*AI Summary*
*# *1. Analyze and Adopt**
*Domain:* Venture Capital & Equity Research (Enterprise Software/SaaS Sector)
*Persona:* Senior Technology Sector Analyst
*Vocabulary & Tone:* Analytical, market-centric, focused on valuation structures, revenue models, and architectural pivots. Professional and objective.
---
### *2. Summarize (Strict Objectivity)*
*Abstract:*
This analysis investigates the structural collapse of the "per-seat" SaaS pricing model triggered by the release of Anthropic’s Claude Co-work plugins. A 200-line markdown file focused on legal contract review catalyzed a $285 billion market cap erasure across major software and private equity firms (e.g., Thompson Reuters, RELX, KKR). The core thesis posits that while software infrastructure remains essential—as argued by NVIDIA’s Jensen Huang—the traditional financial model linking revenue to human headcount is functionally obsolete in an agent-driven ecosystem. The report highlights a shift from "UI-first" to "agentic-first" architectures and details how real-world entities, such as KPMG, are already leveraging AI to force fee compressions in professional services.
*Strategic Analysis: The Deconstruction of the Enterprise Software Economy*
* *0:00 The $285 Billion Catalyst:* Anthropic’s release of an open-source, 200-line markdown prompt for legal contract review triggered a massive sell-off in firms like Thompson Reuters (-16%) and LegalZoom (-20%). The prompt approximates core workflows previously requiring expensive subscriptions and billable hours.
* *2:31 Structural vs. Competitive Problems:* The market reaction was not due to a superior product but the exposure of a structural flaw. The enterprise software economy is built on "per-seat" licensing; this model fails when AI agents execute tasks without human logins.
* *3:34 Market Compression Signals:* Prior to the crash, software P/E ratios had already begun compressing. Current data shows software companies missing revenue estimates at rates not seen since the post-COVID correction, indicating the per-seat model was already under terminal pressure.
* *4:58 The Jensen Huang Counter-Argument:* NVIDIA’s CEO argues that AI increases software demand (APIs, databases, middleware). However, the analysis notes Huang is defending the *utility* of the software while the market is devaluing the *pricing model.*
* *7:19 The Print Media Parallel:* Content (data) remains valuable, but the access model is being destroyed. Similar to how the internet broke the newspaper bundle, AI is breaking the human-centric software license. Proprietary data is safe, but the "per-seat" gate is not.
* *8:19 Market Inconsistency:* Wall Street is simultaneously pricing in an "AI Winter" (capex boom collapse) and an "AI Revolution" (SaaS obsolescence). These contradictory theses drive volatility despite the logical requirement that one must be false.
* *13:34 Operating Events vs. Market Events:* KPMG successfully negotiated a 14% reduction in audit fees from Grant Thornton by citing AI-driven cost savings. This represents a "permanent operating precedent" where the existence of AI—regardless of its actual deployment—serves as leverage to break human-scaled billing.
* *16:13 Data vs. Accountability:* SaaS incumbents retain two advantages: proprietary data and the "ringable neck" (legal liability/SLAs). AI agents cannot yet replace the vendor accountability that large enterprises require.
* *18:31 Pivot to Agentic-First Architecture:* Survival for incumbents requires moving from a UI that humans navigate to an "agentic-first" backend that AI agents navigate. This requires a total rebuild of product, pricing, and go-to-market strategies while valuations are declining.
* *21:41 The Marginal Cost of Software:* With tools like Cursor and OpenAI’s Frontier, the cost of building custom software is approaching zero. This flips the "buy vs. build" calculus, as enterprises can now generate custom, in-house CRMs or workflows tailored to their specific data.
* *23:09 The Articulation Problem:* The final bottleneck for AI agents is the "articulation problem"—the inability of agents to capture the 95% of implicit knowledge and context required to build functional enterprise tools without high-level human product management.
AI-generated summary created with gemini-3-flash-preview for free via RocketRecap-dot-com. (Input: 24,920 tokens, Output: 931 tokens, Est. cost: $0.0153).
Below, I will provide input for an example video (comprising of title, description, and transcript, in this order) and the corresponding abstract and summary I expect. Afterward, I will provide a new transcript that I want a summarization in the same format.
**Please give an abstract of the transcript and then summarize the transcript in a self-contained bullet list format.** Include starting timestamps, important details and key takeaways.
Example Input:
Fluidigm Polaris Part 2- illuminator and camera
mikeselectricstuff
131K subscribers
Subscribed
369
Share
Download
Clip
Save
5,857 views Aug 26, 2024
Fluidigm Polaris part 1 : • Fluidigm Polaris (Part 1) - Biotech g...
Ebay listings: https://www.ebay.co.uk/usr/mikeselect...
Merch https://mikeselectricstuff.creator-sp...
Transcript
Follow along using the transcript.
Show transcript
mikeselectricstuff
131K subscribers
Videos
About
Support on Patreon
40 Comments
@robertwatsonbath
6 hours ago
Thanks Mike. Ooof! - with the level of bodgery going on around 15:48 I think shame would have made me do a board re spin, out of my own pocket if I had to.
1
Reply
@Muonium1
9 hours ago
The green LED looks different from the others and uses phosphor conversion because of the "green gap" problem where green InGaN emitters suffer efficiency droop at high currents. Phosphide based emitters don't start becoming efficient until around 600nm so also can't be used for high power green emitters. See the paper and plot by Matthias Auf der Maur in his 2015 paper on alloy fluctuations in InGaN as the cause of reduced external quantum efficiency at longer (green) wavelengths.
4
Reply
1 reply
@tafsirnahian669
10 hours ago (edited)
Can this be used as an astrophotography camera?
Reply
mikeselectricstuff
·
1 reply
@mikeselectricstuff
6 hours ago
Yes, but may need a shutter to avoid light during readout
Reply
@2010craggy
11 hours ago
Narrowband filters we use in Astronomy (Astrophotography) are sided- they work best passing light in one direction so I guess the arrows on the filter frames indicate which way round to install them in the filter wheel.
1
Reply
@vitukz
12 hours ago
A mate with Channel @extractions&ire could use it
2
Reply
@RobertGallop
19 hours ago
That LED module says it can go up to 28 amps!!! 21 amps for 100%. You should see what it does at 20 amps!
Reply
@Prophes0r
19 hours ago
I had an "Oh SHIT!" moment when I realized that the weird trapezoidal shape of that light guide was for keystone correction of the light source.
Very clever.
6
Reply
@OneBiOzZ
20 hours ago
given the cost of the CCD you think they could have run another PCB for it
9
Reply
@tekvax01
21 hours ago
$20 thousand dollars per minute of run time!
1
Reply
@tekvax01
22 hours ago
"We spared no expense!" John Hammond Jurassic Park.
*(that's why this thing costs the same as a 50-seat Greyhound Bus coach!)
Reply
@florianf4257
22 hours ago
The smearing on the image could be due to the fact that you don't use a shutter, so you see brighter stripes under bright areas of the image as you still iluminate these pixels while the sensor data ist shifted out towards the top. I experienced this effect back at university with a LN-Cooled CCD for Spectroscopy. The stripes disapeared as soon as you used the shutter instead of disabling it in the open position (but fokussing at 100ms integration time and continuous readout with a focal plane shutter isn't much fun).
12
Reply
mikeselectricstuff
·
1 reply
@mikeselectricstuff
12 hours ago
I didn't think of that, but makes sense
2
Reply
@douro20
22 hours ago (edited)
The red LED reminds me of one from Roithner Lasertechnik. I have a Symbol 2D scanner which uses two very bright LEDs from that company, one red and one red-orange. The red-orange is behind a lens which focuses it into an extremely narrow beam.
1
Reply
@RicoElectrico
23 hours ago
PFG is Pulse Flush Gate according to the datasheet.
Reply
@dcallan812
23 hours ago
Very interesting. 2x
Reply
@littleboot_
1 day ago
Cool interesting device
Reply
@dav1dbone
1 day ago
I've stripped large projectors, looks similar, wonder if some of those castings are a magnesium alloy?
Reply
@kevywevvy8833
1 day ago
ironic that some of those Phlatlight modules are used in some of the cheapest disco lights.
1
Reply
1 reply
@bill6255
1 day ago
Great vid - gets right into subject in title, its packed with information, wraps up quickly. Should get a YT award! imho
3
Reply
@JAKOB1977
1 day ago (edited)
The whole sensor module incl. a 5 grand 50mpix sensor for 49 £.. highest bid atm
Though also a limited CCD sensor, but for the right buyer its a steal at these relative low sums.
Architecture Full Frame CCD (Square Pixels)
Total Number of Pixels 8304 (H) × 6220 (V) = 51.6 Mp
Number of Effective Pixels 8208 (H) × 6164 (V) = 50.5 Mp
Number of Active Pixels 8176 (H) × 6132 (V) = 50.1 Mp
Pixel Size 6.0 m (H) × 6.0 m (V)
Active Image Size 49.1 mm (H) × 36.8 mm (V)
61.3 mm (Diagonal),
645 1.1x Optical Format
Aspect Ratio 4:3
Horizontal Outputs 4
Saturation Signal 40.3 ke−
Output Sensitivity 31 V/e−
Quantum Efficiency
KAF−50100−CAA
KAF−50100−AAA
KAF−50100−ABA (with Lens)
22%, 22%, 16% (Peak R, G, B)
25%
62%
Read Noise (f = 18 MHz) 12.5 e−
Dark Signal (T = 60°C) 42 pA/cm2
Dark Current Doubling Temperature 5.7°C
Dynamic Range (f = 18 MHz) 70.2 dB
Estimated Linear Dynamic Range
(f = 18 MHz)
69.3 dB
Charge Transfer Efficiency
Horizontal
Vertical
0.999995
0.999999
Blooming Protection
(4 ms Exposure Time)
800X Saturation Exposure
Maximum Date Rate 18 MHz
Package Ceramic PGA
Cover Glass MAR Coated, 2 Sides or
Clear Glass
Features
• TRUESENSE Transparent Gate Electrode
for High Sensitivity
• Ultra-High Resolution
• Board Dynamic Range
• Low Noise Architecture
• Large Active Imaging Area
Applications
• Digitization
• Mapping/Aerial
• Photography
• Scientific
Thx for the tear down Mike, always a joy
Reply
@martinalooksatthings
1 day ago
15:49 that is some great bodging on of caps, they really didn't want to respin that PCB huh
8
Reply
@RhythmGamer
1 day ago
Was depressed today and then a new mike video dropped and now I’m genuinely happy to get my tear down fix
1
Reply
@dine9093
1 day ago (edited)
Did you transfrom into Mr Blobby for a moment there?
2
Reply
@NickNorton
1 day ago
Thanks Mike. Your videos are always interesting.
5
Reply
@KeritechElectronics
1 day ago
Heavy optics indeed... Spare no expense, cost no object. Splendid build quality. The CCD is a thing of beauty!
1
Reply
@YSoreil
1 day ago
The pricing on that sensor is about right, I looked in to these many years ago when they were still in production since it's the only large sensor you could actually buy. Really cool to see one in the wild.
2
Reply
@snik2pl
1 day ago
That leds look like from led projector
Reply
@vincei4252
1 day ago
TDI = Time Domain Integration ?
1
Reply
@wolpumba4099
1 day ago (edited)
Maybe the camera should not be illuminated during readout.
From the datasheet of the sensor (Onsemi): saturation 40300 electrons, read noise 12.5 electrons per pixel @ 18MHz (quite bad). quantum efficiency 62% (if it has micro lenses), frame rate 1 Hz. lateral overflow drain to prevent blooming protects against 800x (factor increases linearly with exposure time) saturation exposure (32e6 electrons per pixel at 4ms exposure time), microlens has +/- 20 degree acceptance angle
i guess it would be good for astrophotography
4
Reply
@txm100
1 day ago (edited)
Babe wake up a new mikeselectricstuff has dropped!
9
Reply
@vincei4252
1 day ago
That looks like a finger-lakes filter wheel, however, for astronomy they'd never use such a large stepper.
1
Reply
@MRooodddvvv
1 day ago
yaaaaay ! more overcomplicated optical stuff !
4
Reply
1 reply
@NoPegs
1 day ago
He lives!
11
Reply
1 reply
Transcript
0:00
so I've stripped all the bits of the
0:01
optical system so basically we've got
0:03
the uh the camera
0:05
itself which is mounted on this uh very
0:09
complex
0:10
adjustment thing which obviously to set
0:13
you the various tilt and uh alignment
0:15
stuff then there's two of these massive
0:18
lenses I've taken one of these apart I
0:20
think there's something like about eight
0:22
or nine Optical elements in here these
0:25
don't seem to do a great deal in terms
0:26
of electr magnification they're obiously
0:28
just about getting the image to where it
0:29
uh where it needs to be just so that
0:33
goes like that then this Optical block I
0:36
originally thought this was made of some
0:37
s crazy heavy material but it's just
0:39
really the sum of all these Optical bits
0:41
are just ridiculously heavy those lenses
0:43
are about 4 kilos each and then there's
0:45
this very heavy very solid um piece that
0:47
goes in the middle and this is so this
0:49
is the filter wheel assembly with a
0:51
hilariously oversized steper
0:53
motor driving this wheel with these very
0:57
large narrow band filters so we've got
1:00
various different shades of uh
1:03
filters there five Al together that
1:06
one's actually just showing up a silver
1:07
that's actually a a red but fairly low
1:10
transmission orangey red blue green
1:15
there's an excess cover on this side so
1:16
the filters can be accessed and changed
1:19
without taking anything else apart even
1:21
this is like ridiculous it's like solid
1:23
aluminium this is just basically a cover
1:25
the actual wavelengths of these are um
1:27
488 525 570 630 and 700 NM not sure what
1:32
the suffix on that perhaps that's the uh
1:34
the width of the spectral line say these
1:37
are very narrow band filters most of
1:39
them are you very little light through
1:41
so it's still very tight narrow band to
1:43
match the um fluoresence of the dies
1:45
they're using in the biochemical process
1:48
and obviously to reject the light that's
1:49
being fired at it from that Illuminator
1:51
box and then there's a there's a second
1:53
one of these lenses then the actual sort
1:55
of samples below that so uh very serious
1:58
amount of very uh chunky heavy Optics
2:01
okay let's take a look at this light
2:02
source made by company Lumen Dynamics
2:04
who are now part of
2:06
excelitas self-contained unit power
2:08
connector USB and this which one of the
2:11
Cable Bundle said was a TTL interface
2:14
USB wasn't used in uh the fluid
2:17
application output here and I think this
2:19
is an input for um light feedback I
2:21
don't if it's regulated or just a measur
2:23
measurement facility and the uh fiber
2:27
assembly
2:29
Square Inlet there and then there's two
2:32
outputs which have uh lens assemblies
2:35
and this small one which goes back into
2:37
that small Port just Loops out of here
2:40
straight back in So on this side we've
2:42
got the electronics which look pretty
2:44
straightforward we've got a bit of power
2:45
supply stuff over here and we've got
2:48
separate drivers for each wavelength now
2:50
interesting this is clearly been very
2:52
specifically made for this application
2:54
you I was half expecting like say some
2:56
generic drivers that could be used for a
2:58
number of different things but actually
3:00
literally specified the exact wavelength
3:02
on the PCB there is provision here for
3:04
385 NM which isn't populated but this is
3:07
clearly been designed very specifically
3:09
so these four drivers look the same but
3:10
then there's two higher power ones for
3:12
575 and
3:14
520 a slightly bigger heat sink on this
3:16
575 section there a p 24 which is
3:20
providing USB interface USB isolator the
3:23
USB interface just presents as a comport
3:26
I did have a quick look but I didn't
3:27
actually get anything sensible um I did
3:29
dump the Pi code out and there's a few
3:31
you a few sort of commands that you
3:32
could see in text but I didn't actually
3:34
manage to get it working properly I
3:36
found some software for related version
3:38
but it didn't seem to want to talk to it
3:39
but um I say that wasn't used for the
3:41
original application it might be quite
3:42
interesting to get try and get the Run
3:44
hours count out of it and the TTL
3:46
interface looks fairly straightforward
3:48
we've got positions for six opto
3:50
isolators but only five five are
3:52
installed so that corresponds with the
3:54
unused thing so I think this hopefully
3:56
should be as simple as just providing a
3:57
ttrl signal for each color to uh enable
4:00
it a big heat sink here which is there I
4:03
think there's like a big S of metal
4:04
plate through the middle of this that
4:05
all the leads are mounted on the other
4:07
side so this is heat sinking it with a
4:09
air flow from a uh just a fan in here
4:13
obviously don't have the air flow
4:14
anywhere near the Optics so conduction
4:17
cool through to this plate that's then
4:18
uh air cooled got some pots which are
4:21
presumably power
4:22
adjustments okay let's take a look at
4:24
the other side which is uh much more
4:27
interesting see we've got some uh very
4:31
uh neatly Twisted cable assemblies there
4:35
a bunch of leads so we've got one here
4:37
475 up here 430 NM 630 575 and 520
4:44
filters and dcro mirrors a quick way to
4:48
see what's white is if we just shine
4:49
some white light through
4:51
here not sure how it is is to see on the
4:54
camera but shining white light we do
4:55
actually get a bit of red a bit of blue
4:57
some yellow here so the obstacle path
5:00
575 it goes sort of here bounces off
5:03
this mirror and goes out the 520 goes
5:07
sort of down here across here and up
5:09
there 630 goes basically straight
5:13
through
5:15
430 goes across there down there along
5:17
there and the 475 goes down here and
5:20
left this is the light sensing thing
5:22
think here there's just a um I think
5:24
there a photo diode or other sensor
5:26
haven't actually taken that off and
5:28
everything's fixed down to this chunk of
5:31
aluminium which acts as the heat
5:32
spreader that then conducts the heat to
5:33
the back side for the heat
5:35
sink and the actual lead packages all
5:38
look fairly similar except for this one
5:41
on the 575 which looks quite a bit more
5:44
substantial big spay
5:46
Terminals and the interface for this
5:48
turned out to be extremely simple it's
5:50
literally a 5V TTL level to enable each
5:54
color doesn't seem to be any tensity
5:56
control but there are some additional
5:58
pins on that connector that weren't used
5:59
in the through time thing so maybe
6:01
there's some extra lines that control
6:02
that I couldn't find any data on this uh
6:05
unit and the um their current product
6:07
range is quite significantly different
6:09
so we've got the uh blue these
6:13
might may well be saturating the camera
6:16
so they might look a bit weird so that's
6:17
the 430
6:18
blue the 575
6:24
yellow uh
6:26
475 light blue
6:29
the uh 520
6:31
green and the uh 630 red now one
6:36
interesting thing I noticed for the
6:39
575 it's actually it's actually using a
6:42
white lead and then filtering it rather
6:44
than using all the other ones are using
6:46
leads which are the fundamental colors
6:47
but uh this is actually doing white and
6:50
it's a combination of this filter and
6:52
the dichroic mirrors that are turning to
6:55
Yellow if we take the filter out and a
6:57
lot of the a lot of the um blue content
7:00
is going this way the red is going
7:02
straight through these two mirrors so
7:05
this is clearly not reflecting much of
7:08
that so we end up with the yellow coming
7:10
out of uh out of there which is a fairly
7:14
light yellow color which you don't
7:16
really see from high intensity leads so
7:19
that's clearly why they've used the
7:20
white to uh do this power consumption of
7:23
the white is pretty high so going up to
7:25
about 2 and 1 half amps on that color
7:27
whereas most of the other colors are
7:28
only drawing half an amp or so at 24
7:30
volts the uh the green is up to about
7:32
1.2 but say this thing is uh much
7:35
brighter and if you actually run all the
7:38
colors at the same time you get a fairly
7:41
reasonable um looking white coming out
7:43
of it and one thing you might just be
7:45
out to notice is there is some sort
7:46
color banding around here that's not
7:49
getting uh everything s completely
7:51
concentric and I think that's where this
7:53
fiber optic thing comes
7:58
in I'll
8:00
get a couple of Fairly accurately shaped
8:04
very sort of uniform color and looking
8:06
at What's um inside here we've basically
8:09
just got this Square Rod so this is
8:12
clearly yeah the lights just bouncing
8:13
off all the all the various sides to um
8:16
get a nice uniform illumination uh this
8:19
back bit looks like it's all potted so
8:21
nothing I really do to get in there I
8:24
think this is fiber so I have come
8:26
across um cables like this which are
8:27
liquid fill but just looking through the
8:30
end of this it's probably a bit hard to
8:31
see it does look like there fiber ends
8:34
going going on there and so there's this
8:36
feedback thing which is just obviously
8:39
compensating for the any light losses
8:41
through here to get an accurate
8:43
representation of uh the light that's
8:45
been launched out of these two
8:47
fibers and you see uh
8:49
these have got this sort of trapezium
8:54
shape light guides again it's like a
8:56
sort of acrylic or glass light guide
9:00
guess projected just to make the right
9:03
rectangular
9:04
shape and look at this Center assembly
9:07
um the light output doesn't uh change
9:10
whether you feed this in or not so it's
9:11
clear not doing any internal Clos Loop
9:14
control obviously there may well be some
9:16
facility for it to do that but it's not
9:17
being used in this
9:19
application and so this output just
9:21
produces a voltage on the uh outle
9:24
connector proportional to the amount of
9:26
light that's present so there's a little
9:28
diffuser in the back there
9:30
and then there's just some kind of uh
9:33
Optical sensor looks like a
9:35
chip looking at the lead it's a very
9:37
small package on the PCB with this lens
9:40
assembly over the top and these look
9:43
like they're actually on a copper
9:44
Metalized PCB for maximum thermal
9:47
performance and yeah it's a very small
9:49
package looks like it's a ceramic
9:51
package and there's a thermister there
9:53
for temperature monitoring this is the
9:56
475 blue one this is the 520 need to
9:59
Green which is uh rather different OB
10:02
it's a much bigger D with lots of bond
10:04
wise but also this looks like it's using
10:05
a phosphor if I shine a blue light at it
10:08
lights up green so this is actually a
10:10
phosphor conversion green lead which
10:12
I've I've come across before they want
10:15
that specific wavelength so they may be
10:17
easier to tune a phosphor than tune the
10:20
um semiconductor material to get the uh
10:23
right right wavelength from the lead
10:24
directly uh red 630 similar size to the
10:28
blue one or does seem to have a uh a
10:31
lens on top of it there is a sort of red
10:33
coloring to
10:35
the die but that doesn't appear to be
10:38
fluorescent as far as I can
10:39
tell and the white one again a little
10:41
bit different sort of much higher
10:43
current
10:46
connectors a makeer name on that
10:48
connector flot light not sure if that's
10:52
the connector or the lead
10:54
itself and obviously with the phosphor
10:56
and I'd imagine that phosphor may well
10:58
be tuned to get the maximum to the uh 5
11:01
cenm and actually this white one looks
11:04
like a St fairly standard product I just
11:06
found it in Mouse made by luminous
11:09
devices in fact actually I think all
11:11
these are based on various luminous
11:13
devices modules and they're you take
11:17
looks like they taking the nearest
11:18
wavelength and then just using these
11:19
filters to clean it up to get a precise
11:22
uh spectral line out of it so quite a
11:25
nice neat and um extreme
11:30
bright light source uh sure I've got any
11:33
particular use for it so I think this
11:35
might end up on
11:36
eBay but uh very pretty to look out and
11:40
without the uh risk of burning your eyes
11:43
out like you do with lasers so I thought
11:45
it would be interesting to try and
11:46
figure out the runtime of this things
11:48
like this we usually keep some sort
11:49
record of runtime cuz leads degrade over
11:51
time I couldn't get any software to work
11:52
through the USB face but then had a
11:54
thought probably going to be writing the
11:55
runtime periodically to the e s prom so
11:58
I just just scope up that and noticed it
12:00
was doing right every 5 minutes so I
12:02
just ran it for a while periodically
12:04
reading the E squ I just held the pick
12:05
in in reset and um put clip over to read
12:07
the square prom and found it was writing
12:10
one location per color every 5 minutes
12:12
so if one color was on it would write
12:14
that location every 5 minutes and just
12:16
increment it by one so after doing a few
12:18
tests with different colors of different
12:19
time periods it looked extremely
12:21
straightforward it's like a four bite
12:22
count for each color looking at the
12:24
original data that was in it all the
12:26
colors apart from Green were reading
12:28
zero and the green was reading four
12:30
indicating a total 20 minutes run time
12:32
ever if it was turned on run for a short
12:34
time then turned off that might not have
12:36
been counted but even so indicates this
12:37
thing wasn't used a great deal the whole
12:40
s process of doing a run can be several
12:42
hours but it'll only be doing probably
12:43
the Imaging at the end of that so you
12:46
wouldn't expect to be running for a long
12:47
time but say a single color for 20
12:50
minutes over its whole lifetime does
12:52
seem a little bit on the low side okay
12:55
let's look at the camera un fortunately
12:57
I managed to not record any sound when I
12:58
did this it's also a couple of months
13:00
ago so there's going to be a few details
13:02
that I've forgotten so I'm just going to
13:04
dub this over the original footage so um
13:07
take the lid off see this massive great
13:10
heat sink so this is a pel cool camera
13:12
we've got this blower fan producing a
13:14
fair amount of air flow through
13:16
it the connector here there's the ccds
13:19
mounted on the board on the
13:24
right this unplugs so we've got a bit of
13:27
power supply stuff on here
13:29
USB interface I think that's the Cyprus
13:32
microcontroller High speeded USB
13:34
interface there's a zyink spon fpga some
13:40
RAM and there's a couple of ATD
13:42
converters can't quite read what those
13:45
those are but anal
13:47
devices um little bit of bodgery around
13:51
here extra decoupling obviously they
13:53
have having some noise issues this is
13:55
around the ram chip quite a lot of extra
13:57
capacitors been added there
13:59
uh there's a couple of amplifiers prior
14:01
to the HD converter buffers or Andor
14:05
amplifiers taking the CCD
14:08
signal um bit more power spy stuff here
14:11
this is probably all to do with
14:12
generating the various CCD bias voltages
14:14
they uh need quite a lot of exotic
14:18
voltages next board down is just a
14:20
shield and an interconnect
14:24
boardly shielding the power supply stuff
14:26
from some the more sensitive an log
14:28
stuff
14:31
and this is the bottom board which is
14:32
just all power supply
14:34
stuff as you can see tons of capacitors
14:37
or Transformer in
14:42
there and this is the CCD which is a uh
14:47
very impressive thing this is a kf50 100
14:50
originally by true sense then codec
14:53
there ON
14:54
Semiconductor it's 50 megapixels uh the
14:58
only price I could find was this one
15:00
5,000 bucks and the architecture you can
15:03
see there actually two separate halves
15:04
which explains the Dual AZ converters
15:06
and two amplifiers it's literally split
15:08
down the middle and duplicated so it's
15:10
outputting two streams in parallel just
15:13
to keep the bandwidth sensible and it's
15:15
got this amazing um diffraction effects
15:18
it's got micro lenses over the pixel so
15:20
there's there's a bit more Optics going
15:22
on than on a normal
15:25
sensor few more bodges on the CCD board
15:28
including this wire which isn't really
15:29
tacked down very well which is a bit uh
15:32
bit of a mess quite a few bits around
15:34
this board where they've uh tacked
15:36
various bits on which is not super
15:38
impressive looks like CCD drivers on the
15:40
left with those 3 ohm um damping
15:43
resistors on the
15:47
output get a few more little bodges
15:50
around here some of
15:52
the and there's this separator the
15:54
silica gel to keep the moisture down but
15:56
there's this separator that actually
15:58
appears to be cut from piece of
15:59
antistatic
16:04
bag and this sort of thermal block on
16:06
top of this stack of three pel Cola
16:12
modules so as with any Stacks they get
16:16
um larger as they go back towards the
16:18
heat sink because each P's got to not
16:20
only take the heat from the previous but
16:21
also the waste heat which is quite
16:27
significant you see a little temperature
16:29
sensor here that copper block which
16:32
makes contact with the back of the
16:37
CCD and this's the back of the
16:40
pelas this then contacts the heat sink
16:44
on the uh rear there a few thermal pads
16:46
as well for some of the other power
16:47
components on this
16:51
PCB okay I've connected this uh camera
16:54
up I found some drivers on the disc that
16:56
seem to work under Windows 7 couldn't
16:58
get to install under Windows 11 though
17:01
um in the absence of any sort of lens or
17:03
being bothered to the proper amount I've
17:04
just put some f over it and put a little
17:06
pin in there to make a pinhole lens and
17:08
software gives a few options I'm not
17:11
entirely sure what all these are there's
17:12
obviously a clock frequency 22 MHz low
17:15
gain and with PFG no idea what that is
17:19
something something game programmable
17:20
Something game perhaps ver exposure
17:23
types I think focus is just like a
17:25
continuous grab until you tell it to
17:27
stop not entirely sure all these options
17:30
are obviously exposure time uh triggers
17:33
there ex external hardware trigger inut
17:35
you just trigger using a um thing on
17:37
screen so the resolution is 8176 by
17:40
6132 and you can actually bin those
17:42
where you combine multiple pixels to get
17:46
increased gain at the expense of lower
17:48
resolution down this is a 10sec exposure
17:51
obviously of the pin hole it's very uh
17:53
intensitive so we just stand still now
17:56
downloading it there's the uh exposure
17:59
so when it's
18:01
um there's a little status thing down
18:03
here so that tells you the um exposure
18:07
[Applause]
18:09
time it's this is just it
18:15
downloading um it is quite I'm seeing
18:18
quite a lot like smearing I think that I
18:20
don't know whether that's just due to
18:21
pixels overloading or something else I
18:24
mean yeah it's not it's not um out of
18:26
the question that there's something not
18:27
totally right about this camera
18:28
certainly was bodge wise on there um I
18:31
don't I'd imagine a camera like this
18:32
it's got a fairly narrow range of
18:34
intensities that it's happy with I'm not
18:36
going to spend a great deal of time on
18:38
this if you're interested in this camera
18:40
maybe for astronomy or something and
18:42
happy to sort of take the risk of it may
18:44
not be uh perfect I'll um I think I'll
18:47
stick this on eBay along with the
18:48
Illuminator I'll put a link down in the
18:50
description to the listing take your
18:52
chances to grab a bargain so for example
18:54
here we see this vertical streaking so
18:56
I'm not sure how normal that is this is
18:58
on fairly bright scene looking out the
19:02
window if I cut the exposure time down
19:04
on that it's now 1 second
19:07
exposure again most of the image
19:09
disappears again this is looks like it's
19:11
possibly over still overloading here go
19:14
that go down to say say quarter a
19:16
second so again I think there might be
19:19
some Auto gain control going on here um
19:21
this is with the PFG option let's try
19:23
turning that off and see what
19:25
happens so I'm not sure this is actually
19:27
more streaking or which just it's
19:29
cranked up the gain all the dis display
19:31
gray scale to show what um you know the
19:33
range of things that it's captured
19:36
there's one of one of 12 things in the
19:38
software there's um you can see of you
19:40
can't seem to read out the temperature
19:42
of the pelta cooler but you can set the
19:44
temperature and if you said it's a
19:46
different temperature you see the power
19:48
consumption jump up running the cooler
19:50
to get the temperature you requested but
19:52
I can't see anything anywhere that tells
19:54
you whether the cool is at the at the
19:56
temperature other than the power
19:57
consumption going down and there's no
19:59
temperature read out
20:03
here and just some yeah this is just
20:05
sort of very basic software I'm sure
20:07
there's like an API for more
20:09
sophisticated
20:10
applications but so if you know anything
20:12
more about these cameras please um stick
20:14
in the
20:15
comments um incidentally when I was
20:18
editing I didn't notice there was a bent
20:19
pin on the um CCD but I did fix that
20:22
before doing these tests and also
20:24
reactivated the um silica gel desicant
20:26
cuz I noticed it was uh I was getting
20:28
bit of condensation on the window but um
20:31
yeah so a couple of uh interesting but
20:34
maybe not particularly uh useful pieces
20:37
of Kit except for someone that's got a
20:38
very specific use so um I'll stick a
20:42
I'll stick these on eBay put a link in
20:44
the description and say hopefully
20:45
someone could actually make some uh good
20:47
use of these things
Example Output:
**Abstract:**
This video presents Part 2 of a teardown focusing on the optical components of a Fluidigm Polaris biotechnology instrument, specifically the multi-wavelength illuminator and the high-resolution CCD camera.
The Lumen Dynamics illuminator unit is examined in detail, revealing its construction using multiple high-power LEDs (430nm, 475nm, 520nm, 575nm, 630nm) combined via dichroic mirrors and filters. A square fiber optic rod is used to homogenize the light. A notable finding is the use of a phosphor-converted white LED filtered to achieve the 575nm output. The unit features simple TTL activation for each color, conduction cooling, and internal homogenization optics. Analysis of its EEPROM suggests extremely low operational runtime.
The camera module teardown showcases a 50 Megapixel ON Semiconductor KAF-50100 CCD sensor with micro-lenses, cooled by a multi-stage Peltier stack. The control electronics include an FPGA and a USB interface. Significant post-manufacturing modifications ("bodges") are observed on the camera's circuit boards. Basic functional testing using vendor software and a pinhole lens confirms image capture but reveals prominent vertical streaking artifacts, the cause of which remains uncertain (potential overload, readout artifact, or fault).
**Exploring the Fluidigm Polaris: A Detailed Look at its High-End Optics and Camera System**
* **0:00 High-End Optics:** The system utilizes heavy, high-quality lenses and mirrors for precise imaging, weighing around 4 kilos each.
* **0:49 Narrow Band Filters:** A filter wheel with five narrow band filters (488, 525, 570, 630, and 700 nm) ensures accurate fluorescence detection and rejection of excitation light.
* **2:01 Customizable Illumination:** The Lumen Dynamics light source offers five individually controllable LED wavelengths (430, 475, 520, 575, 630 nm) with varying power outputs. The 575nm yellow LED is uniquely achieved using a white LED with filtering.
* **3:45 TTL Control:** The light source is controlled via a simple TTL interface, enabling easy on/off switching for each LED color.
* **12:55 Sophisticated Camera:** The system includes a 50-megapixel Kodak KAI-50100 CCD camera with a Peltier cooling system for reduced noise.
* **14:54 High-Speed Data Transfer:** The camera features dual analog-to-digital converters to manage the high data throughput of the 50-megapixel sensor, which is effectively two 25-megapixel sensors operating in parallel.
* **18:11 Possible Issues:** The video creator noted some potential issues with the camera, including image smearing.
* **18:11 Limited Dynamic Range:** The camera's sensor has a limited dynamic range, making it potentially challenging to capture scenes with a wide range of brightness levels.
* **11:45 Low Runtime:** Internal data suggests the system has seen minimal usage, with only 20 minutes of recorded runtime for the green LED.
* **20:38 Availability on eBay:** Both the illuminator and camera are expected to be listed for sale on eBay.
Here is the real transcript. What would be a good group of people to review this topic? Please summarize provide a summary like they would:
Jensen Huang Says AI Won't Kill Software. $285 Billion Says He's Missing the Point.
AI News & Strategy Daily | Nate B Jones
172K subscribers
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
K
Share
Ask
Save
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
views
Feb 10, 2026 SEATTLE
My site: https://natebjones.com
Full Story w/ Prompts: https://natesnewsletter.substack.com/...
________________________________________
What's really happening when a markdown file crashes $285 billion in market value? The common story is that AI killed enterprise software—but the reality is more complicated.
In this video, I share the inside scoop on why the per-seat SaaS pricing model is breaking while the data underneath remains valuable:
• Why Thomson Reuters dropped 16% after Anthropic shipped 200 lines of prompts
• How KPMG used AI as negotiating leverage to cut audit fees 14%
• What Jensen Huang's counter-argument gets right and what it misses
• Where the transition from UI-first to agentic-first architecture determines survival
For knowledge workers watching this unfold, the same dynamic applies—bolting AI onto existing workflows is the individual version of what just crashed the SaaS market.
Chapters
00:00 A Markdown File Crashed $285 Billion
02:31 What Anthropic Actually Shipped
04:13 The Per-Seat Pricing Model Was Already Cracking
04:58 Jensen Huang's Counter-Argument
07:19 The Print Media Parallel
08:19 Wall Street's Internally Inconsistent Thesis
13:34 KPMG's AI Negotiating Leverage
16:13 What Died vs What Survived
18:31 The Survival Path: UI-First to Agentic-First
20:23 The Engineering Resource Allocation Crisis
21:41 When Building Software Costs Zero
23:09 The Articulation Problem
Subscribe for daily AI strategy and news.
For deeper playbooks and analysis: https://natesnewsletter.substack.com/
How this was made
Auto-dubbed
Audio tracks for some languages were automatically generated. Learn more
Ask
Get answers, explore topics, and more
Ask questions
Chapters
View all
Transcript
Follow along using the transcript.
Show transcript
AI News & Strategy Daily | Nate B Jones
172K subscribers
Videos
About
377 Comments
Add a comment...
Pinned by @NateBJones
@NateBJones
6 hours ago
Full Story w/ Prompts: https://natesnewsletter.substack.com/p/200-lines-of-markdown-just-triggered?r=1z4sm5&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true
6
Reply
1 reply
@thx1136
2 hours ago
KPMG has created a reference case for KPMG customers to demand lower fees from KPMG. Nicely done.
26
Reply
@soleside
6 hours ago
How on earth are you able to produce so much high quality content at such a regular cadence? That's what I'd like to know - what are your productivity secrets?
163
Reply
26 replies
@idanko731
5 hours ago
I’m a 60-year-old retired IT professional with an insatiable appetite for knowledge, and I find your analysis genuinely fascinating. I can say with confidence that very few corporations in the traditional “old-world” economy are even capable of seriously contemplating the ideas you’re discussing.
Their typical software strategy is to offshore development and then attempt to manage it from halfway around the world, across multiple time zones. This is the reality inside some of the largest corporations on the planet.
96
Reply
7 replies
@Ojisan642
2 hours ago (edited)
These big companies are going to kill their own accountability advantage as they replace their own people and processes with agentic AI. When your ServiceNow workflow breaks, and the person you call has been replaced with an AI, and the professional services team is one offshore worker running a swarm of AI agents, then that advantage no longer exists. And these companies are in such a rush to put AI into everything, they’re going to do it to themselves.
5
Reply
@kristinjones4739
3 hours ago
You consistently offer the best analysis of the business implications of AI that I've found anywhere on the web. Thank you!
7
Reply
@johnguild8850
2 hours ago
I stumbled on this channel several days ago. You, in general, are blowing me away with your thoughts. In my 7th decade; call me amazed. I thought I had seen it all. Exciting times for sure! Peace.
3
Reply
@e1000sn
2 hours ago
Newspaper content didn't survive the change in access model! The whole industry has undergone a huge contraction and consolidation as a result of the change. Many cities and regions lost most or all of their local reporters and the "local" papers that still exist rely heavily on national or international cooperatives of reporters.
4
Reply
@bensmithwell1784
6 hours ago
Your videos are some of the best in this space, hands down - thanks!
47
Reply
15 replies
@droneflyer5065
12 minutes ago
I’m a 68-year-old retired plaintiff’s employment lawyer in California and I am fascinated by everything that you’re saying which is why I’m watching your videos whenever they come out. I firmly believe AI is already changing the practice of law. All I can say to lawyers is to adapt or die! I learn everything I can about AI—it is an incredibly exciting time to be alive and learn! I test and use ChatGPT, Grok, Claude, and am using agents for so many tasks. I built my own AI assistant, AI avatar clone, etc. I cannot recall a time when I was more excited to learn something so much before. And the timetable of advancements is so fast. Love all of it. Again folks, adapt or die.
1
Reply
@Paul-uy1ru
3 hours ago
The marked dropped because people don’t think. With the law firms you pay for liability. Claude cowork won’t be liable for the inevitable mistake that leads to mitigation.
Same with the games dev stocks. People don’t know what game development means and see some ai generated clip a few seconds long and sell their assets.
The whole AI craze will pop. And then we will see who survives and how AI can really produce meaningful gains. For now no company has figured it out.
The large corps think they will reach AGI and any burned money along the way is worth it. But for the last years LLMs did not shed their fundamental limitations.
11
Reply
1 reply
@danielmjiou
8 minutes ago
Man this sucks, the stress that all of these change causes is ridiculous, you don't have time to breathe
Reply
@andersbodin1551
2 hours ago
they could just change the pricing model
2
Reply
@chefboyersteve
4 hours ago
Yes, Claude can't even give you relevant information about open claw without prompting it correctly and giving it information about what openclaw is.
4
Reply
@margorana2628
2 hours ago
7:25 great insight into a contradiction showing the truth: No one knows what is going to happen.
2
Reply
@robert4917-y4y
30 minutes ago
I'm a PhD CS student, and I had that "oh shit" moment with Claude code a month ago. I've been reevaluating how I fundamentally work, trying to consolidate everything into a couple of tools with AI integration. Searching, reference management, writing, coding, heck I'm now trying to make presentations with markdown because claude can sit in line and help. I spent only an hour with little front end experience building a website to log all my technical documentation, and since claude has everything in context it was really smooth. I envision my files will only be markdown or code, all wrapped in a database layer for querying. My workflow in January 2027 will look completely different to January 2026.
2
Reply
@theinfiniteif
2 hours ago
Built an app to watch the videos summarize them pull out key points and action items and allows me to store the summaries/point/items into “knowledge bank” can use to generate podcasts on nates research. Whole week of Nate’ brain in 1 hour!!!! Pew pew we fast as fux boy!
9
Reply
1 reply
@mustys
3 minutes ago
Great video. Your call to action is a good one but for some like myself, who sit in highly regulated industries that have yet to adopt any sort of AI, it’s just not feasible. Sure I can play locally, but once I bring data and/or code out of my company, I’m in trouble. Pet projects only get me so far.
Reply
@JaredWoodruff
13 minutes ago
Absolutely spot on Nate. Thanks for sharing
Reply
@securityinteractive
4 hours ago
They've been warning about all saas review processes are under threat for a decade
1
Reply
In this video
Chapters
Transcript
A Markdown File Crashed $285 Billion
0:00
A 200line prompt just killed $285
0:03
billion in market value. That's right. A
0:06
markdown file, not a product, not a
0:08
platform, a markdown file from some
0:10
product manager at Anthropic erased $285
0:13
billion in market cap on the stock
0:16
market in just 48 hours. On January
0:18
30th, Anthropic released a set of
0:20
plugins for Claude Co-work, its desktop
0:22
AI tool. One of them handles legal
0:24
contract review. It can triage NDAs. It
0:27
can flag non-standard clauses against a
0:29
negotiation playbook and generate a ton
0:31
of compliance summaries. The kind of
0:33
work that until last week required a
0:35
parallegal, maybe a Westlaw
0:37
subscription, something that had to do
0:38
with billable hours, right? The plugin
0:40
is open source. Anyone can read it. And
0:42
when people did, they found roughly 200
0:45
lines of structured markdown prompts.
0:47
First year law school content dressed up
0:49
with some clever workflow logic. It's
0:51
basically a fancy prompt. It shipped
0:53
with a little disclaimer. All outputs
0:55
should be reviewed by licensed
0:56
attorneys. I'll bet by Monday morning.
0:59
Thompson Reuters had posted its biggest
1:01
single day stock decline on record. It's
1:03
down 16%. RELX, the parent company of
1:06
Lexus Nexus, fell 14%. Legal Zoom
1:09
cratered at 20%. You get the idea. The
1:12
selling spread to private equity from
1:13
there. Aries Management, KKR, and TPG
1:16
all dropped about 10%. If AI compresses
1:20
the cost of legal and financial
1:22
analysis, then every firm charging
1:24
premium fees for that analysis has a big
1:27
big margin problem because they can't
1:29
charge that much. Not next year and
1:31
maybe not now. But here's what almost
1:33
nobody is saying clearly enough. The
1:35
markdown file itself is not the cause.
1:39
It just revealed what has been going on
1:41
for a while. the per seat SAS licensing
1:44
model, the financial bedrock that the
1:46
entire enterprise software economy has
1:49
been built on for 20 years, it was
1:51
already cracking. The market just hadn't
1:53
priced it in yet because frankly, Wall
1:55
Street doesn't understand AI that well.
1:57
So, this crash wasn't really about
1:59
Claude. And we should be precise about
2:01
what actually happened because the
2:03
narrative has already crystallized into
2:06
anthropic crash to the software market.
2:08
And that framing, while it's fun for
2:09
headlines, misses the real structural
2:12
story. What Anthropic actually shipped
2:14
was a set of open source starter
2:16
plugins, basically templates that any
2:18
company can customize for their own
2:19
workflows very easily. The legal plugin
2:21
was one of 11. It was very competent,
2:24
but it's not by itself revolutionary.
2:26
Any decent prompt engineer could have
2:28
assembled something comparable in an
2:30
afternoon. So why did it move $285
What Anthropic Actually Shipped
2:33
billion? because the plugin made visible
2:36
what the market has been quietly
2:38
worrying about for months. If a text
2:41
file can approximate the core workflow
2:43
of a $60 billion revenue legal
2:46
information industry, then that whole
2:49
pricing model that the industry is built
2:51
on has a big structural problem. Not a
2:54
competitive problem, not a better
2:55
product, a structural problem. The kind
2:59
that doesn't get solved by shipping
3:01
faster or hiring better salespeople.
3:03
Thompson Reuters charges per seat. Lexus
3:05
Nexus charges per seat. Westlaw charges
3:08
per seat. The entire enterprise software
3:11
economy from Salesforce to Service Now
3:14
to Adobe runs on a model that says every
3:16
human who touches this tool must pay a
3:19
license fee. That's how these companies
3:21
make their money. That's how they
3:23
forecast their revenue. That's how Wall
3:24
Street values them. That model works
3:27
when humans are the bottleneck. It
3:29
breaks when AI agents can do the work
3:32
without logging in. And the signals were
3:34
already everywhere if you knew where to
3:36
look. The software industry's average
3:38
forward price to earnings ratio has been
3:40
compressing for months from X 8 months
3:43
ago to about 2x right when the sell-off
3:45
hit. That is the largest 4-month
3:48
valuation compression since the 2002.com
3:51
bust. Earning season has already been
3:54
ugly. Software companies are missing
3:55
revenue estimates at rates not seen
3:58
since the postcoid correction and
3:59
broader tech continues to beat. The AI
4:01
companies are fine, right? The per seat
4:03
model was under pressure before
4:05
anthropic shipped this little prompt
4:07
file. So the cloud plugin, it didn't
4:10
start the fire. It just showed everyone
4:11
the building was already burning. Now I
The Per-Seat Pricing Model Was Already Cracking
4:13
got to be honest, plenty of smart people
4:15
think that this sell-off is a big
4:17
overreaction. And they might be right
4:19
about the selloff, but they would be
4:21
wrong about what it means. Jensen Hang
4:23
speaking at the Cisco AI Summit a few
4:25
days before the crash offered the
4:27
strongest version of the
4:28
counterargument. This notion that the
4:30
software industry is in decline and
4:31
being replaced by AI is the most
4:33
illogical thing in the world, he said.
4:35
And do you know why? Hong's argument is
4:37
very simple. AI doesn't replace
4:39
software. AI runs on software. The more
4:42
AI agents you deploy, the more software
4:45
infrastructure you need. More databases,
4:47
more APIs, more middleware, etc. So
4:49
every AI agent that replaces a
4:51
parallegal still needs West Law's data.
4:54
It still needs a CRM. It still needs
4:56
document management. If anything, AI
Jensen Huang's Counter-Argument
4:58
should increase the total amount of
5:00
software the economy uses. Jensen's not
5:02
wrong. He's also not making the argument
5:04
he thinks he's making. Nobody's serious
5:06
is arguing that the world needs less
5:08
software. The argument is that the world
5:10
no longer needs to pay for software the
5:12
way it currently pays for software. So
5:14
Jensen is defending the product and he's
5:16
right to do so. The market is attacking
5:19
the pricing model. Those are very
5:20
different things and confusing them is
5:22
how incumbents lose transitions they
5:24
should have survived. Print media made
5:27
this same mistake. Newspapers had
5:29
content people wanted. They had local
5:32
information, investigative journalism,
5:34
weather. The internet didn't make that
5:35
content worthless. What the internet did
5:38
was destroy the access model. the idea
5:40
that you had to buy a whole newspaper to
5:42
get the one section you cared about and
5:45
that advertisers would pay premium rates
5:47
to reach readers with no alternative.
5:49
The content actually survived. The
5:51
business model didn't. And that's why so
5:54
many newspapers are in trouble. Print
5:55
media's content did eventually get
5:57
commoditized. Anybody can publish now.
6:00
software's content like proprietary
6:02
databases like structured workflows,
6:04
decades of accumulated enterprise data
6:07
that hasn't been commoditized and it
6:09
actually probably won't be. Thompson
6:12
Reuters case law database isn't
6:14
something a startup vibe codes in a
6:16
weekend. Salesforce's customer
6:18
relationship data is irreplaceable for
6:20
many of their clients. Adobe's creative
6:22
tool ecosystem has a pretty deep moat.
6:25
So the data is safe, but the per seat
6:28
access model for that data is not. And
6:32
the companies whose entire financial
6:34
identity is built around per seat
6:36
licensing, they're about to face the
6:38
hardest strategic question in enterprise
6:40
software. How do you repric your most
6:43
valuable assets without destroying your
6:45
revenue in the transition? Bank of
6:47
America's Vivic Arya published the most
6:49
revealing analysis of the crash. He
6:51
called the sell-off internally
6:53
inconsistent. And he's right in a way
6:55
that tells you something important about
6:56
where the market's head is at right now
6:58
on software and on AI. Investors were
7:00
simultaneously running two thesis.
7:03
Thesis one, AI infrastructure spending
7:05
is unsustainable and the capex boom will
7:07
collapse. Thesis 2, AI adoption will be
7:10
so powerful that it renders established
7:12
software business models obsolete. Both
7:15
cannot be true. If AI is powerful enough
7:17
to crash $285 billion in software market
The Print Media Parallel
7:21
cap, the infrastructure required to run
7:23
that AI is underbuilt, not overbuilt,
7:26
the SAS apocalypse is paradoxically the
7:28
strongest possible demand signal for
7:30
continued AI infrastructure investment.
7:33
And yet both trades were profitable in
7:35
different hands at different moments.
7:37
The Deep Seek sell-off punished Nvidia
7:39
last year. The SAS correction punished
7:41
Salesforce at almost the same time this
7:43
year. Wall Street does not resolve
7:45
logical contradictions. It rotates
7:47
between them. One week the market prices
7:49
in an AI winter, the next it prices in
7:52
an AI revolution so total that legacy
7:55
software can't survive it. The
7:57
contradiction persists because no single
7:59
firm needs to hold both positions. The
8:01
market as a whole holds them and the
8:03
market as a whole has no obligation to
8:05
be coherent. The incoherence is the real
8:08
story, not the crash, the incoherence.
8:10
But this is not really a story about
8:12
stocks. It's bigger. While everyone was
8:14
watching Thompson Reuters stock price, a
8:17
quieter story broke that almost no one
Wall Street's Internally Inconsistent Thesis
8:19
paid attention to. And that tells you
8:20
about where we're all headed more than
8:22
any given stock chart. KPMG, one of the
8:25
big four accounting firms, pressured
8:27
Grant Thornton UK, which is its own
8:29
auditor. Yes, the big four have to have
8:31
auditors, to cut their audit fees. The
8:33
demand was to pass on cost savings from
8:36
AI. Grant Thornton initially resisted,
8:39
arguing that quote, "High highquality
8:40
audits rely heavily on expert human
8:42
judgment and that fees reflect the cost
8:45
of people." PMG's response, "Per the
8:47
Financial Times, lower your prices or
8:49
we'll find a new auditor." And Grant
8:51
Thornton blinked. PMG's international
8:53
audit fees dropped from $416,000 in 2024
8:57
to just $357,000
8:59
in 2025. They got a 14% discount. And
9:02
that story matters to me more than
9:04
Thompson Reuters stock price. And I want
9:06
to tell you why. The SAS apocalypse was
9:08
just a market event. Traders were
9:10
repricing stocks based on a change view
9:12
of the future. They do that all the
9:13
time. The KPMG negotiation is an
9:16
operating event. A real company using AI
9:19
as a lever in a real business
9:21
negotiation to extract a real price
9:23
reduction from a real counterparty. The
9:26
stock market repricing that could
9:27
reverse tomorrow. The KPMG precedent
9:30
won't. Think about what KPMG actually
9:32
did. They didn't automate their audit.
9:34
They didn't replace Grand Thornton with
9:36
AI. They used the existence of AI. The
9:39
fact that everyone now know these now
9:41
knows these tasks can be done more
9:43
cheaply as a negotiating weapon. The
9:46
threat isn't we'll replace you with AI.
9:48
The threat is we both know AI changes
9:51
the economics. So your old prices,
9:53
they're not justified anymore. That's
9:55
the playbook and it works in every
9:57
knowledge work fee negotiation. Now if
9:59
audit fees get renegotiated on the basis
10:02
of AI cost savings, legal fees can be
10:04
next, then consulting fees, then
10:06
implementation fees, then design fees,
10:08
then every form of pro-services billing
10:11
that currently scales only with the
10:13
number of humans touching the work. You
10:15
cannot use that scaling assumption. Lean
10:17
teams are the future. The cascade
10:19
doesn't require anyone to actually
10:20
deploy AI at scale. It just requires
10:23
buyers to point at that SAS apocalypse
10:25
and say, "We know the world changed. So,
10:28
let's talk about your assumption that
10:30
the work is done per human and let's
10:33
talk about your rates." The big four are
10:35
a sign of things to come. When they talk
10:37
about not automating their own work, but
10:40
just negotiating down the cost of
10:41
services, that is a big operating
10:44
mechanism that is going to shake the
10:47
industry. It's not really the markdown
10:49
files. its fee negotiation leverage
10:51
spreading like wildfires through the
10:53
professional services economy like a
10:55
crack through an iceberg. All of those
10:57
assumptions that humans have to do the
10:59
work are shattering. The software did
11:01
not die. The data systems underneath
11:04
enterprise software, Thompson Reuters
11:06
case law databases, Salesforce's
11:08
customer graphs, SAP's resource planning
11:11
lo SAP's resource planning logic,
11:13
Adobe's creative workflow ecosystem.
11:16
Those all represent decades of
11:18
accumulated, structured, proprietary
11:21
information that no markdown file comes
11:23
close to replacing. Those data systems
11:26
will continue to exist. They must. The
11:28
economy runs on them. And there's a
11:30
second edge that the market panic has
11:32
really overlooked, the single ringable
11:35
neck. Enterprises don't just buy
11:37
Salesforce because it's the best
11:38
possible CRM. You can make the case for
11:41
a lot of other software that's better.
11:42
They buy Salesforce because when
11:44
something goes wrong at 2 am on the
11:46
night before the board meeting, there's
11:48
a phone number to call and a contract
11:50
that says somebody is accountable. That
11:53
accountability layer, the vendor
11:54
relationship, the SLA, the legal
11:56
liability, the proservices team that
11:59
shows up when the system breaks, that is
12:01
enormously valuable to big
12:03
organizations. And no amount of agentic
12:05
AI eliminates the need for it. If
12:07
anything, the complexity of AIdriven
12:09
workflows makes that accountability even
12:11
more important, not less. So, the data
12:14
edge is real. The accountability edge is
12:17
real. What died is the pricing model
12:19
that sits over the top. The idea that
12:21
you can charge every human who touches
12:22
the software a nice convenient fat per
12:25
se license fee and that your revenue
12:27
scales linearly with that headcount. If
12:29
one AI agent can do the research that
12:31
previously required 10 parallegals with
12:33
10 separate Westlaw loginins, Thompson
12:36
Reuters doesn't lose the value of their
12:37
data, they lose nine seats of revenue.
12:40
The data becomes actually more important
12:42
in an AIdriven world. It's the fuel the
12:44
agents run on. But the per seat access
12:46
model, that's just broken. Here's what
12:48
the investor thesis actually comes down
12:50
to. The markdown file represents an
12:52
existential threat if and only if these
12:55
SAS companies run business as usual. If
12:57
they just bolt AI features on top of
12:59
their existing UI, if they just add a
13:00
chatbot, then the market's right.
13:02
They're dead. The market is right to
13:04
repric them. The survival path is
13:06
actually fundamentally different. And
13:08
it's the one Thompson Reuters,
13:09
ironically, is attempting with co-consel
13:12
to pivot from a one-sizefits-all
13:14
interface that humans navigate to an
13:16
agentic first architecture that AI
13:18
agents navigate and charge for the value
13:20
of the data and the accountability
13:22
rather than the number of humans logging
13:23
in. That's not a feature update. That's
13:26
a rebuild of the product, the pricing,
13:28
and the go to market simultaneously
13:30
while your stock price is cratering.
13:32
Whether the incumbents pull it off is a
KPMG's AI Negotiating Leverage
13:34
$285 billion question. Literally, they
13:37
have the data edge, they have the
13:38
ringable neck edge, and those are real.
13:40
But pivoting from UI first to agentic
13:42
first is the kind of architectural
13:44
transformation that does tend to kill
13:47
companies that attempt it too slowly.
13:48
And the clock is running at a speed that
13:51
nobody in enterprise software has ever
13:54
experienced. There's a second angle to
13:56
this that most SAS apocalypse analysis
13:58
completely misses and it might matter
14:00
even more than the pricing question.
14:02
Think about what enterprise software
14:04
companies really spend their money on.
14:05
Engineering. Thousands of developers
14:07
maintaining, updating, debugging, and
14:09
extending one-sizefits-all platforms
14:11
designed to serve every possible
14:13
customer configuration. Docuine employs
14:16
thousands of developers. That's the real
14:18
cost of enterprise SAS. Not the servers,
14:20
not the sales team, but the army of
14:22
engineers keeping a general purpose
14:24
system alive for millions of users who
14:26
each use it just a little bit
14:28
differently. Now, think about the
14:29
opportunity cost. Every developer
14:32
maintaining a legacy SAS UI is a
14:35
developer that is not building custom
14:37
agentic workflows. Every sprint spent
14:39
adding features to a one-sizefits-all
14:41
product is a sprint not spent rethinking
14:43
the product for an agent first world.
14:45
The companies that crashed this week,
14:47
they're not just facing a pricing model
14:49
crisis, they're facing a resource
14:51
allocation crisis. Their most valuable
14:53
people are maintaining the old thing
14:56
when they need to be building the new
14:57
thing desperately. And the transition
14:59
requires doing both of those
15:01
simultaneously within the same budget.
15:03
This is where Agentic software
15:05
engineering changes the math in a way
15:06
that most people haven't fully
15:08
internalized. The cost of building
15:10
software is falling to zero. Not slowly
15:13
and not theoretically. It's happening
15:15
right now. Cursor shipped a system that
15:17
generates a thousand code commits per
15:19
hour with no human involvement. Strong
15:21
DM published a production framework that
15:23
states code must not be written by
15:25
humans and code must not be reviewed by
15:27
humans. That is not laughable. In 2026,
15:29
that is what is happening. A researcher
15:31
at OpenAI spent $10,000 on codeex tokens
15:35
and automated his entire research
15:37
workflow. These aren't demos. These are
15:40
operational systems running in
15:42
production. When building software cost
15:44
starts to approach zero, the economics
15:45
of buy versus build flip for the first
15:48
time in a long time. The entire
15:50
enterprise SAS value proposition was
15:52
predicated on the idea that it's cheaper
15:54
to buy a general purpose tool than to
15:57
build a custom one. That was true when
15:59
software engineering was expensive and
16:00
slow. When an AI agent can build a
16:02
custom CRM in an afternoon, calculus can
16:05
reverse for some folks. Why pay
16:07
Salesforce per seat fees for a tool
16:09
designed to serve every company on earth
16:11
when you could have a tool designed to
16:12
serve your company? That is the promise
What Died vs What Survived
16:14
of vibe coding. That is the promise of
16:16
vibe engineering. Now you might wonder
16:19
is that how it actually works? The
16:21
honest answer is it depends. And what it
16:23
depends on is the hardest problem in the
16:25
entire stack. It's harder than
16:26
intelligence. It's harder than coding.
16:28
And it's harder than pricing models. It
16:30
depends on whether an AI agent can take
16:32
the vague, implicit, half-articulated
16:35
thing a human actually wants and turn it
16:37
not just into workable software, but
16:39
very quickly into workable software with
16:42
minimal sustainment costs. I've
16:44
mentioned in a previous video that I am
16:46
skeptical of this long term, especially
16:48
for enterprises. Remember how we talked
16:50
about companies hiring for a single
16:52
ringable knack and paying for enterprise
16:54
data access? Those remain edges. And
16:58
anyone who wants to engineer their way
17:00
forward into a cheaper CRM and not
17:02
Salesforce must confront them. But they
17:05
also must confront the articulation
17:07
problem. And that is a real bottleneck.
17:09
Not just for SAS companies, but for
17:11
anyone who wants to build your own
17:13
alternative. When a VP of sales says, I
17:15
need a better way to track the pipeline.
17:17
That sentence contains less than 5% of
17:21
the information required to build a
17:22
useful tool. Frankly, less than 1%. The
17:26
other 95 or 99% is buried in how the
17:29
team actually works. What the unspoken
17:31
conventions are, which exceptions matter
17:34
and which don't, how this quarter's
17:36
priorities differed from last, what
17:38
better means in context. Now, a skilled
17:40
product manager will spend weeks
17:42
extracting that information through
17:44
interviews, observation, iteration.
17:46
Whether an agent can do the same thing,
17:48
not just write the code, but understand
17:50
the need deeply enough to write the
17:52
right code is one of the biggest
17:53
questions in software right now. I am
17:55
skeptical that we're there yet, except
17:57
in a few cases where you have
17:59
extraordinary context availability
18:01
across the enterprise. But Agentic
18:03
Search is making progress on exactly
18:05
that problem. Agents can explore
18:07
context. They can ask clarifying
18:09
questions and they do now. And they can
18:11
observe usage patterns and iteratively
18:13
refine their understanding of what a
18:14
human actually needs. So, it's starting
18:16
to come, but the question is timing. For
18:19
SAS incumbents, this means the window
18:21
has not yet closed. Their data edge and
18:24
their accountability edge really do buy
18:26
them time, but only if they use that
18:28
time to pivot to Agentic first, rather
The Survival Path: UI-First to Agentic-First
18:31
than bolting AI onto the existing UI and
18:34
saying a prayer. Here's the thing that
18:35
connects the SAS apocalypse to your
18:37
actual life. The same dynamic that is
18:40
threatening enterprise SAS companies,
18:42
the difference between bolting AI on top
18:44
of your existing approach and actually
18:46
rethinking how you work from the ground
18:48
up applies to every individual knowledge
18:51
worker that is watching this video. If
18:53
you're using chat GPT to proofread
18:55
emails you could have written anyway,
18:58
you are bolting AI on the top. If you're
19:00
using Claude to summarize documents you
19:02
could have read anyway, you're bolting
19:03
AI on the top. If you add Copilot to
19:06
your IDE, but your development workflow
19:08
is just the same as it was two years ago
19:10
or even five months ago, you're bolting
19:12
AI on the top. And just like the SAS
19:14
companies that are bolting AI features
19:16
onto their existing products and hoping
19:18
the market does not notice, you are
19:20
decorating a structural problem in your
19:22
own career rather than solving it. The
19:25
pace right now is almost
19:26
incomprehensible. 20 minutes after Opus
19:29
4.6 dropped, Codeex dropped. And Codeex
19:32
can ship entire desktop apps if properly
19:35
prompted end to end from scratch. OpenAI
19:37
isn't done with Codeex though. They also
19:39
launched Frontier in the same week as
19:41
they dropped Codex 5.3. Frontier is an
19:44
enterprise agent platform. So that means
19:46
that it you can use Frontier to deploy
19:49
enterprise agents securely across your
19:52
entire data ecosystem. Remember when I
19:54
said that context was evolving and
19:56
agents were getting better at searching
19:58
for context and learning from context
19:59
clues how to build good software?
20:01
Frontier is part of why Claude Co has
20:04
gone from an interesting demo to a $285
20:07
billion market event. If you ask an AI
20:10
model right now to help you figure out
20:12
how to use AI, you will get advice
20:15
that's 6 months out of date. Even the AI
20:17
cannot keep up with itself. This is what
20:19
hyper acceleration feels like. And that
20:21
word does sound like marketing. It
The Engineering Resource Allocation Crisis
20:23
sounds like hype. I will have people in
20:24
the comments who say I'm overhyping, but
20:26
you got to live through it. And then it
20:28
sounds like another Tuesday. The gap
20:29
between I use AI tools and I've
20:31
rethought how I work around extremely
20:34
rapidly evolving AI capabilities is all
20:37
of our individual versions of what
20:38
happened in the SAS market. The first
20:40
approach feels really productive.
20:43
Bolting on AI lets you feel like you're
20:45
keeping up. The second approach
20:47
fundamentally rethinking how you work
20:50
from the ground up. That's what changes
20:52
outcomes and the window to make that
20:54
transition keeps compressing every time
20:56
there's a new update, which frankly is
20:58
every few days. If you haven't tried
21:00
Opus 4.6 and experienced what a good
21:03
million token context window feels like,
21:06
you're already out of date. If you
21:07
haven't used Cloud Co-work or Codeex or
21:10
played around with OpenAI Frontier,
21:12
please try them. Not because any one
21:14
tool is the answer, but because the
21:16
experience of using these systems
21:18
changes your mental model of what's
21:20
possible. And your mental model of what
21:22
is possible is the thing that determines
21:25
whether you are bolting on AI in your
21:27
own career and praying or whether you're
21:29
rebuilding for an AI future that is
21:31
coming like a title wave. The SAS
21:33
companies that survive the SAS
21:34
apocalypse will be the ones that rethink
21:36
their architecture before the market
21:38
makes them. The knowledge workers who
21:40
thrive through the transition will be
When Building Software Costs Zero
21:42
the ones who rethink their workflows
21:45
before the boss forces them to. It's the
21:47
same dynamic. It's the same urgency.
21:49
It's just at a different scale. The per
21:51
seat SAS pricing model is broken. The
21:53
data and accountability underneath it
21:55
are not. And the same logic applies to
21:57
you. Your skills, your domain expertise,
22:00
the thing that makes you passionate
22:02
about work, that didn't break. But the
22:05
assumption that you can just take that
22:07
to work and not use AI or only use AI a
22:10
little bit or use AI in a chatbot, that
22:12
is broken. And you're going to need to
22:14
look at how you fundamentally rethink
22:16
your workflows to get there. And that is
22:19
exactly what I'm putting together in the
22:21
exercises that go with this video on my
22:23
Substack. got a bunch of exercises that
22:25
help you think about how you can take
22:27
your unique role and essentially do the
22:30
repricing, do the rebuilding that the
22:32
SAS companies are talking about, but at
22:34
individual scale for your individual
22:37
workflows, how you think about AI, not
22:38
as a bolt-on, but as a fundamental
22:40
shift. A 200line markdown file did not
22:43
decide who wins and loses, but it did
22:46
compress a transition that everybody
22:48
expected to take 5 years into a 48 hour
22:50
repricing event. And the repricing
22:52
hasn't stopped. It's just getting
22:54
started. The clock is ticking. It's not
22:56
stopping. And I want you to make good
22:59
decisions with your career. And we'll
23:02
have to see if the SAS companies make
23:03
good decisions with their futures as
23:06
companies because by the time you watch
23:07
this, whatever the stock market price
The Articulation Problem
23:09
says, the AI that you hear about in this
23:12
video will already be overtaken by some
23:16
other news. That is how fast we're
23:17
moving. AI isn't stopping, and we're all
23:20
going to have to dig in to get through
23:21
this together. I know you can do it.