it right so it's not just the model but you So it's not just the model, but you have a Hillcline scaffold around it, then you will start building your RLE. You will start collecting the traces. Most importantly, you'll have private

evals because we know all the evals out there are good, interesting, but they're not really that critical at this point because they all can be maxed. And so the point is each company will have its own private eval. And so that end -to -end platform story around our models is sort of what models is sort of uh what i think is interesting and then the one other

thing sarah since you brought that up is i do feel there's a new frontier like people talk about the frontier and are you operating at the frontier um interestingly enough if you add a little temporality to it you can use let's say in in fact that the lando lakes demo we showed was pretty cool we used whatever gpt55 right then you collected a bunch of traces and then you took a

I've been reasoning model and achieved higher so that is another aspect of what it means to appear I mean operate at the frontier yeah I think I first of all have to congratulate you on basically building a frontier new lab inside of Microsoft in two years I'm wondering you know you have all this AI strategy that you're rolling out I'm ready what do you know now that you wish you would tell

yourself two years ago two three years ago three years for the Jensen partnership two years for MAI yeah I mean I think the the thing when for MEI? Yeah,

I mean, I think the thing that I reflect quite a bit, right, which is sort of obviously I got into all this when I got excited by the scaling loss paper and, you know, when, you know, even the OpenAI Partnership came about when those folks said, hey, we're going to really throw a lot of computer transformers. And

they've helped, right? The thing that I always look back and say, wow, these things do have capability that they're climbing up. I mean, this, you know, this crude way of saying it is intelligence is log of computer. This, you know, this crude way of saying it is intelligence is log of compute kind of works. Now,

what I think we underestimated perhaps is the real world complexity of deploying these so that they actually deliver the value in the real world, right? So the outcomes as measured by any benchmark is interesting, important, but the true eval is when people out there

are able to do is when people out there are able to do unique things that they only can value and it's very measurable right that i wish we had sort of even like had more in our consciousness right which is as an industry because right now i think when people say wow i don't want

a token max it's an artifact of us not having thought ourselves as an industry that we are using tokens to create value every step of the way so i think that's kind of what i wish value every step of the way. So I

think that's kind of what I wish we had gotten there but I'm glad we are here. What are some of the use cases that you've seen that have created

are here. What are some of the use cases that you've seen that have created the most value for your customers? Because I know that people talk a lot about code and I think it's pretty clear that that's something that's having very large scale impact. Are there other areas that you find in common that your customers are really

impact. Are there other areas that you find in common that your customers are really benefiting? Yeah I think yeah to your point obviously coding is now got but it's

benefiting? Yeah I think yeah to your point obviously coding is now got but it's interesting by the way Elijah to even talk about the coding right which is coding is work so well that we now have to rebuild the IDE. Coding has worked so well that we now have to rebuild the IDE, right? I mean, it's kind of nuts to see what we launched. It's like, oh my god, I have these

100 agent sessions. The cognitive load, it transfers back to me as a human is so excessive that now I need a new UI. Oh, by the way, the chat as the only artifact was also impossible, so that's why we need a canvas.

So it's kind of interesting for all the things about where is software needed or where is UI needed. you kind of need that even for code, right, in a fully agentic world. But that said, one of the things that we are starting to see, we started seeing with co -work, but even some of the work we showed with autopilot, right, on what you see with

clause is a good one. Because if you sort of think about a lot of human capital is doing the glue work, right, if you now can augment that with tokens.

slash agents that are long running, durable, right? Then your

ability to scale, even what is still judgment and glue work, gets amplified like coding does. So you can, I'm positive that six months from now, we'll all be saying, oh, wow, like all through the night, there was a bunch of stuff that all these autopilots that I have working on my behalf with my delegated

authority. It's that I have working on my behalf with my delegated authority, so to

authority. It's that I have working on my behalf with my delegated authority, so to speak, right? I can sort of given even my identity, did a bunch of work,

speak, right? I can sort of given even my identity, did a bunch of work, then of course I'll need my new ADE to say, what did you do? Did

I do this work? And so on. So I think that that's where compressing of workflows, completing of tasks, that's where I think a lot of the value gets created.

I think you raised a really interesting point, which is there's the actual agent is doing the code and then there's a harness around it, and that's the environment, that's the content. And then there's a harness around it, and that's the environment, that's the

the content. And then there's a harness around it, and that's the environment, that's the context, that's everything you're setting up as a developer around actually a coding agent. What

is the harness for the enterprise? Is there an equivalent concept for broader productivity work, or how do you think about that concept sort of generalized? That's right. So in

some sense, you kind of want the harness to define the models, the data, and the tools, and so that you have a loop across those three.

And so what we are trying to, first of all, make sure is each of our And so what we are trying to, first of all, make sure is each of our products that we build, right? Whether it's GitHub Copilot or the security stuff we showed with M -Dash or even the Discovery for Science, it doesn't matter. All

of them are multi -model harnesses with tools access so that you can do this progressive disclosure of tools even so that they're token efficient. And then you're feeding it with very rich context because that's sort of the other hard lesson we have learned. context because that's sort of the other hard lesson we've learned in the

have learned. context because that's sort of the other hard lesson we've learned in the last two years is oh my god the amount of work you need to do to prep the context layer such that your plan can execute in the most efficient way is where the magic is so we have in our case we have the get up harness which essentially we're using across

all our products it's available in foundry and we're open like you can use your llama harness whatever or you can use the um uh you know Lama, harness, whatever, or you can use the, you know, any open harness or any harness of yours and train with your tools and multiple models and your context. And so that's the pitch. Because right now a lot of dialogue is, hey, if I train the harness

pitch. Because right now a lot of dialogue is, hey, if I train the harness plus tools and the model together, you get evals. And what we are proving out is, and the best example of that is what we did with M -Dash, right?

Because when it launched, it found bugs or vulnerabilities.

that were not found by mythos. And so there is existence proof, I would claim, that you can have a multimodal harness that can, in fact, be more performant in the real world. So a premise behind the training at the independent Frontier Labs is really, you know, we're going to have

these models and we'll have an API business and we'll support enterprises and startups. Models,

and we'll have an API business and we'll support enterprises and startups, but a first -party product, be it productivity or code or search, drives the majority of revenue. That's

a different value equation than you're describing, I think, with the Microsoft ecosystem. If that's

the case, tell me if it's the case, because obviously you have first -party products and you have enablement products. What is the role of the developer? What's going to be hard and the set of skills and the value capture the developer has in that world? Yeah. So I think that there's always going to be the case that

that world? Yeah. So I think that there's always going to be the case that someone who is super successful as a platform builder can also have first -party products. It was

true with Windows, it was true with the SaaS side and the cloud side as well with us and others and so on. But the thing that is, is it should not be a limiter to other people achieving that same success, right? That I

think is the core difference, which is the network effects this time around. which is

the the network effects this time around around intelligence as such because they learn from data and not really lots of data it's just the few samples that you have to see to understand what's novel about something so that's why the game becomes how to protect so that's why i would say every company having

private evals may be the biggest ip right i think about it like what's that private eval that you can then use right I think about it like what's that private eval that you can then use even a frontier model to hill climb on and not leak the traces maybe one of the biggest drivers of IP like so

in other words another asset test is you have an eval that's private you're using a model a can you switch it to model B and if you know climb up if you can then you're in control if you can't you're not in If you can't, you're not in control. And that's where

even the harness decision becomes super important, right? So therefore, having an open harness, letting all models come in, having your evals, your context, your tools help you hill climb, I think is the skills that an AI -native startup needs, a SaaS company needs, or every enterprise needs. Yeah, I think in a very real way,

you are Microsoft historically as an operating systems company and then become a cloud company.

Maybe like the third app. operating systems company, and then become a cloud company, maybe like the third act is that you're a harness or evals company, whatever the sort of conglomerate of concepts that you want to put together. I think like enabling every company to have like frontier intelligence or I forget the exact term that you used,

is the mission, right? That's it. That is the platform promise that you build with us. You will get your intelligence for your data. That's it. To me, that is

us. You will get your intelligence for your data. That's it. To me, that is the, like if there was one tag. you're in data that's right that to me that is the like if there was one tagline uh for this entire developer conference is can everybody operate at the frontier with their frontier

intelligence right to me that is so important because otherwise i i don't know how you achieve stable equilibrium right which is how do i then go and say wow my company is going to have a terminal value because i now know how to continuously compound on top of what's a platform that gets better right so when like windows obviously came out adobe built

autodesk built uh or even like take what jensen said we built dx and he built you know kuda on top of it uh right i mean i always say to jensen god i got the short end of that right i wish uh we had recognized it but nevertheless but that idea that you can build a platform layer

that someone else can then extend who can build a platform layer that someone else can then extend out and build their own intelligence layer in this case I think is everything right without it why have a developer conference I can just come and have you all sort of just worship at the altar of one model yeah that's not a developer conference backstage we had a discussion about what is IP or what

is the value in a company it used to be the length of human experience at a company and now it's this other thing which is the evals the experience in sort of applying agents to the company he i just want you to like fresh that all a bit more because yeah it's a great way to frame it right because at the end of the day every company is going to have both

the human capital that is still going to be super valuable uh because humans uh and their ability to find the gaps that exist at all times is going to be the way we all will create value right i mean so i'm definitely in the camp that this is going to be about expressing new Definitely in the camp that this is going to be about expressing new forms of human agency

and ambition, even as token capital goes up, right? So let's say any corporation has lots of tokens and a lot of human capital. The question is, how do you compound the two? So if you have a, like if you take in teams, I have a bunch of agents doing work and a bunch of humans doing work and the traces between those, that is really important context of how

that enterprise is creating value.

then that goes back to train not a generalist model but to train the train the company veteran agent uh right that is super valuable again again right which is when a company guy says it should in fact go on to the balance sheet is how i think about it right that's so in fact there may be like human capital was never possible to go put on a balance sheet uh because

you didn't know how to capture the tacit knowledge know how to capture the tacit knowledge, whereas now I think you can with the agents that have learned through time, through all the traces. So that's what at least we think will happen. I think

the SEC is going to have to have accounting standards for token expertise.

You're talking about the equilibrium state and a stable equilibrium where companies have this compounding value and can see terminal value for themselves. Another challenge to, you know, the considered equilibrium of Another challenge to, you know, the considered equilibrium of, okay, there are applications and workflows that are sort of common to a vertical or a

horizontal, and this was like the generation of SaaS companies, and, you know, Microsoft has lots of SaaS properties as well, and then there are things that are very specific to every enterprise that they're differentiated against. I'm sure you have heard much and participated in much of the debate about the end of software, because all these workflows are cheap to generate now. Do you think the equilibrium looks different between... cheap to generate

now. Do you think the equilibrium looks different between what agents get built in enterprises

now. Do you think the equilibrium looks different between what agents get built in enterprises versus in their vendors in the future? Yeah, so I think what's happening there is, see, we had a particular way we captured, I would say, workflow in apps, right? Because we built a data model, right? We

schematized some part of some business process. We then built a bunch of business logic.

Yep. And then we put a bunch of UI on top of a bunch of business logic and then we put a bunch of UI on top of it, right?

So that's kind of what every SaaS company. And a little configuration. For like 20 years, that was it. And that was it. So interestingly enough, now you kind of get to relitigate that vertical stacking, right? So I still think, for example, that data model that you build underneath every SaaS application is super good, right? Like why reinvent

it? Like my general ledger better be a general ledger. I don't need new schema

it? Like my general ledger better be a general ledger. I don't need new schema creation. In fact, general ledger i don't need new schema creation uh in fact

creation. In fact, general ledger i don't need new schema creation uh in fact that entity relationship uh is actually pretty good robust thing that i want to feed and you want to be stable that's right yeah then same thing with business logic right if you look at uh we have this product called power bi right

it was like dashboards galore people created the beauty underneath that dashboard is a very rich semantic model right someone took the pain to create a dashboard and do all the measures and you want that, that's business logic, right? I want that to be available to

me. So I think the challenge of the SaaS business model is we packaged one

me. So I think the challenge of the SaaS business model is we packaged one way. We now have to learn how to unbundle these things and rebundle in new

way. We now have to learn how to unbundle these things and rebundle in new ways and discover new business models, right? I mean, if you look at it, what's happening today with Microsoft 365 is a great example, right? We have this thing called WorkIQ. So 365 is a great example, right? We have this thing called WorkIQ. In

WorkIQ. So 365 is a great example, right? We have this thing called WorkIQ. In

fact, what we are realizing is, oh my God, like if you look at it, in fact, there's a historical parallel to, right? We sold first Exchange and SharePoint and, you know, before Teams, we had a thing called Lynx Server and what have you.

And we thought, oh, that's all going to move to the cloud. But little did we realize that the number of people who will use servers in the cloud is 10x, 100x, right? Because people were not buying servers. They were just buying a subscription.

Because people were not buying servers, they were just buying a subscription. The same thing is now happening with M365 because with WorkIQ, we have exposed what is perhaps the most important database in a company that never got used as a database because it was only captive to our apps, right? It was email operated on it,

Teams operated on it, Word, Excel, PowerPoint, SharePoint. But now, this is one of the coolest things I get to do with WorkIQ. I go to a GitHub repo and I say, hey, I attended. WorkIQ. I go to a GitHub repo and I say, hey, I attended a bunch of design meetings last week related to this repo. Can

you capture all that and tell me what changes I should make? I mean, think about that, right? It literally can go look at all those transcripts, come back with a plan to change a code base, right? Previously, you could never have thought of using M365 for something like that. So the value creation opportunity now in the agent world is in fact 10x more, but it does In the agent

world is in fact 10x more, but it does require us to have, for example, there's going to be usage around M365, right, which is going to be perhaps more than even the end users. And we have to even re -architect, like in fact, like what I use to serve an inbox or a mailbox cannot be used to serve an agent. And so that's sort of what we're doing. I don't believe in

like permanent business models for any of these domains, but in the near term, do you have a prediction between...

you know, outcomes -based pricing, token -based pricing, enterprise bundles? Yeah, the way I think about this is always we've had, like, let's

enterprise bundles? Yeah, the way I think about this is always we've had, like, let's even take the per -user pricing. is really an artifact of someone creating a budget needing certainty, right? Because it's the most important thing. Like, somebody wants a budget, they need a per -user. important thing, like

important thing. Like, somebody wants a budget, they need a per -user. important thing, like somebody who wants a budget, they need a per user. And per user is just a set of entitlements to usage, right? That's kind of what it is. And so

the way is, if the first bundling will be, take some usage, bundle it into per user stacks, and, you know, then sell subscriptions. So subscriptions, I think are going to be there, per user is going to be there. Then the next big thing will be consumption. So people will say, I want consumption. And it's also possible that people will say, I don't even want to pay for any of the subscriptions or

the consumption. that people will say, I don't even want to pay for any of

the consumption. that people will say, I don't even want to pay for any of the subscriptions or the consumptions outcome. But remember, most people love outcomes until they have an outcome. Because once you have an outcome, it's like giving away royalty, right? I

an outcome. Because once you have an outcome, it's like giving away royalty, right? I

mean, I've talked to customers who love, you know, outcome -based pricing. And I say, I'm all in until they, oh my God, like, what are you talking about? You're

sharing in my outcome? No, no, no. I want you to go back to per -user pricing and I want you to consumption price, right? So I think that debate will go on.

a particular time and a place versus one to rule them all. And if anything, if you're a SaaS vendor or you're a platform vendor, having that flexibility, and quite frankly, we face this with GitHub, right? We just recently announced a per -user pricing on GitHub. Because little, you know, GitHub Copilot was constructed

on GitHub. Because little, you know, GitHub Copilot was constructed at a per -user level before we understood even the intensity of usage of agents. understood even uh the intensity of usage of agents right there's an

of agents. understood even uh the intensity of usage of agents right there's an interactive way for a developer to use code complete maybe task it is not like oh i launched 10 000 you know agents that are going on all day right so that is what the adjustment is about so now that we really want there

will always be a per user but they will have to be a consumption meter how do you think about the durability of sas more generally one thing i've observed is in a lot of enterprises The thing I've observed is in a lot of enterprises internally there will be teams that almost have agent euphoria. They're so excited about the explosion of things they can build that they're trying to rebuild a lot of

applications or going to their SaaS vendors and saying we're not going to work with you anymore or we're considering an internal project and it seems like in six to nine months maybe some of those people will come back and say actually we we can't rebuild everything. How do you think about what's durable in this world and what isn't? I think we have to go through one full budget cycle on

isn't? I think we have to go through one full budget cycle on this to really I just cycle on this to really see the sort of the emergence of the equilibrium, because at the end of the day, there's marginal cost to even generating the app, right? In fact, there can be even

a simple way to say it, like if you should always acquire something, if the marginal cost of building and maintaining something on your own is higher, right? That should be like, it's a quantifiable, right? A quantifiable thing. It's a quantifiable,

right? That should be like, it's a quantifiable, right? A quantifiable thing. It's a quantifiable, right? A quantifiable thing. And the maintenance part is important, right? Even like you got

right? A quantifiable thing. And the maintenance part is important, right? Even like you got to remember like, hey, you know, all the security stuff that now AI will find, you better fix them too fast. Of course, there's a coding agent to help you with, but then that burns tokens, right? So whose responsibility is it? It's kind of like a cycle that you've got to think through. And I think we have gone

through the excitement that I can generate a lot of software. I think the next thing would be what software do I really want to generate? I think the next thing would be what software do I really want to generate? What software do I want to use from others? How do I compose these two into some agentic workflow that I have agency over? Right, because I think there'll be very little tolerance for

anybody who's inflexible at the vendor level. But at the same time, I think that anyone who has got that flexibility, shows up, delivers the value, will be back again, right, with selling software, but with just different business models. yeah again

right we're selling software but with just different business models in fact speaking about building software one of my favorite moments from i think a previous build maybe one or two years ago was they had a big they there was a section of you building your own software i'm curious if you're building anything now yeah so i i think you know first of all let's face it right building software has made

it possible for even the incompetence of a ceo of a company like ours uh you can build so thank god but that said i i i do feel that you know something like um get up copilot to me and especially the new sessions app or the new app has just made it so much more possible for you to have

agency over artifacts that you felt you couldn't touch before right so for me as a ceo even to go to a code base uh to be able to learn about it like i remember joining code base uh to be able to learn about it like i remember joining microsoft long back you know first and then you say man everybody had to go in and look at you know whatever cutlers malik or

what have you to learn how to do good c uh c plus plus code um so now that ability to be more full stack up and down is so good but that doesn't mean every one of us should be doing the same thing the question is how do you then have the ability to inspect things learn

things see things inspect things learn things see things um i think it's just so much more and so to me what i'm building a lot of is these long -running foundry agents uh right so there's autopilots so the easiest thing is to me i think i just built one uh even

last week where the idea was hey can i have an agent that is continuously monitoring essentially my own chief of staff autopilot autopilot right we're going to have that obviously in Scout that's what we showed but it is so easy and trivial to build I took it work

IQ I said take work IQ go and build a foundry long -running agent store all the memory in using rayfin right basically at my back end as a service and lo and behold it built it and not only built it I could say publish to teens and it published the It published the

damn thing to teams. So the ability to have some end -to -end project like this complete is just pretty miraculous. How do you think that impacts the different types of engineering roles that exist in the future? Because right now, I think there's a dozen different types of engineers that you can be from QA, front -end, etc. There's a big swath. I've heard some people argue that in four or five

years, we'll basically end up with four engineering roles. It'll be people who are managing agents. It'll be four deployed engineers or FDE. The people who are managing agents, it'll

agents. It'll be four deployed engineers or FDE. The people who are managing agents, it'll be forward deployed engineers or FDEs, it'll be security engineers, and then people working on large -scale infrastructure for a small number of services, and then everything else just collapses into the agentic world. Do you think that's a correct view of the world? Yeah,

I mean, I think we'll have to experiment our way through it. But what you said is what there are some very at -scale things. At LinkedIn, they did structurally change and basically built up a new discipline called Full Stack Builder. uh and you know basically built up a new discipline called full stack

Stack Builder. uh and you know basically built up a new discipline called full stack builder right so they went and said hey let's bring uh people from design and product management front -end engineering all put them together uh but also have an edge right it's not like the design person still doesn't have the design edge or the front -end person doesn't have the front -end edge but you can give yourself bigger

scope in roles so that you're not confined to one role um and then equally infrastructure Equally, infrastructure has become very critical, right? So in other words, like, I mean, RLEs, I mean, one thing we've realized is even for the Excel team, for example, building the

RLE in which a reward can be learned is actually one of the hardest sort of infrastructure problems. And so you kind of need even new talent, right? Distributed systems

people even in what was considered an end user app team because it's a different skill set. So yes, infrastructure, science is the other one, obviously. skill set so yes

skill set. So yes, infrastructure, science is the other one, obviously. skill set so yes infrastructure science is the other one obviously uh so i think we'll see how these evolve right where's the real i mean always the world will have a bunch of specialists um you know i think the generalist role is going to be the most exciting right because the leverage of a generalist

um is where we are going to see the maximum returns right when you said hey are you coding i'm now a gent like what i've basically translated knowledge I would generally what I've basically translated knowledge work right which I did where I created a Word document or a spreadsheet or even and

now I can build an app right it's in the same sentence right that idea that oh wow my generalist skills have gotten a higher leverage I think is what we're going to see across the board music to the ears of CEOs and VCs that are like a little dangerous and a lot of all the names for idea people idea people These that are a little dangerous at a lot of things. Golden

age for idea people. with a lot of agency. If you take that idea of personal agency and you just zoom it out to the organizational context, my partner Mike Vernal, who actually started his career at Microsoft, just wrote an essay where one of the big takeaways is it's an age where you can be much more ambitious, and you need to be given the pace of the environment and how quickly

actually users and companies are open to adopting new technologies.

opting new technologies um how do you think about i feel silly asking this of somebody running a you know trillion dollar plus company already but how do you think about how microsoft can be more ambitious now it's a great question um i think um i think the the thing in these type of transitions

is to have a conceptual model of how work can change to go after outcomes that you could hardly imagine previously, right? In fact, Kevin Scott has this nice line, right, which is when you can make the impossible, like when you're

making hard things easier, that's sort of one point of leverage. But true

ambition is about making the impossible possible. So, now, the thing that is missing a little bit in all of our organizations is what is that new conceptual model of what can we build what was impossible and what can we build and i'll give you one example of this right which is i take

great inspiration from sort of the people who were managing the azure network and they came to the this was from even last year you know we were scaling you saw that i talked about sort of how we built in the last 15 months more azure capacity more Azure capacity than we built in the first 15 years. I mean, it's crazy, right? It's pretty

wild and it's the same team. So they saw that and they said, Bob, this just ain't going to work if we don't reconceptualize our work. So they built, essentially they said, our job is not to do Azure networking. Our job is to build the agentic system that does Azure networking, right? These are the folks managing the

500 plus fiber operators managing the van, right? All over and five. Fiber operators managing the van, right? All over. And fiber operations ultimately is a

five. Fiber operators managing the van, right? All over. And fiber operations ultimately is a physical operation. Things get caught, things get, you know, have to be repaired. You know,

physical operation. Things get caught, things get, you know, have to be repaired. You know,

we have fancy words called DevOps and so on. Basically, emails are coming in and you got to go respond to them, take care of it. So they built this agentic system. They even have a character for it. It's called Miles and it sort

agentic system. They even have a character for it. It's called Miles and it sort of does all this stuff, right? They started sort of screaming for more tokens and so on. And so they were saying, look, we don't need a headcount. We need

so on. And so they were saying, look, we don't need a headcount. We need

tokens. in order to be able to manage our operation. That reconceptualization of what their

our operation. That reconceptualization of what their work is, right? They basically took their work and made it meta, right? That meta

work is now their new work, right? In the 80s, if somebody had come to us and said, four billion people are going to get up in the morning and start typing, my model would have been, we need four billion typists, but we're not doing typing. We're doing knowledge. four billion typists but we're not doing typing we're doing

doing typing. We're doing knowledge. four billion typists but we're not doing typing we're doing knowledge work so that to me i think is it right which is whether it's microsoft or whether it's any organization is to give ourselves permission to do new types of metacognition meta work using these new tools to change the

outputs that matter uh and then really make the impossible possible so completing that dot or the connective tissue across those i think is where a lot of the enterprise value will get created Should we talk about data centers? Yeah, please ask. Oh, okay. Well, this leads nicely into the data center buildup. I always think, I'm just impressed with the sheer

scale of the buildup from Microsoft, but also everyone else, that this is redefining what it means to be a hyperscaler. And I just feel like that has unprecedented scale on finances, on the way you run the company, but also the communities that are impacted. the company but also the communities that are that are impacted um that just

impacted. the company but also the communities that are that are impacted um that just talk a bit more about what you're seeing on the ground like when you visit your yeah i think there are two aspects of it obviously the the build out is uh extraordinary um you know nothing like this has happened and it's great to be one of the participants in it uh but you brought

up the other part right i think at this point it's clear that unless we as an industry uh are uh are very principled about ensuring that the benefits of all the stuff we're talking about are felt in real ways uh at the community

level right because this is not just a a campaign uh right it has to be real where people are saying look this is not changing the prices on energy for me in fact if anything it's bringing down prices because long term there's going to be a better grid there is going to be more energy water consumption The

better grid, there is going to be more energy. Water consumption is in fact not sort of, in fact, water is being replenished, right? You got to really educate folks on truly what's happening, the closed loop systems we are building. We have to invest in the training, the jobs, the tax base. In fact, the least talked about stuff

is the amount of jobs that get created during construction, after construction. What's

the tax base that's there in the community? And all this has to be real.

in the community and and all this has to be real um and and if that is the case then we will have permission if it is not we won't have permission it's as simple as that right which is uh we we i think we have to take it as an industry pretty seriously uh i think it's good for communities to be skeptical ask the hard question for us to do the hard

work on that um but at the end of the day if there's if we can really be the producer i've always felt like in human history if you use a lot of energy I've always felt like in human history, if you use a lot of energy, but also create a lot of value for society, the story has been fantastic. If you don't do that, it's not been that great. And this time

been fantastic. If you don't do that, it's not been that great. And this time around, I'm a firm believer that ultimately, if you do have a token economy that drives productivity, that drives economic growth, that drives broad spread, you know, participation, better health outcomes, then I think we will be in a

great place. um then i think we will be in a great place uh and

great place. um then i think we will be in a great place uh and that's at least what we all have to be focused on yeah it makes me think actually that with all these initiatives that you're doing might be easier to see roi in the communities first before in enterprise i mean i think both sides in fact it comes back together it has to be the people in the communities are

going to be employed are going to be participants uh in the real economy right that's i think the question is like if we if the broad economy is doing well and it's like if the broad economy is doing well and the communities are doing well, the dots get connected. It's sort of the market forces are such that we will connect the dots. And that I think is it. Like you

ought to be able to see the evidence. You can't be about any one company, but it has to be broad economic growth and broad, you know, community permission.

What have you most updated your personal models on regarding societal impact of What have you updated your personal models on regarding societal impact of AI? So you're saying what's the... What have you updated most on in terms

of AI? So you're saying what's the... What have you updated most on in terms of societal impact of AI? I think the most critical thing is the first question we even started with, which is we need to tell the story and make it real

that everybody has a real shot to participate as... a

participate as... a

first -class participant in this new economy. That's kind of, I think, in the next 12 months, 18 months, we need a way for people to say, oh, wow, I get it, right? There's going to be tremendous capability, tremendous amount of infrastructure, but I can see what is going to happen, whether it's the benefits like

health outcomes, or my ability to create a startup, or my comes or my ability to create a startup or my ability to run my local sort of store more efficiently it's just happening and I see that benefit myself right that to me you know earning that permission in a path dependent

way we can't wait see the one thing you like I've learned is I think the world is going to be very skeptical of tech and tech companies that say trust us we've got it that say trust us we've got it the future is going to be glorious uh you kind of have to

deliver tangible benefits um and quite frankly politicians winning elections uh because they have advocated for that that will be at least my adjustment because without it um thinking that somehow because it's too important this time around it's too much of Because it's too important this time around. It's too much of the economy for it

not to be the case. So one very simple framework I have for, you know, what are, what is going to be the broad benefit of AI beyond the communities just working in technology are sort of wealth creation. It's going to happen in a ton of different companies, startups and large companies. Then you have healthcare. You had amazing

demos today. There are companies like Open Evidence. I think that is happening. Education seems

demos today. There are companies like Open Evidence. I think that is happening. Education seems

like another one. That's an obvious good.

where we haven't seen as much impact as I'd expect. Do you have a hypothesis on why that might be or if it'll come? Yeah I mean I think this is where again how we think about education how you know recently I met with the founders of Alpha School and learned a lot about what they were going and going about and it's fascinating to listen to how to even rethink what is education

really look like because I think it's actually very important and I'm not saying anything look like, because I think it's actually very important. And I'm not saying anything traditionally being done is less important, right? I was even looking at the, it's fascinating to see, I forget which Stanford class it was, the Asian guidelines for CS something.

Because you still need people to learn. Like it was an interesting AI class that they were making sure people were learning how to apply softmax appropriately versus saying, hey, fix my training run. So I think learning concepts is important. It's going to be.

So I think learning concepts is important. It's going to be critical. But the way we create the incentives, what are the credentials, how we value those credentials, what is the employment opportunity for those credentials. So I think that there's a complete change that has to happen given the way to get to information, way

to educate yourself, way to continuously keep yourself updated has changed so much. So I

think interestingly enough, maybe the next big startup and success story could be someone who builds a new university or a new pedagogy even of how to get someone to go through a curriculum and find economic opportunity that's highly valuable. Well, that has

felt perhaps impossible for a long time, but it's a great note to end on and something that might be possible. Thank you, Sanya. Thank you so much. Thank you.

I appreciate it. Thank you all. Thank you, Satya. Thank you so much. Thank you,

I appreciate it. Thank you all.