Latest / UnDocked: The Maritime Transformation Show / Adaptive Learning and the Death of the Manager: UnDocked Live from Bergen
Transcript
- speaker-0: Good afternoon, everyone. speaker-1: Hello. hello everybody and welcome to this very first ever live edition of Undocked and a massive, massive thanks to the organizers for inviting us to be part of what is obviously a fantastic day that ⁓ we're here. And it's very apt that we are celebrating this first ever live Undocked here in Norway, which has a great place in our heart because this is where we first conceived of Undocked, was at Norrshipping last year and this week was the first ever episode. one year ago and for it's been what kickstarted whole thing so it's very apt that we're back here. The other thing to say about Undocked is that it's 50 episodes in and the episodes are generally speaking, Nick and I talking in a very unfiltered... Rambling for about an ⁓ So with that in you better tell us how to get out of this mess. ⁓ speaker-0: We thought we've only got 20 minutes. So we thought rather than just have us ramble and then edit it down, which is what we normally do, we would each present what think is the of big idea for the future when it comes to the human factor. So ⁓ what's down track that the industry needs to prepare for? ⁓ We have a idea what each of us is going to say, but outside of that, pretty well unscripted on So Raoul's going to give his big idea first, and I'm going to quiz him. we'll welcome some heckling, just heckle enough that it gets on audio track. ⁓ and then I'll go second. Over to you, speaker-1: Okay, here we go. So my big idea for today is that AI won't replace human capital, but it will make it scalable, making expertise observable, transferable and continually So let me kind of give you my pitch on this idea. up on screen there, you'll see ⁓ something that you introduced me to this video in episode 44. And this is a what? called a... So my big idea for today is that AI won't replace human capital, but it will make it scalable, making expertise observable, transferable and continually improvable. speaker-0: It's an arm farm. speaker-1: arm farm and this rather dystopian vision Indian garment factory workers with head mount displays there that are recording all of their hand movements how they ⁓ do their with the fairly obvious purpose of replacing them with a blend of AI and robotics, right? So this is our dystopian vision of what's going to happen with jobs disappearing. And if I can just... you to stop being quite so depressed by it for a minute and think about something else that's happening here because if you look at this, what you really see is that head-mounted display and camera and the AI is interpreting how work is being performed. It's saying what is efficient. It's seeing which of the workers does things in an interesting or innovative way that might be replicated. It's showing what's the safest practice, what's the... best use of the machinery and if we think about all of those things that could be very interesting for us in and if you think that's completely crazy think about these kind of cctv images here which form part of a modern VDR system, Vessel Data Recorder and there are already systems out there which are analyzing those for safe practice and sort of risk assessment and all that sort of stuff but are also scoring on behaviors and all that sort of thing as well and why that important because that starts to potentially give us some indications performance. Now if you think about like the number of the amount of data that we have coming into systems from sensors, from navigational information, from plan maintenance systems, all that kind of stuff, we have lots and lots of technical operational data points and very few ⁓ one of the biggest areas of the impacts our performance and also is our operational spend as well. So there are real advantages. Nick and I on the podcast talked a lot about why aren't they Nick Chubb: This episode of Undocked is brought to you by IEC Telecom. At sea, connectivity now spans multiple networks working together. From LEO to GEO, vessels now depend on multiple orbits to stay connected and operational. IEC Telecom brings it all together. With over 30 years of expertise, they deliver fully integrated, multi-orbit connectivity solutions tailored to maritime and offshore operations. As an authorized Starlink reseller and trusted partner to leading GEO providers, they simplify complexity into one seamless system. Reliable, flexible and future-ready. speaker-1: and they're more kind of performance data. Why do we want it? Well, usually we want it because we can find a performance gap and if we can find a performance gap, then we can start to work on the performance gap and we can start to use things like sort of training, behavioral development, all those kind of things to do it. And what might that look like in sort of enabled world? This is the scramblings of a madman. I've kind of been having ideas on the podcast over the last year and I kind of started putting them together to be to illustrate this. So we already get a bit of personal data about people. We collect lots of information about them. They take assessments and all that sort of stuff. But then if we can put in this performance layer of what actually happens when they're actually doing work and we can make pull down on some of that organizational knowledge around all the things that they Nick Chubb: IEC Telecom is your connectivity partner at sea. Learn more at ec-telecom.com speaker-1: not just how they do, but how other people work that's perhaps more efficient and better, that can go into the mix there. And of course we can bed in all the other things we have to concern ourselves with, like customer requirements, industry requirements, best practice guidelines, all of that. And we can put all of that into our needs analysis engine over here, and that will tell us everything that that individual needs to do to be able to perform. speaker-0: big idea was that human capital would be scaled, not replaced. But the arm farm, ⁓ I look at that and think, we're getting replaced here. How you reconcile those two? speaker-1: Well, because we've still got a human in the mix here, and we still need that human to be really performant. But what we're doing currently is we're putting all those people typically through rank-based progression of ⁓ and learning that they have to get through. And we're not really saying what are the particular things that need to be addressed by that individual. So no one's getting replaced at this point. But ⁓ we that needs analysis engine of what they need to do as an individual. And then we can a path line that just works for them through our adaptive assembly engine, I'm calling it there, which will create this learner pathway that's relevant for them and they don't have to do things that they already know and all those sorts of things. Now adaptive learning is not new, that's a concept people have been working on for a very long time, but AI lets us do something even more interesting than that because just like we can have a big corpus of information that builds our needs analysis engine, we can also... Do the same thing with a kind of content engine. If we have an approved corpus of knowledge and approved materials, very important. AI does make mistakes, as we heard about in the last session. And we can actually maybe generate that content in exactly the format that people want it to consume it. So maybe I'm going to the gym and I have some leadership skills I need to work on. I can say I want that in an audio podcast. And I generate that podcast and off I go to the gym. Instead, if I'm someone who's very visual, needs diagrams and things like that, they can be to me in something more like a traditional kind of e-learning package or something like that. And for usage as well. It doesn't have to be everything that's prescribed for me. Maybe we can change it from push to pull. And then they can say, well, actually, I'm to do a toolbox talk, give me a video that I can use with the team that's going to illustrate the main points. And from our corpus, magically it's created for the exact purpose I need to use it. speaker-0: So you're saying our ability to learn increase because we'll only be given the information that we actually need to do the job at the time we need to do it. ⁓ speaker-1: Yes, and also with all of our preferences and our learning design and all of those sorts of things, which you know, our profile, which tells the system how I like to consume information and how it's most successfully consumed by me. speaker-0: Let me just challenge that ever so slightly because I know a fair few HSEQ managers who spend their life dealing with ⁓ and thousands and thousands of emails and seem to have the time to actually think about how to improve, how things are really working. So how you go from thousands of emails trying to log stuff into an HSEQ system to ⁓ a reactive system that? ⁓ speaker-1: that is part of your operational knowledge and performance data. That's its job to condense all of that down. Just like when you were doing the show notes here, you put them into chat GPT and got your thesis pulled out. But ⁓ that's what it is. It's just analyzing all those things and it into the thing that you need. Now, last point I'll make on this one, because I want to hear your big idea. is that within this, a byproduct of all the things that ⁓ learned and all the things that are understood that might allow you to be a mentor. And at that point, we can consider whether we can get a digital twin of you, ⁓ we can then put to work on some of the tasks that you perhaps don't want to take care of. And you could be infinitely scalable, hence my point, and be present to work with people on not just on your ship, but on lots of other ships as well. speaker-0: I've been assured by my team that they do not want a digital twin of me. no. I'm curious, quick show of hands, who would be happy having their performance gap analyzed by AI? One, two, okay. All right, it's maybe 20 % of the audience. speaker-1: Well, I normally get an hour to convince people, don't This isn't enough. But does lead to one final point, and I just want to leave you in that because it's something to think about. If we do have digital twins and you're everywhere, when you leave the ⁓ business, also ⁓ left potentially. So you might want to think about covering your IP, ladies and gentlemen, when you become digital twins. You can earn money on it after you've left, ⁓ speaker-0: Hmm, yeah, I'm not sure how I feel about that. All right, my big idea. Let me take the, I'll take off you. Before I give you my big idea, let me tell you about my friend. first job Shaw ⁓ after I left sea, I started in an working with ⁓ lady called and we both the same week. And I realized within a week that was more intelligent than me. She was a much harder worker than I am. and she was much more charismatic than me. And so it was no surprise at all that she got promoted ahead of me and ahead of me and ended up managing teams and has gone on and had a wonderful, stratospheric career. We're still best friends to this day 10, 12 years on. But I was playing with my various AI tools the other day and I suddenly came to the realization that these tools are more intelligent than me. These tools work much harder than I do. and they are significantly more charismatic than me. So if we play that forward, if we play that forward, where do we actually end up? My big idea is that today, is a helpful assistant in our work. In 10 years time, we will the helpful assistants in organizations run ⁓ primarily AI. speaker-1: He's just fishing. speaker-0: My big idea is that today, AI is helpful assistant in our work. In years time, we ⁓ will be the helpful assistants in organizations run primarily by AI. And I was really pleased to see the three presentations because think it's given ⁓ some ⁓ of possible, when we're looking at the presentation from Cognite going from ⁓ it being intern, the very clever but a bit dumb in some areas intern, ⁓ to actually able to take action ⁓ in a world environment. What do I actually mean by this? I'm talking about the death of the manager, which for some people in the room may sound wonderful and for some may sound terrible, I'm not really sure. But this is organization that ⁓ know and love today, right? We have a workforce and go out and actually do the work and make things happen. And then a few fewer people, they're the managers and they kind of make sure that the work gets done. And then we have leadership and they set the direction and they do like governance and kind of take on those really important trusted relationships. The direction gets set to the managers, and then the managers then execute on that plan, that's how the world works. That's how organizations work. But AI, turns out, is good at doing the things that managers do. Measuring performance. 20 % you are happy to be measured at least. Measuring performance. Taking direction turning it action plans. Measuring outcomes. measuring across an organization or across an operation is very difficult for an individual human to do. So if you look 10 years ahead, what the future organization look like? We'll have people. ⁓ Absolutely, will still have people. And I'm a firm believer that AI is a net job generator. But I think we'll have people. doing execution that is technical experts doing the things that AI just can't do or can't be trusted to do on own ⁓ and the claims that AI is making. And then have leadership setting direction, providing on what AI should or should not be doing, creating that human to trust, because we all buy from people at the end of the day, and providing that layer of because no AI system can be held truly accountable. Ultimately, it has to go down to people. So what happens in the middle? All of the managers. Well, my theory is don't think they're going to end up on some kind of unemployment scrap heap. I think what will happen, and we've actually started to see this in a couple of the organizations that follow that are quite far ahead on this stuff. There's an that took out all of their sales managers. ⁓ And what did is they either ⁓ turned them into individual contributors, because they're very, good salespeople, or they elevated into leadership positions where they're set in direction for the entire organization. But all of the actual day-to-day management of the sales team is now happening on dashboards. So that is my big the death of the manager. speaker-1: Well, just a quick show of hands, who'd prefer it if their manager was AI? It's perhaps a career-ending moment, but if you... I can certainly think of a few in my own case where I might have gone there. I just wondered, about ⁓ the meta job. And I'm not talking about the Facebook meta job. mean, managers on the surface might do a whole bunch of managerial tasks which you can put into your Claude workflow, as I've seen you do. But what is the, you know, there's a whole load of meta job as well. And when you think about it, like very often it's those people in that middle section that are having to sell things to the organisation, they're having to translate what the leadership, very smart people in the boardroom say into something tangible and real. What's going to happen to that meta job? speaker-0: I think it will shift further towards leadership. I think we will end up in a position ultimately, right, if try and distill it down in terms of what management ⁓ means an organization. Often ⁓ it accountability and it trust. And I mean that internally and externally. that human to human trust, no one is going to trust AI ⁓ entirely. And I those will remain incredibly important. But I just see them to the right and becoming much more of a of ⁓ leadership. And I know the difference leadership management is often blurred, I do think they are distinct I think we will have less of the kind of day-to-day ⁓ speaker-1: When you started talking, was of something you brought to me in one of the episodes, which was a meat layer. Has ⁓ anyone heard meat layer? It's horrible. ⁓ It's an AI has things it can't do, right? So it needs humans. And these AIs can book, a bit like an Uber driver picking up your takeaway. And sometimes is that job. And sometimes it's like taking a legal letter to people and stuff like that. I know that's what you intended, but there is a bit of an element there, isn't there, of that middle layer kind of looking a bit like this machine kind of trying to find some meat speaker-0: Yeah, absolutely. And part of me sits there and thinks, this sounds awful. ⁓ then part of me gets really excited about what humans won't have to be doing. But the Meet Layer is a protocol that allows AI agents to hire real-world humans. You can go and look it up at meetlayer.com, MEAT. And is One half of it is effective. It's an MCP. It's sort of like an API for AI agents. It allows them to log in and post a job a human to do, go and fix a washing machine or whatever. danger that we have is that we end up on this execution side, the kind of further of the economy. People in skilled work end up in riskier work taking on fixing washing machine jobs, you know, one a time directed by AI. Actually, if you apply to the maritime industry, if we take this model put it on a ship, something quite interesting happens. Chipping and painting will always need to be done. And it's very, very expensive to get a robot to do it. I've never seen it happen. So we will always have people on board the ship the vessel, keeping it running. We will always need someone who is accountable for safe running of that ship and making that we stay within legal compliance and all of that sort of stuff. The middle layer, mate, second mate, fourth, third, second engineer. That management function, running the plan maintenance system, actually taking the watches, I'm starting to see more and more that I think we could end up in a world where that's no longer necessary on a ship. question then becomes, how do you get people from there? speaker-1: Yeah, I was just waiting for my chance to come in I thought, deal you with perhaps a fatal blow. Because we already see that as a problem in the industry right now. Correct. We've not got enough fourth engineers or whatever, so we don't get enough second engineers, you know. speaker-0: Absolutely right. So what's your plan? I've no idea. That's everyone, that's your problem. We're in last before the break, so I would encourage you to take this discussion into the company. speaker-1: very interesting to hear from you how you implement these great ideas we've had. speaker-0: Well, maybe you have the solution actually with your amplification. ⁓ speaker-1: I'm actually wondering whether it actually just pushes a whole load of managerial stuff into the leadership team, which they won't presumably want. I think we've got some great leaders here in the room. I'm sure tell us after the break when they cancel subscription. ⁓ speaker-0: all seriousness, on this execution side, it's really important that we develop technical expertise across the industry. don't know anyone's heard of a phenomenon called Gell-Mann and amnesia. if you're anyone this room who's shipping, when shipping hits the headlines, the mainstream headlines, we read articles ⁓ the shipping industry, they're often really wrong. Like the Ever Given was described an article when it ⁓ blocked the Cirrus Canal as tanker, ⁓ and that really wound me ⁓ because I'm a shipping person, I understand the difference. But then I read an article about banking and I just took it as read. Whatever it said, I believed it was 100 % accurate. This is called Gell-Mann amnesia. It's a cognitive dissonance that we all suffer from. AI is Gell-Mann amnesia on steroids, right? If you ask it to... do a mortgage application for you and skip the mortgage advisor, it might be right, it might not. If you ask it whether the mushroom's safe, it might be right, it might not. we understand the contextual required in the area that we're working, we know to tell it it's wrong. In other fields, we don't. And so actually, technical expertise becomes more important ⁓ on that not less. speaker-1: And there is on the diagram that I said there is a preamble to that which I didn't have time to get in, which is about the skills going up when you start actually working with these AI systems. Because one of the most important skills that we're going to need is to know when the machine is wrong and when to challenge. And as an industry, we don't have a great reputation in that challenge thing. We already have a problem with people challenging the master even when they're doing something crazy. But we are running out of time. So I think we should find out which of these is more plausible to people, right? speaker-0: Who prefers Ryle's vision of the future? Who prefers mine? speaker-1: ⁓ by the way, who thinks they're both absolute crap? We've got one at the back. I think you take that as a small victory, my friend. speaker-0: Ladies and gentlemen, thank you so, much. This has been a very special live episode of the Undocked podcast. Thank you so much to the BISC team for inviting us to do this. It's been great fun. And I'm looking forward to chatting to you all about it over the next break. Thank you. speaker-1: Thanks, everyone. Raal: Hello everybody and welcome to Undocked. Welcome to you Nick Chubb. Nick Chubb: Hello, Raul Harris, how are you? Raal: I'm great, it's lovely to see you again as always. Nick Chubb: ⁓ lovely to see you. It's been ⁓ i in in reality it's been all of thirty seconds, but ⁓ you know, if for anyone watching it'll feel like seven days. Raal: Hahaha Yeah, that's right. Time is an abstract and elastic thing. But this is the second part, really, of our sort of Bergen, or let's call it our Norway anniversary. Yeah, our Norway anniversary special. We explained last week, Nick and I started this podcast on the back of a cocktail-inspired discussion at Norrshipping in 2025. And the first episode, which you can still Nick Chubb: Bergen special. A Norway anniversary special. Nice, I like that. Raal: go back and view if you're so inclined, was our sort of takes on North shipping. Then we found ourselves last week back in Bergen, this time for the Bergen ⁓ International Shipping Conference, organized by Maritime Bergen. And it was by chance one year on, 50 episodes in, and last week, if you haven't seen it, maybe a good idea to go and watch that episode first, I don't know. It probably works just as well the other way around. We'll find out. the last week's episode was our series of interviews and discussions on the event itself and the themes. This week, we're going to get into what we did in Maritime. Nick Chubb: We we were invited to do a live episode, ⁓ which we'd never done before. ⁓ and what we normally do is we we sort of sit down and ramble for kind of ⁓ some I mean sometimes hours. And then and then and then it gets edited down into a you know fairly compact forty-five minutes to an hour. What the the the Bergen International Shipping Team ⁓ gave us as a brief was twenty minutes. Raal: Ha ha ha! Nick Chubb: ⁓ so we felt the pressure. ⁓ we we were really, really under the clutch. ⁓ but I I think it went okay. Raal: Well, we got rave reviews, as we said, people enjoyed it. well, it was well received, I should say. We didn't get any reviews at all. But I got some very kind words and some nice emails. think that, but the thing that's interesting, like, just to sort of say before we, because I think we can understate this. One of the things that we've said, and you and I have had quite a few discussions on this, and we... Nick Chubb: Don't set expectations too high. They've not they've not listened yet. That's nice. Raal: kind of got into it a little bit last week is that if you want to have a different kind of conversation and you want to look at things differently, you can't always use the same event formats and formats do change dynamics and things like that. So the dynamic of this podcast has always been one, it's unrehearsed, unscripted. Normally we don't even sort of have a theme or anything, which is kind of ⁓ both a dereliction of duty, but it kind of leads to at least a different kind of experience. And so when you then say, well, actually, we'd like you to do that on stage, it becomes very, very challenging because one, ⁓ as you carefully pointed out, the only reason we kind of end up with anything that's worth people listening to is because we edit it so heavily. it's just, know, so... ⁓ So trying to then do that in 20 minutes and make it meaningful when at least some of my sentences last that long. And then having a conversation with a person in front of an audience there is weird, it? Yeah. Nick Chubb: It's weird thing. Yeah. Well the w the weirdest experience for me was having our heads behind us twenty foot tall. ⁓ and I don't know whether I enjoyed that or not. I think secretly we both enjoyed it. Raal: Yeah. Yeah, I think the photographs, someone said to me it looked like a Saturday night at the Apollo or something like that, which is quite funny. But it was, I mean, it was great, great setup and everything. But yeah, so we couldn't have, when we say we do an undock live, we couldn't do it exactly as we would do here. So what we ended up with was something that was. Nick Chubb: Yeah, just less funny. Raal: we put a little bit of a frame around it and tried to ⁓ have a condensed discussion on a couple of topics. Nick Chubb: Yeah, we we we picked our favorite topic, ⁓ which is a combination of AI and and what that does to to the needs of the workforce. ⁓ and we each presented our kind of big idea for where AI will take us in the future. ⁓ and ⁓ and I think we yeah, we got we got some some interesting results. So ⁓ w without further ado, let's ⁓ let's play the clip. Raal: So there you have it, ladies and gentlemen. You've seen what we shared with the audience there in Bergen. And Nick, I that probably ⁓ the between the two ideas that we had, I think they're both bringing together bits of discussions that we've had ⁓ on But I think yours was, ⁓ mine perhaps ⁓ more kind of observable in some of the discussions that we've had. I was... ⁓ sort of deliberately leaning into some, to sort of trying to solidify things that we've talked about before. Whereas your concept was, I think, more, yes, yeah, yeah. The first question that I would ask, because we haven't had a chance to really do an autopsy on this, obviously the audience reaction, I think people... Nick Chubb: I took a bit of a leap into the future. One hell of a leap. Debrief. Raal: You add the edge on me, you know, by about four or five arms, I think, people. Nick Chubb: Yeah, it's important to say it it wasn't a competition, but but if it was, I'd have won. Raal: If it was you won. Lawrence Odgfell said to me later that evening, said, he said, Nick, Nick had the edge on you. He was more provocative, you know, like kind of thing. So. But I think it's fair to say that when we did the show of arms, like nobody was particularly convinced. How much did you kind of get the sense that that people really kind of really not say I understood, of course they understood, but I mean, like. Nick Chubb: To be provocative. Raal: that really got the concepts that we were talking about. there's a, I mean, 10 minute pitches, well, sorry, not even that. The pitches are about five minutes and there's sort of bit of discussion, but it wasn't the kind of exploratory deep dive that you'd need to kind of really get into the topics we covered. Nick Chubb: No, you're right. ⁓ and that I think that's why I I went deliberately provocative and simple 'cause otherwise peop people will either ⁓ viscerally hate it or ⁓ or or or get on board with it. ⁓ and you were quite nuanced in your arguments. ⁓ so ⁓ but I I think generally speaking the thing that's exciting about this ⁓ this stuff is that you know, genuinely no one knows and I all all of these ⁓ All of the kind of future scenarios that we presented and a whole load of others ⁓ are not just possible, ⁓ but e but even probable. ⁓ and ⁓ and I think it's probably one of the more fun things I get to do is kind of thinking about where this stuff could actually end up. ⁓ but no, I I think the number of hands that went up for you're both completely bonkers, ⁓ beat beat both of us in reality. Raal: But I think that's as it should be, you know, I think that's the role that we played in the event was to try to provoke some difference in thought and to have people go away and hopefully that's what happened. I think one of the things just for those that just watched the clip and stayed with us there, we didn't really have time to sort of get into that so much because obviously it's a... It's a very short, you know, it's not, we're not there to do a PowerPoint lecture, but certainly we, everything that we proposed and talked about has some foundation in reality in the sense that it's already elements of it are already happening. There is already directional stuff in there. So for example, your, gave the rather crude kind of example of your one there about the sort of the meat layer thing, you know, that is as dystopian as it is, it's real, it's there, it's a service that's being used. When I talked about activating that corpus of information and breaking all those learning materials down into something that could be repurposed, there are companies that are offering that and are working with companies, learning management systems today for that exact purpose. So I think that's as outlandish as both ideas may have appeared. Nick Chubb: Yeah. Raal: they could very well become reality. Nick Chubb: Well, I I I think you're you're kinda hit on where I've spent most of my career, which is kind of looking at what's going on in other sectors ⁓ and happening today and recognising that few ⁓ that shipping is usually a little bit behind the curve. So it's n it's never that difficult to predict what's gonna happen in the shipping industry. ⁓ because yeah, there are other sectors that kind of ⁓ that that sit at the frontier. And I think I think we've we've both experienced that over the last sort of year or so in the research that we've done to support, you know, to support this show. I I think actually, ⁓ mine was more outlandish than yours, I don't think either of them are particularly outlandish. I th I think they they have a pretty reasonable ⁓ ⁓ chance both of coming to fruition. Raal: Yeah. Yeah, I think the thing that I would say as well, like looking back at what we covered there and I think the bit that we glossed over, you're sort of getting to it when you say like the shipping industry being slightly behind. There are reasons for that. Of course, it's been, you know, connectivity and issues and things like that that have prevented shipping from being at the forefront of a lot of technology. But there is also that safety first mindset, you know, this is high reliability, critical industries. And so things need to be incubated for much, much ⁓ longer. And I think that's maybe that was some of the nuance that was missing, I think, from a little bit. Like when I talk about that sort of like creation of learning materials and stuff on the fly, of course there has to be some governance layer in there around ⁓ accuracy and that it doesn't distort. But again, we're already seeing people doing that with AI translations being done on the fly and things like that. And the assumption is that that hasn't corrupted in any way. any of the procedural knowledge and that sort of stuff there. So these things will be overcome. There will be ways of making it. But I think that that again was something that perhaps we didn't, we would have spent more time on if we'd have had a longer session, wouldn't we? We'd have got into some of the governance issues around it. And that maybe watching that clip there, we might come across as a little bit cavalier. Nick Chubb: You you did ⁓ you you did it's worth saying you did inspire me. I I I took your idea and and ⁓ put it into practice over the weekend and I've I've built a little prototype of something which I will share in due time because it's not quite ready yet. But ⁓ I Rao got a text from me on Sunday with a ⁓ slightly slightly mad cat prototype of exactly what you were talking about, a kind of adaptive learning ⁓ tool. ⁓ and actually what's what's fascinating is just how Raal: Yeah. Yeah, it's exciting though. Yeah. Yeah. Nick Chubb: accessible this stuff is ⁓ and and and how quick it can be to prototype this stuff when you've got the right tools in front of you. Raal: Yeah, I don't know. I'm not sure it's fair to have a big discussion until you're ready to talk about it. But I think that that maybe it's worth just dwelling on the fact that we were on stage together on Thursday, something that I kind of said and posed as a kind of would be ⁓ possible ⁓ on the on And by the weekend, you sent me a link for something that actually ⁓ takes part of that and immediately. is created and that's like Nick Chubb: that the the benefits of having a a very, very ⁓ quiet social life. I c I could well have been in the pub at the weekend. I was not Raal: Hahaha Yeah, yeah, True enough. But that's where we are though. that's, you know, that in a way that kind of illustrates why we are, let's say confident to talk about those kinds of things that we're saying, where we're saying, look, here's the acorn, the tree is not going to come in 30, 40 years, the tree is going to be there, you know, this time next summer, potentially, you know what I mean for some of these things. And that's, Nick Chubb: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Raal: That's what's both terrifying and exciting about where we find ourselves right now. Nick Chubb: Yeah. Yeah. Exciting times ahead. Well, if you've enjoyed ⁓ that live episode ⁓ and you're hosting an event anytime soon, we do weddings, bar mitzvahs, ⁓ probably not funerals. just get in touch. no, I ⁓ I really enjoyed it. I would like to do it again. So j in all seriousness, if anyone is is planning an event and they would like the two of us to come and present some ideas then ⁓ then do shout. Raal: Good. I'll give it a go. Yeah, no, was a lot of fun. Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. I loved it as well and it was really good. And I think as well, just like to event organizers, whether they can afford me and you or not, ⁓ they do think about mixing it up a bit with the event formats that you do, because they do lead to a bit more interesting discussion, I think. Nick Chubb: Well, I think that's it for the week. always lovely, Raoul, to catch up. looking forward to doing it all again next week, I guess. ⁓ Raal: Yeah, yeah and until we see you all, do keep the ideas coming through to us and if you've got things you want to put in front of us and for us to discuss on the show, just bring us, yeah put it in the comments, send us a LinkedIn message or whatever, yeah. Until next time! Nick Chubb: Put it in the comments. Yeah. Awesome. Thanks all. Bye.