Speaker:

Welcome back to Data Driven, where we dive headfirst into the bubbling

Speaker:

cauldron of AI, data science and the occasional existential

Speaker:

crisis about digital transformation. In this episode,

Speaker:

Frank chats with Itai Habber, CEO of Data Noetic,

Speaker:

a company daring to bring order to the chaos of supply chain data.

Speaker:

Forget dashboards and spreadsheets. Data Noetic is building an

Speaker:

autonomous digital brain for supply chain operations.

Speaker:

No, not Skynet. Though the temptation must be overwhelming.

Speaker:

From AI agents that flag delivery issues before they become

Speaker:

disasters, to why your 3 month wait for bathroom tiles could have

Speaker:

been avoided with better data orchestration, this episode is a

Speaker:

masterclass in how agentic AI is moving from hype to hard results.

Speaker:

So grab your headphones and your favorite supply chain KPI.

Speaker:

It's time to get Data Driven with a dose of dry wit and digital

Speaker:

wisdom. Hello and welcome back

Speaker:

to Data Driven, the podcast we explore the emerging

Speaker:

ecosystem of AI machine learning, data

Speaker:

science and data engineering. Now, my favorite is data

Speaker:

engineering. Data engineer in the world is not here

Speaker:

today because he is presenting at SQL Pass

Speaker:

in Seattle this week. And I'm actually going to be at Microsoft

Speaker:

Ignite this week. So Andy and I will be in the same time

Speaker:

zone, but not the same city. But we must march on.

Speaker:

So today I have with me the an excellent

Speaker:

guest. He is the CEO of Data Noetic

Speaker:

and it's Itai Haber. How's it going,

Speaker:

sir? Very good, thanks. Thank you very much, Frank.

Speaker:

Awesome. Great to meet you as well. Thanks for scheduling this. And

Speaker:

you know, we love, we love talking data. We love talking AI.

Speaker:

When I saw the name of your company, I had to go back and

Speaker:

relive some freshman philosophy,

Speaker:

Data Noetic. And I actually, not gonna lie, how to pull up

Speaker:

ChatGPT because I'm like, I remember that means

Speaker:

something around like not gnosis because that's more spiritual

Speaker:

knowledge, but more intellectual kind of understanding. And it turns out

Speaker:

it does. It's a, it's an ancient Greek word and it

Speaker:

in noetic refers to

Speaker:

wisdom, intellectual insight, and so on. So how do we get,

Speaker:

what does Data Noetic do?

Speaker:

How does it live up to its name? Right, okay,

Speaker:

so the origins, I can't take credit for

Speaker:

the naming. That goes to our founder,

Speaker:

Sandeep, who's been in

Speaker:

supply chain industry for a couple of decades and has

Speaker:

had the original idea of the

Speaker:

company. But I can definitely talk about what we are,

Speaker:

what we're trying, what we're trying to do is basically Data

Speaker:

Analytic was founded to become the autonomous digital brain

Speaker:

for supply chain process optimization, automation

Speaker:

and to jump to the kind of where data analytics comes

Speaker:

from, it is in a way taking advantage of

Speaker:

new developments in AI, machine learning, data science, etc. Which we might

Speaker:

come to a bit later, in order to tackle a gap

Speaker:

that exists in a lot of organization at the moment. And the gap is currently

Speaker:

between on the one side and the

Speaker:

lots of transactional analytical data that exist in various places,

Speaker:

data warehouses, data lakes, etc. And on the other hand, the

Speaker:

same organizations have the process improvement initiatives,

Speaker:

lean robotic process automation, et cetera. And those two things,

Speaker:

the data that they have and the process improvement initiatives don't always

Speaker:

sync. There's no sync between them. And so data analytic

Speaker:

aims to be, as I said, the autonomous digital brain for optimization

Speaker:

and automation. By tapping into the data

Speaker:

that exists in various systems in the organization, applying

Speaker:

AI, agentic AI more specifically, or slightly

Speaker:

more specifically, and trying to

Speaker:

predict and suggest actions that can be taken,

Speaker:

can be taken, sorry to, to improve things,

Speaker:

and by so doing, orchestrating the data

Speaker:

and making it actionable.

Speaker:

That's interesting. So, so getting to the brush tacks

Speaker:

like how do you make it actionable? Like what, what happens? Do you, do you

Speaker:

have like a UI where business user would use it, or do you have.

Speaker:

Or do you enabled kind of data engineers to kind of

Speaker:

work stuff and then surface it in a tool like tableau, power BI,

Speaker:

etc. Great question. The intention is actually

Speaker:

to allow people who wouldn't necessarily be able to

Speaker:

do all the data analysis on their own, so to

Speaker:

kind of rather

Speaker:

augment the ability of a business manager to

Speaker:

take actions without necessarily having to rely as heavily as they

Speaker:

might otherwise have to on the. On the business analyst that can

Speaker:

go and query the Power BI or various other

Speaker:

analytical tools that exist at the moment. And so

Speaker:

to give an example of a prospect that we've

Speaker:

spoken to recently, this

Speaker:

is a company without naming names. They are in the business of

Speaker:

providing household. It's not appliances because it's

Speaker:

like taps

Speaker:

and syncs and things like that. And

Speaker:

they had an order from a customer.

Speaker:

Now one of the things that they care deeply about is delivering on time and

Speaker:

in full for customer orders, also known as OTIF or otfd. On time, in

Speaker:

full delivery. And it was almost by coincidence

Speaker:

that some process analyst has actually looked at the data and figured out that that

Speaker:

particular custom order couldn't actually be

Speaker:

delivered in full and on time because the particular item or

Speaker:

items that they had in the order didn't exist, it would take too long to

Speaker:

manufacture, to deliver, etc. Etc. Now that's great

Speaker:

that they kind of figured it out ahead of it

Speaker:

actually happening. But that was the kind of

Speaker:

exception that proved the rule that normally that information

Speaker:

comes to light at the point at which the customer delivery order has already

Speaker:

been kind of missed and on time, in full delivery was not

Speaker:

met. Now

Speaker:

what can be done and what data ethics

Speaker:

helps to do is apply for example, what we call like the

Speaker:

KPI guard, a KPI guard agent, which is

Speaker:

basically

Speaker:

an agent, think about it like a virtual assistant, a

Speaker:

copilot as an example

Speaker:

that looks at the information that already exists. The information

Speaker:

that the customer order has just been placed exists, the

Speaker:

SKUs, the particular products that have been

Speaker:

requested, that data exists not necessarily on the same

Speaker:

systems. And here I go back to what I said about the lack of autonomous

Speaker:

thing. The information about what exists in the warehouses

Speaker:

exists in some potentially warehouse management system, etc. Etc.

Speaker:

And so by being a little bit more proactive on an

Speaker:

ongoing sort of automated basis, it can flag

Speaker:

the point that okay, this customer over here has just made an order for this

Speaker:

particular items that you don't have enough of in the system. And

Speaker:

given the knowledge I have about what is happening in the,

Speaker:

in your, in your business up to now, you will not be

Speaker:

able to meet the delivery timelines that you have just told

Speaker:

me are your, your effective delivery timelines.

Speaker:

And, and therefore I'm alerting you that hey, this is an

Speaker:

issue. So now you can either try and if maybe there's an

Speaker:

option to move some stock from warehouse A to warehouse B that would allow

Speaker:

you to deliver that, or if maybe,

Speaker:

maybe that's not an option. Another option might be, hey, why don't you reach out

Speaker:

to the customer proactively and say I need to change the delivery date because of

Speaker:

so and so.

Speaker:

That's another example. Well, it's easier

Speaker:

to have that conversation early in the process.

Speaker:

As someone who's done a lot of home renovations and

Speaker:

more than I care to. I remember it was from a major

Speaker:

big box hardware store. I won't name them,

Speaker:

but we had these really nice like tile

Speaker:

set up. But it took them three months to get this tile. And the

Speaker:

frustrating thing I understood, it was stuck in customs, right? Or

Speaker:

there was an issue with the supplier that I can relate to. But the fact

Speaker:

that I wasn't told, I had to basically go through

Speaker:

I don't know how many hours on hold, how many people to talk to,

Speaker:

right? That to me makes me like whenever

Speaker:

they, you know, we do another project, I'm like, if it's not in the

Speaker:

store And I have to order it. I don't want to do it right because

Speaker:

I, you know, I had to, I had to hold up contractors and stuff like

Speaker:

that. It was, it was, it was very painful. Now if they had told me

Speaker:

straight up that it's going to take three months to get this, you know, instead

Speaker:

of the normal 14 days, I would have chose

Speaker:

a different tile or found a different

Speaker:

supplier. Like, you know, and then like to this day, every time I

Speaker:

walk into that store, it kind of taints my like

Speaker:

Absolutely, absolutely. You know and I think

Speaker:

the amazing thing is that the, it's not like the information didn't exist.

Speaker:

If somebody cared enough to connect the dots, it would have

Speaker:

absolutely been possible. Now the actions that could have been taken once

Speaker:

those dots were connected, there are probably different things that they could do. They could

Speaker:

have actively decided, hey, we don't want to tell Frank that

Speaker:

it's late because we're worried that he's going to cancel the order.

Speaker:

Fine, you can do that. But you have to take

Speaker:

the risk associated risk as that particular operator that you're going to end

Speaker:

up having a very unsatisfied customer. You might get the order not

Speaker:

cancelled. Small gain. Shorter, but might have

Speaker:

very meaningful potential. Oh, any,

Speaker:

any other tile job at. Since like unless they have it in the building, I

Speaker:

don't order it. Like I go with somewhere else. Right. So yeah, I mean

Speaker:

granted I'm not a big contractor, although I think, I think what my wife's second

Speaker:

career one might be becoming a contractor. I don't know.

Speaker:

But no, like it totally. You know

Speaker:

actually just as we're recording this this weekend we had a,

Speaker:

our hot water heater like basically flooded our basement. Right.

Speaker:

So I have to go back. It's very relevant, right? Because I have to go

Speaker:

back and I have to figure out what you know, tile I want to put

Speaker:

down or flooring. And I'm like, my wife was like what if

Speaker:

we go to this store? I'm like, no.

Speaker:

Exactly. But you're right though. Like it is a short term gain. But

Speaker:

even if they, I would have been okay if they told me honestly because I,

Speaker:

they would be in the running for any kind of future work. But I guess

Speaker:

people don't think like that. And, and, and the fact by the way, even telling

Speaker:

you in, in advance might actually you might really want that tile. And you

Speaker:

would say you know what, fine, I'll, I'll wait those three months but I will

Speaker:

reschedule my plumber or my Tyler or whatever. Right. So that I don't up

Speaker:

being annoying or, or kind of frustrating.

Speaker:

Another call it process that you have a few, which is

Speaker:

for you is renovating your bathroom or whatever, you can

Speaker:

adapt accordingly. Maybe you say okay, I'll do, I'll check, whatever.

Speaker:

But I imagine that also would impact, you know,

Speaker:

larger projects. Right. If I was a real estate developer or

Speaker:

whatever. Right. We actually had a previous guest that,

Speaker:

that does, you know, basically optimization for

Speaker:

construction jobs. Right. Because if there's a delay, the project

Speaker:

manager would rather know that. And we're talking like massive

Speaker:

skyscrapers, like sort of thing type GC and like the UAE

Speaker:

and stuff like that apparently. So some of the work that that company had

Speaker:

assisted on. But like you know, a delay of a day is like

Speaker:

millions of dollars, tens of millions of dollars in some cases. Right. So

Speaker:

if I am presented, if I'm a project manager, I'm presented. Well, you

Speaker:

know, if going, going dark on the customer

Speaker:

right now, obviously me, Frank as an individual is probably a way

Speaker:

less influence over a supplier than like somebody who's building

Speaker:

skyscrapers. But you know, I would at least have, I would be,

Speaker:

I would as a customer be able to make an informed choice. Right. I could

Speaker:

be delayed by one day. I could be delayed by four weeks if I can't

Speaker:

avoid the delay. I think I know which one I would pick. Right.

Speaker:

I mean, I think, I think everybody appreciates stuff happens. Yes.

Speaker:

And it's just about the ability to be more informed about it. So

Speaker:

you can actually take the appropriate actions about it.

Speaker:

And look, to use another example, spoke to another customer, this

Speaker:

time not in household goods, more in pharmaceutical. And there

Speaker:

again actually OTFD was on time in full delivery was

Speaker:

a key factor for them. And there was an instance where one of

Speaker:

the key executives went to their customers and proudly presented how their

Speaker:

on time, in full delivery of the pharmaceutical goods to the particular

Speaker:

healthcare provider was 90 plus percent whatever they, they thought it was

Speaker:

only to be then told by the customer. Well actually no it

Speaker:

isn't. When we are, according to what we know, it's like

Speaker:

whatever 70, 80%, whatever it is,

Speaker:

whatever it actually was that the numbers don't make, don't

Speaker:

aren't relevant for, for the purpose of the point that there was a

Speaker:

difference between what the pharmaceutical executive thought

Speaker:

that their performance was and what their actual performance was as reported by

Speaker:

the customer. Obviously very embarrassing for the, for the executive coming

Speaker:

back into the organization saying what the hell is going on? What's going on here?

Speaker:

That must have been an uncomfortable meeting or two. Absolutely set meetings

Speaker:

actually in the Organization. And

Speaker:

what they figure out actually is that as they were kind of

Speaker:

summing up, the amount of time that it takes to provide the full delivery was

Speaker:

being done by different departments. Now, for all sorts

Speaker:

of semi valid internal reasons, various

Speaker:

departments chose what components to include and what to exclude

Speaker:

from what they reported as for the time that it takes to deliver.

Speaker:

So for example, this one department that

Speaker:

counted the amount of days that it took them to

Speaker:

get the thing from point A to point B, they excluded

Speaker:

credit checks because credit checks is not part of what the department did.

Speaker:

So very kind of, which is, which. Is my point of view, look, not a

Speaker:

customer pov exactly. Which is fair enough for the department which maybe is

Speaker:

doing, actually shipping the thing from, from the warehouse to the

Speaker:

distribution center, but they can't distribute it, they can't do it before the

Speaker:

credit check is done. Okay, so for the purposes of their work, yeah,

Speaker:

it's true that the credit check is irrelevant and they shouldn't be quote unquote punished

Speaker:

or, or, or in somehow in some way kind of

Speaker:

made to look worse than underperformance than they actually were.

Speaker:

But for the purposes of the customer, the fact that however many one or

Speaker:

three or seven days have taken an additional days for

Speaker:

somebody in the finance team or the procurement team or whatever to do a credit

Speaker:

check on, the customer still added those exact same days, which would then

Speaker:

manifest themselves into the amount of time that it takes from the point at which

Speaker:

the customer in their view made, not in their view, in reality made the

Speaker:

order until the point is delivered. And

Speaker:

that is just one example of the sorts

Speaker:

of discrepancies that can

Speaker:

create problems and where

Speaker:

what I'm talking about, the orchestration that we're talking about, the data

Speaker:

noetic system, the data knowing system

Speaker:

that looks at the various components kind of dispassionately

Speaker:

and practically and kind of is able to give the

Speaker:

suggestions, in this case, it would be able to connect to

Speaker:

the CRM that maybe

Speaker:

captures the date at which the order is made,

Speaker:

the financial system that does the credit

Speaker:

check and then the warehouse management system and the

Speaker:

ERP etc that track the various other steps that

Speaker:

go along the way and give you a complete and hopefully more

Speaker:

accurate picture of everything that's going on.

Speaker:

Right. So, so what do you think is blocking organizations from doing this?

Speaker:

Right. Is it data silos? Is it the fact that

Speaker:

when these data systems, particularly the larger, the enterprise,

Speaker:

when these were built, supply chains were not as complicated

Speaker:

as they are today? Do you think, you think it's a combination of those data

Speaker:

silos organizational politics. You did say, you did kind of allude

Speaker:

that, you know, the problem was some of the problems are valid.

Speaker:

I can assume the ones that are not valid are kind of ridiculous internal

Speaker:

politics within that organization. Or is there something else I'm missing?

Speaker:

First of all, just in terms, I think the answer is that it's probably a

Speaker:

combination. And just to correct any

Speaker:

misconception, I'm not blaming the organization for doing something

Speaker:

that's outright ridiculous. I think that when you check each individual

Speaker:

action or decision on its own, it kind of makes sense. But when you edit

Speaker:

and aggregate, it creates a situation where you have an executive going

Speaker:

saying, our delivery performance is X,

Speaker:

where actually the delivery performance is worse than. Worse than X.

Speaker:

Going back to why that's happening, I think it's a combination of

Speaker:

probably most, if not all the things you said. It's a combination of

Speaker:

silos. It's a combination of kind

Speaker:

of people looking a little bit different, people for

Speaker:

valid reasons having a bit of tunnel vision. Exactly. And also

Speaker:

there has been, up until relatively recently,

Speaker:

it's been very hard to be able to orchestrate all

Speaker:

those things, which is something that the

Speaker:

advent of various forms of artificial intelligence and machine

Speaker:

learning is manifested by large language models and the

Speaker:

increasingly amazing capabilities that AI agent building

Speaker:

brings on board. Those things haven't been around. And so

Speaker:

being able to connect all those dots that once you tell a

Speaker:

story after the fact sound obvious. Like, why didn't your

Speaker:

tiling company know that. That they're going to be delayed? And

Speaker:

why didn't they tell you that it's going to take three months? And why did

Speaker:

it take you 15 calls to. To

Speaker:

figure that out? It's all, yeah, it sounds

Speaker:

kind of obvious, but the reality is I don't think that anybody in this

Speaker:

company, in the company that the retailer that or the company

Speaker:

you're working with kind of set out, okay, how do we deceive

Speaker:

Frank? That's not. No, no. Absolutely no. No. And if I phrase the

Speaker:

question that way, I apologize. That's not what I meant. I mean, I

Speaker:

think that what you described with like each little, each

Speaker:

little error added to one big massive compound error.

Speaker:

There's a fancy word, there's like a fancy word to

Speaker:

describe that in engineering of complex systems, right? And the classic example

Speaker:

is like the space shuttle, right? The issues that they had, like,

Speaker:

some people knew that, that, you know, whether it was the, the what, the heat

Speaker:

tiles, whether it was the O ring, Some people knew, some people didn't know they.

Speaker:

How to communicate. It was there Maybe some other things going

Speaker:

on. Maybe. But you know, but, but you know,

Speaker:

honest mistakes can happen and honest little mistakes add up to

Speaker:

one big. One big honest, you know, mistake. I, I

Speaker:

really doubt that this company was, you know, you know, had a picture of me

Speaker:

on their wall and it's like if this guy calls, like. But exactly.

Speaker:

But I mean, you know, just the same, like, it's still frustrating. Right. And

Speaker:

that's a great point that you brought up like up until now with Agentic.

Speaker:

You bring up a great point about Agentic. AI really would make this much easier

Speaker:

because the alternative historically would have been doubling or tripling

Speaker:

the size of your data analytics team. Right. And even then

Speaker:

that's not a guarantee. But I suppose you could say the same about agents.

Speaker:

Right. Like an agent that is operating on bad data.

Speaker:

Right. Could also do some serious

Speaker:

damage. Absolutely, absolutely. I think that is why,

Speaker:

look, when we talk about, to use data analytics, just an example, and

Speaker:

you can extrapolate from that afterwards what we are trying to do,

Speaker:

we'll kind of try and think about it a little bit like a brain. There's

Speaker:

a left side, right side. The left side for us is what

Speaker:

we call Data Pro V. Looking at the data processes and

Speaker:

actually process value. So we use principles of value stream

Speaker:

mapping and we are,

Speaker:

and we're relying, we're not trying to replace the systems that you already have. So

Speaker:

you probably already have an ERP system in place and a CRM

Speaker:

and various other warehouse transport, various other management

Speaker:

systems. So it's not about ripping and replacing everything. No, you've probably made

Speaker:

a decent choice and they're probably doing a good job of

Speaker:

managing the particular part of the process that they were meant to

Speaker:

deal with. But the problem is that they were all provided as point solutions

Speaker:

and they don't necessarily talk to each other. And so up to now,

Speaker:

what you needed to do is to somehow connect the data points

Speaker:

yourself. But going back to what we're doing. So dataprov is about

Speaker:

first of all capturing the value stream map as it matters to you, to your

Speaker:

process, to your supply chain, capturing the KPIs

Speaker:

as they matter to you. Because for you, maybe cost is the most important

Speaker:

thing, maybe on time, in full delivery, various other things. And,

Speaker:

and irrespective of what that thing is, you probably also have

Speaker:

a quantitative measure for what is good versus bad. One company's own time

Speaker:

in full delivery should be over 90, another might be 75. Doesn't matter, but

Speaker:

it's kind of your stuff. So that's kind of the Data proofy side of what

Speaker:

we're talking about. And this is where it's crucial that the data

Speaker:

that we are able to connect to the, to the data and that the data

Speaker:

is valid because. Absolutely right. If you're saying,

Speaker:

you are absolutely right in saying that if the data is incorrect, all the

Speaker:

conclusions you're going to draw on top of it are going to be problematic.

Speaker:

So that's on the one side. On the other side we've got what we call

Speaker:

dnai. So the data analytic AI part, which is where at the most basic level

Speaker:

we provide you with some sort of copilot, let's call it, which

Speaker:

allows you to interact with it a bit like a

Speaker:

consumer would interact with ChatGPT or Claude or whatever the favorite

Speaker:

LLM model is, which is basically ask a question in

Speaker:

plain language and it should be able to give you a

Speaker:

contextually correct answer. And in our case, in the context

Speaker:

of your supply chain, your supply chain data. So it's not about

Speaker:

data analytics, isn't about asking it a question like, okay,

Speaker:

what does the word noetic mean for that you have Gemini and whatever other

Speaker:

tools. But if you want to ask, okay, how much of SKU

Speaker:

1 to 3 have I sold from the distribution center

Speaker:

in Baltimore over the last six months? It should give

Speaker:

you the right answer that would otherwise have taken you

Speaker:

and put you on the queue for the business analyst to interrogate the

Speaker:

various SQL or other databases and give you an answer maybe in

Speaker:

a week. Or if you get to

Speaker:

the queue. Get access to and dig through 30, 40

Speaker:

different dashboards or spreadsheets. Right, that's the thing. I see,

Speaker:

absolutely, yeah, absolutely. And

Speaker:

so that's at kind of a. Call it a basic level, but then

Speaker:

you can take it and not chop, because that basic level of a

Speaker:

copilot requires you to proactively ask a question.

Speaker:

Whereas what an agent can do is,

Speaker:

and you can have actually a set of agents that do

Speaker:

a particular job for you, like what I mentioned as an example, you can have

Speaker:

a KPI guard you might want. So let's take the case of

Speaker:

dashboards that you rightly said. Lots of organizations have various dashboards and

Speaker:

various systems. And then those dashboards get complemented by those

Speaker:

spreadsheet dashboards which collect information for all sorts of data points and some

Speaker:

manual intervention, etc. They tend to be,

Speaker:

okay, a weekly or monthly report that somebody sees and kind

Speaker:

of, it could be that a week or month after the fact that you have

Speaker:

breached whatever key performance indicator you wanted to meet,

Speaker:

you get to know, oh, My costs have just gone

Speaker:

20% higher than what I need them to be or something like that.

Speaker:

At the base, at one level you can say okay, let me have

Speaker:

a KPI guard that tells me as soon as

Speaker:

a part of my process has breached a particular KPI

Speaker:

against a particular guardrail or a boundary that I

Speaker:

set, I want a notification immediately. And you can choose whether the notification

Speaker:

is a slack message or an email or whatever else.

Speaker:

You can go a level beyond that and say,

Speaker:

okay, I want you to actually, on a particular part of the

Speaker:

process or a particular KPI, I want you to

Speaker:

try and kind of simulate or predict basically

Speaker:

what's going to happen and tell me if you think it's likely that I'm going

Speaker:

to breach a particular KPI.

Speaker:

Those things are. There's a lot of kind of

Speaker:

work that needs to go behind the scenes and lots of ifs and

Speaker:

ends and buts etc that kind of need to take into

Speaker:

account. But in principle you can see, I think

Speaker:

it's kind of exciting that the

Speaker:

emerging and constantly evolving capabilities of

Speaker:

Gen AI

Speaker:

and either various types of models, be it LLMs or

Speaker:

SLMs or VLMs, whatever is

Speaker:

relevant to your. In our,

Speaker:

in our data analytics example in enterprise context,

Speaker:

allow you to do things that have up to now been either

Speaker:

impossible or very, very hard. Interesting.

Speaker:

So does it help, Is it fair to say this helps with governance? Right. There

Speaker:

were discovery, not necessarily governance, but kind of the discovery like what does

Speaker:

the agent do? In particular, does it. How do you discover all these

Speaker:

different disparate sources? Is it.

Speaker:

How much of a degree, to a degree is it automated? So

Speaker:

this is if I understand the question correctly and I may not have.

Speaker:

Phrased it right, so. I'll have a go.

Speaker:

I think you write those like

Speaker:

let me try and raise the question a little bit differently and you tell me

Speaker:

if it was kind of. If I got the general gist and

Speaker:

can I rely on the agent to kind of. I'll exaggerate a little bit. And

Speaker:

can you rely on the agent or agents to

Speaker:

kind of save me for any. From any possible

Speaker:

kind of fire drill or problem that I might face

Speaker:

is one way of asking the question or another way of asking the question is

Speaker:

how specific do I need to be in what I'm

Speaker:

asking the agent to do? Am I kind of roughly on the right track?

Speaker:

Yeah, I would say so. Like that. That's one of, the, one of the, one

Speaker:

of the aspects of it. But the first one I was going for is I

Speaker:

get your product, I sign up. What happened what's the first thing

Speaker:

that happens? Do I talk. You do get together with the business. Like who orders

Speaker:

the product? Is the cto, is it the CEO, is it the.

Speaker:

I don't know how many companies have chief logistics officers. Like who, who,

Speaker:

who you sell to. Is basically, it could be. There's a number of

Speaker:

kind of levels of, of buyers, and it could be any one of the,

Speaker:

of the following from the Chief Digital

Speaker:

officer. Different companies have different names for it, but could

Speaker:

be chief Digital Officer, chief Information Officer,

Speaker:

kind of somebody who's responsible for the.

Speaker:

What historically has been called the IT side of things

Speaker:

to the systems management.

Speaker:

Or it could be the chief supply chain officer. Which companies have.

Speaker:

It could be the layer below that, but

Speaker:

doesn't matter about the titles. It's still the same functions all the way

Speaker:

through to. It could be the

Speaker:

Personas, the managers. It could be the

Speaker:

product manager of a particular product in the

Speaker:

pharmaceutical organization or written organization

Speaker:

that can use the capabilities that we're talking about.

Speaker:

So that's a little bit in terms of the types of users and buyers that

Speaker:

we, that we're looking into, that we're, that we're working with

Speaker:

The.

Speaker:

Sorry, that was the question about who we're dealing with. I think there was another

Speaker:

problem. Yeah, no, no, that was really it. And then like, what's the first step?

Speaker:

Right? Like, you know, say, like, you know, you or your sales rep have come

Speaker:

to me and you explain it and I'm a, I'm a company. Whether

Speaker:

I was like, oh, pretend I'm the executive that got kind of

Speaker:

embarrassed by that thing, we need this today, we need this

Speaker:

yesterday. What happens next? Does the

Speaker:

agent go out and search around for

Speaker:

SQL Server instances and spreadsheets, or do you tell the

Speaker:

agent, hey, I got my data here, I got my data here, I got my

Speaker:

data here, and have at it. So there

Speaker:

is a. I think it's probably before going

Speaker:

into the specific process that we go through and kind of the

Speaker:

steps. Yeah, sorry, I was just excited because this sounds. No, no, it's fine. It's

Speaker:

fine. It's great. I think it's worth maybe

Speaker:

pausing for a second and doing a slight detour

Speaker:

to talking about the evolving business models that

Speaker:

are happening, I think, in the industry overall. And then I'll tie it back to

Speaker:

how we're dealing with things. The, the

Speaker:

fact that AI is making the rapid progress that it is. I think, I

Speaker:

think it's kind of fairly evident to, to everybody that we're talking about

Speaker:

a, a fundamental technology evolution,

Speaker:

if not revolution that we're, that we're seeing similar, if

Speaker:

not at least as impactful as the Internet and cloud revolution

Speaker:

etc and, and the same way that the

Speaker:

advent of, of the Internet revolution or the cloud

Speaker:

revolution has, has given birth to a new

Speaker:

a paradigm of delivery which we all know is software as a service,

Speaker:

which replaced kind of client server software,

Speaker:

the advent of AI is very likely to also usher

Speaker:

in a different delivery model which is not so much going to

Speaker:

be the software serve model, software as a service

Speaker:

model, whereby there are those monolithic kind of systems that

Speaker:

you more or less need to adapt to. Because the whole purpose of software as

Speaker:

a service or the whole. One of the basic tenets of it was that

Speaker:

you kind of build it once for everyone and which means that everybody needs to

Speaker:

adapt to you. These new models, there are different names

Speaker:

being given to them, they're not all the same. But you might have heard of

Speaker:

things like bespoke at scale or service as a software to kind of revert

Speaker:

the SAS acronym or

Speaker:

outcomes as a service. Those are all kind of different

Speaker:

models that try and

Speaker:

verbalize a changing a paradigm in,

Speaker:

in delivery of software in that context. Now, going back to

Speaker:

how we're, how we're doing things, we are, we're

Speaker:

not seeing ourselves as kind of charging on, on a, on a perceived

Speaker:

basis. Not, not that I'm talking about pricing now, but the

Speaker:

delivery is, is intended to be tailored

Speaker:

per customer in the sense that when we get to you say you're excited

Speaker:

and you just bought the product, we will come. And one of the first things

Speaker:

we you is a process discovery and data maturity

Speaker:

assessment because exactly as you said earlier, if the data that

Speaker:

you have is actually not going to give us

Speaker:

sufficient information in order to make any decisions,

Speaker:

we're going to fail. However brilliant the agents that we have are

Speaker:

going to be later because the data is not going to be there. So we

Speaker:

have to do this process discovery and data maturity. Then we have to

Speaker:

kind of connect to various systems that you have. We need to understand your

Speaker:

value Stream, map your KPIs, your, your targets,

Speaker:

ensure that all that is kind of

Speaker:

adapted for your, for your circumstances. And then

Speaker:

we can start saying okay, here's maybe a library of a few agents that you

Speaker:

can choose to use as is, or here's a sort

Speaker:

of call it a canvas in an agent builder that you can take

Speaker:

a few capabilities and build again an agent that's specifically

Speaker:

tasked with addressing challenges that, that you have.

Speaker:

So that that's kind of a slightly longer answer

Speaker:

to your question about what happens next?

Speaker:

Interesting, interesting. So it's almost like software

Speaker:

as an agent, right? You know, saw. I

Speaker:

never heard that acronym before. But. So agent is

Speaker:

a service. I don't know, there's different ways. No, that acronym has.

Speaker:

Would be pronounced very awkwardly. Asian.

Speaker:

So your website says you

Speaker:

focus on, you know, the

Speaker:

four main industries are pharmaceuticals and life science, Omni channel retail,

Speaker:

consumer goods and what is fmcg?

Speaker:

Fast moving consumer goods. Gotcha, gotcha. Okay. And logistics and supply

Speaker:

chain. But I guess any industry really has to

Speaker:

rely on some kind of supply chain, right?

Speaker:

Correct, Correct. The reason why you're seeing the particular

Speaker:

industries you just called out is that we think that

Speaker:

the. If you have a relatively

Speaker:

large number of products that you have to deal with in a relatively complicated

Speaker:

supply chain, this is where the potential added

Speaker:

benefits of having like proper orchestration

Speaker:

and the assistance of AI agents and is going to be more

Speaker:

pronounced if, if you have just one product in a super

Speaker:

simple process. Yes, you can benefit, but it's probably

Speaker:

something you might be able to do kind of intuitive.

Speaker:

Intuitively on your own or relatively LinkedIn system. That,

Speaker:

that's why you're seeing the industries there which have

Speaker:

the characteristics I said. I mean that makes sense. Right? Pharmaceuticals, life

Speaker:

sciences, those are very highly regulated. People's lives are literally online

Speaker:

on the trend of retail. I mean to compete in a world with

Speaker:

Amazons and Walmarts, etc, you have to

Speaker:

be. You have to bring your A game. Right. And

Speaker:

consumer goods, probably the same thing. Right. Because any consumer good or

Speaker:

what is a fast moving consumer good? I. I've not heard that term yet,

Speaker:

to be honest. I'm not sure where is the definition of what's fast

Speaker:

versus not fast. It's just a. It's one of the definitions.

Speaker:

I. Another term that I've heard for this is

Speaker:

cpg, Consumer packaged goods. Okay. That, that. I know what that is.

Speaker:

Yeah. I mean I would imagine something like food, right?

Speaker:

Yeah. There's a time component to a lot of

Speaker:

foodstuffs possibly. Although I think, I think

Speaker:

I am not sure of the look, not being

Speaker:

an fmcg, I have not been in the FMCG industry

Speaker:

myself, but I would imagine that they would

Speaker:

refer to things like anything that you can kind of

Speaker:

take and use quickly. A bar of soap.

Speaker:

Oh, okay. That makes sense. Perish necessarily quickly. But it's going to use

Speaker:

it. Within a week it's gone. It's. I think it also falls under.

Speaker:

That makes sense. McG as an example. That makes sense.

Speaker:

Okay. Wow. It's

Speaker:

fascinating stuff. And like you Know, I think one of the big concerns

Speaker:

is about AI of late. Right. It's always fascinating

Speaker:

me how the, the tech news cycle works.

Speaker:

Right? It works and it finds something to grab

Speaker:

onto. It's like a little like, it's like a toddler

Speaker:

basically. I have a three year old and you know, when he gets

Speaker:

his mind on one thing, nothing else in the universe

Speaker:

exists, you know what I mean? And I think the

Speaker:

tech news industry like. Right, like so, you

Speaker:

know, earlier this year it was agentic this,

Speaker:

agentic that. Right now the last week or two it's all been

Speaker:

about oh my God, we're in AI bubble. Are we in an AI bubble? Are

Speaker:

we like, it's almost like so. But I think that, you

Speaker:

know, one of the things you kind of pull back with the concerns about AI

Speaker:

bubble is the concern of how do you add value.

Speaker:

How does AI realistically add value to organization?

Speaker:

I would imagine that when you get your product installed and everything's working

Speaker:

amazingly, you probably have pretty quick ideas in terms of

Speaker:

how much time is saved in terms of analysts, how much more

Speaker:

effective people can be. I mean, is

Speaker:

that something you see? Yeah, I think, look,

Speaker:

there's a lot to unpack. What you said we can go back to the bubble

Speaker:

and tech news maybe later. But

Speaker:

in terms of the tangible results that you can get,

Speaker:

it's. Yeah, I mean it depends on again, going back to the value

Speaker:

stream map and the KPIs that that matter to you. If you care

Speaker:

for example about cost, you might find that transportation cost per unit

Speaker:

is particularly relevant for you and for various reasons because it's

Speaker:

been, actually because it's been hard to analyze the data, to

Speaker:

collate, collate and synthesize the data from different sources to orchestrate

Speaker:

it. Basically you haven't been able to achieve

Speaker:

the reductions that could have been achieved in transportation. So you can

Speaker:

end up finding you got 5 or 10% improvement there.

Speaker:

If you care about asset utilization, the same thing can be

Speaker:

said for inventory turns and, or days inventory outstanding.

Speaker:

Again, you can buy better orchestration of the data and looking into it,

Speaker:

you might find improvements that are 10 to 20%,

Speaker:

etc. Etc. And so almost every KPI that you,

Speaker:

that you look at, there are bound to be

Speaker:

improvements that you can make. Some of them can translate immediately

Speaker:

into capex savings or cost

Speaker:

reduction or revenue enhancement capabilities,

Speaker:

etc. Some of them are going to be a little bit more,

Speaker:

I was going to say qualitative, but let's go back to the example of what

Speaker:

I said earlier about the OT3 for the pharmaceutical companies, the fact that

Speaker:

the executive came with the wrong number to the customer,

Speaker:

I'm sure there is a value to it. So they would like to have the

Speaker:

right number if they have the right number, as opposed to the wrong number.

Speaker:

How, how much exactly does that quantifiably?

Speaker:

Well, there's trust. It's a trust issue, right? Exactly, exactly. It's a trust issue. Like

Speaker:

if they're wrong, you start wondering if they're wrong about that.

Speaker:

Yeah, I agree. What else are they wrong about? Right, exactly. And

Speaker:

so all I'm saying is that some things will be very easy to

Speaker:

translate immediately to cash, to dollars. Some things definitely

Speaker:

have value in dollars, but are not as easy or obvious to make the

Speaker:

connection. But on the whole, there are,

Speaker:

there are so many different places in which you can, you can see

Speaker:

additional value here that it's just, I mean, the

Speaker:

opportunities I think are, are endless. We can go back if you want. We can

Speaker:

discuss. Oh, no, I think it's great because, like, you know, I, I've been, I've

Speaker:

been poking around agentic AI. I've been fascinated by it. But

Speaker:

when it comes down to breast hacks, as people would

Speaker:

say, it's hard to figure out what exactly

Speaker:

would be a good objective source of value. I guess what

Speaker:

we're saying is there's objective value, like hard cash numbers,

Speaker:

hard dollar or pound numbers, because you're in the UK

Speaker:

as well as, you know, kind of that

Speaker:

soft kind of subjective stuff, whether that's trust, whether that's,

Speaker:

you know, et cetera, et cetera, both are important.

Speaker:

But I think that, you know, if we do get into a situation where people

Speaker:

are going to tighten their belts or the hype wave is going to crash,

Speaker:

having hard numbers, yep. Is always,

Speaker:

always good to have the hard numbers. Right.

Speaker:

But I mean, I would imagine that, you know, and again, you're right. Like, you

Speaker:

know, I would. Even within the same organization, I would imagine, like there are

Speaker:

different metrics to track, right. Like, you know, whether it's time, whether

Speaker:

time to fulfillment, cost

Speaker:

of transportation. Right. There's probably some kind of ecological

Speaker:

things too, right. Like, you know, you know, we use this much fuel versus that

Speaker:

much fuel, which again does tie to cost. But

Speaker:

I think that there is a number of different. It's. It's.

Speaker:

I think that over the last, say, 20 years,

Speaker:

companies, supply chains have gotten orders of magnitude more complicated

Speaker:

and the demands of a business environment have gotten orders of magnitude more

Speaker:

complicated. And the

Speaker:

people, the headcount for the departments that would figure stuff like this

Speaker:

out have not grown by orders the same orders of magnitude.

Speaker:

And I think that AI, far from being this job taker,

Speaker:

could actually solve a lot of these problems that people don't have the

Speaker:

job anyway. Right? No, they're, you know, they're not gonna hide, they're not

Speaker:

gonna go out on a hiring spree and hire like a thousand people to kind

Speaker:

of sort out the stuff. Right. They're gonna, they're gonna demand it of the

Speaker:

existing or even less people. Right. So this is,

Speaker:

yeah, I, I, I. Think that this is, look, we can, we can talk, let's

Speaker:

talk a little bit about the, the, the potential hypo bubble and, and

Speaker:

let's talk about the, the jobs. So, so the bubble

Speaker:

talk of the last how many days or weeks.

Speaker:

In a way, irrespective of whatever my personal

Speaker:

opinion is, it almost doesn't matter if

Speaker:

there is a bubble or not. Because first of

Speaker:

all, let's be clear, I think my understanding, at least when people talk about

Speaker:

the bubble, they talk about the financial valuation bubble. So people

Speaker:

will ask, okay, is Nvidia really worth 5, should it be worth

Speaker:

$5 trillion? Yes or no. And even if you

Speaker:

subscribe to the notion that no, it isn't, and it's actually how much

Speaker:

overpriced and so instead of 5 trillion, it should be worth 40 less,

Speaker:

first of all, still worth 3, 3, 3 trillion and still a lot

Speaker:

of money. And second, again, irrespective of how much

Speaker:

Nvidia in particular is worth or open AI or any other company, it doesn't

Speaker:

matter. There's a completely separate question as to whether

Speaker:

or not the underlying technology that it is part of the, of

Speaker:

the industry that enables AI. Is that

Speaker:

hype? Is it hype that AI is actually never

Speaker:

going to achieve anything meaningful? I think that is a completely

Speaker:

separate question and I don't hear anybody, and I would disagree

Speaker:

with anybody who would say no, no, AI in itself, the actual technology,

Speaker:

the actual capabilities are a bubble. It's actually meaningless.

Speaker:

As I said earlier, I think it's going to be at least as meaningful as

Speaker:

the advent of the Internet or mobile telephony and the combination of

Speaker:

which have enabled things like, like Uber and Airbnb

Speaker:

and a lot of, I mean to name just two of like many,

Speaker:

many applications that have made our lives different.

Speaker:

No, that's true. Right. You know, when you look back and I'm old enough to

Speaker:

remember the.com boom, right, the.com and the. Com

Speaker:

bust, right? And a lot of the

Speaker:

things that these.com startups in the late 90s promised have come

Speaker:

true. Right. I can. Pets.com

Speaker:

didn't optimize their supply chain. Right. The cost of getting you dog

Speaker:

food, they

Speaker:

hadn't figured that out. But obviously Amazon does. I get my dog

Speaker:

food 90% of the time as an auto delivery. Right.

Speaker:

Because they can use. And it's not so much

Speaker:

the technology aspect of it. Right. Because HTML

Speaker:

hasn't really changed radically in that

Speaker:

intervening time. The backend systems have changed in a lot of

Speaker:

ways. But you know, for the end of the day, I mean it was really

Speaker:

the process. You know, Amazon built out a whole delivery network and

Speaker:

worked out deals with other delivery companies. Right.

Speaker:

So it is now, you're right, like it is now possible to do that. Right.

Speaker:

It is now possible to call an Uber and you

Speaker:

know, get, you know,

Speaker:

get a car. But like the whole notion of, I think a lot of that

Speaker:

relied on, you know, having smartphones. Right. Because now it's easy to order

Speaker:

stuff versus in the olden days you had to sit down at a

Speaker:

computer, you had to wait for it to boot up, see the loading

Speaker:

screen and then you had to dial,

Speaker:

click to Internet, connect to Internet. Then you had to hear the screeching of the

Speaker:

modem. It was a five minute process to get online,

Speaker:

plus the page had a load. Now it's just

Speaker:

a lot of people have broadband or certainly faster than dial up

Speaker:

today. You know, it seems much

Speaker:

more feasible to do that. Like if I need dog food I can just, you

Speaker:

know, even when I'm talking to you, even though I shouldn't because it's kind of

Speaker:

rude, I could click open another window and say click order now.

Speaker:

Right. But I think that's a

Speaker:

long winded way of saying I agree with you because the, the promise of E

Speaker:

commerce, the promise of the Internet has been fulfilled

Speaker:

right now though how we got there

Speaker:

was not the way that the startups in the 90s kind of

Speaker:

thought. Right. But yeah, sorry, go ahead.

Speaker:

Yeah, so, so we're very much agreeing on the fact that

Speaker:

the underlying capabilities and new capabilities

Speaker:

that AI in its broader term will enable, I

Speaker:

don't think anybody's questioning that. I think very few people know exactly how

Speaker:

it's going to work out, but I think there's wide consensus that it's going to

Speaker:

be fundamentally, it's going to have

Speaker:

fundamental, a fundamental impact. Now part of the

Speaker:

fundamental impact that people worry about is about jobs, which is what you said earlier

Speaker:

about oh my God, is AI going to take everybody's jobs? Etc. And

Speaker:

look, again, I don't I don't know, I'm not, I'm not a prophet. There

Speaker:

are valid arguments as to why AI might

Speaker:

be, might be risky for some jobs. My

Speaker:

white might be disruptive

Speaker:

to all sorts of jobs. But if, if we want to take the optimistic

Speaker:

view, which also is, has a lot of valid arguments for

Speaker:

one of which being every technological evolution or

Speaker:

revolution has impacted certain jobs,

Speaker:

but by and large created more opportunity, more jobs, more

Speaker:

advancement than it, than it created, to use my favorite

Speaker:

example is just because I can't remember where I came across it, but

Speaker:

the word computer used to mean a person that did

Speaker:

computations. Yes, that's right. And, and lo and behold,

Speaker:

computers. Now when anybody says computer nowadays, they don't mean

Speaker:

a person doing computational because we've got machines that do that. So if

Speaker:

you want to find a job as a computer, good luck. Right, right,

Speaker:

right. Gonna be quite hard. But does that mean that kind of nobody can find

Speaker:

a job anymore? Absolutely not. Is that, is that

Speaker:

a promise that, that, that's exactly what's going to happen with AI?

Speaker:

No, but at least the trajectory up to now has been

Speaker:

one of, I don't know to call it like

Speaker:

a positive, positive trend going forward.

Speaker:

And I think, I personally think that the, exactly as you said, at

Speaker:

least some of the capabilities that AI builds and the examples that we talked

Speaker:

about about what data analytics does and being able to give you this

Speaker:

KPI guard or various other agentic capabilities,

Speaker:

I'm not necessarily seeing it, in fact, I'm not at all seeing it

Speaker:

as kind of taking away anybody's job. I don't think

Speaker:

that the business analyst that currently

Speaker:

can't deal with all the tasks that they're being given

Speaker:

is going to be replaced. I think that they are going to be helped

Speaker:

by both them. So they're going to be helped by it. And more

Speaker:

importantly all the business managers who up to now just wouldn't deliver

Speaker:

what they needed to deliver because they didn't have access to the business analyst. Now

Speaker:

they have access to an agent that is able to. Yeah, I wish Andy

Speaker:

was here because Andy has a really good anecdote about how

Speaker:

DBAs used to be. Like you would have a database

Speaker:

administrator and typically you had, it was a one to one

Speaker:

relationship. Every database had one DBA and

Speaker:

then sometimes a backup if it was important enough. Right.

Speaker:

But now the job of a DBA is they realistically manage

Speaker:

dozens if not hundreds of databases. Right. And that's because of the

Speaker:

cloud and automation and things like that, even before AI.

Speaker:

But the job of a DBA still exists.

Speaker:

Right. It just looks really different. And I agree with you.

Speaker:

I have faith in the trend line. Right. Historically, every

Speaker:

aspect of automation has created more

Speaker:

jobs over the longer haul. And my only

Speaker:

concern is irrational. There's irrational exuberance. Right.

Speaker:

But there's also what people don't talk about as much as irrational

Speaker:

pessimism. Right. And that was, I

Speaker:

lived through that in the dot com bubble. That's the part of the dot com

Speaker:

bubble I remember the most because it was the most difficult

Speaker:

where it was, oh, you know, the Internet's just a fad and like it's over

Speaker:

and it's like, you know, we, we don't

Speaker:

laugh enough at the, the people who said that. Right. You know what I mean?

Speaker:

Like, you know, so to your point, right, like, you know, is, is

Speaker:

Nvidia worth really worth $5 trillion? Is it worth.

Speaker:

Who knows? Today it could be like worth seven. Right. I haven't

Speaker:

checked the markets, but. But it's certainly not worth zero.

Speaker:

Right. It's certainly not worth like I can easily see kind

Speaker:

of the way the

Speaker:

clickbait machine works is, you know, we go from

Speaker:

they make the money on the roller coaster right up and they make the money

Speaker:

on the roller coaster right down. Right. Irrational exuberance,

Speaker:

irrational pessimism. And that's kind of the,

Speaker:

there are dangers to both. But the part that at least traumatized

Speaker:

me more was the, the way down and how far

Speaker:

that kind of went in the other direction. That's the only thing that would

Speaker:

keep me up at night. Yeah, look, there's no,

Speaker:

there's no guarantee, I think that we are,

Speaker:

it's possible, let's phrase it not in double negative. It's possible that we

Speaker:

are in a financial bubble and it's possible as a result that at some point

Speaker:

there's going to be a correction and that correction might be a short and sharp

Speaker:

kind of decline or it could be a, a long and steady

Speaker:

decline. It could be all sorts of things. Things. And whichever, if it, if it

Speaker:

does happen, whichever form it takes, it's going to carry with it

Speaker:

something. All of that is under rival if it goes down

Speaker:

that path, irrespective of whether it does that or

Speaker:

not. In the same way that happened with the dot com

Speaker:

boom and bust of 2000, the late 90s and

Speaker:

what then happened in 2000 and a little bit afterwards,

Speaker:

the boom and bust, the financial boom and bust and the absolute

Speaker:

roller coaster that the NASDAQ had and the implication, the financial, very real

Speaker:

financial implications that it had for people didn't change the fact, as we've

Speaker:

said and agreed, that the Internet, or the

Speaker:

Internet, which is what created the to begin with, has

Speaker:

fundamentally changed the way a lot of things

Speaker:

operate the same, absolutely the same will be true of

Speaker:

AI. I have no doubt about that.

Speaker:

I think that in the same way that the Internet has had a lot of

Speaker:

positive impacts and some impacts that people would argue are actually

Speaker:

not that positive, I'm sure the same will be over. And

Speaker:

hopefully again, as with the trend up to now,

Speaker:

hopefully we can all,

Speaker:

if everybody does everything they can in order to maximize the positive

Speaker:

and minimize the negative, we have a very, very,

Speaker:

we can be very, very optimistic about the future.

Speaker:

And, and, and to give a few examples, I mean, AI in theory holds

Speaker:

the promise of helping us solve really, really hard problems like climate

Speaker:

change, like the world hunger,

Speaker:

how do we feed the population, how do, how do we manage resources in a,

Speaker:

in a, a, an earth that is limited in size, with

Speaker:

a population that keeps growing,

Speaker:

how do we fight cancer, et cetera, et cetera. Those are all things that

Speaker:

theoretically AI should help us kind of increase

Speaker:

manifold. Yeah, so there's, you also have to think too.

Speaker:

Like the cognitive load that we have today

Speaker:

could be reduced. Like if you're a business analyst and

Speaker:

you have a book next, you used to have a book next to you. How

Speaker:

do I do this in SQL? Because they don't want to wait for the data

Speaker:

people, right? How do I do that? How do I do I go look and

Speaker:

I do, I go, I do a Google search, right? And you know, Stack

Speaker:

Overflow would have a billion different answers.

Speaker:

Well, two or three different answers and then 100 people, anytime

Speaker:

you post a question would chomp on you. Like check through the existing answers rather

Speaker:

than. Whereas now you go to ChatGPT. How do I do this? And it gives

Speaker:

it to you right now. Is it always accurate? You know, obviously there's some

Speaker:

rough edges there, but for the most part, you know, if you

Speaker:

run into a problem in an unfamiliar space, it's a

Speaker:

lot easier to get an answer now than it was before. It's a lot

Speaker:

more time efficient. So if you think about the cognitive load that now can be

Speaker:

shifted to actual other more

Speaker:

pertinent problems. I don't know. I see that as a net

Speaker:

positive. I think we both agree, which is cool. That's always nice.

Speaker:

Brilliant minds do think alike. I know we're coming at the

Speaker:

top of the hour, so where can folks find out

Speaker:

more about data noet and about you?

Speaker:

The obvious places. So for data analytics, best place to start is our

Speaker:

website which is datanoetic AI. So data

Speaker:

D A T A N O E T I C

Speaker:

A I data analytic AI. The website about myself.

Speaker:

I'm on LinkedIn so I spell my name it A

Speaker:

Y. Like Italy without the L and last name Haber H A

Speaker:

B for Bravo E R. You can find me on LinkedIn, you

Speaker:

can find our website and

Speaker:

happy exploring from there on. Awesome. I think this is great. I think

Speaker:

it's the reason why I bring up the bubbles and is

Speaker:

I. Think that. What your company

Speaker:

optimizes will give people the hard numbers to kind of

Speaker:

splash cold water into the irrational pessimism.

Speaker:

That's what I think. Because I think if you're an AI company

Speaker:

today, start thinking about gathering those hard numbers. Right? Because those

Speaker:

hard numbers are going to be. I mean that's how Amazon survived. That's how any

Speaker:

of the survivors of the dot com crash, they had the hard numbers to prove

Speaker:

it. Right. And most

Speaker:

of the major Internet companies today,

Speaker:

not all of them, but a lot of them had

Speaker:

the survivors. There were survivors in the dot com bust, right? Absolutely.

Speaker:

And they came out stronger for it. I think Amazon being the most

Speaker:

notable. Amazon being the most obvious. Google was started kind

Speaker:

of in that era and they're a major player. And so

Speaker:

I think that, yeah, just remember, you know, the

Speaker:

sun always rises, right? No, I

Speaker:

think again, we're probably violently agreeing. If you're

Speaker:

able to deliver real tangible outcomes,

Speaker:

you'll weather the storm. You'll, you'll be able to,

Speaker:

you'll become indispensable as people find Amazon at the moment at a consumer

Speaker:

level and actually AWS as an example at

Speaker:

the business level. So yeah, absolutely. Well, I think on

Speaker:

that thought, thanks for having, thanks for coming on the show

Speaker:

and what a great conversation. We'd love to have you back sometime and

Speaker:

we'll let our AI finish the show. And that's a wrap on

Speaker:

another illuminating journey into the dataverse. Huge

Speaker:

thanks to Itai Haba for joining us and proving that AI isn't just

Speaker:

about generating cat poems or pretending to write your emails. It can

Speaker:

actually prevent multimillion dollar supply chain nightmares and possibly,

Speaker:

just possibly stop Frank from reliving tile related trauma.

Speaker:

If you enjoyed this episode, be sure to subscribe, rate

Speaker:

and leave a review because somewhere an AI agent is judging you

Speaker:

based on your podcast engagement. Until next time, keep

Speaker:

your data clean, your models lean, and remember, in a world

Speaker:

full of dashboards, be the agent of change. Bailey

Speaker:

signing off with perfect on time in full delivery.