'Building a magical AI code editor used by over 1m developers in 4 months: Inside Windsurf'

Varun Mohan: A lot of the bets we're making inside the company are for things that are not three, four weeks away.

Varun Mohan：我们在公司内部做出的很多赌注都是针对距离三、四个星期不远的事情。

We should be cannibalizing the existing state of our product every six to 12 months.

我们应该每 6 到 12 个月就调整一次产品的现有状态。

Every six to 12 months, it should make our existing product look silly.

每六到十二个月，我们现有的产品就会显得很愚蠢。

It should almost make the form factor of existing product look dumb.

它几乎会让现有产品的外形看起来很愚蠢。

Lenny Rachitsky: How do you know when it's time to hire someone?

Lenny Rachitsky：你怎么知道什么时候该雇用某人？

Varun Mohan: I want the company to almost be like this dehydrated entity.

Varun Mohan：我希望公司就像这个脱水的实体一样。

Every hire is like a little bit of water, and we only go back and hire someone when we're back to being dehydrated.

每次招聘就像一点点水，只有当我们再次脱水时，我们才会回去雇用某人。

Lenny Rachitsky: Any other there skills you think people should be investing more in with the rise of AI building more and more of our products?

Lenny Rachitsky：随着人工智能的兴起，您认为人们应该更多地投资其他技能来构建越来越多的产品吗？

Varun Mohan: The engineers are now able to produce more technology.

Varun Mohan：工程师现在能够生产更多技术。

The ROI of building technology has actually gone up.

建筑技术的投资回报率实际上已经上升。

This actually means you hire more.

这实际上意味着您雇用更多人。

The best thing to do is just get your hands dirty with all of these products.

最好的办法就是亲自接触所有这些产品。

You could be a force multiplier to your organization in ways in which they never even anticipated.

您可以以他们从未预料到的方式成为组织的力量倍增器。

Lenny Rachitsky: Today my guest is Varun Mohan.

Lenny Rachitsky：今天我的客人是 Varun Mohan。

Varun is the co-founder and CEO of Windsurf, which has quickly become one of people's favorite AI coding tools, and is basically the main competitor to Cursor with over 1 million users four months in.

Varun 是 Windsurf 的联合创始人兼首席执行官，Windsurf 已迅速成为人们最喜爱的人工智能编码工具之一，基本上是 Cursor 的主要竞争对手，四个月内拥有超过 100 万用户。

In our conversation, Varun shares what makes Windsurf unique, why they decided to invest heavily in enterprise sales very early in their history, why agency is going to be the most important skill for engineers and product builders to build, also the story of how they started out as a GPU infrastructure company and realized there was a much bigger opportunity up the stack and the two pivots that got them to where they're today.

在我们的对话中，Varun 分享了 Windsurf 的独特之处、为什么他们在历史上很早就决定大力投资企业销售、为什么代理将成为工程师和产品构建者构建的最重要的技能，以及他们如何从一家 GPU 基础设施公司起步并意识到在堆栈中存在更大的机会以及使他们达到今天的水平的两个支点的故事。

Lenny Rachitsky: He also gives a live demo, advice for being successful at Windsurf, and so much more.

Lenny Rachitsky：他还提供现场演示、在风帆冲浪上取得成功的建议等等。

There's so much to learn about where things are heading for engineers and product builders in general in this conversation.

在这次对话中，对于工程师和产品构建者来说，关于事情的发展方向，有很多东西需要了解。

And I'm really excited to bring it to you.

我很高兴能把它带给你。

Lenny Rachitsky: Thank you to everyone on LinkedIn and Twitter and my newsletter community for suggesting great questions to dig into with Varun.

Lenny Rachitsky：感谢 LinkedIn 和 Twitter 以及我的时事通讯社区中的每个人提出了一些值得与 Varun 深入探讨的好问题。

If you enjoy this podcast, don't forget to subscribe and follow it in your favorite podcasting app or YouTube.

如果您喜欢这个播客，请不要忘记订阅并在您最喜欢的播客应用程序或 YouTube 中关注它。

Also, if you become a yearly subscriber of my newsletter, you get a year free of Perplexity Pro, Notion Plus, Linear, Granola, and Superhuman.

另外，如果您成为我的时事通讯的年度订阅者，您将获得一年的免费 Perplexity Pro、Notion Plus、Linear、Granola 和 Super human。

Check it out at lennysnewsletter.com.

请访问 lennysnewsletter.com 进行查看。

With that, I bring you Varun Mohan.

接下来，我为您带来瓦伦·莫汉。

Lenny Rachitsky: This episode is brought to you by Brex, the financial stack used by one in every three US venture-backed startups.

Lenny Rachitsky：本集由 Brex 为您带来，Brex 是美国三分之一的风险投资支持的初创公司使用的金融堆栈。

Brex knows that nearly 40% of startups fail because they run out of cash.

Brex 知道，近 40% 的初创公司因现金耗尽而失败。

So they built a banking experience that focuses on helping founders get more from every dollar.

因此，他们建立了一种银行业经验，专注于帮助创始人从每一美元中获得更多收益。

It's a stark difference from traditional banking options that leave a startup's cash sitting idle while chipping away at it with fees.

这与传统的银行业务截然不同，传统的银行业务让初创公司的现金闲置，同时通过费用来削减资金。

To help founders protect cash and extend runway, Brex combined the best things about checking, treasury, and FDIC insurance in one powerhouse account.

为了帮助创始人保护现金并扩展跑道，Brex 将支票、财务和 FDIC 保险的最佳功能整合到一个强大的账户中。

You can send and receive money worldwide at lightning speed.

您可以在全球范围内以闪电般的速度汇款和收款。

You can get 20X the standard FDIC protection through program banks.

您可以通过计划银行获得 20 倍标准 FDIC 保护。

And you can earn industry-leading yield from your first dollar while still being able to access your funds anytime.

您可以从第一笔资金中获得行业领先的收益，同时仍然能够随时提取资金。

To learn more, check out Brex at brex.com/banking-solutions.

要了解更多信息，请访问 brex.com/banking-solutions 查看 Brex。

That's B-R-E-X, .com/banking-solutions.

这是 B-R-E-X，.com/banking-solutions。

Lenny Rachitsky: This episode is brought to you by Productboard, the leading product management platform for the enterprise.

Lenny Rachitsky：本集由企业领先的产品管理平台 Productboard 为您带来。

For over 10 years, Productboard has helped customer-centric organizations like Zoom, Salesforce, and Autodesk build the right products faster.

十多年来，Productboard 帮助 Zoom、Salesforce 和 Autodesk 等以客户为中心的组织更快地构建合适的产品。

And as an end-end platform, Productboard seamlessly supports all stages of the product development lifecycle, from gathering customer insights to planning a roadmap, to aligning stakeholders, to earning customer buy-in, all with a single source of truth.

作为一个终端平台，Productboard 无缝支持产品开发生命周期的所有阶段，从收集客户见解到规划路线图，到协调利益相关者，再到赢得客户的认可，所有这些都具有单一的事实来源。

And now, product leaders can get even more visibility into customer needs with Productboard Pulse, a new voice of customer solution.

现在，产品领导者可以通过新的客户之声解决方案 Productboard Pulse 更深入地了解客户需求。

Built-in intelligence helps you analyze trends across all of your feedback and then dive deeper by asking AI your follow-up questions.

内置智能可帮助您分析所有反馈的趋势，然后通过向人工智能询问您的后续问题来更深入地了解。

See how Productboard can help your team deliver higher-impact products that solve real customer needs and advance your business goals.

了解 Productboard 如何帮助您的团队交付更具影响力的产品，解决真正的客户需求并推进您的业务目标。

For special offer and free 15-day trial visit productboard.com/lenny.

如需特别优惠和 15 天免费试用，请访问productboard.com/lenny。

That's Productboard.com/L-E-N-N-Y.

这是 Productboard.com/L-E-N-N-Y。

Lenny Rachitsky: Varun, thank you so much for being here and welcome to the podcast.

Lenny Rachitsky：Varun，非常感谢您来到这里，欢迎来到播客。

Varun Mohan: Buddy, thanks for having me.

Varun Mohan：伙计，谢谢你邀请我。

A long time listener.

长期聆听者。

Lenny Rachitsky: Oh, I really appreciate that.

Lenny Rachitsky：哦，我真的很感激。

I'm so excited to have you here.

我很高兴你能来到这里。

I feel like just you guys have become this overnight success, which is definitely not an overnight success, but I feel like I've been hearing about Windsurf more and more as people's favorite AI tool.

我觉得只有你们才一夜成名，这绝对不是一夜成名，但我觉得我越来越多地听说 Windsurf 作为人们最喜欢的人工智能工具。

And I just don't think people know the story behind Windsurf, behind Codeium, the company that you built.

我只是认为人们不知道 Windsurf 背后的故事，以及您创建的公司 Codeium 背后的故事。

So I thought it'd be good to maybe just start there and have you just briefly share the history of Codeium and how Windsurf emerged out of Codeium.

因此，我认为最好从这里开始，让您简要分享一下 Codeium 的历史以及 Windsurf 如何从 Codeium 中脱颖而出。

Varun Mohan: Yeah.

瓦伦·莫汉：是的。

So the company was actually started close to four years ago.

所以该公司实际上是在大约四年前成立的。

As you know, AI coding was not a thing four years ago.

如您所知，四年前人工智能编码还不是一个东西。

ChatGPT was not out four years ago.

ChatGPT 四年前还没有出现。

At the time, we actually started out building GPU virtualization and compiler software.

当时，我们实际上开始构建 GPU 虚拟化和编译器软件。

Before this, I worked in autonomous vehicles.

在此之前，我从事自动驾驶汽车工作。

My co-founder, who I had known since middle school, worked on AR/VR at Meta.

我的联合创始人是我从中学就认识的，他在 Meta 从事 AR/VR 工作。

And for us, we believe deep learning would touch many, many industries.

对于我们来说，我们相信深度学习将触及很多很多行业。

It wouldn't just touch autonomous vehicles.

它不仅仅涉及自动驾驶汽车。

It would touch financial services, defense, healthcare.

它将涉及金融服务、国防、医疗保健。

And we believe these applications were hard to build, these deep learning applications.

我们相信这些深度学习应用程序很难构建。

So we made it possible for you to effectively run these complex applications on computers without GPUs, and we would handle all the complexity of being able to actually run the workload on the GPUs for you.

因此，我们使您能够在没有 GPU 的计算机上有效地运行这些复杂的应用程序，并且我们将为您处理能够在 GPU 上实际运行工作负载的所有复杂性。

And we were able to optimize these workloads a ton.

我们能够大量优化这些工作负载。

Varun Mohan: And in the middle of 2022 rolled around and we had a couple million in revenue and we were managing upwards of 10,000 sort of GPUs.

Varun Mohan：到 2022 年中期，我们的收入达到了几百万美元，并且管理着超过 10,000 个 GPU。

We had eight people.

我们有八个人。

At the time, we were free cash flow positive.

当时，我们的自由现金流为正。

But I think what we felt was once these generative models started to get very good, we sort of felt a lot of what we built was not as valuable.

但我认为，一旦这些生成模型开始变得非常好，我们就会觉得我们构建的很多东西就没那么有价值了。

And this was a very, very hard moment for us at the company.

对于我们公司来说，这是一个非常非常艰难的时刻。

We were only eight people at the time, but we felt, "Hey, would people be training these very bespoke sentiment classifier models anymore that were very, very custom models?

当时我们只有八个人，但我们觉得，“嘿，人们还会再训练这些非常非常定制的情感分类器模型吗？

Or would they just ask GPT-N, is this a positive or a negative sentiment?" Probably it's going to be the latter, right?

或者他们会问 GPT-N，这是积极的还是消极的情绪？”很可能会是后者，对吧？

And in a world in which everyone was going to run generative AI models, why would an infrastructure company be a differentiator?

在每个人都将运行生成式人工智能模型的世界中，为什么基础设施公司会成为差异化因素？

Because everyone is going to run the same kind of infrastructure down the line.

因为每个人都将运行相同类型的基础设施。

Varun Mohan: So instead what we decided to do was we believe generative AI was almost going to be like the next internet.

Varun Mohan：因此，我们决定做的是，我们相信生成式人工智能几乎将像下一个互联网一样。

And in that case, what we should go out and do is build the next great apps like Google, like Amazon.

在这种情况下，我们应该出去做的是构建下一个伟大的应用程序，比如谷歌，比如亚马逊。

And we vertically integrated and actually took our infrastructure, our inference infrastructure to go out and build Codeium at the time.

我们垂直整合并实际上利用了我们的基础设施、推理基础设施来构建当时的 Codeium。

And at that time, we were early adopters of GitHub Copilot and we thought the coding space was going to get tremendously disrupted in the next coming years.

当时，我们是 GitHub Copilot 的早期采用者，我们认为编码空间将在未来几年内受到巨大破坏。

So we actually took our infrastructure, we ran our own models in massive scale.

所以我们实际上利用了我们的基础设施，大规模运行了我们自己的模型。

We even trained our own models.

我们甚至训练了自己的模型。

Varun Mohan: In the very beginning it was very, very simple.

Varun Mohan：一开始它非常非常简单。

It was purely an autocomplete model, which basically means that as the user was typing, we'd complete the next one or two or three or four lines of code.

它纯粹是一个自动完成模型，这基本上意味着当用户键入时，我们将完成接下来的一两行或三行或四行代码。

But we provided the product entirely for free in all the IDEs that developers coded.

但我们在开发人员编码的所有 IDE 中完全免费提供该产品。

That meant to VSCode, JetBrains, Eclipse, Visual Studio, Vim, Emacs.

这意味着 VSCode、JetBrains、Eclipse、Visual Studio、Vim、Emacs。

And the reason why we were able to build it for free was because of our infrastructure background.

我们之所以能够免费构建它是因为我们的基础设施背景。

We were able to optimize these workloads a ton.

我们能够大量优化这些工作负载。

Varun Mohan: I guess very quickly after that, some large businesses also wanted to work with us.

Varun Mohan：我想在那之后很快，一些大企业也想与我们合作。

And we built out this enterprise motion to work with these large companies like Dell, JPMorgan Chase.

我们制定了这项企业动议，旨在与戴尔、摩根大通等大公司合作。

And for them the bigger thing wasn't just, "Hey, could we autocomplete code or could we chat with the code base?" It was, "Could you offer us a secure offering that was also personalized to all the private data inside the company?" So we took our infrastructure and made it so that we invested a ton in making sure that we deeply understood these large companies code bases.

对他们来说，更重要的事情不仅仅是“嘿，我们可以自动完成代码吗？或者我们可以与代码库聊天吗？”问题是，“您能为我们提供一个安全的产品，并且可以针对公司内部的所有私人数据进行个性化设置吗？”因此，我们采用了基础设施，并投入了大量资金来确保我们深入了解这些大公司的代码库。

And that's what we were working on until six months ago.

这就是我们六个月前一直在做的事情。

Varun Mohan: It's not that we've stopped working on that, but basically what we realized six months ago was we were getting limited by the IDEs that we were already working in.

Varun Mohan：并不是说我们已经停止了这方面的工作，但基本上我们六个月前就意识到我们已经受到我们已经使用的 IDE 的限制。

So VSCode, which is a very popular IDE, had a ceiling for the AI capabilities, we could showcase our users.

所以VSCode这个非常流行的IDE，它的AI能力是有上限的，我们可以向用户展示。

And because of that, we decided to go out and fork VSCode and build our own IDE with some of these new agentic capabilities.

正因为如此，我们决定分叉 VSCode，并使用其中一些新的代理功能构建我们自己的 IDE。

And over time in the last couple of years, the model capabilities have also been growing exponentially year over year.

随着过去几年的时间，模型功能也逐年呈指数级增长。

And that's sort of where we are right now.

这就是我们现在的处境。

I skipped a lot of pieces there, but that's what we're landed.

我在那里跳过了很多部分，但这就是我们所得到的。

Lenny Rachitsky: There's so many interesting threads there.

Lenny Rachitsky：那里有很多有趣的话题。

One is just, there's always this question of just where value will accrue in AI.

一是，人工智能的价值将在哪里产生，这一问题始终存在。

And it's so interesting, you guys started almost at the bottom layer of infrastructure GPUs and then you went to what people call a GPT wrapper, not actually.

这很有趣，你们几乎从基础设施 GPU 的底层开始，然后进入人们所说的 GPT 包装器，但实际上并非如此。

So I guess any just lessons there, just thoughts on just where you think value will end up in this world of AI and the stack of AI tools?

所以我想那里有什么教训，只是想一下你认为人工智能世界和人工智能工具堆栈的价值最终会在哪里？

Varun Mohan: Maybe I can start by just saying one thing about startups that I think are really true, it's very unlikely the first thing that you believe you should go work on is going to be the right thing, which is a very hard thing to kind of wrangle with being a startup founder, right?

Varun Mohan：也许我可以先说一件关于初创公司的事情，我认为这是真的，你认为你应该去做的第一件事不太可能是正确的事情，作为一个初创公司创始人，这是一件很难争论的事情，对吧？

You need to kind of be irrationally optimistic that what you're going to do is going to be differentially important.

你需要保持一种非理性的乐观态度，相信你要做的事情将具有不同的重要性。

Because otherwise, why would you go out and do what you're doing?

因为否则的话，你为什么要出去做你正在做的事情呢？

And if it's obvious, then a bigger company would've already done it, right?

如果这是显而易见的，那么一家更大的公司早就这么做了，对吧？

Varun Mohan: But then you also need to be really, really realistic because most ideas that are, I guess, non-conventional are usually bad ideas, right?

Varun Mohan：但是你也需要非常非常现实，因为我想，大多数非常规的想法通常都是糟糕的想法，对吧？

So it's this weird tightrope you need to kind of balance on top of where you're pushing for a future that you believe is true, but all the while you're getting new information.

因此，这是一条奇怪的钢丝，你需要在推动你相信是真实的未来的地方保持平衡，但同时你又会获得新的信息。

You need to kill the beliefs that you had.

你需要消灭你曾经拥有的信念。

And if I were to start with the infrastructure piece, we first went in with the assumption that model architectures were going to be really, really heterogeneous.

如果我从基础设施部分开始，我们首先假设模型架构将是非常非常异构的。

Varun Mohan: Working from an autonomous vehicle background, there were many different types of model architectures out there.

Varun Mohan：从自动驾驶汽车的背景来看，有许多不同类型的模型架构。

There were convolutional neural networks, graph neural networks, recurrent neural networks, LSTMs, sort of lighter neural nets with frustrum point networks.

有卷积神经网络、图神经网络、循环神经网络、LSTM、带有截头锥体网络的较轻的神经网络。

And there were maybe tens of architectures we were dealing with.

我们正在处理的架构可能有数十种。

And at that point we were like, the complexity of this is so high that it's very clear if someone offloaded the complexity, there would be a lot of value.

那时我们就想，这个问题的复杂性是如此之高，很明显，如果有人卸载了复杂性，将会有很多价值。

Varun Mohan: Fast-forward to the middle of 2023, everything looks like it's going to be a transformer.

Varun Mohan：快进到 2023 年中期，一切看起来都将成为变形金刚。

So now our hypotheses are just wrong.

所以现在我们的假设是错误的。

So at this point then, most of the value is probably not going to accrue at purely the, at least this is our belief, at the infrastructure layer.

因此，在这一点上，大部分价值可能不会纯粹在基础设施层产生，至少我们认为是这样。

It's going to accrue somewhere else.

它会在其他地方累积。

Where is the layer that you can actually differentiate on?

您真正可以区分的层在哪里？

And we believe the application layer is a very, very deep layer to go out and differentiate on, right?

我们相信应用层是一个非常非常深的层，需要走出去并进行差异化，对吧？

What are the number of ways we can build better user experiences and better workflows for developers?

我们可以通过哪些方式为开发人员构建更好的用户体验和更好的工作流程？

We think there's effectively no ceiling on that, on how much better we can make the lives of developers basically.

我们认为，我们基本上可以让开发人员的生活变得更好，实际上没有上限。

Lenny Rachitsky: You touched on the second thread that I thought was really interesting here, is just how you guys pivoted from ideas that were working.

Lenny Rachitsky：你谈到了我认为非常有趣的第二条线索，就是你们如何从有效的想法中转向。

You were making money, people loved it.

你赚钱了，人们喜欢它。

You said you had millions of dollars of ARR revenue.

您说您有数百万美元的 ARR 收入。

And then you're just like, "No, we're going to completely change the business."

然后你就会说，“不，我们要彻底改变这个行业。”

Lenny Rachitsky: So the question there is, just like, what have you learned about knowing what to follow?

Lenny Rachitsky：所以问题是，你学到了什么关于知道要遵循什么的知识？

And one thing I heard there that was really interesting is just once your assumptions change about that you built your idea on, it's time to think this idea and maybe try something else.

我在那里听到的一件非常有趣的事情是，一旦你对你的想法的假设发生了变化，你就应该考虑这个想法，也许尝试其他的东西。

Varun Mohan: I think the way we sort of think about this is even when we're working right now, we just accept that we're going to get a lot of things wrong.

Varun Mohan：我认为我们思考这个问题的方式是，即使我们现在正在工作，我们也只能接受我们会犯很多错误。

We're just going to get a lot of things wrong.

我们只会弄错很多事情。

Obviously that's a very big moment because that was a bet the company moment in the sense that we basically said, told our investors, "Hey, we're making money on this." We had already raised 28 million of capital and we were just like, "Hey, we're just going to pivot entirely from this." And we did that overnight.

显然，这是一个非常重要的时刻，因为这是公司的一个赌注，我们基本上是在告诉我们的投资者，“嘿，我们正在靠这个赚钱。”我们已经筹集了 2800 万美元的资金，我们当时的想法是，“嘿，我们将完全以此为中心。”我们一夜之间就做到了。

This wasn't this thing where we just said, "Hey, maybe a quarter, one or two quarters." Because one of the things we knew that's very important for startups is focus.

这不是我们刚才说的，“嘿，也许一个季度，一个或两个季度。”因为我们知道对于初创公司来说非常重要的事情之一就是专注。

Varun Mohan: If you're trying to do another thing that you think is big and you're focused on something that you don't believe is valuable, you're guaranteed going to fail at the thing you think is going to be big.

Varun Mohan：如果你试图做另一件你认为很重要的事情，而你专注于你认为没有价值的事情，那么你肯定会在你认为会很重要的事情上失败。

So that's a very obvious thing there.

这是非常明显的事情。

But I think once you go in with the assumption that a lot of your hypotheses are going to be wrong, but you will do the most concentrated work possible to go out and validate these hypotheses and you won't be in love with your ideas.

但我认为，一旦你假设你的很多假设都是错误的，但你会尽最大努力去验证这些假设，你就不会爱上你的想法。

Varun Mohan: I think ideas, it's awesome when you have a great idea, but you should never be too in love with your ideas.

Varun Mohan：我认为想法，当你有一个伟大的想法时真是太棒了，但你永远不应该太热爱你的想法。

And you have an organization that is very truth-seeking.

你们有一个非常追求真理的组织。

I think a lot of people at the company have had their ideas tested over and over again.

我认为公司里很多人的想法都经过了一遍又一遍的检验。

Even just building Windsurf.

即使只是建造 Windsurf。

That is not a complete company pivot, but that's a big decision that we made at the company.

这并不是一个完整的公司转型，但这是我们在公司做出的重大决定。

You kind of need to make some bets.

你需要做一些赌注。

And sometimes you're wrong and sometimes you're right.

有时你是错的，有时你是对的。

But if you have an organization that comes out and you feel like morale is not going to be low if you made the wrong decision, that's the best, right?

但如果你有一个组织出来了，而且你觉得如果你做出了错误的决定，士气也不会低落，那是最好的，对吧？

That means you have optionality for the rest of time.

这意味着你在剩下的时间里有选择权。

Varun Mohan: And Lenny, one thing that I try to tell the company about this is, this year the total amount of engineering output we'll have is much larger than the engineering output we've had since the beginning of the company's creation 'till now.

瓦伦·莫汉：莱尼，我试图告诉公司的一件事是，今年我们将拥有的工程产出总量远远大于自公司创建之初至今的工程产出。

So that almost means every year is a new lease on life for us, right?

所以这几乎意味着每一年对我们来说都是新的生命，对吗？

It's almost a new way for us to test out an entirely new set of hypotheses.

这对我们来说几乎是一种检验全新假设的新方法。

And maybe we were wrong about our original hypotheses in the first place.

也许我们最初的假设就错了。

What makes us more smart than everyone else to be right more times than that?

是什么让我们比其他人更聪明，并且比其他人更正确？

Lenny Rachitsky: That's so empowering.

Lenny Rachitsky：这真是太有力量了。

It makes me think about...

这让我思考...

Uri Levine was on the podcast, co-founder of Waze, and he has this phrase that he wears on his shirt.

Uri Levine 是 Waze 的联合创始人，也是播客的一员，他的衬衫上也印着这句话。

His book is called this Fall in Love with the Problem, Not the Solution.

他的书名叫《爱上问题，而不是解决方案》。

And that feels like that's exactly what you're describing.

感觉就像你所描述的那样。

Lenny Rachitsky: Okay, so let's talk about Windsurf.

Lenny Rachitsky：好的，我们来谈谈风帆冲浪。

What's the simplest way for people to understand what is Windsurf?

人们了解什么是Windsurf的最简单方法是什么？

Varun Mohan: Yeah.

瓦伦·莫汉：是的。

So Windsurf is an IDE, right?

那么 Windsurf 是一个 IDE，对吗？

It's an application to go out and build software and build applications.

它是一个用于构建软件和应用程序的应用程序。

The crazy thing is a lot of people who use the product don't even probably know what an IDE is, which is crazy.

疯狂的是，很多使用该产品的人甚至可能不知道 IDE 是什么，这很疯狂。

And we'll get into that in a second.

我们稍后会讨论这个问题。

Varun Mohan: But why did we go out and build Windsurf and what is Windsurf maybe?

Varun Mohan：但是我们为什么要出去建造 Windsurf，Windsurf 是什么？

Why couldn't we have just done this on top of conventional IDEs like Visual Studio Code?

为什么我们不能在 Visual Studio Code 等传统 IDE 之上完成此操作？

So maybe just to get into this a little bit, as we saw that AI was getting more and more powerful, the way people go out and build technology, we thought the interface for that was going to change remarkably.

因此，也许只是简单地讨论一下，当我们看到人工智能变得越来越强大，以及人们构建技术的方式时，我们认为其界面将会发生显着变化。

It was not going to be a conventional pure text editor where the user is writing a handful of lines of code or most of the code and the IDE provides maybe some basic feedback on what the user is doing right or wrong.

它不会是一个传统的纯文本编辑器，用户编写几行代码或大部分代码，IDE 可能会提供一些关于用户做对或做错的基本反馈。

And the basic feedback could be, "Hey, there's a bug in your software or compiler error in your software." It could do much more, right?

基本的反馈可能是，“嘿，你的软件中有一个错误，或者你的软件中有编译器错误。”它可以做更多的事情，对吗？

It could actually go out and modify large chunks of code.

它实际上可以出去修改大块代码。

Varun Mohan: One of the key pieces that we recognized was, with this new paradigm with AI, AI was probably going to write well over 90% of the software, in which case the role of a developer and what they're doing in the IDE is maybe reviewing code.

Varun Mohan：我们认识到的关键部分之一是，借助 AI 的新范例，AI 可能会编写 90% 以上的软件，在这种情况下，开发人员的角色以及他们在 IDE 中所做的事情可能就是审查代码。

Maybe it's actually a little bit different than what it is in the past.

或许，现在的情况确实与过去有些不同。

And we'll see this very soon with Windsurf.

我们很快就会在 Windsurf 中看到这一点。

Maybe when you're using the product, actually a good chunk of the user's time is that you're reviewing what the AI is outputting.

也许当你使用该产品时，实际上用户的很大一部分时间都在查看人工智能输出的内容。

So we needed to build custom-review flows into the IDE to actually make it so that it was easier to actually go out and do that, right?

因此，我们需要在 IDE 中构建自定义审核流程，以便实际执行此操作更容易，对吗？

Because the developer is not spending all their time writing code.

因为开发人员并没有把所有的时间都花在写代码上。

Varun Mohan: And this is the fundamental premise on why we built the product.

Varun Mohan：这是我们构建该产品的基本前提。

We thought we were going to get limited a ton if we had very, very basic UI out there.

我们认为，如果我们有非常非常基本的用户界面，我们将会受到很大的限制。

And I'll give you even a simple example here.

我将在这里给你一个简单的例子。

We have this auto-complete product that completes a handful of lines of code.

我们有这个自动完成产品，可以完成几行代码。

Now we've actually launched this offering called Windsurf Tab that basically shows you refactors as well.

现在我们实际上推出了名为 Windsurf Tab 的产品，它基本上也向您展示了重构。

And these refactors are almost inline refactors.

而这些重构几乎都是内联重构。

And we were able to build a custom UI for that in Windsurf.

我们能够在 Windsurf 中为此构建自定义 UI。

Varun Mohan: But in VSCode, because of the access to the APIs, we needed to dynamically generate images right alongside the user's cursor because we just didn't have access to the capabilities to showcase and edit properly.

Varun Mohan：但在 VSCode 中，由于可以访问 API，我们需要在用户光标旁边动态生成图像，因为我们无法访问正确展示和编辑的功能。

And what we realized is immediately by porting over to Windsurf, our acceptance rate tripled.

我们立即意识到，通过移植到 Windsurf，我们的接受率增加了两倍。

Same ML models, it just tripled.

相同的机器学习模型，只是增加了两倍。

So what that, I guess, gave us confidence in is yeah, you could argue technology is very important.

所以，我想这给了我们信心，是的，你可以说技术非常重要。

And I think technology is very important.

我认为技术非常重要。

But if our users are getting very little value from the technology we're sort of building, you need to really clarify, "Maybe we do need to build a new surface and interface." And that's what Windsurf is.

但是，如果我们的用户从我们正在构建的技术中获得的价值非常少，那么您需要真正澄清，“也许我们确实需要构建一个新的表面和界面。”这就是风帆冲浪。

Lenny Rachitsky: So the big bet you took there just to make this super clear, is you were initially working within existing IDEs that everyone was familiar with.

Lenny Rachitsky：因此，为了让这一点变得非常清晰，您所下的大赌注是，您最初是在每个人都熟悉的现有 IDE 中工作。

And then it was like, "This isn't going to get us where we need to go.

然后就像是，“这不会让我们到达我们需要去的地方。

We're going to try to convince people to switch to something completely new because it's going to be so much better.

我们将尝试说服人们转向全新的东西，因为它会好得多。

It's our own IDE."

这是我们自己的 IDE。”

Lenny Rachitsky: I think maybe people may not recognize just how risky that is, convincing engineers to use something completely new.

Lenny Rachitsky：我认为人们可能没有意识到说服工程师使用全新的东西有多大风险。

That's a huge deal.

这是一件大事。

Varun Mohan: Yeah, no, of course.

瓦伦·莫汉：是的，不，当然。

And one of the key pieces, maybe Lenny, that would be important to share is a lot of our developers do use Visual Studio Code.

值得分享的关键部分之一（也许是 Lenny）是我们的许多开发人员确实使用 Visual Studio Code。

But there are lots of people that write in languages like Java, sort of C++ and so on and so forth, and they might use the JetBrains family of IDEs that like IntelliJ.

但是有很多人使用 Java、C++ 等语言进行编写，他们可能会使用 JetBrains 系列 IDE，例如 IntelliJ。

And for us, we are actually still committed to building on those platforms, right?

对于我们来说，我们实际上仍然致力于在这些平台上进行构建，对吧？

We just felt though that one of the dominant IDEs, which was Visual Studio Code, was limiting the sort of user interface that we could give to our actual customers.

我们只是觉得占主导地位的 IDE 之一（即 Visual Studio Code）限制了我们可以为实际客户提供的用户界面类型。

Lenny Rachitsky: What is the current state of traction for Windsurf?

Lenny Rachitsky：Windsurf 目前的发展状况如何？

You hear all these crazy numbers about all the competitors in your space.

您会听到有关您所在领域所有竞争对手的所有这些疯狂的数字。

What can you share there for folks just to know?

您可以在那里分享什么供人们了解吗？

Varun Mohan: Yeah, so maybe a handful.

Varun Mohan：是的，所以也许是少数。

We launched the product a bit over four months ago.

我们在四个多月前推出了该产品。

And in that period of time, over a million developers have tried the product.

在那段时间里，超过一百万的开发者尝试过该产品。

And obviously we have many hundreds of thousands of monthly active users right now.

显然，我们现在每月有数十万活跃用户。

Lenny Rachitsky: I love how these days like, "oh, a million.

Lenny Rachitsky：我喜欢这些日子，“哦，一百万。

Oh, no big deal." It's just the numbers are absurd these days.

哦，没什么大不了的。”只是现在的数字很荒谬。

We're just getting used to just 100 million ARR here, million users in four months there.

我们刚刚习惯这里只有 1 亿 ARR，而那里四个月内就有 100 万用户。

It's just like, "Oh, of course.

就像，“哦，当然。

How could you not have that?" But that's absurd.

你怎么能没有那个呢？”但这是荒谬的。

It's just like an insane time right now.

现在就像一个疯狂的时刻。

Lenny Rachitsky: You touched on something that I wanted to get to later, but I may as well bring it up now, the question of just how engineering will change in the future.

Lenny Rachitsky：你提到了一些我想稍后再谈的问题，但我不妨现在就提出来，即未来工程将如何改变的问题。

You throw out the stat that 90% of code is going to be written by AI in the future.

你抛弃了未来 90% 的代码将由人工智能编写的统计数据。

Dario from Anthropic recently said the same thing.

Anthropic 的 Dario 最近也说了同样的话。

You guys have a really interesting glimpse into just how things will look in the future.

你们对未来的情况有非常有趣的了解。

Lenny Rachitsky: So I guess the question is just, how do you think coding specifically will look in the next few years, how different will it be from today?

Lenny Rachitsky：所以我想问题只是，你认为未来几年的编码具体会是什么样子，与今天会有什么不同？

Varun Mohan: I think when we think about what is an engineer actually doing, it probably falls into three buckets, right?

Varun Mohan：我认为当我们思考工程师实际在做什么时，它可能分为三个部分，对吗？

What should I solve for?

我应该解决什么问题？

How should I solve it?

我该怎么解决呢？

And then solving it.

然后解决它。

I guess everyone who's working in this space is probably increasingly convinced that solving it, which is just the pure, "I know how I'm going to do it" and just going and doing it.

我想在这个领域工作的每个人可能都越来越相信解决这个问题，这只是纯粹的“我知道我要怎么做”，然后就去做。

AI is going to handle vast majority, if not all of it.

人工智能将处理绝大多数（如果不是全部）。

In fact, it probably actually, with some of the work that we've done in terms of deeply understanding code bases, how should I solve it is also going to get closer and closer to getting done.

事实上，可能实际上，随着我们在深入理解代码库方面所做的一些工作，我应该如何解决它也将越来越接近完成。

If you deeply understand the environment inside an organization, if you deeply understand the code base, how you should solve it, given best practices when the company also gets solved.

如果您深入了解组织内部的环境，如果您深入了解代码库，那么您应该如何解决它，并给出公司也得到解决时的最佳实践。

Varun Mohan: So I think what engineering kind of goes to is actually what you wanted engineers to do in the first place, which is, what are the most important business problems that we do need to solve?

Varun Mohan：所以我认为工程类型实际上是您希望工程师首先要做的事情，即我们需要解决的最重要的业务问题是什么？

What are the most important capabilities that we need our application, our product to have?

我们的应用程序、我们的产品需要具备哪些最重要的功能？

And actually going and prioritizing those and actually going and making the right technical decisions to go out and doing it.

并实际行动并优先考虑这些，并实际行动并做出正确的技术决策来执行它。

And I think that's where engineering is probably heading towards.

我认为这可能就是工程学的发展方向。

Varun Mohan: Now, does that mean that no one needs a CS degree?

Varun Mohan：现在，这是否意味着没有人需要计算机科学学位？

I think that's maybe a little bit overplayed a little bit just because maybe here's my argument for that.

我认为这可能有点夸大了，因为也许这就是我的论点。

A lot of developers nowadays that build full stack applications, at least until a handful of years ago, they probably went to college and took an operating system course.

如今，许多构建全栈应用程序的开发人员，至少直到几年前，他们可能都上过大学并参加了操作系统课程。

And in theory, they're not really playing around with the operating system, like the kernel scheduler very frequently.

从理论上讲，它们并没有真正频繁地使用操作系统，例如内核调度程序。

But do those principles help them in understanding why their applications are slow?

但这些原则是否可以帮助他们理解应用程序速度缓慢的原因？

Do they help them in understanding why some design decisions are better than the other?

它们是否帮助他们理解为什么某些设计决策比其他决策更好？

Yeah, that makes them a much better engineer than another engineer.

是的，这使他们成为比其他工程师更好的工程师。

And I think that idea and the understanding of what's going on at the bottom will make a good engineer even better.

我认为这个想法和对底层发生的事情的理解将使一名优秀的工程师变得更好。

But also at the same time, it empowers a bunch of people that never understood all of those things, how to actually build as well, which is another remarkable sort of thing that fell out through this whole process.

但与此同时，它也赋予了一群从未理解所有这些事情的人权力，以及如何实际构建，这是整个过程中发生的另一件值得注意的事情。

Lenny Rachitsky: I don't know if you have kids, but just say you had kids or you had niece or nephew going into college, let's say, would you suggest they do do computer science or would you suggest you're not going to have a good time if that's the career you choose right now?

Lenny Rachitsky：我不知道你是否有孩子，但只是说你有孩子或者你有侄女或侄子要上大学，比方说，你会建议他们做计算机科学，还是会建议你如果这是你现在选择的职业，你不会过得很愉快？

Varun Mohan: Yeah.

瓦伦·莫汉：是的。

Maybe I think back a little bit.

也许我回想了一下。

So I went to MIT.

所以我去了麻省理工学院。

A lot of us at the company went to MIT together on the engineering team.

我们公司的工程团队中的很多人都一起去了麻省理工学院。

I think when I think about what we learned the most for engineering or computer science, it was not exactly like how do you write code.

我想当我想到我们在工程或计算机科学中学到最多的东西时，它并不完全像你如何编写代码。

That is almost a given that you can write code after going to college.

上大学后就可以编写代码几乎是理所当然的。

It's more like the principles of how you think about a problem and how you break it down and how you solve it in an interesting way.

它更像是你如何思考问题、如何分解问题以及如何以有趣的方式解决问题的原则。

Varun Mohan: So an example of a class that I really enjoyed was our distributed systems class.

Varun Mohan：我真正喜欢的一个课程的例子是我们的分布式系统课程。

And there, you're kind of reading through literature and understanding how some design decisions were kind of made.

在那里，你可以阅读文献并了解一些设计决策是如何做出的。

And I think it's more like a problem solving kind of course and a major.

我认为这更像是一门解决问题的课程和一门专业。

It's a major of how you solve problems given some constraints of how computers today function, right?

考虑到当今计算机运行方式的一些限制，这是解决问题的主要方式，对吗？

Like, here's the speed at which memory sort of operates.

就像，这是内存运行的速度。

Here's the speed at which...

这是速度...

Here's how much computation you can do in one cycle or one second.

以下是一个周期或一秒内可以完成的计算量。

And based on that, you can make some trade-offs and solve a problem.

在此基础上，您可以进行一些权衡并解决问题。

Varun Mohan: So I don't know if I would say that you shouldn't go get a computer science degree.

Varun Mohan：所以我不知道我是否会说你不应该去获得计算机科学学位。

I think computer science is almost synonymous with problem solving.

我认为计算机科学几乎是解决问题的代名词。

In that case, I think it's pretty valuable.

在这种情况下，我认为这是非常有价值的。

Is everything you learn in your computer science degree useful?

你在计算机科学学位中学到的一切有用吗？

I'd say a lot of things that I learned in my computer science degree are not useful.

我想说我在计算机科学学位中学到的很多东西都没有用。

I'll give you an example.

我给你举个例子。

I took a parallel computing class in Julia.

我在 Julia 参加了并行计算课程。

I don't think Julia is a very popular programming language anymore.

我认为 Julia 不再是一种非常流行的编程语言。

Am I very sad that I took the class?

我上这门课很伤心吗？

No. The principles of parallel computing are still very useful, I would say, today.

不。我想说，并行计算的原理在今天仍然非常有用。

Lenny Rachitsky: So what I'm hearing is, skills that you still want to build, whether it's computer science or maybe some version of computer science, is kind of building the mental model of how computers and systems work.

Lenny Rachitsky：所以我听到的是，你仍然想要建立的技能，无论是计算机科学还是计算机科学的某种版本，都是建立计算机和系统如何工作的心理模型。

Lenny Rachitsky: Parallel processing, memory, hard drives, internet, things like that.

Lenny Rachitsky：并行处理、内存、硬盘、互联网等等。

And then there's just problem solving skills, being able to solve interesting problems.

然后就是解决问题的能力，能够解决有趣的问题。

Is there any other skills you think people should be investing more in with the rise of AI building more and more of our products?

随着人工智能的兴起，我们的产品越来越多，您认为人们应该在哪些技能上投入更多？

Varun Mohan: I think one of the things that's maybe a little bit undervalued is this kind of agency piece.

Varun Mohan：我认为可能有点被低估的事情之一就是这种代理作品。

And I think about this a lot, which is, you have a lot of people that could go through college and go through school and they're basically told exactly what to do on a P-set.

我经常思考这个问题，也就是说，有很多人可以读完大学并完成学校学业，他们基本上都被告知要在 P-set 上做什么。

They're given these very, very, I would say, well-defined paths that they need to take.

我想说，他们被给予了他们需要走的非常非常明确的路径。

I think maybe in society and just school, we don't prioritize how do you make sure you get people with real agency that want to build something, right?

我想也许在社会和学校里，我们不会优先考虑如何确保你能找到真正想要建造一些东西的人，对吗？

Their goal is not just to maybe graduate from college and then get a job at a big tech company where they're told exactly what to do or where to put the pixel for this one website.

他们的目标不仅仅是从大学毕业，然后在一家大型科技公司找到一份工作，在那里他们被确切地告知要做什么或将这个网站的像素放在哪里。

I think that's maybe a skill set that is undervalued just right now, probably in the last maybe 10 years or so.

我认为这可能是一项目前被低估的技能，可能在过去十年左右的时间里。

And I think that's going to be really, really important.

我认为这将非常非常重要。

Varun Mohan: For a startup, obviously these are skills that we just look for.

Varun Mohan：对于初创公司来说，显然这些都是我们所寻找的技能。

We look for people that are really high agency because we just recognize that by default, if we don't innovate and do crazy things, we're going to die.

我们寻找真正具有高度代理能力的人，因为我们认识到，默认情况下，如果我们不创新、不做疯狂的事情，我们就会灭亡。

The company is just going to die.

公司快要死了。

So we just look for this, right?

所以我们只是寻找这个，对吧？

But I would say for most software engineering jobs, that's probably not the case.

但我想说，对于大多数软件工程工作来说，情况可能并非如此。

Just think about big company X and what they're hiring for on the average software engineering interview.

想想大公司 X 以及他们在软件工程面试中平均招聘的职位。

It probably doesn't look like that.

看起来可能不是那样的。

Lenny Rachitsky: I love how you phrased that.

Lenny Rachitsky：我喜欢你的措辞。

If we don't do crazy things and innovate, we're going to die.

如果我们不做疯狂的事情和创新，我们就会灭亡。

That would be a great title for this podcast episode.

这将是这个播客节目的一个很好的标题。

And I think, I know, it's 100% true.

我想，我知道，这是 100% 正确的。

There's just a lot of crazy things happening and a lot of innovation happening.

有很多疯狂的事情正在发生，也有很多创新正在发生。

And if you can't keep up, you'll die.

如果你跟不上，你就会死。

Lenny Rachitsky: So let's talk about hiring.

Lenny Rachitsky：那么我们来谈谈招聘吧。

You have a really interesting approach to hiring.

你们的招聘方式非常有趣。

There's a few questions I have here.

我这里有几个问题。

One is just how do you...

一是你如何...

I know you try to stay really lean.

我知道你努力保持苗条。

That's a common theme across all the AI startups these days.

这是当今所有人工智能初创公司的共同主题。

How do you know when it's time to hire someone?

你怎么知道什么时候该雇用某人？

Varun Mohan: I love the idea of being a lean company, but I don't idolize it in the way that, "Hey, it is a dream to be a 10% or 20% company that's making 50, 100, 200 million in revenue." That's not, I think, what we idolize inside the company.

Varun Mohan：我喜欢成为一家精益公司的想法，但我并不像这样崇拜它，“嘿，成为一家收入 50、100、2 亿的公司是一个梦想，成为 10% 或 20% 的公司。”我认为，这并不是我们公司内部所崇拜的。

Varun Mohan: I think what we idolize is, be the smallest company we can be to satisfy our ambitions.

Varun Mohan：我认为我们的偶像是，成为最小的公司来满足我们的抱负。

That's what the goal is.

这就是我们的目标。

And maybe, Lenny, the way I would sort of put that out there is, if I told you, "Hey, I'm going to build an autonomous vehicle," and I said our team is 10 people, you should rightfully say, "Hey Varun, you're not serious.

也许，莱尼，我的表达方式是，如果我告诉你，“嘿，我要制造一辆自动驾驶汽车，”并且我说我们的团队有 10 个人，你应该正确地说，“嘿瓦伦，你不是认真的。

And you'd be right.

你是对的。

I'm not serious at that point.

我当时并不是认真的。

So I think the answer is, what is the minimum number of people to go out and build the crazy ambition project that you have?

所以我认为答案是，最少需要多少人才能出去建立你拥有的疯狂野心项目？

Varun Mohan: And I think the project we are trying to go out and do, which is completely transform the way software gets built, we've mentioned this the company, our goal is to reduce the time it takes to build apps and technology by 99%, right?

Varun Mohan：我认为我们正在尝试开展的项目完全改变了软件的构建方式，我们已经提到过这家公司，我们的目标是将构建应用程序和技术所需的时间减少 99%，对吧？

It is a tremendously sort of ambitious goal.

这是一个非常雄心勃勃的目标。

And it's not possible for us to be a 10, 20, 30, 40 person engineering team in the long term and actually satisfy that goal.

从长远来看，我们不可能成为一个 10、20、30、40 人的工程团队并真正实现这一目标。

We think there's a very, very high ceiling.

我们认为上限非常非常高。

So that's maybe the first key piece there.

所以这可能是第一个关键部分。

It's like, if we can crack actually being a fairly sizable company but still operate as if we're a startup, that's the dream.

就好像，如果我们能够成为一家相当大的公司，但仍然像一家初创公司一样运营，那就是梦想。

That's the dream.

这就是梦想。

Varun Mohan: In terms of hiring philosophy, the way we sort of think about things is, we only hire for a role if we're actually underwater for that function.

Varun Mohan：就招聘理念而言，我们思考问题的方式是，只有当我们确实无法胜任某个职位时，我们才会招聘该职位。

So let's say we're going out and building inference technology.

假设我们要出去构建推理技术。

Unless we're underwater there, we will not go out and hire someone to go out and work for that.

除非我们在水下，否则我们不会出去雇人出去工作。

And the reason for that is, I actually think this is a feature.

原因是，我实际上认为这是一个功能。

When you hire for a role and you already have enough people there, you get a lot of weird politics that ultimately ends up happening.

当你招聘一个职位并且你已经有足够的人手时，你会遇到很多奇怪的政治，最终会发生。

And it's not because people are bad people.

这并不是因为人们是坏人。

I think most people are really well-intentioned.

我想大多数人都是出于好意的。

But what happens when you have people that join a company and in reality you didn't really need them?

但是，当有人加入公司而实际上你并不真正需要他们时，会发生什么情况呢？

They will go out and manufacture some other thing that they should go work on.

他们会出去制造一些他们应该继续做的其他东西。

They will go out and figure out something else to work on.

他们会出去寻找其他可以做的事情。

And realistically, it's not that important, but they will go out and try to convince the rest of the organization that it is important.

实际上，这并不那么重要，但他们会出去尝试让组织的其他成员相信这很重要。

Varun Mohan: I just think as a startup, we don't have the bandwidth to go out and deal with that, right?

Varun Mohan：我只是认为作为一家初创公司，我们没有足够的带宽来处理这个问题，对吧？

For me, I would like to see everyone just almost be raising their hands up being like, "I'm dying.

对我来说，我希望看到每个人都举起手来，说：“我快死了。

We need one more person." And that's when we go out and hire someone.

我们还需要一个人。”那就是我们出去雇人的时候。

And one of the analogies I like to give is, I want the company to almost be this dehydrated entity and every hire is like a little bit of water.

我喜欢给出的一个类比是，我希望公司几乎成为一个脱水的实体，每一位员工都像一点点水。

And we only go back and hire someone when we're back to being dehydrated.

当我们恢复脱水状态时，我们才会回去雇用某人。

Lenny Rachitsky: I love this metaphor so much.

Lenny Rachitsky：我非常喜欢这个比喻。

And it sounds painful.

而且听起来很痛苦。

It sounds painful that you need to be underwater and raising your hand, "I'm about to die and dehydrated." But I also know that it's a really exciting way to work.

听起来很痛苦，你需要在水下举起手，“我快要死了，脱水了。”但我也知道这是一种非常令人兴奋的工作方式。

It sounds hard, but if you're in it, it's just like...

听起来很难，但如果你身处其中，就会发现...

I guess talk about just that side of it because I think it could sound like, "This is terrible.

我想只谈论它的另一面，因为我认为这听起来像是，“这太糟糕了。

I don't want to work this way."

我不想这样工作。”

Varun Mohan: You know what I actually think, Lenny?

瓦伦·莫汉：你知道我真正的想法吗，莱尼？

It's really good for a handful of reasons, which is that a lot of the...

它确实很好，有几个原因，那就是很多......

We respect and trust the people that work at the company.

我们尊重并信任在公司工作的员工。

So this forces ruthless prioritization.

因此，这迫使我们无情地确定优先顺序。

You have a team that's going out and doing something.

你有一个团队正在出去做一些事情。

They will never ask to work on something that's not important.

他们永远不会要求做一些不重要的事情。

In fact, if there are two things that they're working on, they're just going to just tell me, "Hey, there are two things on my plate.

事实上，如果他们正在做两件事，他们只会告诉我，“嘿，我的盘子里有两件事。

I just don't have the ability to do two.

我只是没有能力做两个。

I can only do one." And they will pick the one that's most important.

我只能做一件事。”他们会选择最重要的一项。

Varun Mohan: And this actually goes back to one thing that I think is true about startups and just companies in general.

Varun Mohan：这实际上可以追溯到我认为对于初创公司和一般公司来说是正确的一件事。

You don't win by doing 10 things well.

做好 10 件事并不能赢得胜利。

You win by doing one thing really well and maybe you fail nine things.

你通过把一件事做得很好而获胜，也许你会失败九件事。

This is the thing that I've told the company, "This is very different than school," right?

这就是我告诉公司的事情，“这与学校非常不同，”对吗？

In school you optimize for your total GPA.

在学校，你会优化你的总 GPA。

But for companies, I just need to get an A+ on the one class that matters.

但对于公司来说，我只需要在重要的一门课上获得 A+ 即可。

And then I can get an F in all the other classes.

然后我在所有其他课程中都可以得到 F。

And an F in all the other classes doesn't mean just doing illegal things.

所有其他类别的 F 并不意味着只是做非法的事情。

That basically means you just deprioritize things that don't matter.

这基本上意味着你只是降低了不重要的事情的优先级。

That actually forces this organizational prioritization that is just really, really good.

这实际上迫使组织确定了非常非常好的优先顺序。

Varun Mohan: And Douglas and I, Douglas being my co-founder, we can tell the company, "These are the two things that are the most important." But if we go out and tell these are the two things that are the most important to the company and then we put the company has 20% more people than necessary, what's going to ultimately happen?

瓦伦·莫汉：道格拉斯和我，道格拉斯是我的联合创始人，我们可以告诉公司，“这是最重要的两件事。”但如果我们出去告诉公司这两件事是最重要的，然后我们让公司的人员数量比必要的多 20%，那么最终会发生什么？

It's almost a forcing function for ruthless prioritization to have fewer people or people that are just underwater internally at the company.

这几乎是一种无情的优先顺序的强制功能，以减少人员数量或在公司内部处于水下的人员。

Lenny Rachitsky: Everyone listening that works at a big company knows exactly what you mean when you described when there's just too many people, they will all find work to do and they will all be pitching ideas.

Lenny Rachitsky：每个在大公司工作的听众都清楚地知道你的意思，当你描述的时候，人太多了，他们都会找到工作要做，他们都会提出想法。

They all want to show impact, they want to do well in their performance reviews.

他们都想表现出影响力，他们想在绩效评估中表现出色。

That's just the nature of too many people at a company.

这就是公司太多人的本性。

And so I think this all really resonates.

所以我认为这一切确实引起了共鸣。

Lenny Rachitsky: To even getting even deeper on just what it looks like when someone's underwater to tell you it's time to hire, is it just someone coming to you, "Varun, I need someone on this team.

Lenny Rachitsky：为了更深入地了解当有人在水下告诉你该招聘的时候是什么样子，是否只是有人来找你，“Varun，我需要这个团队中的一个人。

This is just not possible"?

这根本不可能”？

What does that look like even more practically?

更实际的情况是怎样的？

Varun Mohan: Yeah, I think it's basically along those lines.

Varun Mohan：是的，我认为基本上就是这样。

It's that, "Hey, there's some pressure to get something done in a short period of time." By the way, one of the things that we do believe though for software, if you want to do great things, it's not possible to just say, "Hey, I want to get it done in one month" if it is like...

就是“嘿，在短时间内完成某件事有一些压力。”顺便说一句，对于软件来说，我们确实相信的一件事是，如果你想做伟大的事情，就不可能只是说，“嘿，我想在一个月内完成它”，如果它像......

Because you have to think about it from this perspective.

因为你得从这个角度去思考。

If a software project could get built in two to three weeks, what does that really mean about the true complexity and differentiation of what you built?

如果一个软件项目可以在两到三周内构建完成，那么您构建的项目的真正复杂性和差异化到底意味着什么？

It's probably not very high, unless you believe you are way smarter than everyone else.

它可能不是很高，除非你相信自己比其他人聪明得多。

But I think that's hubris, right?

但我认为这是傲慢，对吧？

I think we actually have a very exceptional engineering team.

我认为我们实际上拥有一支非常出色的工程团队。

But also at the same time, I don't think our engineering team is so exceptional that we can do things in three weeks that the rest of the world can't do in six to nine months.

但与此同时，我不认为我们的工程团队如此出色，以至于我们可以在三周内完成世界其他地方在六到九个月内无法完成的事情。

That's kind of stupid to believe that.

相信这一点有点愚蠢。

Varun Mohan: So I think basically it comes down to that person coming out and being like, "Hey, look, I don't have enough time to do X." Us having a conversation to be like, "Okay, what can you do then?" And if the answer is, "I can only do less than that," then maybe we make a decision actually, "Oh wow, that's great.

Varun Mohan：所以我认为基本上这取决于那个人出来并说，“嘿，听着，我没有足够的时间做某件事。”我们的对话就像是：“好吧，那你能做什么？”如果答案是，“我只能做的比这少”，那么也许我们实际上会做出一个决定，“哦，哇，那太好了。

Maybe we actually should deprioritize Y." Because this is actually also another thing that's very hard even for people like me and my co-founder.

也许我们实际上应该降低 Y 的优先级。”因为这实际上也是另一件很难的事情，即使对于像我和我的联合创始人这样的人来说也是如此。

It's that we also want to do a lot of things.

就是我们也想做很多事情。

There's an urge to do a lot of things.

有一种想做很多事情的冲动。

But if we are forced to make a decision constantly on like, "We cannot do X," it's very clarifying.

但如果我们被迫不断地做出诸如“我们不能做某件事”之类的决定，那就非常清楚了。

It's very clarifying because our engineering interview process is also extremely low acceptance rate.

这非常清楚，因为我们的工程面试过程的接受率也极低。

So it's not very easy for us to very quickly spin up people and have them join the company really, really quickly either.

因此，对我们来说，快速培养人才并让他们真正非常快地加入公司也不是一件容易的事。

Varun Mohan: So I think it's clarifying for everyone.

Varun Mohan：所以我认为这对每个人来说都很清楚。

It's clarifying for the person that wants more people.

这对于想要更多人的人来说是澄清的。

We can just tell them, "Hey look, we don't believe you should be doing this other thing." And it's also clarifying for us because we can also get on the same page with them.

我们可以告诉他们，“嘿，看，我们认为你不应该做其他事情。”这也让我们明白了，因为我们也可以与他们达成共识。

And sometimes we just kind of agree, "Hey..." Our teams are very flexible that, "Hey, actually we do need to get something done." And one of the things that we've kind of tried to make sure is true on our engineering team is, people's value to the company does not have anything to do with the size of their team.

有时我们只是同意，“嘿......”我们的团队非常灵活，“嘿，实际上我们确实需要完成一些事情。”我们试图确保在我们的工程团队中正确的一件事是，人们对公司的价值与团队的规模无关。

There are projects inside the company, there are directly responsible individuals for these projects inside the company.

公司内部有项目，公司内部有这些项目的直接负责人。

And if we feel like one project is very important, then people can move from one project to the next.

如果我们觉得一个项目非常重要，那么人们就可以从一个项目转移到下一个项目。

Varun Mohan: There's no notion of someone owning people at the company.

Varun Mohan：公司里不存在有人拥有员工的概念。

That is a very bad and gnarly idea.

这是一个非常糟糕和粗俗的想法。

In fact, the person that is the most valuable at the company is the person that can do the most crazy sort of project out there with as few people as possible.

事实上，公司里最有价值的人就是能够用尽可能少的人完成最疯狂的项目的人。

And that's what you should be rewarding internally.

这就是你应该在内部奖励的东西。

Lenny Rachitsky: How many people do you have at coding at this point?

Lenny Rachitsky：目前你们有多少人负责编码？

Varun Mohan: So we have close to 160 people and the engineering team is over 50 people right now.

Varun Mohan：我们现在有近 160 人，工程团队超过 50 人。

Lenny Rachitsky: Awesome.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：太棒了。

Oh, what's the other bigger functions?

哦，还有什么更大的功能呢？

So -

所以——

Varun Mohan: We have go-to-market.

Varun Mohan：我们已经进入市场。

We have a...

我们有一个...

Yeah.

是的。

Lenny Rachitsky: Oh, right.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：哦，对了。

Okay.

好的。

I want to talk about that, the sales learning that you guys had.

我想谈谈你们学到的销售知识。

Okay.

好的。

But let's close out this hiring conversation.

但让我们结束这次招聘谈话吧。

So we talked about what you look for...

所以我们讨论了你在寻找什么......

To tell you it's the time to hire, what do you look for in the people that you interview and hire?

告诉您现在是招聘的时候了，您在面试和雇用的人中寻找什么？

Varun Mohan: One of the key pieces that we look for, we have a very high technical bar.

Varun Mohan：我们寻找的关键部分之一，我们有非常高的技术标准。

So assuming that they actually meet the technical bar, I think we sort of look for people that are really, really passionate about the mission of what we're actually trying to solve and people that are willing to work very hard.

因此，假设他们确实达到了技术标准，我认为我们会寻找对我们实际要解决的问题真正充满热情的人，以及愿意非常努力工作的人。

I think one of the things that we don't try to do is convince people, "Hey look, we are a very chill company and it's great to work here." I think, no, this is a very exciting space.

我认为我们不会尝试做的事情之一就是说服人们，“嘿，看，我们是一家非常冷静的公司，在这里工作真是太棒了。”我认为，不，这是一个非常令人兴奋的空间。

It's very competitive.

竞争非常激烈。

You should expect us to lose if the people at the company are not kind of...

如果公司里的人不友善的话，你应该预料到我们会失败……

They're not working very hard.

他们工作不是很努力。

And I think one of the biggest dog whistles I hear is, when I ask people how hard are you willing to work, some people actually ultimately say, "Hey, I work very smart." And I basically ask them a question, "If we have many smart people at our company that also work hard, what's the differentiator going to be?

我认为我听到的最大的狗哨声之一是，当我问人们你愿意多努力工作时，有些人实际上最终会说，“嘿，我工作得非常聪明。”我基本上会问他们一个问题：“如果我们公司有很多聪明的人而且也努力工作，那么差异化因素是什么？

Are you just going to pull them down?"

你就这么把他们拉下来吗？”

Varun Mohan: Because I think one of the things that's true about companies is it's like this massive group project.

Varun Mohan：因为我认为公司的真实情况之一就是它就像一个庞大的团体项目。

And I think the thing about a person that is not pulling their weight that's bad.

我认为一个人不尽自己的职责是很糟糕的。

It's not the productivity, right?

这不是生产力吧？

At some point when the company becomes many hundreds of engineers, I'm not going to be thinking about the one engineer that's not pulling their weight.

在某个时候，当公司拥有数百名工程师时，我不会去考虑那些没有尽职尽责的工程师。

It's the team of people they work with that are almost basically saying, "Is this the bar internally at the company?

与他们一起工作的团队几乎基本上都会说：“这是公司内部的酒吧吗？

Is this the expectation?" And I guess, Lenny, if I told you you have a team of five people and the four other people you're working with just don't care, how much are you going to feel like you should care?

这是期望吗？”我想，莱尼，如果我告诉你你有一个由五个人组成的团队，而与你一起工作的其他四个人根本不在乎，你会觉得你应该在乎多少？

Varun Mohan: Exactly.

瓦伦·莫汉：没错。

So for us, I think that's what we more care about.

所以对于我们来说，我认为这是我们更关心的。

We have a culture where it's very collaborative.

我们有一种非常协作的文化。

It's not an individual sport, but people feel like they can rely on other people to get complex sort of tasks done.

这不是一项个人运动，但人们觉得他们可以依靠其他人来完成复杂的任务。

Lenny Rachitsky: So the question you asked there just basically is, how hard are you willing to work?

Lenny Rachitsky：所以你问的问题基本上是，你愿意多努力工作？

How hard do you want to work?

你想工作多努力？

And I know some people, there's this whole group of folks that are just like work-life balance, "How dare you ask me to work crazy hours?" And I love just the filter upfront of, "If you work here, you will work really hard.

我认识一些人，有一整群人都喜欢工作与生活的平衡，“你怎么敢要求我疯狂工作？”我喜欢前面的过滤器，“如果你在这里工作，你会非常努力地工作。

You'll work a lot of hours.

你会工作很多小时。

It's a crazy space to be in.

这是一个疯狂的空间。

And we will win by working smart and also really hard."

我们将通过聪明且努力地工作来取得胜利。”

Lenny Rachitsky: You said at some point earlier that your engineering pass rate, as you said, it was like 0.6% of candidates, something like that.

Lenny Rachitsky：您之前曾说过，您的工程通过率，正如您所说，大约是候选人的 0.6%，类似的情况。

Varun Mohan: Yeah, it's probably post or take home.

Varun Mohan：是的，可能是邮寄或带回家。

It's probably that actually.

实际情况大概就是这样。

So the take home itself filters probably another 10, 15X on top of that.

因此，带回家本身可能会在此基础上再过滤 10、15 倍。

Lenny Rachitsky: Here's a question that I've been hearing more and more, is just, how do you do interviews these days with tools like Windsurf out there that solve all your problems?

Lenny Rachitsky：这是我越来越多地听到的一个问题，就是，现在你如何使用像 Windsurf 这样可以解决你所有问题的工具进行采访？

Varun Mohan: We are okay with people using the tools because I think one of the worst things is like, if someone comes here and doesn't like using these tools, we believe there are massive productivity improvements.

Varun Mohan：我们对人们使用这些工具没有意见，因为我认为最糟糕的事情之一就是，如果有人来到这里并且不喜欢使用这些工具，我们相信生产力会得到巨大的提高。

We do bring people into the company on site so we can actually see how they think through problems on a whiteboard and all these other pieces.

我们确实将人们带到公司现场，这样我们就可以实际看到他们如何在白板上和所有其他部分思考问题。

So we do want to see how they think on their feet and hopefully they're not just taking what we're saying, putting it in a voice translator and sticking it into ChatGPT and getting the answer out.

所以我们确实想看看他们是如何思考的，希望他们不仅仅是接受我们所说的，将其放入语音翻译器中并将其插入 ChatGPT 并得到答案。

Varun Mohan: So there is a way to do this.

Varun Mohan：所以有一种方法可以做到这一点。

My viewpoint on this is the tools are really, really important, but I do think we still look for some problem solving ability.

我对此的观点是，工具确实非常重要，但我确实认为我们仍然在寻找解决问题的能力。

If the only way you can solve a hard problem is put it into ChatGPT, I think that's a concern to us.

如果解决难题的唯一方法是将其放入 ChatGPT，我认为这是我们关心的问题。

Lenny Rachitsky: Today's episode is brought to you by Coda.

Lenny Rachitsky：今天的节目由 Coda 为您带来。

I personally use Coda every single day to manage my podcast and also to manage my community.

我个人每天都使用 Coda 来管理我的播客和社区。

It's where I put the questions that I plan to ask every guest that's coming on the podcast.

我在这里提出了我计划向播客中的每位嘉宾提出的问题。

It's where I put my community resources, it's how I manage my workflows.

这是我放置社区资源的地方，也是我管理工作流程的方式。

Lenny Rachitsky: Here's how Coda can help you.

Lenny Rachitsky：以下是 Coda 可以为您提供的帮助。

Imagine starting a project at work and your vision is clear, you know exactly who's doing what and where to find the data that you need to do your part.

想象一下，在工作中启动一个项目，您的愿景很清晰，您确切地知道谁在做什么以及在哪里可以找到完成您的工作所需的数据。

In fact, you don't have to waste time searching for anything because everything your team needs from project trackers and OKRs to documents and spreadsheets lives in one tab all in Coda.

事实上，您不必浪费时间搜索任何内容，因为您的团队所需的一切（从项目跟踪器和 OKR 到文档和电子表格）都位于 Coda 的一个选项卡中。

With Coda's collaborative all in one workspace, you get the flexibility of docs, the structure of spreadsheets, the power of applications, and the intelligence of AI all in one easy to organize tab.

借助 Coda 的协作式全合一工作区，您可以在一个易于组织的选项卡中获得文档的灵活性、电子表格的结构、应用程序的强大功能以及 AI 的智能。

Lenny Rachitsky: Like I mentioned earlier, I use Coda every single day.

Lenny Rachitsky：就像我之前提到的，我每天都使用 Coda。

And more than 50,000 teams trust Coda to keep them more aligned and focused.

超过 50,000 个团队相信 Coda 可以让他们更加协调和专注。

If you're a startup team looking to increase alignment and agility, Coda can help you move from planning to execution in record time.

如果您是一个希望提高一致性和敏捷性的初创团队，Coda 可以帮助您在创纪录的时间内从计划转向执行。

To try it for yourself, go to coda.io/lenny today and get six months free of the team plan for startups.

要亲自尝试，请立即访问 coda.io/lenny，并获得六个月免费的初创公司团队计划。

That's C-O-D-A, .io/lenny to get started for free and get six months of the team plan.

这就是 C-O-D-A，.io/lenny，免费开始并获得六个月的团队计划。

coda.io/lenny.

coda.io/lenny。

Lenny Rachitsky: Okay.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：好的。

Let's talk about this go-to-market sales experience that you guys had.

我们来谈谈你们的上市销售经历。

So you started obviously like most people, started building without sales team.

所以你显然像大多数人一样开始，在没有销售团队的情况下开始建设。

And then you realized, from what I hear, that that was a huge miss and a big opportunity to talk about there because that's really unique, I think, that you guys have a large sales team and go-to-market team.

然后你意识到，据我所知，这是一个巨大的错过，也是一个在那里谈论的绝佳机会，因为我认为这真的很独特，你们拥有一支庞大的销售团队和进入市场团队。

Varun Mohan: Yeah, we actually made this decision pretty early in the company's history, I would say.

Varun Mohan：是的，我想说，我们实际上在公司历史的早期就做出了这个决定。

We hired our VP of sales over a year ago actually.

实际上，我们一年多前就聘请了销售副总裁。

And the go-to-market team is now over 80 people inside the company.

公司内部的市场推广团队目前已有 80 多人。

So it's a pretty sizable function inside the company.

所以这是公司内部相当大的职能。

Varun Mohan: Yeah.

瓦伦·莫汉：是的。

Maybe a little bit of a backstory here.

也许这里有一些背景故事。

So when we started the company, actually we had a handful of angels that actually were operators, go-to-market operators.

因此，当我们创办公司时，实际上我们有一些天使投资人，他们实际上是运营商、市场运营商。

So an example of one was Carlos Delatorre who used to be the CRO of MongoDB.

Carlos Delatorre 就是一个例子，他曾担任 MongoDB 的 CRO。

And I think for us, we never viewed enterprise sales and sales as a very negative thing.

我认为对我们来说，我们从来没有将企业销售和销售视为非常负面的事情。

I think this is a interesting thing that technical founders sometimes don't really like.

我认为这是一件有趣的事情，但技术创始人有时并不真正喜欢。

They think sales is a very negative part of the process.

他们认为销售是整个过程中非常消极的一部分。

Everything should be product-led growth.

一切都应该以产品为主导的增长。

I think it's not that black and white.

我认为这不是那么黑白分明。

I think enterprise sales is really valuable.

我觉得企业销售真的很有价值。

But maybe when we were a GPU virtualization company and we were an infrastructure company, the reason why we never hired a salesperson is, I didn't know how to scale the function.

但也许当我们是一家 GPU 虚拟化公司和一家基础设施公司时，我们从未聘请销售人员的原因是，我不知道如何扩展功能。

I was the one who was selling the product.

我是销售该产品的人。

Varun Mohan: So ultimately speaking, if it was hard for me to sell the product incrementally, I didn't know how we could make that into a process that we could then go and scale.

Varun Mohan：所以归根结底，如果我很难增量销售产品，我不知道如何将其变成一个可以进行和扩展的流程。

I didn't know how we could take the revenue of the business from a couple million to hundreds of millions and let alone even tenths.

我不知道怎么才能把生意的收入从几百万变成几亿，更别说是零点几了。

So if I didn't know how to do that, how could I go out and hire someone and make them scale it out?

因此，如果我不知道该怎么做，我怎么能出去雇用某人并让他们扩大规模呢？

Varun Mohan: On the other hand, for Codeium, very quickly, a lot of large enterprises reached out to us.

Varun Mohan：另一方面，对于 Codeium，很快就有很多大型企业向我们伸出了援手。

And from that alone in the middle of 2023, we started, I guess, me and a handful of other folks at the company started selling the product and we were doing tens of pilots concurrently with large enterprises and we were very quickly able to understand that there was a large enterprise motion that needed to be built in this space.

仅从 2023 年中期开始，我想我和公司的其他一些人就开始销售该产品，我们与大型企业同时进行了数十个试点，我们很快就了解到需要在这个领域建立一个大型企业动议。

So by the end of 2023, we actually hired our VP of sales.

因此，到 2023 年底，我们实际上聘请了销售副总裁。

And very quickly after that, scaled our sales team.

此后很快，我们的销售团队就扩大了。

Yeah, I mean look, if you want to sell to the Fortune 500, it is very hard to do that purely by swiping a credit card.

是的，我的意思是，如果你想向财富 500 强企业销售产品，纯粹通过刷信用卡是很难做到的。

Lenny Rachitsky: Let's talk about Cursor.

Lenny Rachitsky：我们来谈谈光标。

I don't want to spend too much time with competitors, but that's what everyone's always thinking about when they think of you guys.

我不想花太多时间和竞争对手在一起，但这就是每个人想到你们时总是想到的。

You guys are kind of the leading players, I think, in the space also.

我认为你们也是这个领域的领先者。

There's Copilot, but that's different.

有副驾驶，但那是不同的。

Lenny Rachitsky: So what's the simplest way to understand how you guys are different from Cursor and also just how you think you win in the space long-term?

Lenny Rachitsky：那么，最简​​单的方法是什么来了解你们与 Cursor 的不同之处以及你们认为自己如何在该领域取得长期胜利？

Varun Mohan: So I think maybe a handful of things that I could share.

Varun Mohan：所以我想也许有一些我可以分享的事情。

So on the product side, I think we've invested a lot in making sure code-based understanding for very large code bases is really high quality.

因此，在产品方面，我认为我们投入了大量资金来确保对非常大的代码库的基于代码的理解确实是高质量的。

And that's just because of where we started.

这只是因为我们的起点。

We worked with some of the worlds are just companies like Dell, JPMorgan Chase.

我们与一些世界上的公司合作过，比如戴尔、摩根大通。

Companies like Dell have singular code bases that are over 100 million lines of code.

像戴尔这样的公司拥有超过 1 亿行代码的单一代码库。

So being able to understand that really, really quickly to make large scale changes is something that we've spent a lot of time doing.

因此，我们花了很多时间才能真正、真正快速地理解并进行大规模的改变。

And that requires us actually building our own models that can consume large chunks of their code base in parallel across thousands of GPUs and almost rank them to be able to find out what the most important snippets of code are for any question that are asked about the code base.

这需要我们实际构建自己的模型，这些模型可以在数千个 GPU 上并行消耗大量代码库，并对它们进行几乎排名，以便能够针对有关代码库提出的任何问题找出最重要的代码片段。

So we've gone out and built large distributed systems based on our infrastructure background to go ahead and do that.

因此，我们已经根据我们的基础设施背景构建了大型分布式系统，以继续实现这一目标。

That's maybe one.

这也许就是其中之一。

Lenny Rachitsky: Let me actually follow that thread because I think people may underestimate just how big of a deal that is.

Lenny Rachitsky：让我实际上遵循这个思路，因为我认为人们可能低估了这件事的重要性。

So when we talk about, we had the founders of Bolt and Lovable on the podcast, so those products, they build something from scratch, they built, they write the code for you.

所以当我们谈论时，我们在播客上有 Bolt 和 Lovable 的创始人，所以这些产品，他们从头开始构建一些东西，他们构建，他们为你编写代码。

So that versus just loading, say, Windsurf on your million line code base, say, at Airbnb or Uber.

因此，这与仅仅在 Airbnb 或 Uber 的百万行代码库上加载 Windsurf 相比。

Like, understanding what the hell you have and how it works and where to go change things without breaking it is insanely hard.

就像，了解你到底拥有什么，它是如何工作的，以及如何在不破坏它的情况下改变它是非常困难的。

And so what I'm hearing is that's kind of a big differentiator as you guys started there actually.

所以我听到的是，这是一个很大的区别，因为你们实际上是从那里开始的。

And then Windsurf is now building up that advantage.

Windsurf 现在正在建立这一优势。

Varun Mohan: That's right.

瓦伦·莫汉：没错。

Yeah.

是的。

So that's a big thing that we spent a lot of time on, which is just understanding what the code base is doing.

所以这是我们花了很多时间的一件大事，就是了解代码库在做什么。

And actually one of the other things is, what are all the user interactions with respect to the code base?

实际上，另一件事是，与代码库相关的所有用户交互是什么？

And happy to show that also in a bit here.

并且很高兴在这里也展示这一点。

Varun Mohan: The second key piece probably is we're not only tied to Windsurf actually.

Varun Mohan：第二个关键部分可能是我们实际上不仅仅与 Windsurf 相关。

This is probably a weird statement given even we are talking about Windsurf, which is that actually we're pretty focused on supporting IDEs like JetBrains.

即使我们谈论的是 Windsurf，这也可能是一个奇怪的说法，实际上我们非常专注于支持 JetBrains 等 IDE。

JetBrains or IntelliJ has over 70 to 80% of all Java developers coding in JetBrains based IDEs, right?

超过 70% 到 80% 的 Java 开发人员在基于 JetBrains 的 IDE 中进行编码，对吗？

The reason why we don't feel as big a need to almost build a competing product to JetBrains is JetBrains is actually a very sort of extensible product in a way that VSCode is not.

我们之所以不觉得有必要构建一个与 JetBrains 竞争的产品，是因为 JetBrains 实际上是一种非常可扩展的产品，而 VSCode 则不然。

VSCode is not very extensible.

VSCode 的可扩展性不太好。

Varun Mohan: So I think for us, our goal here is not only just to satisfy a subset of users that can actually switch onto our IDE, but we want to give this agentic sort of experience to every sort of developer out there.

Varun Mohan：所以我认为对我们来说，我们的目标不仅仅是满足实际上可以切换到我们的 IDE 的一小部分用户，而且我们希望为每种类型的开发人员提供这种代理式的体验。

And if that means there are Java developers that write in JetBrains, that's fine.

如果这意味着有 Java 开发人员在 JetBrains 中编写代码，那也很好。

We work with a lot of large enterprises that have 10 plus thousand developers where over 50% of the developers are on JetBrains.

我们与许多拥有 10 多名开发人员的大型企业合作，其中超过 50% 的开发人员使用 JetBrains。

It's a very large product.

这是一个非常大的产品。

And by the way, that company itself is a privately held company that makes many hundreds of millions of dollars a year.

顺便说一句，该公司本身是一家私营公司，每年赚取数亿美元。

So it's a very, very large company.

所以这是一家非常非常大的公司。

So for us, that's another key piece.

所以对我们来说，这是另一个关键部分。

We actually want to meet developers sort of where they are.

我们实际上希望在开发人员所在的地方与他们会面。

And if they use a different platform, we'll work on that too.

如果他们使用不同的平台，我们也会努力解决。

Varun Mohan: The third key piece, and this probably sounds another key piece for enterprises, is we work in a lot of very secure environments.

Varun Mohan：第三个关键部分，这可能听起来对企业来说是另一个关键部分，是我们在许多非常安全的环境中工作。

We have FedRAMP compliance, which means we can sell to very large government entities.

我们符合 FedRAMP 合规性，这意味着我们可以向非常大的政府实体出售产品。

We have a hybrid mode of actually using the product, which means that all the code that lives that is indexed, it actually lives on the tenant of the user, right?

我们有一种实际使用该产品的混合模式，这意味着所有被索引的代码实际上都存在于用户的租户中，对吗？

Code is one of the most important pieces of IP for the company.

代码是公司最重要的知识产权之一。

So I think just if you were to look at it from a big company perspective, there are many reasons why over the years of just building an enterprise product, we've handled a lot of complexities that large companies want to see.

因此，我认为，如果您从大公司的角度来看，那么多年来我们在构建企业产品的过程中，已经处理了许多大公司希望看到的复杂性，原因有很多。

But that's part of it is because of the history of how we got here in the first place.

但这部分是因为我们最初是如何到达这里的历史。

Lenny Rachitsky: Okay, Varun, enough teasing.

Lenny Rachitsky：好吧，Varun，戏弄得够多了。

Let's do a live demo of Windsurf so folks can see what it's like.

让我们进行 Windsurf 的现场演示，以便人们可以了解它是什么样的。

And then I'm just going to ask you a bunch of questions as we're going through it.

然后我会在讨论过程中问你一系列问题。

So I'll let you pull up a little shared screen where you have Windsurf pulled up.

因此，我将让您拉出一个小共享屏幕，您可以在其中拉出 Windsurf。

Varun Mohan: Great.

瓦伦·莫汉：太好了。

So some context, this is a very basic React project.

所以一些上下文，这是一个非常基本的 React 项目。

There's nothing in it right now.

现在里面什么也没有。

So if you were to open any sort of file, it's the default React app project.

因此，如果您要打开任何类型的文件，它就是默认的 React 应用程序项目。

I have this basic image here.

我这里有这个基本图像。

You can pass Windsurf images of what you'd like the project to look like, of what I would like an Airbnb for dog's website to kind of look like.

您可以传递 Windsurf 图像，其中包含您希望项目的外观，以及我希望 Airbnb 狗网站的外观。

Lenny Rachitsky: Beautiful.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：美丽。

Beautiful mock-up by the way.

顺便说一句，漂亮的模型。

I love that this is like all you need.

我喜欢这就像你所需要的一切。

Varun Mohan: This is all you need.

Varun Mohan：这就是你所需要的。

This is all you need.

这就是您所需要的。

So basically what we're going to do is we're going to say, "Hey..." One of the cool parts about Windsurf is it can actually work in an existing project already.

所以基本上我们要做的就是说，“嘿......” Windsurf 的一个很酷的部分是它实际上已经可以在现有项目中工作。

So I can basically say, "Hey, change this React app to show an Airbnb for dog's website based on this image and preview it."

所以我基本上可以说，“嘿，更改这个 React 应用程序以显示基于此图像的 Airbnb 狗网站并预览它。”

Varun Mohan: So now it'll just go out and start executing code, reading through the repository.

Varun Mohan：所以现在它会出去并开始执行代码，读取存储库。

Obviously, it doesn't know what the current code base actually looks like.

显然，它不知道当前的代码库实际上是什么样的。

And it'll go out and analyze the code base to actually find out the set of changes necessary.

它将出去分析代码库，以实际找出所需的更改集。

So we'll go out and wait and see what it's going to do.

所以我们会出去等待，看看会发生什么。

But while we're doing that, let's continue the conversation.

但在我们这样做的同时，让我们继续对话。

Lenny Rachitsky: Awesome.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：太棒了。

Okay, so first of all, so you open up Windsurf.

好的，首先，你打开 Windsurf。

You had a boilerplate React project ready to go.

您已经准备好了一个样板 React 项目。

And Windsurf had never really seen this code before.

Windsurf 以前从未真正见过这段代码。

You ask it to do stuff on your code base, which is just like, "Change this to Airbnb for dogs using this design." Amazing.

你要求它在你的代码库上做一些事情，就像“将其更改为使用此设计的狗的 Airbnb”。惊人的。

Varun Mohan: That's right.

瓦伦·莫汉：没错。

That's exactly right.

完全正确。

Lenny Rachitsky: Yeah.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：是的。

Okay, cool.

好吧，酷。

So we'll let it run and we'll talk.

所以我们就让它运行，我们会谈谈。

Let me ask you this question that I've been asking everyone that comes on that is building a product that helps engineers build products and product managers build products and designers.

让我问你这个问题，我一直在问每个正在构建产品的人，帮助工程师构建产品，产品经理构建产品和设计师。

Lenny Rachitsky: Say you could sit next to every single new user that opens up Windsurf and whisper a couple tips in their ear to help them be successful with the product.

Lenny Rachitsky：假设您可以坐在每个打开 Windsurf 的新用户旁边，在他们耳边低语一些提示，以帮助他们成功使用该产品。

What would be a couple tips you'd share?

您会分享哪些技巧？

Varun Mohan: Tip number one is just be a little bit patient and both patient and explicit.

Varun Mohan：第一个建议是要有一点耐心，而且要耐心且明确。

When you ask the application to go out and make some changes, it could actually go out and make many irrelevant changes.

当您要求应用程序进行一些更改时，它实际上可能会进行许多不相关的更改。

One of the things that I think prevents this the most is just be really, really explicit or as explicit as possible.

我认为最能阻止这种情况发生的事情之一就是要非常非常明确或尽可能明确。

And one of the things I ask people to do is in the beginning, start by making smaller changes.

我要求人们做的一件事就是从一开始就进行较小的改变。

If there's a very large directory, don't go out and make it refactor the entire directory because then if it's wrong, it's going to basically it destroy 20 files.

如果有一个非常大的目录，不要去重构整个目录，因为如果出错的话，基本上会毁掉 20 个文件。

Varun Mohan: And I think from there, one of the key pieces I think that comes from the users that use the product is they sort of learn what the hills and valleys of the product are.

Varun Mohan：我认为从这里开始，我认为来自使用该产品的用户的关键部分之一是他们了解该产品的山丘和山谷是什么。

The analogy I like to give are kind of similar to autocomplete.

我喜欢给出的类比有点类似于自动完成。

When you use a product like autocomplete, you would think a product that is suggesting things but only getting accepted 30% of the time would be really, really annoying.

当您使用像自动完成这样的产品时，您会认为一个提供建议但只有 30% 的时间被接受的产品会非常非常烦人。

But the reason why it's not very annoying is actually because you've actually learned that, hey, 70% of the time, I don't need to accept this.

但它不是很烦人的原因实际上是因为你实际上已经了解到，嘿，70％的时间，我不需要接受这个。

And the times that I do, I know to get value from it.

当我这样做的时候，我知道从中获得价值。

And you also know beforehand if a sort of command that you write is very complex, you just expect, "Hey, the autocomplete is not going to work for it." So I think it's almost like a, understand what the hills and valleys of the product are.

而且您还事先知道您编写的某种命令是否非常复杂，您只是期望，“嘿，自动完成功能不会对其起作用。”所以我认为这几乎就像是了解产品的山丘和山谷是什么。

Varun Mohan: The crazy thing is, every three months that kind of gets changed and reevaluated.

Varun Mohan：疯狂的是，每三个月就会进行一次更改和重新评估。

It almost becomes the case that it becomes materially better than it was in the past.

几乎可以说，它在物质上变得比过去更好了。

So I think maybe patience and being explicit are maybe the two important key pieces I would tell users.

所以我认为耐心和明确可能是我要告诉用户的两个重要关键部分。

Lenny Rachitsky: And I think something that was kind of between the lines there is get a gut feeling of what the model is capable of, like how specific to be versus how abstract it can be.

Lenny Rachitsky：我认为，在字里行间，人们可以对模型的能力有一种直觉，比如具体的程度与抽象的程度。

And there's kind of this gut feeling you start to build over time.

随着时间的推移，你会开始产生这种直觉。

Varun Mohan: That's right.

瓦伦·莫汉：没错。

Yeah.

是的。

And with that, it feels like we have an actual preview.

就这样，我们感觉就像有了一个真正的预览。

Guess what?

你猜怎么着？

We have a nice-

我们有一个美好的——

Varun Mohan: A nice dog app.

Varun Mohan：一款不错的狗狗应用程序。

And one of the cool parts is that we've also done beyond just modifying code is actually being able to point to different pieces.

最酷的部分之一是，我们所做的不仅仅是修改代码，实际上还能够指向不同的部分。

And I guess I could just kind of say...

我想我可以说...

I could point to different elements and say, "Hey, make the background..." This is not great design, but I could basically say, if I took this element, "Make this background red and just take a particular element and just change it and make it red." And it should go out and be able to go out and do this.

我可以指着不同的元素说，“嘿，让背景......”这不是一个伟大的设计，但我基本上可以说，如果我采用这个元素，“使这个背景为红色，只需采用一个特定的元素，然后将其更改为红色。”它应该出去并且能够出去做这件事。

Varun Mohan: The preview aspect of the product of being able to showcase the app while it's getting built helps in that, now actually you can live entirely in app world.

Varun Mohan：产品的预览方面能够在构建应用程序时展示应用程序，这对此有所帮助，现在实际上您可以完全生活在应用程序世界中。

You don't even maybe even need to look at the code.

您甚至可能不需要查看代码。

Granted this looks hideous, but in some ways if I wanted to, I could go out and do that, right?

虽然这看起来很可怕，但在某些方面，如果我愿意，我可以出去这样做，对吧？

Lenny Rachitsky: This is what happens when there's no more designers.

Lenny Rachitsky：这就是当不再有设计师时会发生的情况。

Like, .

喜欢， 。

Varun Mohan: Yeah.

瓦伦·莫汉：是的。

When there's no more designers.

当不再有设计师的时候。

Sure.

当然。

Maybe the answer is like, when you ask me what should people be doing, they should study great taste.

也许答案是，当你问我人们应该做什么时，他们应该研究伟大的品味。

Having great taste.

有很好的品味。

Because I think taste is also a very, very hard, right?

因为我觉得味道也是非常非常辛苦的吧？

Varun Mohan: But maybe the other key piece, Lenny, that I wanted to showcase here is obviously you could keep going here.

Varun Mohan：但莱尼，我想在这里展示的另一个关键部分显然是你可以继续在这里。

I could take different components and kind of change them.

我可以采用不同的组件并对其进行某种程度的更改。

We have a lot of plans here that are beyond just point and click changing components.

我们这里有很多计划，不仅仅是点击更改组件。

But one of the cool pieces is the AI.

但最酷的部分之一是人工智能。

There's an AI review flow as well, which is kind of like what I was saying.

还有一个人工智能审核流程，这有点像我所说的。

The goal of AI has now changed a lot in that it is now modifying large chunks of code for you.

人工智能的目标现在已经发生了很大变化，因为它现在正在为你修改大量代码。

And the job of a developer now is to actually review a lot of the code that the AI has generated.

开发人员现在的工作是实际审查人工智能生成的大量代码。

And granted right now during this podcast, I'm not going to review all the code that's getting generated.

在本播客期间，我不会审查正在生成的所有代码。

Varun Mohan: But let's say I want to go out and modify some of this code.

Varun Mohan：但是假设我想出去修改一些代码。

And this is where if you're an actual developer that actually wants to go modify, maybe I don't like my variable name being called title.

如果您是真正想要修改的实际开发人员，也许我不喜欢我的变量名称被称为标题。

I want it to be called Title String instead, like this.

我希望它被称为标题字符串，就像这样。

And if I wanted to go out and make that change and change to go out and say Title String and that's what I'm going to do, I'm just going to tell the AI to continue.

如果我想出去做出改变并改变出去并说出标题字符串，这就是我要做的，我只是告诉人工智能继续。

Varun Mohan: The cool part about this is Windsurf not only knows about what the agent has done.

Varun Mohan：最酷的部分是 Windsurf 不仅知道代理做了什么。

It also knows everything that the user has done.

它还知道用户所做的一切。

Our goal here is to have this almost flow-like state where everything the user has done, the AI also knows.

我们的目标是拥有一种几乎类似流程的状态，其中用户所做的一切，人工智能也知道。

And it is able to predict the intent.

并且它能够预测意图。

And as you can see, it said, "I noticed that the interface property title was changed to Title String." And then it now has gone out and modified all the locations within the app from title to Title String.

正如您所看到的，它说：“我注意到界面属性标题已更改为标题字符串。”然后它现在已经退出并修改了应用程序内的所有位置，从标题到标题字符串。

And now it no longer says that.

现在它不再这么说了。

Varun Mohan: So this is where even if I'm writing software and I want to go and make point changes, the AI can go out and quickly make these changes on the user's path.

Varun Mohan：因此，即使我正在编写软件并且我想要进行点更改，人工智能也可以走出去并在用户的路径上快速进行这些更改。

Imagine doing a refactor or a migration and you just change one part of the code.

想象一下，进行重构或迁移时，您只需更改代码的一部分。

You can just tell the AI to continue the rest.

你可以告诉人工智能继续剩下的事情。

And because it deeply understands the code base, it should go out and find all the corresponding places to go out and make the change.

而且因为它深入了解代码库，所以它应该走出去，找到所有相应的地方去进行更改。

And obviously now when I reload my app, there's no bug in the app.

显然，现在当我重新加载我的应用程序时，应用程序中没有错误。

It still loads properly.

它仍然可以正常加载。

I could obviously tell it to do even cooler things like make the app retro.

我显然可以告诉它做更酷的事情，比如让应用程序复古。

I don't know what that means, but I guess I could do that.

我不知道这意味着什么，但我想我可以做到。

And it should go out and make the change correspondingly for me.

它应该出去并为我做出相应的改变。

Varun Mohan: But yeah, that's maybe the high level parts there where the AI is not only able to operate entirely in app space but also on the code space of the users going out and modifying code and to bridge the gap between the two.

Varun Mohan：但是，是的，这可能是高级部分，人工智能不仅能够完全在应用程序空间中运行，而且还能够在用户出去修改代码的代码空间上运行，并弥合两者之间的差距。

So it should add leverage not only non-developers that are just purely building apps, but also developers that are just hands-on keyboard too.

因此，它不仅应该增加那些纯粹构建应用程序的非开发人员的影响力，而且还应该增加那些只是动手键盘的开发人员的影响力。

Lenny Rachitsky: Amazing.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：太棒了。

By the way, if you're not on YouTube, you can't see, but you can just select any element of the page and then reference that in your ask of, "Here's what I want changed." I didn't know that was a feature.

顺便说一句，如果您不在 YouTube 上，则看不到，但您可以选择页面的任何元素，然后在“这是我想要更改的内容”的请求中引用该元素。我不知道这是一个功能。

And that is extremely cool.

这非常酷。

Lenny Rachitsky: So interestingly, so having just looked at Lovable and Bolt and Replit and apps like that, it's basically doing all the things those apps do.

Lenny Rachitsky：很有趣，看了 Lovable、Bolt 和 Replit 以及类似的应用程序，它基本上完成了这些应用程序所做的所有事情。

Oh, wow.

哦，哇。

There's the retro version.

还有复古版的。

That's good.

那挺好的。

I like that it built on your red and made it really nice actually.

我喜欢它以你的红色为基础，而且实际上非常漂亮。

Varun Mohan: Actually the red looks way better now.

Varun Mohan：实际上红色现在看起来好多了。

Lenny Rachitsky: Yeah, a little green button.

Lenny Rachitsky：是的，一个绿色的小按钮。

This is great.

这太棒了。

Okay.

好的。

Lenny Rachitsky: So I don't think people realize this, but apps like Windsurf, that it could actually do a lot of agentic work for you where you just tell it, "Here.

Lenny Rachitsky：所以我认为人们没有意识到这一点，但像 Windsurf 这样的应用程序实际上可以为你做很多代理工作，你只需告诉它，“在这里。

I want you to do this" versus it's auto completing code for you.

我希望你这样做”，而不是它自动为你完成代码。

Lenny Rachitsky: The big difference is you need to start it with some code base so you have this kind of boilerplate React project.

Lenny Rachitsky：最大的区别是你需要用一些代码库来启动它，这样你就有了这种样板的 React 项目。

Is there a reason you guys aren't taking that step and just doing that automatically for you?

你们有什么理由不采取这一步而只是自动为您做这件事吗？

Is it because you're targeting engineers and they don't need that or is there other reasons?

是因为你的目标是工程师而他们不需要，还是有其他原因？

Varun Mohan: Lenny, the interesting thing is the base app that you saw for this was also generated by Windsurf.

Varun Mohan：Lenny，有趣的是您看到的基础应用程序也是由 Windsurf 生成的。

The reason why we sort of didn't generate it is installing all the dependencies takes like three or four minutes.

我们之所以没有生成它，是因为安装所有依赖项大约需要三到四分钟。

And for the demo, I didn't want to wait.

对于演示，我不想等待。

But totally, actually most of the users of the product, probably zero-to-one build these apps.

但总的来说，实际上该产品的大多数用户（可能是零到一）都构建了这些应用程序。

Varun Mohan: And if I can say one interesting thing is, when we launched Windsurf, actually we tasked everyone at our company to go out and build an app with Windsurf.

Varun Mohan：如果我可以说一件有趣的事情是，当我们推出 Windsurf 时，实际上我们要求公司的每个人都出去使用 Windsurf 构建应用程序。

That included our go-to market team and our sales team.

其中包括我们的市场进入团队和销售团队。

There was a crazy stat that I think people would find surprising, but we've saved over half a million dollars of SaaS products we were going to buy because our go-to-market team has now built apps instead of buying them.

有一个疯狂的统计数据，我认为人们会感到惊讶，但我们已经节省了超过 50 万美元的 SaaS 产品，因为我们的市场推广团队现在已经构建了应用程序，而不是购买它们。

Our head of partnerships, instead of buying a partner portal product, has actually built its own partner portal.

我们的合作伙伴主管实际上没有购买合作伙伴门户产品，而是建立了自己的合作伙伴门户。

He had never built software in the past.

他过去从未开发过软件。

We've actually come up with ways inside the company to deploy these apps easily in a secure way.

实际上，我们在公司内部已经想出了以安全的方式轻松部署这些应用程序的方法。

And we're actually now building very, very custom software for our company to operate more efficiently, which is, I would not have expected this probably six months ago.

实际上，我们现在正在为我们的公司构建非常非常定制的软件，以便更有效地运营，也就是说，我在六个月前可能没想到会出现这种情况。

Lenny Rachitsky: That is incredibly interesting.

Lenny Rachitsky：这非常有趣。

You don't need to name company names, but I guess what's a space you're least bullish on that you think is going to have the most problem here with people building their own version of these sorts of products?

你不需要说出公司名称，但我想你最不看好的领域是什么，你认为人们在构建自己的此类产品版本时会遇到最大的问题？

Varun Mohan: I think maybe my viewpoint are these very, very verticalized niche products I think are going to get...

Varun Mohan：我想也许我的观点是这些非常非常垂直的利基产品，我认为将会得到......

They're going to get competed down a ton.

他们将面临激烈的竞争。

And I think sales products are an example of one of these things.

我认为销售产品就是其中之一的例子。

And maybe this is a...

也许这是一个...

I don't want to be very negative, but it's very hard inside a company like ours to task our best engineers to build a best in class sales product.

我不想表现得非常消极，但在像我们这样的公司内部，很难指派我们最好的工程师来打造一流的销售产品。

There's not enough interest to do that.

没有足够的兴趣去做这件事。

Or to build a best in class legal software product or finance software product.

或者构建一流的法律软件产品或财务软件产品。

It's very, very hard for us to.

这对我们来说非常非常困难。

And actually that's a very big moat for these companies that built these products that they were able to come out, have an opinionated stance on how to do this, hire good enough engineers to go out and build the software.

实际上，对于那些构建这些产品的公司来说，这是一条非常大的护城河，他们能够推出这些产品，对如何做到这一点有自己的立场，聘请足够好的工程师出去构建软件。

Our company is unwilling to do that.

我们公司不愿意这样做。

So previously, we would go out and buy the technology because there would be no alternative.

所以以前，我们会出去购买技术，因为没有其他选择。

Varun Mohan: But now one of the crazy things is that the domain specialists now have access to build the tools that they ultimately wanted, which is actually crazy.

Varun Mohan：但现在最疯狂的事情之一是，领域专家现在可以构建他们最终想要的工具，这实际上是疯狂的。

If you think about why were these software companies able to exist these vertical software companies, the reason is because they had many features.

如果你想一下为什么这些软件公司能够存在这些垂直软件公司，因为它们有很多功能。

The kitchen sink of features worked for a lot of companies, but each individual company only wanted 10% of the features.

厨房水槽功能适用于很多公司，但每个公司只想要 10% 的功能。

But the problem is, each individual company was not capable of maintaining a piece of software or building the custom piece of software for 10% of the features, but that has now changed entirely.

但问题是，每个单独的公司都没有能力维护一个软件或为 10% 的功能构建定制软件，但现在情况已经完全改变了。

Now they can.

现在他们可以了。

Lenny Rachitsky: Yeah.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：是的。

There's always been a story of like, "Why would I spend any time building my own software if I could just..." But now it's like five minutes of time.

一直有这样的故事，“如果我可以……，我为什​​么要花时间构建自己的软件……”但现在就像五分钟的时间。

Varun Mohan: Five minutes and maybe even more custom to your system.

Varun Mohan：五分钟，甚至可能更适合您的系统。

How many times have you bought a software and you're almost like, "Why is there no integration to X?

有多少次您购买了软件后您几乎会想，“为什么没有集成到 X？

And I actually use X." How annoying is that?

我实际上使用的是 X。”这有多烦人？

That actually makes the software less useful to you.

这实际上降低了该软件对您的用处。

Lenny Rachitsky: So I think what's cool is when you go back, if someone zooms back to the beginning of when you started the demo, it's basically a PM talking to an engineer, "Hey, build me a Airbnb for dogs.

Lenny Rachitsky：所以我认为很酷的是，当你返回时，如果有人回到你开始演示时的开头，这基本上是一个 PM 与工程师交谈，“嘿，为我建造一个 Airbnb 供狗使用。

Here's a stupid mock that I made with some boxes." That's almost like a bad PM talking to an engineer and it just actually works.

这是我用一些盒子做了一个愚蠢的模拟。”这几乎就像一个糟糕的产品经理与工程师交谈一样，而且确实有效。

That's what's insane about this.

这就是这件事的疯狂之处。

And so that's why this example you're sharing of go-to-market folks, building their own things, it's like they don't need to know anything about product building.

因此，这就是为什么您要与进入市场的人员分享这个示例，构建他们自己的东西，就好像他们不需要了解有关产品构建的任何信息。

It's just describe it in some ridiculous way and draw a couple boxes of what you want it to look like and it makes something for you.

它只是以某种荒谬的方式描述它，并画出几个你想要它看起来像的盒子，它就为你创造了一些东西。

Varun Mohan: Which shows that agency is what matters.

Varun Mohan：这表明代理才是最重要的。

If you have a product manager that has an idea, there's no reason for why that idea cannot be more well fleshed out.

如果你的产品经理有一个想法，那么这个想法就没有理由不能得到更好的充实。

How many times do you have a product manager that just continualize ideas, but it just feels like they are extremely unsure on how to execute on it?

有多少次你的产品经理只是延续想法，但感觉他们非常不确定如何执行它？

They just want to say things for sake of saying things?

他们只是为了说话而说话吗？

But for the people that have ideas and a lot of, I guess, agency, they can go out and prove out what they want without any sort of external resources.

但对于那些有想法并且有很多代理的人来说，他们可以出去证明他们想要的东西，而无需任何外部资源。

Lenny Rachitsky: I think even more acutely for product folks listening to this, it's the salesperson coming to you being like, "Hey, I want this thing.

Lenny Rachitsky：我认为对于产品人员来说，听这个的更敏锐的是销售人员来找你，“嘿，我想要这个东西。

It's going to help me with my sales team." And you're like, "I don't have a million things to build.

这将对我的销售团队有所帮助。”你会说，“我没有一百万个东西要建造。

I don't have time for this." And so that problem goes away, which I think will make a lot of product leaders really happy.

我没有时间做这个。”这样问题就消失了，我认为这会让很多产品领导者感到非常高兴。

Lenny Rachitsky: The model that this is sitting on, is it Sonnet?

Lenny Rachitsky：这个模型是 Sonnet 吗？

Varun Mohan: Yeah.

瓦伦·莫汉：是的。

So just to break down how it ultimately works, we have a model that does planning.

因此，为了分解它最终如何运作，我们有一个进行规划的模型。

And I would say right now Sonnet is a really, really good planning model.

我想说，现在 Sonnet 是一个非常非常好的规划模型。

I think OpenAI's GPT-4o is also good.

我觉得OpenAI的GPT-4o也不错。

But the crazy thing is what we try to do is we try to make the Anthropic based model or Sonnet model try to do as much of the high level planning as possible.

但疯狂的是我们试图做的是我们试图让基于人择的模型或十四行诗模型尝试尽可能多地进行高层规划。

And then what we try to do internally is run all the models necessary to do high quality retrieval for the agent.

然后我们在内部尝试做的是运行为代理进行高质量检索所需的所有模型。

As you could see, the agent needed to understand what the rest of the code base ultimately did.

正如您所看到的，代理需要了解代码库的其余部分最终做了什么。

We actually make sure we run models to actually chunk up the entire code base and understand the code base so that obviously it would not be a good idea if we had a 100 million line code base to send that entire code base to Anthropic.

实际上，我们确保运行模型来真正对整个代码库进行分块并理解代码库，因此如果我们有 1 亿行代码库将整个代码库发送到 Anthropic，显然这不是一个好主意。

Varun Mohan: First of all, you couldn't do that.

Varun Mohan：首先，你不能这样做。

That's over 1.5 billion tokens of code.

这是超过 15 亿个代码代币。

So obviously that would be three or four orders of my actually larger than the largest context lens right now.

显然，这实际上比现在最大的上下文镜头大三到四个数量级。

Varun Mohan: But you also wouldn't want to do that from a cost and latency standpoint too.

Varun Mohan：但从成本和延迟的角度来看，您也不想这样做。

So that's one.

这就是其中之一。

And the second piece that you saw was the model is able to very quickly make edits to the software as well.

您看到的第二部分是该模型也能够非常快速地对软件进行编辑。

We have custom models that we built that are post trained on top of popular open source models that can make these edits really, really quickly to the code base.

我们构建了自定义模型，这些模型在流行的开源模型之上进行了后期训练，可以非常非常快速地对代码库进行这些编辑。

And the reason why you would want to do that is it's A, faster, and B, also that model can actually have more of the code base in context too.

你想要这样做的原因是它的 A，更快，B，而且该模型实际上也可以在上下文中拥有更多的代码库。

So it can be better at applying changes than even Anthropics model too.

因此，它甚至比 Anthropics 模型更擅长应用变化。

Varun Mohan: So I think the way we like to think about it is, our only goal is how do we build the best product possible?

Varun Mohan：所以我认为我们喜欢思考的方式是，我们唯一的目标是如何构建尽可能最好的产品？

How do we build the best product possible and how do we make the ceiling as high as possible?

我们如何打造尽可能最好的产品以及如何让上限尽可能高？

And we will go out and build models and train models wherever necessary.

我们将在必要时出去建立模型并训练模型。

But if we're not going to be good at a task and we think the open source is better or Anthropic's better, we'll go and just use the open source or Anthropic.

但是，如果我们不擅长某项任务，并且我们认为开源更好或 Anthropic 更好，我们就会直接使用开源或 Anthropic。

Lenny Rachitsky: And so the models you guys are building, those are built on open source models that people are releasing?

Lenny Rachitsky：所以你们正在构建的模型是基于人们发布的开源模型构建的？

Varun Mohan: Yeah.

瓦伦·莫汉：是的。

Interestingly, the one that does retrieval is actually completely pre-trained in-house that actually does that.

有趣的是，进行检索的人实际上是完全经过内部预先训练的，实际上可以做到这一点。

But yeah, for a lot of different pieces, it's based on open source.

但是，是的，对于很多不同的部分来说，它都是基于开源的。

Interestingly for the one that does the edits and auto-complete, that is also in-house.

有趣的是，对于进行编辑和自动完成的人来说，这也是内部的。

As you're typing, we actually do some auto-complete related stuff.

当您打字时，我们实际上会做一些与自动完成相关的事情。

I'm happy to show that, but I think a lot of users are familiar with that capability.

我很高兴向大家展示这一点，但我认为很多用户都熟悉该功能。

So I think the way we like to look at it is like, what could we be best at and we will go out and trade.

所以我认为我们喜欢看待它的方式是，我们最擅长什么，然后我们就会出去进行交易。

But if we're not going to be best at it, we should not just, for the sake of ego, go out and trade something.

但如果我们不想在这方面做到最好，我们就不应该仅仅为了自我而出去交易。

Lenny Rachitsky: This may be getting too technical, but just, is there anything interesting around what you train on?

Lenny Rachitsky：这可能太技术性了，但是，你的训练有什么有趣的地方吗？

Varun Mohan: Yeah, so one of the interesting things that we have from our users, and this is where we try to think like, "Why would we be any better?" is that, actually every hour, we get probably tens of millions of pieces of feedback from our users.

Varun Mohan：是的，这是我们从用户那里得到的有趣的事情之一，这就是我们尝试思考的地方，“为什么我们会变得更好？”事实上，我们每小时都会从用户那里收到数千万条反馈。

We get a lot of feedback on what they like and what they don't like.

我们收到了很多关于他们喜欢什么和不喜欢什么的反馈。

For something like autocomplete, we get a lot of preference data, a lot of preference data.

对于像自动完成这样的东西，我们得到很多偏好数据，很多偏好数据。

And the preference data is weird.

而且偏好数据很奇怪。

It doesn't look like data that you find on the internet.

它看起来不像您在互联网上找到的数据。

It's like data as the user is typing.

这就像用户输入时的数据。

Imagine you're typing some code in a code base, the code's going to be incomplete as you're typing it, right?

想象一下，您正在代码库中输入一些代码，当您输入这些代码时，这些代码将是不完整的，对吗？

It's not going to be in a full-fledged form.

它不会是一个成熟的形式。

It's not like it is on GitHub.

它不像 GitHub 上那样。

But we have a lot of data that looks like this.

但我们有很多数据是这样的。

Varun Mohan: So we are uniquely well-positioned to actually build a good model that can complete code even when it's in an incomplete state when the models that are out there, the frontier models have consumed very little code that looks like this.

Varun Mohan：因此，我们处于独特的有利位置，可以实际构建一个良好的模型，即使处于不完整状态，当现有模型、前沿模型消耗了很少的代码时，该模型也可以完成代码，如下所示。

So for that case we're like, "Hey, we can go out and do a much better job potentially." And we'll go out and train models on all the preference data we have.

因此，对于这种情况，我们会说，“嘿，我们可以走出去，做得更好。”我们将根据我们拥有的所有偏好数据来训练模型。

Varun Mohan: The same is kind of true on retrieval, right?

Varun Mohan：检索也是如此，对吧？

There's a way to find out, are we retrieving the right data?

有一种方法可以查明我们是否检索到了正确的数据？

Did the user accept the code change after that?

之后用户接受代码更改吗？

Was the retrieval actually a good retrieval a signal that we can get?

检索实际上是一次好的检索，是我们可以获得的信号吗？

So basically the way we like to look at it is, if something is just purely code planning, there's not a great reason why we would be the best at that.

所以基本上我们喜欢的看待它的方式是，如果某件事只是纯粹的代码规划，那么我们就没有理由成为最擅长的。

I can't come up with a coherent argument for that.

我无法为此提出一个连贯的论据。

But for something that looks more along the lines of, "Hey, here's an intermediate code base that is very gnarly and here are some changes that need to get made" and we know the evolution of the code or we've seen the evolution of code across millions of users, we feel like we can do a great job of that.

但对于看起来更像是“嘿，这是一个非常粗糙的中间代码库，这里有一些需要进行的更改”的东西，我们知道代码的演变，或者我们已经看到了数百万用户的代码演变，我们觉得我们可以做得很好。

Lenny Rachitsky: I think what's interesting about this is another differentiator/moat for companies that end up winning in this space, is you just have more and more of that data than other companies if you're ahead.

Lenny Rachitsky：我认为有趣的是，对于最终在这个领域获胜的公司来说，这是另一个差异化因素/护城河，如果你领先的话，你就会比其他公司拥有越来越多的数据。

Varun Mohan: Yeah.

瓦伦·莫汉：是的。

This is sort of why maybe at a high level we like the zero-to-one app building product space.

这就是为什么在较高层面上我们喜欢零到一的应用程序构建产品空间。

I think it's really...

我觉得这真的是...

It's a good product space.

这是一个很好的产品空间。

But ultimately I think it needs to boil down to you understanding the code, because otherwise, you're living at too high a plane where it's not clear why you would be able to be the best at that compared to everyone else.

但最终我认为这需要归结为你对代码的理解，因为否则，你生活在太高的层面上，不清楚为什么与其他人相比你能够在这方面做到最好。

It's not really clear.

还不太清楚。

Varun Mohan: It feels like it might get competitive in a way that it's not clear where you would continue to differentiate over and over with time.

Varun Mohan：感觉它可能会变得具有竞争力，但随着时间的推移，我们并不清楚你会在哪里继续保持差异化。

Lenny Rachitsky: I see.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：我明白了。

Because if they're just sitting on top of Sonnet and just doing what every other Sonnet wrapper is doing, there's not a lot of differentiation or moat.

因为如果他们只是坐在 Sonnet 之上并做其他所有 Sonnet 包装器正在做的事情，那么就没有太多的差异化或护城河。

Varun Mohan: It depends on how you do it.

Varun Mohan：这取决于你如何做。

But maybe if I was to say this, if the inputs you're consuming are just web elements, extremely high level web elements, then the interface might be high level enough that it's hard to maybe get better than maybe what the frontier models are doing just across the board.

但也许如果我要这么说，如果您使用的输入只是 Web 元素，非常高级的 Web 元素，那么界面可能已经足够高级，以至于很难比前沿模型全面所做的更好。

You are just better off just plugging in Sonnet for everything.

你最好只插入 Sonnet 来完成所有事情。

Lenny Rachitsky: Got it.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：明白了。

Awesome.

惊人的。

One thing I wanted to come back to that I wrote down that I think is really important for people to understand, you talked about how with Windsurf it's not necessarily...

我想回到我写下的一件事，我认为这对人们理解非常重要，你谈到了 Windsurf 不一定......

There's a boilerplate code base that you want to start with because it's actually...

您想要从一个样板代码库开始，因为它实际上......

Because it's not an abstracted zero-to-one app builder.

因为它不是一个抽象的零到一应用程序构建器。

It's an actual IDE you're coding in.

这是您正在使用的实际 IDE。

And you talked about how has to install dependencies, which is kind this painful thing.

你谈到了如何安装依赖项，这是一件痛苦的事情。

And the reason it has to do that is because running locally on your machine versus in the cloud, like, say, Lovable and Replit and all these guys, although I think Bolt runs in your browser in this really cool way.

它必须这样做的原因是因为在你的机器上本地运行而不是在云中运行，比如 Lovable 和 Replit 以及所有这些人，尽管我认为 Bolt 以这种非常酷的方式在你的浏览器中运行。

Lenny Rachitsky: So that's an important distinction.

Lenny Rachitsky：这是一个重要的区别。

This is like you're running this locally in your machine and has all the libraries you need to actually run it.

这就像您在计算机本地运行它，并且拥有实际运行它所需的所有库。

Varun Mohan: No, I think that's important.

瓦伦·莫汉：不，我认为这很重要。

I think we believe a lot of people sort of build software in what are called code spaces and things in a remote machine.

我认为我们相信很多人在所谓的代码空间和远程机器中构建软件。

I just think it's that a lot of developers like building locally for what you said.

我只是认为很多开发人员喜欢按照你所说的在本地进行构建。

Like if you're doing things that are more than just full stack applications, you might have dependencies on your machine that are just system dependencies that are just gnarly to install.

就像如果您正在做的事情不仅仅是全栈应用程序一样，您的机器上可能有一些依赖项，这些依赖项只是安装起来很困难的系统依赖项。

Let's imagine you're building a GPU-based application and the Nvidia drivers, they're necessary.

假设您正在构建一个基于 GPU 的应用程序，并且 Nvidia 驱动程序是必需的。

You just want to give people the flexibility to build where they can build.

您只想让人们能够灵活地在他们可以建造的地方建造。

And I think the IDE and building locally has been a thing that people have done for decades, so probably it's not going to go away in the next couple of years.

我认为 IDE 和本地构建已经是人们几十年来所做的事情，所以它可能不会在未来几年内消失。

Lenny Rachitsky: I love that your sales folks now are running local host servers.

Lenny Rachitsky：我喜欢你们的销售人员现在运行本地主机服务器。

Varun Mohan: Well, with the browser previews, it's easier, right?

Varun Mohan：嗯，有了浏览器预览，就更容易了，对吧？

You kind of just open it up on the side.

你只需从侧面打开它即可。

Lenny Rachitsky: Yeah.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：是的。

Yeah.

是的。

Oh my god.

我的天啊。

Okay.

好的。

I have a few more questions just about how you think and operate at Codeium.

我还有几个关于您在 Codeium 的想法和运作方式的问题。

So you guys are kind of at the forefront of how product teams are going to operate.

所以你们在产品团队如何运作方面处于最前沿。

You're seeing the future every day.

你每天都在看到未来。

And so I'm curious if there's ways you guys have structured your teams, engineers, product design that might be different from how other companies are doing it or have tried stuff that has worked really well or tried stuff that's a huge disaster?

所以我很好奇，你们的团队、工程师和产品设计的结构是否与其他公司的做法不同，或者尝试过效果很好的东西，或者尝试过带来巨大灾难的东西？

Varun Mohan: One interesting decision that we kind of have for core engineering is that we don't have pure product managers for the core engineering side of the company.

Varun Mohan：我们对于核心工程的一个有趣的决定是，我们没有专门负责公司核心工程方面的产品经理。

And by the way, that's purely because we build for developers and our product is built by developers.

顺便说一句，这纯粹是因为我们是为开发人员构建的，而我们的产品是由开发人员构建的。

So I think the intuition from our own developers is hopefully valuable.

所以我认为我们自己的开发人员的直觉是有价值的。

If not, we might be hiring the wrong type of people.

如果不是，我们可能会雇用错误类型的人员。

So I think our developers are, in some sense, flexing to be more product conventional product managers.

所以我认为，从某种意义上说，我们的开发人员正在努力成为更传统的产品经理。

Varun Mohan: Now on the other hand, if we were building something that looked more like Uber or the persona was very different and we didn't ourselves understand it, I think the organization wouldn't look the way it looks.

Varun Mohan：另一方面，如果我们正在构建看起来更像 Uber 的东西，或者角色非常不同，而我们自己并不理解它，我认为该组织不会看起来像它看起来的样子。

Varun Mohan: For the enterprise side of the company, because we do work with a lot of large enterprises where the requirements are not something that our engineers would automatically understand, I don't think our engineers wake up and they're like, "We need FedRAMP." This is probably something that a lot of customers come to us with and tell us.

Varun Mohan：对于公司的企业方面，因为我们确实与许多大型企业合作，但我们的工程师不会自动理解这些企业的需求，所以我认为我们的工程师醒来后不会说“我们需要 FedRAMP”。这可能是很多客户来找我们并告诉我们的。

We have people that flex in this product strategy role that understand what the customer wants and understands the technical capabilities that we have to best build a product that would help them at scale.

我们的员工能够灵活地扮演这一产品战略角色，他们了解客户的需求，也了解我们必须具备的技术能力，才能最好地构建能够大规模帮助他们的产品。

Varun Mohan: So I think we have an interesting organization in this regard, but mostly I would say because we are a developer-based product, I would say that's true.

Varun Mohan：所以我认为我们在这方面有一个有趣的组织，但主要是因为我们是基于开发人员的产品，我认为这是事实。

Varun Mohan: And then also kind of like what you said for the engineering team itself, the team structure is, it's fairly flat.

Varun Mohan：就像您所说的工程团队本身一样，团队结构相当扁平。

We try to go with two pizza teams, teams that are fairly small just because I think the problem is when a team gets too big, the person leading the team is no longer able to get in the weeds of the technology itself.

我们尝试与两个披萨团队合作，这两个团队规模相当小，因为我认为问题是当团队变得太大时，领导团队的人不再能够涉足技术本身的杂草。

And I think in a space that's moving this quickly, I think it's dangerous to have leaders that don't understand the technology deeply and are not building.

我认为在一个发展如此迅速的领域，领导者不深入了解技术并且不进行建设是危险的。

It's very, very dangerous because there's too much armchair quarterbacking.

这是非常非常危险的，因为有太多纸上谈兵的四分卫。

And so I think that's maybe one other decision we made.

所以我认为这可能是我们做出的另一项决定。

Varun Mohan: And then teams are very, very flexible.

Varun Mohan：团队非常非常灵活。

So if we decide something is a new priority, we're very quick to change the way a team looks.

因此，如果我们决定某件事是新的优先事项，我们会很快改变团队的外观。

And it's very centrally planned in this regard.

在这方面它是非常集中计划的。

Lenny Rachitsky: The two pizza team concept, I saw a tweet long ago where someone from India, was like, there's always talk about two pizza teams, but pizzas in India are much smaller.

Lenny Rachitsky：两个披萨团队的概念，我很久以前看到一条推文，来自印度的一个人说，总是在谈论两个披萨团队，但印度的披萨要小得多。

And so the teams end up being smaller and they're like, "Why can't we build as much of these teams in the US?"

因此，团队最终会变得更小，他们会想，“为什么我们不能在美国建立尽可能多的团队呢？”

Lenny Rachitsky: Okay.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：好的。

So how many PMs do you have?

那么你们有多少位 PM？

So you said you have 150 employees, something like that?

你说你有 150 名员工，是这样的吗？

Varun Mohan: Yeah.

瓦伦·莫汉：是的。

So in terms of the product strategy function, we have three people in that role right now.

因此，就产品战略职能而言，我们现在有三个人担任该职位。

Lenny Rachitsky: I see.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：我明白了。

So it's like product...

所以这就像产品...

They're in their titles is product strategy, not necessarily product management?

他们的标题是产品策略，不一定是产品管理？

Lenny Rachitsky: Interesting.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：有趣。

And then 50 engineers, you said 80-ish sales folks?

然后是 50 名工程师，你说的是 80 名左右的销售人员？

Varun Mohan: Yes, that's right.

瓦伦·莫汉：是的，没错。

And then obviously we have functions like recruiting parts of G&A, like finance.

显然，我们有招聘 G&A 部分的职能，比如财务部门。

We have marketing at the company.

我们公司有营销。

So some other functions internally as well.

所以内部还有一些其他功能。

Lenny Rachitsky: It's interesting.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：这很有趣。

And this is something that you hear all the time with companies like Dario for example, from Anthropic talking about how 90% of code is going to be written by AI.

你经常会在 Dario 这样的公司听到这样的话，例如 Anthropic 谈论 90% 的代码将如何由人工智能编写。

But all at the same time, all you guys are hiring engineers like crazy.

但与此同时，你们所有人都在疯狂地招聘工程师。

Lenny Rachitsky: It's that contradictory, will there be an inflection point of like, "All right.

Lenny Rachitsky：这很矛盾，会不会有一个拐点，比如“好吧。

Now we don't need them anymore."

现在我们不再需要它们了。”

Varun Mohan: I think it really comes down to, do you get incremental value by adding more engineers internally?

Varun Mohan：我认为这实际上可以归结为，你是否可以通过在内部增加更多工程师来获得增量价值？

I'm going to take...

我要带...

First of all, maybe just to set the record straight, if AI is writing over 90% of the code, that doesn't mean engineers are 10X as productive.

首先，也许只是澄清一下，如果 AI 编写了超过 90% 的代码，这并不意味着工程师的生产力提高了 10 倍。

Engineers spend more time than just writing code.

工程师花费的时间不仅仅是编写代码。

The review code, test code, debug code, design code, deploy code, right?

审查代码、测试代码、调试代码、设计代码、部署代码，对吧？

Navigate code.

导航代码。

There's probably a lot of different things that engineers do.

工程师可能会做很多不同的事情。

There's this one famous law in parallel computing, it's called Amdahl's Law.

并行计算中有一条著名的定律，叫做阿姆达尔定律。

I don't know if you've heard about it.

我不知道你是否听说过。

But it basically says if you have a graph of tasks and you have this critical path and you take any one task and parallelize it a ton, which is make it almost take zero amount of time, there's still a limit of the amount of how much faster it made the whole process go.

但它基本上说，如果你有一个任务图，并且有这条关键路径，并且你接受任何一个任务并将其并行化大量，这使得它几乎花费零时间，但它使整个过程加快多少仍然是有限的。

Varun Mohan: So maybe put simply, let's say you have 100 units of time and only 30 units of time is being spent writing software and I took the 30 and made it three, I only took the 100 and made it 73.

Varun Mohan：所以也许简单地说，假设你有 100 个单位的时间，但只有 30 个单位的时间用于编写软件，我拿了 30 个单位，把它变成了 3 个，我只拿了 100 个单位，把它变成了 73 个。

It's only a 27% improvement in the grand scheme of things.

总体而言，这仅提高了 27%。

Varun Mohan: So I think look, we are definitely seeing over 30, maybe close to 40% productivity improvements.

Varun Mohan：所以我认为，我们肯定会看到超过 30%，甚至接近 40% 的生产力提高。

But I think for the vision that we're solving for, even if I were to say the company in the long tail had 200 engineers, it'd probably be too low still at that point.

但我认为，对于我们正在解决的愿景，即使我说长尾公司有 200 名工程师，但在这一点上可能仍然太低。

So the question is, how much more productivity do you get per person?

所以问题是，每人的生产力提高了多少？

Actually, maybe just to even say one of those thing for some of these large companies, let's say you took the CIO of a company like JPMorgan Chase, right?

事实上，也许只是为了对其中一些大公司说一件事，假设你担任了像摩根大通这样的公司的首席信息官，对吗？

Her budget on software every year is $17 billion and there's over 50,000 engineers inside the company and you told her, "Hey, each of these engineers are now able to produce more technology." That's effectively what you've done, right?

她每年的软件预算是 170 亿美元，公司内部有超过 50,000 名工程师，你告诉她，“嘿，这些工程师现在每个都能够开发出更多的技术。”这实际上就是你所做的，对吧？

The right calculus that JPMorgan Chase or any of these companies will make is the ROI of building technology has actually gone up.

摩根大通或任何这些公司将做出的正确计算是，建筑技术的投资回报率实际上已经上升。

So the opportunity cost of not investing more into technology has gone up, which means that you should just invest even more.

因此，不加大技术投资的机会成本已经上升，这意味着你应该加大投资。

And maybe in the short term you have even more engineers, right?

也许在短期内你会有更多的工程师，对吧？

Varun Mohan: Now, that's not true across the board.

Varun Mohan：现在看来，情况并非如此。

There are some companies that are happy with the amount of technology they're building and there's a ceiling on the amount of technology they want to build.

有些公司对他们正在构建的技术数量感到满意，但他们想要构建的技术数量是有上限的。

But for companies that actually have a very high technology ceiling, this doesn't mean you stop.

但对于实际上拥有很高技术天花板的公司来说，这并不意味着你就停下来。

This actually means you hire more.

这实际上意味着您雇用更多人。

Lenny Rachitsky: This is a great bull case for engineers.

Lenny Rachitsky：这对工程师来说是一个很好的牛市。

I feel like the canary in the coal mine for the engineering profession is when companies like yours slow down on hiring engineers.

我觉得对于工程行业来说，就像煤矿里的金丝雀一样，像你们这样的公司放缓了工程师的招聘速度。

Varun Mohan: .

瓦伦·莫汉：。

It seems like Anthropic is also hiring a lot to get it done.

看来 Anthropic 也正在招聘很多人来完成这项工作。

Lenny Rachitsky: Yeah.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：是的。

Everyone is.

每个人都是。

So I think that's really promising.

所以我认为这确实很有希望。

I think if you're in college still, makes sense to get into engineering at this point.

我认为如果你还在上大学，那么此时进入工程学是有意义的。

Lenny Rachitsky: Okay.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：好的。

Let me ask you this question as kind of a final question maybe.

让我问你这个问题也许是最后一个问题。

What's maybe the most counterintuitive thing you've learned about building AI products, building Windsurf and just being in a space?

关于构建人工智能产品、构建 Windsurf 以及在太空中，您学到的最违反直觉的事情可能是什么？

Varun Mohan: I think one of the weird things is online, everyone is very excited about the short-term wins that we are making, right?

Varun Mohan：我认为奇怪的事情之一是在线，每个人都对我们正在取得的短期胜利感到非常兴奋，对吧？

Like what we're putting out maybe weekly.

就像我们每周发布的内容一样。

We do these waves every couple of weeks.

我们每两周进行一次这些波浪。

But actually a lot of the bets we're making inside the company are for things that are not three, four weeks, maybe three, six months, nine months away.

但实际上，我们在公司内部所做的很多押注都不是三、四个星期，甚至三、六个月、九个月后的事情。

That's what we're working on internally.

这就是我们内部正在努力的事情。

Because I think this is kind of, Lenny, what I was mentioning to you before.

因为我认为这就是我之前向你提到过的，莱尼。

One of the goals that I tell everyone at our company is we should be cannibalizing the existing state of our product every six to 12 months.

我告诉公司每个人的目标之一是，我们应该每 6 到 12 个月就调整一次产品的现有状态。

Every six to 12 months, it should make our existing product look silly.

每六到十二个月，我们现有的产品就会显得很愚蠢。

It should almost make the form factor of our existing product look dumb.

它几乎会让我们现有产品的外形看起来很愚蠢。

Varun Mohan: So there's this weird tension where you want to have a product in market and you want to incrementally iterate and listen to users and keep making it better and better.

Varun Mohan：因此，存在着一种奇怪的紧张关系，您希望将产品推向市场，并且希望逐步迭代并倾听用户的意见，并不断使其变得越来越好。

But I would say we were the first identical IDE product out there.

但我想说我们是第一个相同的 IDE 产品。

That's what we landed with.

这就是我们着陆的结果。

And I think the value of that is going to depreciate very quickly unless we continue to re-prove ourselves.

我认为除非我们继续重新证明自己，否则它的价值将会很快贬值。

And we will need to re-prove ourselves in ways in which our users are not even asking.

我们需要以用户甚至不问的方式重新证明自己。

So there's this tension here, where incremental feels very safe, right?

所以这里存在着一种紧张感，增量感觉非常安全，对吗？

Add this one more button.

再添加一个按钮。

Users say, "Hey, I would like to be able to have this drop down to do X." But that is not the reason why we're going to win.

用户说：“嘿，我希望能够通过这个下拉菜单来执行 X 操作。”但这并不是我们获胜的原因。

That's almost table sticks.

那几乎就是桌棍了。

Yeah, we'll decide to do some of these.

是的，我们会决定做其中一些。

We might not decide to do a lot of these things.

我们可能不会决定做很多这样的事情。

But it's these longer term efforts inside the company that almost disrupt the existing product that are ultimately the reason why we're going to succeed.

但正是公司内部的这些长期努力几乎颠覆了现有产品，这才是我们最终取得成功的原因。

Varun Mohan: It's this weird tension that you need to have in your head of, you can't also not listen to your users at all because they're the reason you exist.

Varun Mohan：你需要在头脑中保持这种奇怪的紧张感，你也不能完全不听取用户的意见，因为他们是你存在的原因。

Lenny Rachitsky: This reminds me of a recent podcast guest.

Lenny Rachitsky：这让我想起最近的一位播客嘉宾。

We had Gara from captions on the podcast and he told us that he has two roadmaps.

我们从播客的字幕中找到了加拉，他告诉我们他有两个路线图。

They have two roadmaps at the company.

他们在公司有两个路线图。

They have the real roadmap, like the typical roadmap based on feature requests and user feedback and data and things like that.

他们有真正的路线图，比如基于功能请求、用户反馈和数据等的典型路线图。

And then they have the secret roadmap, which is completely not informed by users or data/ it's just them making bets on where they think the world is going.

然后他们就有了秘密路线图，该路线图完全不由用户或数据告知/只是他们对他们认为世界的发展方向进行押注。

Lenny Rachitsky: And I love that he calls it the secret roadmap just to make it very mysterious and-

Lenny Rachitsky：我喜欢他称之为秘密路线图，只是为了让它变得非常神秘，而且-

Varun Mohan: That's smarts.

瓦伦·莫汉：这就是智慧。

That's very smart.

这非常聪明。

Lenny Rachitsky: Okay.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：好的。

I have one more question.

我还有一个问题。

I apologize.

我道歉。

What's one thing that you wish he had known before starting Codeium?

您希望他在创办 Codeium 之前就知道哪一件事？

Varun Mohan: Honestly, I wish I had...

瓦伦·莫汉：老实说，我希望我有……

Maybe humility is the wrong term, but this idea of just being okay with being wrong faster.

也许“谦逊”这个词是错误的，但这种想法就是更快地接受错误。

I always think about things on when we make decisions.

当我们做决定时，我总是会考虑一些事情。

Me and my co-founder, we always talk about it.

我和我的联合创始人，我们总是谈论它。

We're almost like, "Hey, I wish we had made the decision to do this a couple months earlier." We always talk about this.

我们几乎会说，“嘿，我希望我们早几个月就做出了这样做的决定。”我们总是谈论这个。

And the weird thing is outside looking and everyone's like, "Wow, actually the decision was made at the right time." But in my head I'm always banging my head being like, "What if we had made it a couple months earlier?" I think part of that is I waxed poetically about like, "Oh, you need to be irrationally optimistic and uncompromisingly realistic." But it's very hard to do this in practice because you drink your own Kool-Aid too.

奇怪的是，从外面看，每个人都会说，“哇，实际上这个决定是在正确的时间做出的。”但在我的脑海里，我总是敲着头想，“如果我们早几个月就成功了怎么办？”我认为其中一部分原因是我诗意地描述道，“哦，你需要非理性的乐观和不妥协的现实。”但在实践中很难做到这一点，因为你也喝自己的酷爱饮料。

Because if you're not drinking your own, you won't get up out of bed.

因为如果你不自己喝，你就起不来。

The answer is already solved.

答案已经解决了。

It's not actually any of these startups.

它实际上不是这些初创公司中的任何一个。

The answer is Microsoft is going to be the winner in any software category.

答案是微软将成为任何软件类别的赢家。

Isn't that the answer?

这不是答案吗？

Just because of distribution, resources and capital, they're going to commoditize every space.

仅仅因为分销、资源和资本，他们就会将每个空间商品化。

Varun Mohan: So I think in some ways this amount of just understanding that, hey, re-evaluate your hypotheses and get into an uncomfortable space way more frequently is something I need to remind myself even to this day.

瓦伦·莫汉（Varun Mohan）：所以我认为，在某些方面，即使是今天，我也需要提醒自己，重新评估你的假设并更频繁地进入一个不舒服的空间。

And probably something that I didn't know coming in and starting the company.

也许还有一些我在加入并创办公司时不知道的事情。

We started the company at peak zero time.

我们在零高峰时期创办了公司。

At that time, probably everything seemed like it was going to moon.

那时，大概一切都像是要登月了。

And there was probably a lot of irrational confidence, I would say, that we shouldn't have had.

我想说，可能存在很多我们不应该拥有的非理性信心。

Lenny Rachitsky: Varun, we covered so much ground.

Lenny Rachitsky：Varun，我们涵盖了很多领域。

What an incredible conversation.

多么令人难以置信的谈话啊。

I learned so much just sitting here listening and asking you questions.

我坐在这里听并问你问题就学到了很多东西。

Is there anything else that you wanted to share I leave listeners with, any last piece of nuggets or wisdom before I let you go?

在我让你离开之前，你还有什么想与听众分享的吗？最后的金块或智慧吗？

Varun Mohan: To be honest, I could give predictions about the space.

Varun Mohan：说实话，我可以对这个空间做出预测。

Probably most of them are going to be wrong.

也许他们中的大多数人都会错。

I think the best thing to do is just get your hands dirty with all of these products.

我认为最好的办法就是亲自接触所有这些产品。

And I think one of the most obvious things that's going to happen is, in the next year, there will be a tremendous amount of alpha for anyone that is able to take maximum advantage of these tools.

我认为将要发生的最明显的事情之一是，明年，对于任何能够最大限度地利用这些工具的人来说，都会有大量的阿尔法。

Just imagine how many of your coworkers just don't even know the existence of these tools, don't know what they can do and how much less productive they will be.

想象一下，您有多少同事甚至不知道这些工具的存在，不知道它们能做什么，也不知道它们的工作效率会降低多少。

And I would just say get your hands as dirty as possible, as quickly as possible.

我只想说，尽可能快地把手弄脏。

Lenny Rachitsky: And when you say get your hands dirty, basically it's like download Windsurf, start coding.

Lenny Rachitsky：当你说“动手”时，基本上就像下载 Windsurf，开始编码一样。

Ask it to build things for you.

要求它为你构建东西。

Varun Mohan: Yeah, build apps.

Varun Mohan：是的，构建应用程序。

Build apps.

构建应用程序。

Start using it for maybe even making mocks, modifying your existing code base.

开始使用它甚至可以进行模拟，修改现有的代码库。

There's probably ways in which you could be a force multiplier to your organization and ways in which they never even anticipated, right?

也许有一些方法可以让您成为组织的力量倍增器，而有些方法是他们从未预料到的，对吗？

Imagine if you were a product manager that could actually very quickly make edits to the code base and just start pushing changes yourself.

想象一下，如果您是一名产品经理，实际上可以非常快速地编辑代码库，然后自己开始推送更改。

You probably get a tremendous amount of respect from your own engineering peers.

您可能会得到您自己的工程同行的极大尊重。

You could probably get way more done because of that.

因此，您可能可以完成更多工作。

I feel like there's no sort of ceiling at that point.

我觉得到那时就没有上限了。

Lenny Rachitsky: I think this is such an underestimated point you're making here.

Lenny Rachitsky：我认为你在这里提出的观点被低估了。

There's apps that can build things from scratch and then there's apps like this that can edit your existing code base if you're a PM at...

有些应用程序可以从头开始构建东西，如果您是...的 PM，则有类似的应用程序可以编辑您现有的代码库。

What's the largest company you work with, people-wise?

从人员角度来看，您合作过的最大的公司是哪家？

Varun Mohan: Publicly, let's just say JPMorgan Chase.

Varun Mohan：公开地说，我们就说摩根大通吧。

Varun Mohan: They have over 50,000 developers.

Varun Mohan：他们拥有超过 50,000 名开发人员。

Lenny Rachitsky: Okay.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：好的。

So you could be a PM at JPMorgan Chase and be like, "I have a problem I need to solve.

所以，你可能是摩根大通的一名产品经理，你会说：“我有一个问题需要解决。

I want to move this metric.

我想移动这个指标。

I want to change the step in the signup flow." You just open up Windsurf and tell it to do the thing you want.

我想更改注册流程中的步骤。”您只需打开 Windsurf 并告诉它做您想做的事情。

And then can you push straight to GitHub and do a-

然后你可以直接推送到 GitHub 并执行-

Varun Mohan: Yeah.

瓦伦·莫汉：是的。

Actually, you could do that too.

事实上，你也可以这样做。

Varun Mohan: Yeah, it could make a PR for you.

Varun Mohan：是的，它可以为你做公关。

Lenny Rachitsky: Oh, my God.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：哦，天哪。

This is insane.

这太疯狂了。

Folks, future is out of control.

朋友们，未来已经失控了。

Okay.

好的。

Man, that was such an important point at the end there because I think people may not realize this.

伙计，最后这一点非常重要，因为我认为人们可能没有意识到这一点。

They see all these other apps, they're like, "Oh, , prototypes," but this is legitimately something a PM can actually do work with.

他们看到所有这些其他应用程序，他们会说，“哦，原型，”但这确实是产品经理可以实际使用的东西。

Varun Mohan: Yeah.

瓦伦·莫汉：是的。

When you think about the people, at least that, I don't know, Lenny, who you respect the most, they're the people that somehow, despite their title, their level of agency and just output just all the way down to the weeds to the highest level strategy is just perfection, right?

当你想到这些人时，至少，我不知道，莱尼，你最尊敬的人，他们是这样的人，不管他们的头衔、他们的代理水平和只是输出，从杂草到最高层的战略，都是完美的，对吧？

They know when to go all the way down.

他们知道什么时候该一路走下去。

And I think sometimes you see people that talk about roles and they irrationally feel like, "Oh, because I'm this role, I'm not allowed to touch this." Well now everything's open season, right?

我想有时候你会看到人们谈论角色，他们会不合理地觉得，“哦，因为我就是这个角色，所以我不被允许碰这个。”好吧，现在一切都在开放季节，对吧？

And I think this is an opportunity to almost go all the way down to the weeds and all the way up to the top and just be effective on every level.

我认为这是一个机会，几乎可以一直深入到高层，并在各个层面上发挥作用。

Lenny Rachitsky: Unbelievable.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：难以置信。

All right.

好的。

Well with that, we'll leave folks.

好吧，我们就离开人们了。

Varun, thank you so much for being here.

瓦伦，非常感谢你来到这里。

Lenny Rachitsky: What an incredible conversation.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：真是一次令人难以置信的谈话。

Thanks, Varun.

谢谢，瓦伦。

Bye everyone.

再见大家。

Lenny Rachitsky: Thank you so much for listening.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：非常感谢您的聆听。

If you found this valuable, you can subscribe to the show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your favorite podcast app.

如果您发现这很有价值，您可以在 Apple Podcasts、Spotify 或您最喜欢的播客应用程序上订阅该节目。

Also, please consider giving us a rating or leaving a review as that really helps other listeners find the podcast.

另外，请考虑给我们评分或留下评论，因为这确实有助于其他听众找到播客。

You can find all past episodes or learn more about the show at lennyspodcast.com.

您可以在 lennyspodcast.com 上找到所有过去的剧集或了解有关该节目的更多信息。

See you in the next episode.

下一集见。