Boz To The Future - The Future According to Ed Catmull

0:00Welcome to Boz to the Future, the podcast where we dive deep into a smaller number of topics. I kind of created this podcast after I felt so many podcasts I listened to in the technology sector tended to go really broad and not as deep. And so we have the opportunity to do the opposite. And I'm here today with somebody who I would normally say needs no introduction, although I suspect most people, even our most avid listeners, will not have the full story.

0:32Sure, everyone is familiar with Pixar, which you co-founded, and Toy Story and all the tremendous films that came there. And then moving to the president of Disney Animation, where we get frozen in Moana and Inside Out and a bunch of additional, it was Utopia and a bunch of additional great films. An Oscar-winning career leading this incredibly important storytelling vehicle. But that isn't the whole story. The whole story I didn't learn till I read your great book, Creativity, Inc., about how you managed the culture at Pixar. Actually, it starts way before that when you were a kid and wanted to create stories with animated animated stories, and you didn't know how to do that. And you embarked on this incredible career where you are probably the godfather of 3D graphics, inventing such tremendous, important things like the Z-Buffer and texture mapping, which for those who don't know at home are things that you are using all the time. If you're using playing computer games, if you're watching any movies,

1:29has to be a relatively small list of people who've won both an Oscar and a Turing Prize. And so, you know, for us at least, the storytelling piece, this media piece is such a salient part, and that's a global audience. I doubt I'd find a person around the world who hasn't come across these stories. But it is also a technology story, and you as a technologist, starting from very, very early on in our industry and pioneering so many important techniques.

1:55I mean, have I left anything out? Is there anything that people need to know about you that I haven't included here? I'm so thrilled to have you on the program. I gotta tell you, one thing that's interesting for me at least is the story of your life is one of an incredible commitment to a vision from a relatively early age. You talked about in your book, watching cartoons at home with a kid and that being an inspiration to you and then maintaining a through line to what you ended up doing for your entire career. And this is a little bit before we get into the deeper tech stuff, which I want to talk about.

2:50Talk to you about that that commitment to an idea. I'm you know here at Meadow We're working on reality labs and we're 10 years in we think of this as a tremendously long-term investment in the modern era 10 years into a vision pursuing VR and AR But you really pursued a vision over many many decades Well the of course I couldn't predict the future and where we ended up I would But I would say there are points in which where I ended up was something a place I didn't even want to go and when I got there I really enjoyed it, but it was not It wasn't the point it was and it wasn't the choice either was like he's sort of evolved into it and so how did I get here? But it it started with that just and for me it's that the love of storytelling in the curiosity and the magic of Watching Disney and even as a kid. I knew that you know, they're they're playing tricks and around run you watch the characters come off of the animation boards and come alive and That what's fun. That's what see you know, what are they doing?

3:47to make that happen. How does that work? I made a platen for drawing, took courses and did a lot of drawing. And around the time of high school, I couldn't see how to take the leap from what I wanted to where I wanted to go. So I did stop pursuing that one at that time.

4:17and I switched over into physics. And I will say that for many years I wanted to tell people that I switched from animation to physics. There's this kind of titter in the audience. Because it seems incongruous. But I have to tell you, I didn't think they were incongruous. And I actually think it's a societal problem that people would think that the arts and the technology, you pick one or the other, but...

4:46There's an incongruity between them. Right. And I became one of those, the few foundational principles that I had was that sort of the deeper connection. And it's a false dichotomy. It's a false dichotomy. It's exactly right. It's a thing that's so misunderstood about every engineer I know puts the same care into what they're producing, whether it be lines of code, a server infrastructure, an architect.

5:12There's a very deep discipline inside of the space of engineering that at some point resembles art. I imagine any deep discipline does nuclear science pick a favor. There's an elegant way to do things. There's a way that an aesthetic way of doing things. And then itself, the product is something that ideally, and this goes back to Xerox Park and Doug Engelbart, it's people's lives are affected. It changes people's lives somehow. There's a real pride.

5:39in engineering craft that there is some work product at the end that affects people. And there are other example, false dichotomies or even misconceptions. I was fortunate in at Pixar and Disney that I could work with world-class artists and with production people and with computer scientists. And there's assumption somehow that the that certain people are much more organized, the others are more detailed, and so forth. You know, it actually wasn't true, is that some of the artists, frankly, were far more organized than these other people, extraordinarily. I gotta tell you, I understand that he's one organized guy. And, you know, there's variance between each one, each of them. I'm not saying everybody's the same in terms of their abilities, but if you were to look at them as a group of people,

6:36the conceptions about their skills actually don't match at all. What they're doing. Yeah, the stereotypes don't match up to the expectations. And the stereotypes persist. Yeah. But that's how they're incorrect stereotypes. Yeah. And this became one of the things that you anchored on, one of the reasons that you were able to build to the team was that you kind of rejected these preconceived notions. Yes. But it wasn't like I knew it intuitively. It was a learning process along the way.

7:06when I went into physics, I was good, but I wouldn't say that I was great, and I knew that there was a problem I had having to deal with memory, which 50 years later, I learned why, having to deal with visualization, which is both an advantage and a handicap. Yeah. Are you referring to the... Aphantasia.

7:36which I did not know existed myself until an early product manager at Facebook started asking everyone, hey, when I tell you to picture an apple, what do you see? And it was like shocked to find out that many of us literally could imagine an apple because he had aphantasia. So for those of you maybe listening don't know, aphantasia, the inability to create a visual in your mind based on an image. And people have a, there's a spectrum. There's people who really see nothing. It's just a conceptual construct. And there's people who have a very vivid image of an apple, and there's people who are kind of in between. Phenomenal that you actually ended up being one of the, you know, premier storyteller, visual storytellers in the world, and you suffer from a Fantasia. That's right. When I close my eyes, I don't see images. That's it. When I open them, I can draw perfectly fine. Yes. But when I close them. And this was an issue for physics because so much of this is visually understanding.

8:31some kind of representation of a space. Well, what I do have is a good intuitive three-dimensional sense. And what I realize in retrospect is that I was judging a teacher by whether or not they gave me an intuition. Teachers would tell me things, and I would struggle with the problems. But once in a while something would happen where I would develop either on my own or because what a good teacher would say, they would give an intuition.

9:01And as soon as I had the intuition, then all of a sudden the problems weren't mathematical, they were intuitive. And then I could just race through the test. And I remember those experiences very well. How do we get to that point where it actually goes into a different place in my brain? Now this is, I didn't know it at the time, but you, some, most people know, or I shouldn't say this, I'm not saying this right, there's a technique for remembering things called the palace. Right, the mine palace. The mine palace, and you go through. I remember this from Sherlock Holmes. That's right. And so it's, you know, and there are books written, it goes back to Greek times as a memory technique. So I tried this technique. It never worked for me. I didn't realize the reason was I couldn't see the damn palace. You're putting things in a dark room. In a dark room.

9:58But the thing was, the people who were describing these techniques and used them didn't know that other people couldn't do that. Here's how you do it. The other person can't do it. That was an impairment in my memory. That was a disadvantage. The advantage was, I did develop really good intuition about things and spaces. I do remember when I came up with one of my more important discoveries, which actually most of the curved surface you see in movies today on the characters were something I did at Utah, which were not part of my dissertation. I was trying to solve a problem of how you describe a mathematical surface that handles these curved surfaces because it turns out that the four-sided

10:53objects with coming together forward a corner, half topological problems. So you put nerves or splines together. It's a problem you've got. So I spent a lot of time thinking about this as a side project. And I finally came up with the solution. It's now called the Cantwell-Clarke Subdivision Surface. But it's the one that's used. It's public domain. Pixar gives it to everybody and a lot of...

11:22papers were written on and so forth. When I first wrote it up, I remember vividly, well, actually the process of how I came up with it. And that was I would draw out a whiteboard, the problem, and then I could feel the problem disappear out of my conscious awareness and know it was going somewhere else in my brain. So I would rock back and forth in front of the whiteboard with my Hands behind my back for 20 to 30 minutes not knowing what's going on Just knowing that something was happening and then something would come up and I would write on the board and when they got stuck back down it would go So it wasn't math. It wasn't pictures I'm like can use math. Yeah, I could draw on the board if I needed a picture But the rest of was happening. No idea what's going on except that I came up with this

12:20Rating through migrating it to an intuitive as opposed to a kind of a road construct So having that that thing in mind Then flies forward to many years when he discovered this aphantasia only about 10 15 years ago Yeah, and then discovering that the greatest hand on animator animator of all time glen keen also as aphantasia incredible and he does the same thing he goes down into his his his body, and then when he draws, his body actually in space takes on the expressions in a way that he wasn't aware of until a video was taken with him with a cell phone. And it was really incredible, but that's his way of getting it out. Our brain's just different. It's cool. It is cool. Getting a little ahead of myself, I suppose, but one of the things I'm very enthusiastic about AI for is personalizing education to students.

13:20a thing that we've known for a long time in society that personalized education, one-on-one tutoring, one of the few interventions that reliably improved educational outcomes. Not necessarily all types of outcomes, but educational outcomes. But it's just not scalable. You can't have half the population teaching the other half the population. It's just, it's a challenge. I obviously, I did nothing near producing the result of your, yeah, subsurface division technique, but I struggled with math my whole kind of life. Math was actually my toughest subject.

13:49And then I got to college and eventually I switched to applied math and it was completely easy. All the problems became word problems. And so as opposed to differential equations, it was like, imagine wind and each molecule in the air is moving through space. I was like, oh, this makes perfect sense. I completely can understand now what I am integrating across. This all makes sense to me now. But when they weren't word problems, I really could not figure out what was going on. There was very abstract symbolic math. It was not my strength.

14:17like pure computer science actually was not my great strength but as soon as we got into like actually applied things I found that they were much easier and I just like yeah I probably would have had a much easier time with math at a much younger age had I been able to like recast the same exact math problem as a word problem that had some tangible construct around it now I realize that the higher levels of math that whole idea is BS anyways but for a lot of the math that I needed for my job it was like totally workable if I had had access to that kind of adapted tutoring. Well, if you get those hooks, then when you do need the abstract, you can do it. But if you start off with the abstract, then it's like you're just lost. What are your connections to the outside world? And our connections, like the embodiment of our ideas, is just different for each one of us. Yeah, that's right. Yeah. So you've gone through these transitions, and at some point you

15:15or now you're professional and you're gonna write software at this point. You've gone through the, the software wasn't a job back then. Well, the software was a job. So what happened was I was in physics and I get to like the last year and I take a computer science class. Okay. Now, also this is really cool. And you were at Utah. I was at Utah. For real, it was a hot bed of- Not quite, not that time. Just before.

15:44When I was undergraduate, there was the things happening. I wasn't aware of the things that were beginning. I was just finishing up and then because I'd taken a lot of classes, in my five years, I'd taken five years worth of courses, I had enough to both get my bachelor's degrees in computer science and in physics. But in that last year, it's like, okay, I'm now switching to computer science.

16:11When the teachers in that year was Alan Kaye was a graduate student. Incredible. So, and for Alan, not only is he inspirational, but it was like, she's saying, our things are going to change fast. And I really got that. It's like, this is changing fast. Yeah. And we are at the Easter egg hunt and the front of the line, and it just cut the string. Right. So, yeah. God, that's great. Yeah, amazing. So, that I got a job to go out and work at Boeing. Yeah, incredible. And I was there for a while. It was an interesting experience working on a CDC, yeah, CDC 6600 supercomputer. All right. Using cards. Yeah, it was with punch cards, right? Yeah. Using punch cards. And then Boeing got in trouble and they laid off 50,000 people. That was the origin of that.

17:08the joke that went around with the last person who leaves Seattle, please turn off the lights. That was when I was with them. That was it. That was the time. And my boss said, Ed, you're new here, but you need to know everybody else in your group has lived here for 10 years. They own their homes and their kids are in school. And I said, I understand. It's not a problem. I went back to grad school. I sneaked into grad school with the intent.

17:38of studying AI. Yeah, amazing. But the first course was taught by Ivan Sutherland. Yeah, so, I mean, really, this is the, if you're the godfather of 3D graphics, Ivan Sutherland might be the godfather of all graphics. Of all graphics, yeah. I mean, really, an incredible, you know, incredible lineage. So, and that was the start, and he's, through Ivan, he picked a big goal, but you gotta go step at a time. And the students that were there, We're all, in their own minds, we're all advancing the state of the art and help each other. So, Jim Clark and John Warnock and Alan Kaye, we're all students together, Martin Newell and Henry Fuchs, who went up and spent years in virtual reality. And we had Ivan Sutherland's Sort of Damocles. Sort of Damocles, the virtual reality. The first ever. Guys, yeah, he brought it.

18:39Over from Harvard when he came yeah, and so we're playing with that and and all this is going on when I graduated to the end the four years I finished my degree I Recognized that I had just been through You know the best thing I'd I'd ever had in my life experience. It was it was fantastic. Yeah amazing, but the conclusion I reached was I wanted to have that kind of environment for the rest of my life. So that became like this second foundational principle. It's like, that way these people supported each other. We had support from the government. I was grateful at the time for the support from ARPA, as it was then called. And that it was a long-term view of the government in supporting that kind of research, for which I don't think they ever got due credit.

19:39Yeah, certainly. I mean DARPA did, but I think from the point of view of federal electorate, federally elected officials, that was a great thing. Yeah, tremendous investment. And the one that everyone in the world benefits from without even realizing it. Not realizing that that forward thinking had such an impact on the world. Yeah. So with that, I went out and I ended up in a research lab in New York. I'd been in New York two years.

20:09earlier than that when I was at work in the New York World's Fair. Pre-fun? 65 or 64 and 65. And then back in New York on just outside of Queens and five years built up a lab. But now using these same principles is like we're in this new field. We want a group that works together and we made a decision because there are other people who wanted to make animated films. Sure. We were the only ones that said, we're going to publish everything we do. Yeah. So Jim Clark was there. In fact, that's what he and I took the idea they had at Utah and wrote the paper. Right. That was, you know, the now famous. Yeah. So, and Pat and Hannah later joined, he joined after I left New York Tech. But in five years, we built this team up.

21:06We participated in SIGGRAPH and published everything we did. And the reason was that we knew we were so far away that the best thing we could do was to engage with everybody else. And my long-term, longest-term professional relationships come out of the graphic community, not the entertainment community. And because of our success, George hired me to bring...

21:35technology into the film industry. But that led to a third foundational principle for me. Another thing I assume said this in the book, largely because I'm just sort of thinking, what are those things that made a difference? But one of them was that as I left New York Tech and I'd become a manager for the first time, I knew that I screwed up a lot. I made a lot of mistakes.

22:03To remember about half the decisions I made were great like the publishing everything we did and the way we Approach all we work with each other. That was great. Some of the stuff that we organized to the crock of Sure didn't work. All right. Yeah, I was just wrong So when I went to Lucas on my thigh, well, okay Well, we'll keep on doing the things that work for us that I've not got some new ideas about how to do things but I believe My guess is about half of these new ideas will be wrong, too. Right. And that will probably continue for the rest of my life. Now, I said that recently to somebody, an executive. I said that that would continue for the rest of my life. He said, no, Ed, your record is better than that. Yeah. And I couldn't think fast enough, but the reality is it wasn't better than that. It seemed like it was better.

23:02because I knew that I was wrong half the time and if you know you're wrong half the time then you let go of things that don't work faster and you spend less time on them. Yeah, for sure. So the ratio doesn't change, the amount of time you spend on them changes. Yeah. You can't control whether the idea is good or not at the front. You don't know. You can be honest with yourself about it. Yeah. We're going through the AI right now.

23:29While we can talk about exponential change in technology and so forth, the other exponential change has taken place is exponential growth of hype. For sure. All right, that's right. Wait, we have the same problem. When graphics were starting, there were articles coming out about how we're just about ready to reproduce Marilyn Monroe. Right. And for those of you in the field, this thing was cringing. Oh my God, this doesn't help. Yeah, that's right. Put this hype out there. Yeah.

23:58The field was small. But as technology changed and the internet came out and social media and cell phones, then the sheer gigantic size of the industry and the impact on it was such that the hype thing grew correspondingly at this compound rate. I think of this all the time. I was in Washington DC not too long ago and to some degree people who aren't in our industry are legitimately and fairly confused because they are reading daily sometimes from leaders in our space these exasperated kind of really high degrees of hype about AI and they're using AI and it's a very it's a very different experience than what they're reading and in so far yeah and there's a real disconnect between the two and I kind of apologize on behalf of our industry

24:57I do think we had a period here in the internet era and mobile phones where the world's behavior could change surprisingly quickly. A new app could come out and a million people could be using it that day. And, you know, in the physical world, that was nearly an impossibility. And now that you have this fully digital deployed over the internet software, it became possible to have these big companies even built relatively rapidly.

25:26But the rate of technological change, actual like real innovation, real pioneering new technology has never quite met that pace. And also humans don't change their fundamental behaviors that quickly. Adopting a new app is relatively lightweight. Picking up any piece of hardware is quite a bit tougher. Changing a fundamental behavior of how they go through their days is tougher still. Changing how they work at their job is maybe even the toughest of the group. There's a real mismatch.

25:55And I find myself sometimes a man without a tribe in the AI world, because I am both phenomenally enthusiastic about AI and also relatively sober about its current deficiencies and the amount of work we have to do to get it into position to do all the things that we're promising the world that almost can already do. I really worry about the relationship between the narrative around technology and the actual state of technology sometimes.

26:24There are certain things that are in parallel as we've gone through these transitions, and there are certain things that are just fundamentally different. The parallel things are other people's reaction to new technology is somewhat similar, and their ability to estimate the impact of where it's going has always been poor. The other thing which is in parallel, which I found very surprising at the time, was that in the then smaller world of computers and workstations, that the leaders of the workstations, I'm speaking particularly of the CEO of Silicon Graphics and of Sun, who had engineers, frankly, who understood the rate of change better than they did. But they were making incredibly poor decisions given the fact that the underlying rate of change of

27:24Compute power per dollar right was changing at this Compound rate of 40% per year right conflated with With more slot and there's the whole thing was confusing him. So they were making essentially short-term decisions Even people inside these technology companies. That's easy. It's not just the I know politicians I know that was it the guys who should have known better It's like son and son graphics don't exist today. No workstation company survived today. Yeah, that's right What did survive was Unix operating system. Yep. That's right. And so, you know, one evolved down this one track leading to Berkeley BS, from Bellabs, Berkeley BSD, Next Step. Sure. Apple into your phone. But that's like the general change in operating systems as it's matured over the years. And so that was one path. But these people who should have

28:22been there to take advantage of it, didn't. The ones who were better able to do it, because they started at the commodity product, kind of had it in their bones that the commodity product was actually always going to come up as a threat. And everybody that started at a higher level had a difficult imagining that the commodity product was going to come up and change everything. But the scale was going to change everything. And they were in the damn business. That's right. And it's like, I'm not even saying this like, It's like, well, of course they couldn't see at the time, but they could see at the time there are people said what are they doing? That's right. Like why did Silicon Valley's by Craig computer? Yeah, talk about this stupidest possible decision. Yeah, it's it's the wrong direction fighting the last war and But this has happened several times I mean if you look at like deck and all the companies that came before when they were when they're on mainframes going to mainframes to workstations was it was a tremendous, you know similar disruption where those folks saw this

29:22new thing as a disruptor on the edges as opposed to being the next technological leap forward. Exactly. The thing with the workstation wasn't the first time this happened. You're probably with DAC and others, it just kept happening over again. They couldn't see the implication of Moore's Law, which is the term we used at the time. It was a stand-in term for the rate of change. That's right. Yeah.

29:51And even today, people try to explain exponential change. I actually found that all explanations about explanation, exponential change are worthless. I agree. They're absolute bullshit. And partly because the people that try to explain it to like business leaders first, it literally means fast.

30:15It doesn't mean anything else to them. It doesn't mean fast. That's right. No, it doesn't. It doesn't mean slow. And it's also used in physics to indicate things that oscillate. The idea that it's not just that it's fast, it's that the rate is changing fast and the rate of rate of change is also fast. It's a very, very steep curve that is increasing its steepness. I, knowing what the term exponential means, having in my head a visual of what an exponential curve looks like, I've been saying this to my team a bunch about AI.

30:44I know that I'm on this curve because every time I think I've adjusted for it, and I check again, I am once again below the line, or every time I check for it, I am once again below the line. So as I think I've adjusted enough, I have not adjusted enough. It's a real scale and variant experience being on a technological exponential curve, where no matter how much I think I've adjusted, I haven't adjusted enough.

31:07and so you're trying to get ahead of it, and kind of all you feel like you can do is barely keep up with it. It is the feeling I had when the internet came out, and we were at the very early stage of the internet. By the way, my coming out of college, the first internet native generation, I had very much the Easter egg, the cutting of the rope, and the Easter egg feel. Everything was just, it was just, you know, it's a cool thing about computer science, is you're always at the edge. That's what we are right now. That's what we are right now, and if you feel it again right now, and it's very fun to be there, it will be curious to see.

31:36if this generation of leaders, technology leaders, have internalized the great, you know, anti-grove-ism, only the paranoid survive enough to disrupt themselves, to say the way that we were doing things before was great, was working, will not be enough in the future, can they actually stay on top of it, or do they themselves get disrupted by the opt-in comers? Well, on that particular topic, I'm not optimistic about the leaders.

32:04But I spent some time working with a friend trying to come with different words than exponential to explain it, let alone addressing the conceptual thing you were talking about of that rate of change. I did find we found that it really represents a couple other phenomenon in the case of Moore's Law. Moore's Law was a result of a compounding of knowledge. Right. And so it's an easy stand-in for it.

32:35but was focused on the number of transistors and so forth, which is too abstract for people to relate to. So I tried with a few people putting in terms of business terms, which is compound growth. So if you say what's the amount of compute power you get per dollar, then the compound rate of growth of computing per dollar has increased at 40% per year for over 60 years and is increasing.

33:04with the GPUs. Now, when I put it in that way, I found that with one executive, his eyebrow went up, but it didn't change behavior. It's a little closer to business, but even in business, if you have a high compound growth rate, it's not sustainable. Right, that's right. So like it's in a high compound growth rate, it's either gonna change or end. Yeah. And it's like, that's just the reality of it. There's nothing quite like it.

33:33it's hard to explain, even in a side of our industry, it can be hard to explain the nature of these things. But I will say that over the course of this time, knowing this at the time, we would make decisions where we felt it's probably true for 15 years. And so we made decisions in terms of software and in algorithms and in...

33:56acquisition of equipment. So you had a horizon in mind. Like, let me figure out what is the, what do I think is the permanent base that I can operate against? Yes. Yeah. Because you, you, like, I could not have imagined that, uh, that they would solve all the problems together we are. I mean, they were saying, we're going to run up against physical limits. And it turns out they've gotten much closer too. Then they would have reasonably could have predicted at the time. Yeah, totally.

34:26So they say, well, I'm not going to make an unreasonable prediction. I could be wrong. And they may solve these problems. And there's a lot of money behind it to solve the problems. So there's a moderate chance to go, but we don't know. But what do we know? Do we figure out what it means has something which is 10 and 100 times different. The material part of our business, different by a factor of 10 or 100 or even more.

34:55In this time period either for us or for our vendors or our buyers. Yeah, so if you just say okay, that's just a reality you have to think that because this is happening. Yeah, and it's in it's it affecting more and well affecting everybody now. Yeah, we're never watching this as it spreads. It's a compound of knowledge in general crossing fields from you know medicine in our robotics and manufacturing. If you think about the compound growth from monitoring, we're talking about compound knowledge growth. Exactly. That's the real point. Since the beginning of the discovery of the male in Europe, which launched peer review, you begin this new method of compounding of knowledge across a diverse community of people. That just kept growing and leading an industrial age up to electronics.

35:52Travel and all that, it just kept growing, but it's compounding across all of these. Yeah. G-mini, Christmas. But how do you get your head around it? Totally. I mean, they can't get their head around the implication, just increase the number of trends on the chip. We're talking about a compound of knowledge in general. Yeah. Kaboom! Yeah. Head explodes. Yeah, that's right. In unpredictable ways. Yeah, no, that's right. Funny, so, you know, again, you're tremendously humble about it in many ways, and I think...

36:20to you the course the journey was there's a path dependence to it but you you Pixar did make that switch like you did see it coming Pixar was building a machine and it was going to be a machine that you were going to have as a business and you were going to have this the Pixar uh and then you switched quite dramatically into doing the thing that the machine was built for and like so instead of building you know just okay i'll have these kind of computer rendering stations that that people can use you actually decided that no i'm going to make the stories for this It seems like that's a pretty tremendous switch to make, especially at the time that you made it. Well, because it's very clear to us. So you saw it. That the commodity side was going to bypass it. So we had to build it in order to test the ideas. That's right. The cool thing about computers is you can't emulate the future. That's why Alan would put it. Because computers let you emulate something in the future. It may not be economical. So we were building things that weren't economical.

37:20But we needed in order to say, what does it mean to make an image at 2k by 4k resolution? Yeah. And what's the depth? And now you just have to solve all these problems. Right. And how do you make a picture, which is 20,000 times more complex than you think at the time? It may take an hour. It may not be economical. And then you've got to get the experience and build up the tools, but it's not economical. So behind all of this is like...

37:49At some point, it's got to make financial sense for somebody. So our job is to get there while we've got it and not pretend that we're there. One of our competitors actually bought a Craven computer. Right. And because they thought they were close. That's right. And they were not, they made some pretty good looking images. They were not close to economically solving it. They were up by a couple of orders of magnitude. Yeah. Why waste money pretending you're there?

38:19So for us, we build a machine for making images, but we knew that that machine was doomed because we weren't big enough to be in that commodity race. So at this point, it had helped us establish a relationship and get a name going. But I got a call once for somebody who's trying to consolidate all the image processing companies.

38:47And he called me up and he said, he said what he wanted to do was consolidate them because, you know, the competitive advantages will be willing to sell our hardware business to them. And one of the reasons we were hanging on is we had a software contract with Disney, which relied on that machine. And we knew we were doomed if we kept making that machine. Right, of course. So how do we maintain a relationship and not get killed by the thing, got us into the relationship. Totally.

39:17So you made the offer and I said, well, let me think about it. So I got the phone and I'm going, yes. So we sold it to them. So they had to pay us and they owed us a million dollars to buy this. And that harder part of the kind of the bill that went off with them. And I knew we would never get the million dollars. It didn't matter. What did matter was they kept making the machine.

39:45for Disney because I knew that the selling graphics in the sun boxes were coming along. And now they're getting to the point where they had sufficient power to solve the rendering problem or the two-dimensional coloring problem for Disney. So we then, under contract with Disney, ported our software over onto selling graphics successfully. And then...

40:13They're almost even unaware of the fact that the hardware disappeared underneath them because it was working for the movies, which is what they wanted in the first place. Right, yeah, totally. Amazing. Yeah. Okay, so now we're right in the zone. You're making your storytelling again at this point. You've now got the proof. You have to build the proof with Toy Story. Well, we...

40:39There's a step there of making short films. That's right. You did make short films, yeah. And these were each of them had to prove out a technical capability that you needed to make a feature film. Well, they were each advancing it. They were great PR. Steve, who bought us out of Lucasfilm, knew that we were losing money. Our head of marketing knew we were, but he knew that it was important for the soul of the company, but also for the name of the company.

41:07advancing the technology while we were making these short films by a company that was losing money. Right. Right. In order to hold all these pieces together, we were fortunate in that Steve bought Pixar because he believed that graphics was going to become important in the future. And so that was a unique characteristic that he had. No VC would have taken that.

41:37long of a bet. Yeah. And it was $54 million bet. Painful one for him. Right. Because his net worth was a little over $100 million at the time. Like half of his net worth. So he put half of his net worth into this thing. That's right. That no VC would take on the belief that this was a vision of the future that he believed in. Yes. Now, I believe his original vision was the graphics was going to become important. Sure.

42:06for films and he saw that better I'd said anybody else at the time um and um but as we started to make these short films then he saw well okay this is actually first of all it's what these guys want to do but um this is this is going to be uh big and so he was careful about the relationship with disney and because of our short films uh we entered into a contract with Disney in 1991. 91 and 95 were four pivotal years in Steve Jobs' life and in the motion picture industry and Pixar's life. So prior to that, we're struggling. But in order to make this transition, we've hired some animators. We were very conscious in saying that

43:01As we bring animators in, they will be peers with us. And we were using that language. Because I visit all these companies. They went to Cray and Disney and Microsoft and others. And there's a class structure. People don't talk about class structures unless they feel like the second class. They'll say the second class, but never say I'm first class. It's not an American terminology.

43:29The reality is there's a class structure and for my point of view, this could not be good. This is not the right kind of relationship between the groups that are making the company. So we worked, so as we brought in John Lasseter, the first artist we came in, as he was a peer. Yeah, totally. Treat him that way. And then as we brought in Andrew and Andrew Stenz, the first one, and then of course Pete Docter. Yeah, of course, incredible, incredible cast of storytellers. And they were...

43:58They came in as animators. That's right. But they had these skills. They were part of solving the problem. So we were doing this together. And in 1991, there was a pivotal year, was that three things happened. One of them was we entered into the contract to make Toy Story. Steve Jobs got married and his son Reed was born.

44:29Terminator 2 came out, which is the first movie that had a full-on character in the movie, which was all CG. Yeah, and blowing people's minds. Blowing people's minds. Absolutely, still to this day, chills on that character. So this was an important year, and then in 93, Jurassic Park came out. Sure, yeah, of course. So Jurassic Park was like the big film. Yeah, of course. It was gigantic. It blew everybody away.

44:58In the entertainment world, I think even within that conference we were talking about that is the actual amount of animation that was CG dinosaurs was like five minutes or something like that. Yeah, right. A lot of it was just actual conventional props. No, it was. I mean, there were conventional props in there. But no, what it was was, when the dinosaurs were there, the impact was so great, it felt like it was easier than it was. I was cutting to the face. So you're looking at Dr. Ian Malcolm.

45:29quivering in fear. In your mind, the T-Rex has been there the whole time, but you only saw it on film. You see a little bit of it. For a little flash, yeah. So, as Jim Morse likes to say, Steven Spielberg is the master of doing a lot for little. So, and he was over the ILM at the time. Yeah, of course. So, 54 shots, is it in the movie? Yeah, wow. Because I remember very well, it's like...

45:56There's a lot more than that. There was more material. When I found out how little it was, I was like, holy crap. That's incredible. Yeah, well. So that was 95 and then 90 through 93 and then 95 Torstray came out. Right. And so that transition of using video editing for editing, which went through a lot of resistance. Sure. More so than animation did, frankly. Yeah, yeah.

46:23between digital audio, computer graphics, and video editing. Video editing had the toughest time, because the workflow was so utterly different. I can't imagine, yeah. But basically it was digital on all three domains, and that pretty much was it. Changed the movie industry. Changed the movie industry. The resistance to it compared to today was pretty minor, to be honest.

46:50Yeah, we're gonna talk about today them because the echoes a history may not repeat But it certainly rhymes the echoes of this conversation in our own technology industry in the movie industry are unmissable and yeah You and I were at a conference recently and I hope you don't mind me quoting you. You said something great There's there's fear about AI and it's used in the movie industry today and under there's reasons for that's well-founded or it's not depending But you said something great you said that if you were just a few years younger, you'd be leading the charge. Tell me more about how you think about the impact of, here we are, another maybe wave of technological advancement could be a positive boon for storytellers who want to tell stories that were previously hard to tell. Certainly computer graphics have come a long way, but it's still pretty expensive to be using a lot of VFX in these movies. What is your perspective from today?

47:46For the the filmmakers of today looking at this technological shift. Well, there are a couple of big ones are it is clear that something big is going to happen, right? I can foresee some things I can also Things are happening, but I can't foresee all of which is fine, but we know something is going to happen, right? And if it's going to change Then the best thing you can do is participate fully in it. Yeah All right, that's the key thing that's being missed. You're afraid of what's coming, then you actually should be engaged with it because you can directly, you can understand it and participate and take advantage of it. Now, I think that's just fundamental. It's stupid not to understand that. In any industry at any time, if change is coming, be a part of the change as opposed to having a change affect you. That's right.

48:44There'll be a victim to the change. There'll be a victim to the change. Yeah. So now you look back at the rhyming of the past, because we saw these things where a new technology would come along. Typically, there's a promise the future. And usually with these big things, the promise comes true. Internet was the promise of the future. And it's going to democratize information. It did. It also democratized disinformation. Sure. Social media comes along.

49:13allows people to connect together. True, allows proxy sub-wealth. That also is true, right? Those things happen too. Yeah, not all connections are good. Not all information sharing is good, but they are as delivered, as promised. They are as promised. And you sometimes, while the unpredictable things happen, like in the case of, let's say the smartphones, infrastructure was in place.

49:42Some people thought they were there earlier. There was general magic. Sure. All right. Who thought they'd conceived of this thing. Actually, a lot of people conceived of the idea. They thought they were nearly there, which is the problem. Yeah, that's right. It's your earlier point. Thinking you're almost there when you're not is a tough position to put yourself in. That's right. Yeah. And it was had an interesting documentary came out of it. Great documentary. Yeah, very good documentary. But it was an example of...

50:11I mean, there were some smart people in that group for sure. But in terms of their organizational decisions when they thought about it, it was naive. Yeah. More so than it should have been at the time. Nevertheless, the technology kept developing as they get better bandwidth, better devices and so forth. The telecom companies are in fierce competition with each other and they're very smart.

50:37Phones there's a Motorola and you've got the blackberry. Yeah, and they've got their proprietary operating systems But they've got a communicate over open system. So all this infrastructure is in place The Android is being written if it would have been acquired by somebody would have just been another operating system sure but then this sort of accidental thing happened where Steve That knew because we talked about this ahead of time is that the desktop was threatened sure by the these devices and that was the the future of Apple dependent on him recognizing that there was an end to that growth, right? Yeah, so so he knew the change was coming. He knew the change is coming anybody back his team and he said okay, we're gonna do the iPad Yeah, and his team argued with him and said no we should be a phone first, huh? And they won the argument

51:34It can't be done. Yeah, it was interesting because there's a book written. He's called The One Device or something like that. Yeah. It was a great book except for the fact that he thought that was a weakness in Steve. Like Steve showed his fallibility and I'm thinking, no! God! He had a team which argued with him and they won that argument. Right. So he had the credibility of being able to build devices, namely the iPod. So now having ported Unix, I would say that, next step and so on to the phone, he really could do that. And now for the first time, there was somebody who actually had all these capabilities, gave him some capability with the others. Meanwhile, on the board of directors, there's the chairman of Google.

52:33That's right, you're sure. Who can see, oh crap, this is really cool. If they control the pocket, we're screwed. So he goes back. She got butt Android. Yep. So then he come to Steve's second season where he got the wrong decision. He decided to make apps proprietary. Right. They're controlled by Apple. All first-party. People forget that the first generations of the iPhone didn't have an app store. Yeah, the new app store.

53:03And they had software from the browser from Google and a few outside apps there. That's right. But they were controlling their control of the ecosystem. Yeah. And so they bought Android before that was released to get prepared for what they was, potential doomsday. Yeah. Thinking ahead. Obviously, Steve didn't know this. He was very angry when it came out. He said, we guess because it was people claim that.

53:33None of this ever happened, but for legal reasons, of course, but you know exactly what happened. Right, right, right, yeah. You can't prove that it happened. It's all like we can say. But there's something really interesting is because Steve's original thing was with AT&T. Then that let Google go in and now make it open to everybody else. Everybody else says, okay, this is a real device now. Apple is real, AT&T is real. We're screwed. So they didn't sign up.

54:03and Google then let others have access to Android. So now we're down to two operating systems suddenly everywhere. And app developers can manage two operating systems. They couldn't do five. They can't do five. That's right. Yeah, absolutely. They can do two. By the way, we don't love doing two. But the internet was the best. But if you have to do a specific operating system, two is workable. That's right. But five is out of the question. What can you manage there?

54:30But here's the interesting thing to me is that none of them were predicting that the real gigantic breakthrough was where the apps themselves. The result of the dynamic is the apps were opened up on both devices and the apps changed everything. But it wasn't the way that either Steve or any of them were thinking at the time. They were like, Telephone everywhere and that isn't that cool. Yeah, it's like holy crap Now we've got you know millions of different apps out there for every possible thing. Yeah, not predicted. Yeah, that's right. So the nature of Yeah, so there's there's the predicted your point is in the new technology comes There is the predicted path which probably will happen. Yes Then there's a bunch of unpredictable consequences that only the people in the vanguard have a chance at really pioneering. Yes

55:25And then there's that we've always had along the way the prediction of the fact that there are bad actors of different sorts. And so we've been through this enough time that in terms of people writing about it, then it's really easy to go super bright or super dark and get whipsawed daily. Yeah, my request to so many people lately has been Let's look at the entire distribution curve. We tend to decide on how we feel about technology based on the top 10 best use cases and the top 10 worst use cases when like 99% of people live in a gray area where it's like, what does that feel like to people? What is the actual products that they get access to? And it's so rarely what we discuss in media, certainly. And for me, AI is a...

56:25tremendously empowering technology. You know, it's a what if, you know, people have different capabilities, people have different memory capabilities, people have different cognition capabilities, people have different eyesight, different hearing, and all these human traits that fall in these normal curves. What if the whole of humanity had the full use of their faculties? What is the full use of the genius level faculties? What is the weight that we generate of tremendous human capability. But also that means the people who are bad people are now fully capable people whereas previously maybe they had some... Exactly. We've given a superpower to bad people also and a superpower to good people. And I do think as technologists in the Valley especially we are generally very optimistic people obviously to some degree technology you know kind of predicts that but also we generally speaking feel like if you just give most people the stuff

57:22they can create apps that you never thought about coming. And if you were trying to design it up front, you'd screw it up. And if you kind of have to let the reins go, and people can create apps. And I think it's a fair critique that we sometimes under-appreciate the harm prevention that we need to put in up front. But also, I think some people only care about the harms, and in the pursuit of preventing some harm, they try to prevent all the good. And it's funny, a cousin of mine, Gianna, shout out to Jana is in film school and she wants to make films. And you look at what a daunting task it would be for her to try to go make a film without using these tools today. It's a tremendously large endeavor. Even small films are expensive to make in the kind of modern era. But you give her access to these tools and she can make interesting films that no one's ever seen before, some of which that would be very hard to film otherwise. So I do think we lean towards empowerment.

58:22We're a little bit blind on the downside sometimes in the technology space. I think in the broader public, they're sometimes a little bit blind on the upside. But there's probably a big middle piece. My favorite example lately is Waymo's. You know, this idea people in San Francisco, right, had a proxism when a Waymo, I think, struck a pet, an animal. I remember that. And it's very sad. I'm not saying it's not sad. Don't look at the statistics.

58:48on taxi drivers hitting humans. It would really shock you, it would really upset you. You know, if you think you're upset about that, wow, let me tell you, we so often compare these things to some imagined perfection when that doesn't exist. Instead of comparing them to the actual alternative that exists in the real world today. Well, it's funny, Jim, in our house, how old it's like, Cap, can we please get Waymo out here in Marin County? It's the best, by the way. Because I would, I would so much want to have to do that.

59:18from my own safety. First of all, I'm 80 years old now, which my neck isn't the same it was when I was 17, for some reason. I'm not quite sure what happened or when it happened, but just for safety purposes, I'd feel safer in a good self-driving car. We have it in the peninsula, and I want to be able to put my kids in it. Like, hey, my kid is at soccer practice. Like, get in the way, Mo. I can see a picture. That's my kid. Let's bring him home.

59:47I really want that. Meanwhile, it's worth being very afraid of when your 16 or 17 year old starts to drive, because the statistics are very poor for them and the insurance rates are very high. It's like, oh, I'd rather put them in a way mode. Absolutely. There's something about their brain, which is in their heart. Not fully there. They don't have the judgment yet. That's right. If they had the physical ability. But for my wife, I said there's no way in the world.

1:00:17She would ever get into it. She wouldn't even try it. It's like it's inconceivable Yeah, to do it. She doesn't like technology and she doesn't like to drive But not to have a person there. We got to get her there. It's gonna help We are running low on time. I'd be remiss if I didn't ask you moving beyond even just movies Creativity Inc and now the revised version You talk a lot about maintaining creative teams and the culture that you built relates to the principles he talked about before of thinking about who you want to work with. There's one of the primary vehicles that you use to decide how to make progress on something. What is creativity in the age of AI? Is it different at all? Does AI affect the creative process? Does it affect how creative teams work? How do you see creativity impacted by AI in general? Well, in terms of, let's say, telling stories.

1:01:14Sure. Rich stories. They involve a lot of ideas from people. And of course, AI, even though I hate the term AI. Just want to call it intelligence. Well, no, I don't have a good word for it. All I know is when you call it intelligence, it scares the hell out of people. Right, I got you. But, you know, it's got this incredible capability. Most of which we accept, you know, it's faster at Earth, particularly, etc.

1:01:40Finding data and all that we accept that this one's kind of like seems scary to people, but the reality is that that I'm often curious about something and I will ask Questions and I'll get information where it would not have been practical to do it before right if I just want to ask a simple question I really would like to know the knowledge, but I'm not gonna go to a research project under the University of the library that totally to the entire sources And it's satisfying curiosity. And I feel my mind is expanding by doing that. Totally. So in the telling of stories, you're trying to tell a story that reaches out to people. So you bring in experiences from each other, but from other sources. And when you tell a story, it isn't just that that group comes up with a story. They'll reach out. Our best stories are where we've done research to find something that we didn't know.

1:02:39We made ratatouille that went into three-star Michelin the restaurants in France in the kitchen Yeah, because the culture there in the kitchen is not the same as it is on the cooking channel or in your home Yeah, or that you see in the back of the kitchen. We see cooking all the time We don't see that culture so they capture that they think that bring it into the story And the audience doesn't necessarily know whether or not it's true, but the sense it is. And it's the sense that you want. How do you get that? And you get it through life experiences by study, by reading, observation. This is another tool for observation, for helping and thinking. Creativity is, in my mind, solving problems, all sorts. What kind of problems? Well, life problems.

1:03:33I mean, a lot of things I'm asking about have to do with social issues, medical problems, things like that. The human condition. Human condition. Yeah. That's cool. I know that some of the stuff isn't correct. And the AI say, some of this isn't correct. It's just being honest, right? Yeah. It isn't all correct. That's right. And sometimes I know a lot about it. It's like newspaper articles.

1:04:02A lot of it's not correct. Okay, so I get pointed. Always a little skeptical about stuff. But cool, I find out so much. It also is true that for students coming in that the professional tools that are available that they're expected to use aren't available to them as students.

1:04:25The reason they're the vanguard for using stuff is because they can't afford the other stuff. They can't. Yeah, they're the only choice they have. Of course, they're going to use the new technologies like they like in the entertainment business. What are they thinking? Yeah. All the students come in. Of course, they need to use digital first because that's the thing. Yeah. And the same thing happened with the cameras, the editing. Right. So then they come out and they're educated in that. Yeah, that's right. And they weren't they weren't held back by the fact they're expected to Know something here when it actually wasn't the relevant thing they needed to know totally this is where we are now. Yeah That's why we have to engage But we shouldn't have to say let's say the engagement for the young. Yeah, what the hell I mean What at what point you decided that you shouldn't be curious anymore? No, so you know not that's not a good idea. No, that's very totalist curiosity at any age at any age

1:05:18I think this is, for me at least, it's been such a fascinating process in my life. I have, you know, previously when you write software, and I love writing software. Software, you know, when I kind of moved into management and wrote less software, I felt an absence of that creative process. And I kind of filled it with other things. I felt photography and different things to kind of have a sense at the end of the day that I produced something that didn't exist. But when I was writing software, you know, so much of the software.

1:05:44I'm solving problems, I'm engaged intellectually, but I'm solving problems that have been solved before a million times. I'm thinking how to structure the code and how to have the objects and how to lay things out. Now I'm actually just doing the hard parts. Now I'm just deciding what it is that I want and whether the thing that's been produced is good enough or is the right thing. And intellectually it's like way tougher. So, you know, if Steve Jobs used to say, you know, 10% of the 10% is upfront is designing 80% is building and 10% on the end is is polishing it I'm only doing the first part in the last part and that's actually the way harder the parts of it So I do find AI by virtue of taking some of these pieces that could be automated out of my Out of my kind of off my plate I'm writing software again, which is exciting and I'm just doing the right right intellectual work out of the whole thing We find it threatening to be to remove the part of our

1:06:34our job, which is the least creative. That's right. That's exactly right. Exactly right. It's like, no, no, no. I would rather, I find, I can, I do find, I go faster. Yeah. Because I get stuff done and then I get down to the heart of the thing because, you know, I typically write with Claude. Yeah. And, but I've type, I've used the others there and each have strengths and weaknesses and I get something. They don't capture what I want. Yeah. They give me 80% of the way there. That's right. It's like, I love that.

1:07:04get 80% of the way there, because I'm lousy at getting 80%. I know it's just hard, and it's a slog, and then finally it goes, okay, this is what I really wanna get right. And there's something about getting through that part, but the other is it's testing myself against the world. And for me, this is a harder and more abstract, but more important discussion, which is how do you get to the truth of something?

1:07:33Totally. And the brain trust was a mechanism for having hard discussions without it becoming personal. Totally. And we worked really hard at that environment where they could challenge each other. But I meant paying attention to the dynamics. What makes somebody feel threatened or vulnerable? Sure. And because that's our reality is we do feel that way. Absolutely. And that's what we're going through now is we feel vulnerable and threatened.

1:08:02So how do we address the problem in terms of our feelings as humans? Yeah. So that's the brain trust is one example, but there's some other examples. This is where I think some people like Steve Jobs stood out because people have an image of Steve when he was younger because that was written about as like a sexy story. But Steve went through an arc and there are a couple of things that people miss.

1:08:31One other was, which some of you almost nobody knows, is that Pixar was a public company for 10 years, between 95 and 2006 when Disney acquired it. Sure. In that 10 years as a public company, Steve fired two members of the board of directors. The reason he fired them was he said they never disagreed. And if they don't disagree, they weren't adding anything, they weren't adding any value. Steve and I often disagreed, but we never argued.

1:09:01was always on the topic. And the brain trust is on the topic. And when Steve had the team that argued about whether or not they should do an iPad or the iPhone, then they were arguing about topic and they convinced him, because it wasn't interesting in him having made the right decision, but getting the right place. It wasn't ego, it was about the decision itself. Decision.

1:09:29he felt strongly about having a controlled ecosystem. So when they argued about having a store, because his own people knew there needed to be a store. And on that one, he called it as a CEO, there was going to be closed. And then within four months of it coming out, he knew that he'd made a mistake. And so they've spent the rest of the year... Opening it up. ...to create what that store was. Yeah, totally. But in both cases, there was a disagreement. Wasn't a personal disagreement.

1:09:59is what the right thing to do was. And when he knew he was wrong, you switch over. I'm very curious the role that AI will play in some of these hard conversations for people in the future as well. One of the reasons I'll say that is because one of the things I love to do at AI, and it's actually kind of popular in terms of a viral meme inside of our company.

1:10:21people are asking AI, hey, look at all my work, look at my emails, my diffs, my like conversations and like give me feedback, but and spare nothing, like really give it to me straight. And I did that. And I got very good feedback, actionable feedback was correct that I know that if a human give it to me, I would feel so inclined to resist it to like, to defend myself. And oh, you have to understand about this. And oh, But, you know, it's a little bit, for some reason, for me, it's a little bit different when it's coming from an AI. I was a little bit more, I was like, oh man, it's just, it's really, there's no hiding behind it. It's not judging me. It doesn't have an opinion. It's not saying I'm a bad, it doesn't care. It's just telling me what it's seeing. So you're either braver than me, or you've got more controlled circumstances. I would not do that outside of a walled garden. You, well, they can join a walled garden. I was inside the company. It doesn't have, it's not.

1:11:16reading my texts to my wife, you know? Just not get too ahead of ourselves. There are things I would love to do, but I'm not going to let an AI outside of a wall garden, and I don't know enough yet to have an entirely contained system to go through all of my works, which I would like to do. Yeah, we have a good little wall garden for that here.

1:11:41I have kept you past the time that I had committed to I was gonna ask you one last little fun one. Do you have a favorite Easter egg? There's so many Easter eggs in Pixar films You know, there's a there's I was trying to think what was the one that we would we were just talking about there's a in Catmull's in there a couple places. Well, the one of them was I didn't know about until I saw there. That's pretty fun The other one which I didn't know about until after me came out and that was it was a surprise but in Toy Story, they're in cars, they have this neon stuff. One of the windows said catmallow oil. Catmallow oil, there you go. They actually put that in the store in the Cars Land for a while. In Cars Land, that's right. It went all over there, but it was there for a while. We have pictures all over the front of it. That's pretty fun.

1:12:32I love this idea of these little artifacts, these little totems that are in the culture that a lot of people wouldn't know. You know, they come from a very deep history in building out the varied tools that you were used to render the catmull oil sign. Well, it's the artist having fun. And I believe in signals, that is both in terms of giving signals and listening to signals.

1:13:01in the case of that, it's like that felt like they would play around with a lot of things like that. They wouldn't ask for permission because they didn't feel like they needed to. Sure. And I love that. It's like you just do things and you don't try to keep reins on everything there. Yeah. And if you don't put tight reins on everything, you get the signals of openness and it makes open for other things. Yeah. Unexpected things. Yeah. That's what you want. You want the unexpected.

1:13:30Totally agree. I could talk to you all day, but I don't want to take all your time. Thank you, Ed, for being here for those at home. Thank you for tuning in. This has been Boz to the Future. You can listen to us wherever you listen to fine podcasts. We will see you in the future.