No. 37·中文精读

7.5亿Excel用户对3000万程序员,Wordware创始人赌“文字工匠”时代

From Software Engineers to AI Word Artisans: Filip Kozera of Wordware

Wordware 创始人谈如何借鉴 Excel 的普及路径,用自然语言与结构化工具让非程序员构建 AI 应用。

节目音频00:00 / 43:04
中文精读由 AI 基于原始访谈改写,非官方翻译,可能存在偏差或错误;表述以原节目为准。

全世界有3000万软件工程师,Excel的活跃用户有7.5亿。这两个数字之间25倍的差距,就是Filip Kozera看到的生意。

Kozera是Wordware的联合创始人,研究出身,早年做LSTM,也就是Transformer架构的前身,第一家公司尝试用GPT-2和BERT做全天候听觉记忆设备。最近他上了红杉资本的播客Training Data,讲他现在做的事:一个用英语写程序的编辑器。他和联创Robert从2023年3月就开始公开写怎么搭agent,算是这个领域最早的一批实践者。他的类比很直接,Excel在八十年代把数据分析从工程师手里解放出来,Wordware想对AI做同一件事。

这一集的判断一个接一个:英语会成为LLM的汇编语言,Transformer是新的晶体管,DeepSeek只是一阵热闹,预训练远没撞墙。下面把干货拆开。

英语是新汇编语言,但前提是你有话可说

2023年,前特斯拉AI总监、OpenAI创始成员Andrej Karpathy发过一条流传很广的推文:最热门的新编程语言是英语。主持人Sonya Huang拿这句话开场,问Kozera怎么看。

他的回应比原推文更冷静一步。英语之于LLM,相当于汇编语言之于计算机,你确实能用它指挥机器,但依然要讲结构,依然要用上循环、条件判断这些老编程概念,才能让模型真正按你的意图干活。

他还补了一句大实话:就算人人都能用英语编程,也未必人人写得出东西,因为有些人本来就没那么多想说的。

这句话背后是他押上的十年。把结构带进人机协作,是他决定投入下一个十年的问题。难点在于,编程僵硬、确定,模型输出天生模糊,把这两样嫁接在一起,选对交互方式和抽象层级,让人用起来足够简单又能干复杂的事,是整件事最硬的部分。

别叫他no-code,他听了会不自在

采访里有个细节很有意思。主持人把Wordware归进no-code赛道,Kozera当场承认,听到这个称呼他心里会咯噔一下。

他的理由有三层。第一,Wordware的客户至今没人撞到能力天花板,工具里留了代码执行块这个逃生舱,纯自然语言搞不定的环节随时可以补代码。第二,它的文档结构跟代码高度同构,有循环,有条件语句,有流程调用流程,后者其实就是函数调用。第三,也是他反复强调的定位:未来的“文字工匠”依然在编程,只是他们用极其精确的方式组织英语,让提示词各就各位。

产品本身不复杂。一个类似IDE的编辑器,用自然语言加编程结构搭agent。Kozera特意划清界限,Wordware不做代码生成,直接做agent。他给agent下的定义也值得记一笔:agent依然是软件,接输入、给输出,只是中间有些环节是模糊的。模糊的环节用自然语言写,确定的环节用编程结构框住。搭好的东西有三个出口:部署成API,给产品或那个AI按钮供血;跑成AI原生的工作流,大脑比几段提示词串起来复杂得多;发布到他们在建的“AI界的GitHub”,让别人fork你的成果,站在彼此的肩膀上。

至于什么人在用,他给的画像是“分析型创作者”,偏技术,职位不低,比如CEO和技术PM。Instacart的一位创始人Max,花了四天在Wordware里打磨自己的想法,省下的是组建一个团队的功夫。产品接下来会往画布方向走,用户描述想法,用o3生成流程初稿,细粒度的编辑能力照样保留。

使用上有个扎心的现实。前两年冒出一批评测软件公司,Kozera跟客户聊下来发现,大部分公司手里根本没有能拿来做评测的数据集,评测这条路第一步就卡住了。他的解法朴素:先在编辑器里快速点上一百次,建立手感。现阶段最重要的能力,是对什么有效、什么无效长出直觉。直觉的前提是想清楚目标,这件事比听起来难,他提到有位大客户上门就问,你们能帮我预测天气吗。他哭笑不得,你得先有一份文档,写清要做什么,输入是什么,中间怎么处理,输出长什么样。有客户发明了一个说法:用Wordware之后,创造力的速度变快了。人是边撞上模型的边界边搞明白自己要什么的,比如发现Gemini能吞超大PDF,Claude能吞小一点的,GPT-4干脆读不了PDF。工具逼着人把思路结构化。

品味,人类的最后堡垒

Kozera举了一个假想的例子。如果让George Lucas拿着GPT-7做《星球大战》,他只丢两句“拍一部关于星系战争的电影”,模型自己就能跑起来,但这恰恰是他不想要的。人真正想传递的是创作意图和品味,两句话给不了。

他相信品味比很多人想的更值钱。写一封好邮件靠品味,给公司团建选一家对的餐厅也靠品味,他招行政助理时考察的就是这个人做事有没有主见。有人说将来没人有工作,他完全不同意,品味和创造力会是人类最后的堡垒。

机器能不能学会品味?他的回答是能,但那无关紧要。他引用了一项研究:把人放进核磁共振仪,看两幅AI生成的画,并被告知其中一幅出自人类艺术家。当受试者相信作品背后有人的意图时,大脑激活的区域完全不同。他用Suno写歌打比方,随手生成一首歌发给朋友,对方觉得还行;如果那首歌写的是你们一起去霞慕尼滑雪的糗事,笑点和意图都埋在里面,朋友的大脑会给出完全另一种体验。

意图加品味,也是他对下一个十亿开发者的定义。他连头衔都想好了,半开玩笑说希望叫“Wordware工程师”,备选是“文字工匠”。这十亿人需要两样东西:意图,即要发生什么;品味,即想怎么做。剩下的活,会有上千个“知识工人”在底下执行,每个人的体感都像一家大公司的CEO。

说回今天的现实,他给AI的定位是:一个刚毕业的实习生。你得像给实习生布置工作那样,写清楚岗位名称,给它哪些文档和输入,数据源是哪些,期望的输出长什么样。两个坑要特别小心。数据源必须是你信得过的,一句“去网上搜”经常搜回你完全不认同的东西,实习生在错误的地基上盖楼,后面全塌。另外,有些事你就是不敢交给实习生,比如替你回全收件箱的一千封邮件,AI现在也一样。判断标准很简单,凡是能在一页纸上给实习生讲清楚的工作,今天都可以交给AI。

十年后的工作长什么样?他观察身边人的方法是问对方每天用什么软件,开会、邮件、PPT、Excel还是代码,因为岗位描述往往虚,软件才是工作的实体。他想象中的形态接近一份文档:你像CEO一样在画布上写下战略和意图,Wordware的copilot帮你把思路结构化,底下成百上千个agent执行。他拿做鞋举例,十年后最好的鞋品牌,卖的是注入了品味和意图的奢侈品,制造这些环节会自动发生,人保留的是跟其他CEO谈合作、判断对方意图、注入自己审美的工作。人类不想交出去的,是控制权。

至于十亿人里有多少人真愿意干活,他自己也打了个问号。资源不再稀缺的世界里,多数人可能不想工作,但每个时代都会有“亿万富翁”的等价物,比的是影响力、品味,以及你能不能把自己的资源翻倍放大。主持人补了一句,创造的冲动是刻在人类基因里的,他点头,说他相信人。

Lovable做壳,Wordware做心脏

主持人问,Wordware到底服务效率,还是服务创造。Kozera的回答是,现阶段主打生产力,Wordware是产品的“AI心脏”。他们没碰生成式界面,也明确说Lovable很出色,甚至有些客户的项目就是拿Lovable给Wordware的AI心脏包一层壳。

两家公司都喊出“下一个十亿开发者”,分歧在开发者的定义。Lovable眼里的开发,接近今天的SaaS,数据库加仪表盘,他们把界面和数据库一起抓,解锁了大批用例,很多人会基于Lovable做出出色的垂直SaaS。Kozera赌的是另一头:应用的三件套里,界面、应用逻辑、数据库,他只要把应用逻辑,也就是那个推理引擎,做到极致。

更深一层的判断是数据。过去的数据库是离散的、结构化的,现在的LLM能直接消化非结构化的模糊数据,你的日常所见、你公司的文档,都成了可计算的“数据库”。他原话的大意是,SaaS还是那个SaaS,只是底下的数据库变模糊了,在这上面干活才是真正让人兴奋的部分。

2D画布装不下套娃式的反思循环

聊到界面,Kozera的观点几乎是在跟行业唱反调。眼下做agent的工具,主流形态是2D画布加积木块。他和Robert搭agent搭了两年,体会是模型越强,提示越难写,中间还出现过“提示词将死”的风潮,他们明确反对,后来行业也转了回来。而一旦想在反思循环里再套一个反思循环,2D画布的维度就不够用了。

他的类比是,把整个Uber应用塞进一张2D画布,结果只能是满屏乱线。代码的伟大之处,恰恰在于能表达极其复杂的系统,同时让人看得懂、改得动。所以Wordware选了文档加IDE的形态。

他把整个行业放在一条时间线上:Transformer是新的晶体管,模型是新的大型机。从大型机到几十亿人用上,中间隔着两次跳跃,第一次是苹果带来的桌面GUI,第二次是移动。现在的聊天界面,只是把模型的参数和逻辑裸露出来,还没人找到更好的答案,但他不信聊天就是终点,电影《她》里那种全程语音的交互也不行,语音表达复杂知识工作的效率太低。

他们的领投投资人说过一句狠话,Kozera很认同:

两句话,刚好够模型把自己吊死。

丢两句描述就让模型自己跑,跑出来的东西往往跟你想要的完全两样,这也是Lovable和Devin们共同的难题。他理想中的界面能跨抽象层缩放:先写一句话跑起来,看哪里不对劲,放大到四句话,看清这一步的输入、处理和输出,继续往下钻,直到五秒钟一个镜头的精度。至于agent该干什么,他拿打车举例:你想让agent判断乘客从哪上车、去哪、接受什么样的价格,这套逻辑在Wordware上搭得出来,只是不用再搭Uber那套界面。你大概不会想通过聊天机器人叫车,点两下屏幕更舒服,但日历里有个行程,系统自动把Waymo订好、订对时间,那就是agent该干的事。

闪电轮:DeepSeek只是一阵热闹

这期节目的闪电轮火力全开,几乎每个回答都带火药味。

谈DeepSeek,他的判断是,大家冲着戏剧性一拥而上,训练便宜不代表之前那些试错没花钱,他甚至猜测对方在实验阶段用上了最好的英伟达卡。他的结论是,半年后没人会记得这件事,无非是多几个开源模型。模型本身没那么重要,怎么用好当下最强的模型才重要。

谈预训练撞墙,Ilya等人说过类似的话,他直接反对。模型智能与训练资源呈对数关系,但智能翻倍带来的产出远超翻倍,聪明两倍的人,干活可能是十倍。

谈明年谁家模型最强,他的答案是不知道。OpenAI惯于过度承诺,他刚在YC的AI活动上听过Sam Altman讲o3,画得很美,但他保留了怀疑。他喜欢Anthropic,可刚发布的Gemini 2.0 Pro能一次吞下六千页PDF,让他印象最深。他补了一句,这个领域高度碎片化,用户毫无忠诚度。

日常在用的应用,他报了三个:剪视频用Descript,记会议用Granola,模型里最服Gemini 2.0 Pro。他还惦记着一个品类,有完整个人上下文的AI,当年他第一家公司做的就是用GPT-2和BERT做全天候听觉记忆,他下单Limitless的吊坠已经一年半,至今没收到货。至于谁能做成这件事,他押苹果的AR眼镜,理由有二,苹果有隐私的品牌资产,而且眼镜没电了,戴上五千美元的硬件依然体面。

他给AI从业者的学习清单只有两样:吴恩达的DeepLearning.AI,从底层讲到实操;还有YouTube上的3Blue1Brown,把数学和AI讲得明明白白。

明天就能用的三件事

看完这期,有三件事明天就能上手。

  • 给AI的任务先过一遍“实习生测试”:写清岗位、输入、可信的数据源和期望输出,写不清楚的,先别交给AI,问题多半出在你自己没想明白。
  • 把提示词当文档写,别当许愿写。带上条件判断和循环的思维,写明中间步骤,丢给模型的两句话越少,它跑偏的概率越大。
  • 挑模型按任务来,别讲忠诚度。长PDF找Gemini,别的能力各有各的强项,工具链该混着用。

节目最后,有位面试者问Kozera,十年后你希望自己做成了什么。他的回答是,他想保住人类的创造愿景。他喜欢假期逛手工艺小店,喜欢那种有人投入了意图和手艺的东西。AI把执行的活接走之后,留下来的核心资产只有两样:你知道要什么,以及你知道什么算好。

文稿来源:sequoiacap.com;机器转写可能有识别错误,人名与数字请以音频为准。
id="podcast-transcript" data-framer-component-type="RichTextContainer" style="transform:none">Filip Kozera: We have 30 million software engineers in the world, and we have 750 million active users of Excel. And now you’ll ask, like, “How does Wordware compare to Excel?” And what Excel did in the ‘80s to data analytics and numbers is what we are trying to do to AI. So in the ‘80s, you either had to have a team of data analytics people or engineers, or you were using a calculator. And I would say the calculator equivalent here is the ChatGPT that every time you need to redo the conversation, and every time you need to instill your own needs into it. What Wordware is trying to do is saying, “Hey, a lot of the things that you do are repeatable, similar to Excel, and you can encode your taste into it with Wordware. Sonya Huang:  Today we’re joined by Filip Kozera, co-founder of Wordware, who’s building tools to help bridge the gap between human creativity and AI.  Philip shares his vision for why English is becoming the new assembly language for LLMs, why he believes that the future belongs not just to coders but to people he calls “word artisans” who can communicate effectively their creative vision to an AI system, and what that means for the future of programming computers. Filip, thank you so much for joining us today. I’m excited to learn about you and Wordware and get your take on how, you know, programming computers is fundamentally going to change with large language models. Filip Kozera: Thank you for the invite. The hottest new programming language is EnglishSonya Huang: Let’s dig right in. I want to start with Andrej Karpathy. He had a tweet in 2023 that went viral. Filip Kozera: Yeah. Sonya Huang: “The hottest new programming language is English.” What do you make of that, and what does it mean relative to what you are trying to build at Wordware? Filip Kozera: I think syntax will not be as important. You know, everyone will be somewhat of a coder. People used to have to know Python; now English is enough. However, you still need to know what you’re trying to say. And in that way, I would say, you know, not everyone will be able to use it because some people don’t have that much to say. [laughs] And I would maybe rephrase it a little bit in a little bit more of an exciting way for us, is that the assembly language to LLMs is English, but you still have to structure it in the right way, and you still have to use some of the concepts even from typical programming, in order to actually make sure that it does what it’s supposed to do. Sonya Huang: You heard it here first, okay? English is not the hottest new programming language—it is the new assembly language. And at Wordware, you are trying to build that new programming language to work with that new assembly language. Filip Kozera: I think bringing structure to human-AI collaboration is something that I’ve chosen to spend the next 10 years of my life on. And it’s an exciting problem, because right now we are trying to mix the structure of programming, which is very rigid and deterministic, with something that’s intrinsically fuzzy. And that marrying of these concepts and choosing the right affordances and the right abstraction layers for that communication to be incredibly easy, yet enable people to do complex things is hard. And this is what we are trying to do with Wordware as the engine to enable the right mix of the two. Sonya Huang: Let’s talk a little bit more about no-code. I remember back when I first got to Sequoia in 2018, I remember no-code was the hottest thing ever, and it was like, we’re not going to program anymore. And obviously some no-code companies have done extremely well, like Retool, for example. But by and large, we still have software engineers today and so far that no-code promise hasn’t really come to fruition. What’s different now? Like, what has changed? Filip Kozera: I think coming back to what I just said as well, the assembly language is English. And I kind of have this small insecurity when people call Wordware a no-code tool. Sonya Huang: Okay. Filip Kozera: Because we have not yet reached a ceiling with any of our clients. So you can achieve absolutely everything. We’ve created an ability to put in code execution blocks, which if you want an escape hatch and Wordware is not fully capable of everything, you still can do it. And in that way, you know, the document format of how to structure agents and how to write them down one by one is still very similar to how code works. We still have loops, we still have conditional statements, and we have flows calling other flows, which really is function calling, you know? So in a way we don’t see ourselves as a no-code tool, and we kind of believe that the word crafters, the word artisans of the future, are still coding. It’s just, you know, they are structuring the English in a very precise way to make sure that the prompt is populated in the right manner. Sonya Huang: Hmm. Word crafters and word artisans. I like it. Filip Kozera: [laughs] Wordware engineers. You heard it here first. Not no-codeSonya Huang: How are you using the English language then to make—you know, since you bristle at the no-code term, how are you making no-code more code-like? And maybe this is a good time to just give a 30-second overview on the Wordware product and how people use it to build things. Filip Kozera: Sure. So by trying to bring that structure to the intrinsically fuzzy English language, we’ve created an editor where you can use the similar concepts to software engineering—looping, conditional statements, functions calling functions—and marry it in that editor in that natural language, IDE, in a way that people can construct agents, something that we are not, we are not codegen. We go straight to agents. And in my definition, agents are almost—like, they are still software. They are still a little bit like software, taking in inputs and outputting outputs, but some of the stages of what they do is fuzzy. So marrying that structure in the editor, whatever you build there, whatever you iterate on there, you then have three different ways of deploying it. You can deploy it as an API that will power your product, or that AI button, or that AI chatbot that is a little bit more complex than just doing a vanilla API call to Claude or OpenAI. That’s number one. Number two is you can deploy it as a workflow, where the main part of the workflow is not like Zapier, it’s more AI native. And really, the brain of the AI is a little bit more complex than a couple prompts strung together. And the third thing that we’re building is the GitHub for AI, let’s say, for people to share what they’ve done, and other people are able to then fork it and to use these things as components. Again, marrying some concepts from software engineering, you need other people’s components and libraries, and you want to be building on top of the shoulders of the giants of these AI thinkers. So again, Wordware engine, editor, way to actually create these agents, and then three different ways to deploy. Sonya Huang: I think one of the beauties of code is just its expressibility and its precision. You know exactly what you are telling the machine to do, and you are expressing it in some languages in the most precise way possible. English is not like that. To your point, it’s fuzzy. And so as you are turning the English language more code-like, should I think about that as helping with the controllability and the steerability of that? Or what is the, I guess, abstract thing you were doing with English to make it more programmable? Filip Kozera: Yeah, I think you’re exactly correct. We are trying to bring a little bit more structure. It’s not all the way, because if you go all the way to a programming language, you lose the fuzziness and you lose the power of it. But it’s hard. And right now, most of the people—you know, we had this wave of evaluation software companies at some stage. And what we’ve realized with a bunch of companies that we work with is that they don’t know, like, they don’t have these data sets to use for evals. And what we came up with is that editor very quickly gets you to understand and develop an intuition of what works and what doesn’t work. And for now, this is the most important thing. It’s clicking around a hundred times quickly, and making sure that what you’ve written here has enough structure in order to output things on the right side that you want. And in that way, you know, as long as you know what you’re trying to achieve—and this is very hard. You know, we have a lot of companies coming in and just saying, “AI, predict weather.” I literally had a big customer say, “Can you guys, like, predict weather for me?” And that’s not the case. You need a document where you outline what you’re trying to do. And even that document, that has enough structure, if you have done an intro, those are the inputs. You’ll be playing around with images and PDFs, and then you will manipulate it in this way, and then you will get some outputs. And developing that intuition is just enough structure for today. Soon maybe we’ll be able to do better evals. But for now, a lot of people really don’t know at the moment when they start playing around with Wordware, they don’t know what they are trying to achieve. And one of our customers coined this term of “speed of creativity with Wordware is higher.” So they learn what they are actually trying to do as they encounter problems with the underlying models, and they realize Gemini 2.0 Pro might be better. And maybe Gemini can take huge PDFs, and Claude can kind of take PDFs but smaller, and then GPT4 cannot take PDFs. And, you know, they develop that understanding, and that helps them to structurize their thoughts. Sonya Huang: How do you instruct the machine to go from intent to outcome? Like, let’s say I’m a brilliant filmmaker and I want to use Wordware to create the next hit. What do I do in Wordware in order to make that happen? Filip Kozera: Yeah. So for now, we focus on knowledge workers. Sonya Huang: Knowledge workers. Okay. George Lucas and GPT-7Filip Kozera: Where that is a little bit easier. I think, using your example for figuring out how the future will be, you know, if we have, let’s say, George Lucas playing around, hypothetically playing around with GPT-7 and trying to create Star Wars, he might type in just the prompt being like the two sentences, and he would just say, “Hey, create a movie about wars between star systems.” And that’s just enough to give a model an ability to run on its own. And this is actually not what you want. You want to convey your creative vision, which for now in Wordware is just knowledge work. But soon it will be all work where it needs that human sprinkle, that human taste. And these are the things that I really value is like, people say, “Oh, nobody will have a job whatsoever.” I don’t agree with it at all. I think the human taste and how you do things will matter even more. And I use this George Lucas example because it’s a little bit easier to understand how taste is influencing that. But everywhere, writing a good email is dependent on good taste. Figuring out—I was just hiring for an executive assistant and, like, everyone in our company needs to show that taste, and needs to show a little bit more conviction in the way that they do things. So for an executive assistant, like, she needed to choose a right restaurant for our off site, you know? And that also has taste. I don’t want to trust an AI with this. So yeah, that’s kind of that sprinkle of human touch is very important. Sonya Huang: So taste as the last bastion of humanity. Filip Kozera: I think so. I think creativity and taste. Sonya Huang: Do you think machines can learn human taste? Filip Kozera: I think they can, but that’s not the point. There is an interesting analogy here. They put humans into an MRI machine, and they’ve shown them two different pieces of art. Both of them were done by AI, and they told the people, “Hey, one is created by a human artist and another one is created by AI.” Our brains work completely differently, and our different parts of the brain fire when we assume human intent behind something. So, you know, I can create a song and just, like, it will be a good song with Suno or whatever and send it to my friend and he’ll be like, “Yeah, it’s a cool song.” But if I ingrain my intent and I’ll create a song about our, you know, skiing trip to Chamonix, and I’ll make it funny and that intent will be there, I’m pretty sure his brain will be firing in a completely different way, giving him a completely different experience in that way. Does that make sense? Sonya Huang: It makes a lot of sense. Filip Kozera: Yeah. The next billion developersSonya Huang: I love it. I want to transition to talking about the next billion developers. And you’ve alluded to this a few times in the conversation, and I really want to just pull on that thread. So you started this conversation by saying there’s a certain set of people in the world that know how to code, but there’s a difference of the people in this world that have creativity and have ideas. Do you think that set of people is larger? Is that how we get to the next billion developers? Filip Kozera: There’s an interesting analogy here. We have 30 million software engineers in the world, and we have 750 million active users of Excel. And now you’ll ask, like, “How does Wordware compare to Excel?” And what Excel did in the ‘80s to data analytics and numbers is what we are trying to do to AI. So in the ‘80s, you either had to have a team of data analytics people or engineers, or you were using a calculator. And I would say the calculator equivalent here is the ChatGPT that every time you need to redo the conversation, and every time you need to instill your own needs into it. What Wordware is trying to do is saying, “Hey, a lot of the things that you do are repeatable, similar to Excel, and you can encode your taste into it with Wordware.” And I believe that taste will be important, as mentioned before, and I think the next 500 million or a billion users of AI might be calling them—I don’t know what will be the term. Hopefully it’s ‘Wordware engineer,’ but, you know, word artisan or whoever. And the really important part here is that they need to know what the AI is supposed to do. Many, many, many times, you know, we are a horizontal tool, and people come to us and they say, “Hey, what can I do with AI?” And I tend to explain it as if for now it’s an intern, but an intern after university. And you need to write out on a piece of paper a couple of things that you would want to do with the intern. So you need to say, “Hey, this is your job. This is the title of what you’re trying to do. Here are some of the documents or input that you will be working with. Here are the data sources, and here’s the output that I’m expecting of you.” And the important caveats here that people don’t often understand is that the data sources has to be something that you trust. You can’t just say, “Hey, go and search the internet,” because often you end up with things that you don’t agree with. And if the intern works on top of that, that’s a problem. And another one is—and this is very important, is that you’re going to trust the intern with this. So, you know, if you want to send a thousand emails to every person that needs a response in your inbox, with some people you just won’t trust an intern to do this. And this is how AI works right now. So as long as you have a job right now that you say, “Hey, if I have one intern, I could easily explain it to them.” And a lot of our work is like this right now. We often read an email, go search in Dropbox, go search Notion. And then we create a response that is essentially based on this database that we curate. Then you can be using AI. And I think more and more, this knowledge work is going to be automated, and I think in that way, the next billion people are going to need two things: Intent, what action needs to happen, and taste, how do you want to do this? And all of the rest will feel like CEOs of the biggest enterprise, because we will have a thousand knowledge workers working beneath us and trying to actually execute on these two things. Sonya Huang: What I heard just now was a lot of automation about knowledge work. I mean, the thing that I’m most intrigued about within AI and within generative AI is its generative capacity, including the ability to create. You know, you mentioned the George Lucas example, but also to create new applications, new marketplaces, you know, new products. And so do you imagine—do you see Wordware primarily serving, you know, making the knowledge worker more productive, or do you see it also assisting in kind of the creation of new products, services, you know, pieces of art? Filip Kozera: For now, it’s mostly about the productive work, I would say. It’s—you know, the AI engine is—the AI heart of your product is Wordware. Currently we have not dipped into the generative UI part of things. We’re not Lovable. We’ve actually used Lovable to wrap our AI heart for some of our customers, and that has worked great. I’m just so impressed with their product. Sonya Huang: Talk more about this. Lovable, I think, also sees themselves as enabling the next billion developers. You have a similar vision. How do you think your view of how the world will go fits with their view? And, like, why didn’t you choose to make that style of no-code tool? The UI for AIFilip Kozera: Yeah, because the way that I see the word ‘developer’ is a little bit different. They see the word ‘developer’ as what developers do today, which is a lot of SaaS is a wrap around a database with some dashboard and ability to manipulate that data. They are creating much more personalized dashboards, you know, and a lot of people are going to create incredible vertical SaaS based on Lovable. And I think that’s incredible. And the one thing that was missing through all of this is that they not only grab the UI part, they also grab the database part, which many people do not know how to manipulate. And hence, they unlocked a lot more use cases. But what we are trying to say is that this part of, like, creating a generative—creating a UI on top of a database is not the future. The future is to actually utilize this reasoning engine that an LLM is in a productive manner, and we focus on that substance of AI at the beginning. In the future we might want to expose that engine in a UI, maybe it’s a Chatbot, maybe it’s digesting some images, et cetera. But the real important part is the AI engine. Sonya Huang: So if you think about an app as there’s the UI, there’s the application logic, and there’s a database, what you’re saying is you really want to just knock it out of the park on the application logic, so to speak. Filip Kozera: Yes. And I think the databases that we used to work on were discrete, and right now we are able to work on a lot more data which is not structurized. And this is the big, big difference right now. A lot of SaaS’s right now will still work in a similar manner, just the database is fuzzy. And the database might be what you see every day, and how the hell would you put that in a typical normal database? And I think working on top of that context is the really exciting part for me. Sonya Huang: Yeah. Let’s go back to this concept of word artisans or Wordware engineers. If everything goes right, what’s your vision of what a Wordware engineer looks like in 10 years? Filip Kozera: Oh, that’s a tough one. I have been thinking a lot about what does work look like in 10 years for human beings. And I was struggling with this at the beginning because it’s really hard to understand people’s jobs, even today. And often I boil it down to the software that they use. They can talk a big game about strategy and, you know, I set the mission, and in the end of the day, I ask them, “Do you do meetings, do you do email, do you do PowerPoint presentations? Do you work in Excel? What exact—or do you work in code?” And I just want to understand what does work look like in 10 years and, like, what are you really working with, you know? Is it like the movie Her, like interface, when you just talk to the AI and it does a lot of work for you? I think, to be honest, voice is kind of not the best modality to express that. Hence, I kind of think that in its simplest form, Wordware is a document where you jot down your thoughts, and you do it in a more structured way, Wordware copilot AI is helping you throughout, structuring it. And in the end of the day, you behave like a CEO, which sets the strategy, intent, and all of that on that piece of paper, essentially on this blank canvas, and you draw that vision. Maybe it’s even more than words. It’s just, you know, you generate this vision of how your own enterprise works. And, you know, I look at different things around us, and I see furniture or shoes or whatever. And I think there is taste ingrained into what kind of shoe would you like to make. So in 10 years, if somebody wants to become a creator of the best brand of shoes, it becomes about—that shoe becomes a luxury object which has ingrained taste and intent in it. And then a bunch of things in the end will be—will happen on its own. The really tough parts, even manufacturing it and so on will happen on its own. But what’s your job in the future is talking to other CEOs, I think will not—humans don’t want to lose that control. So you will talk with other CEOs about maybe doing a partnership with your shoe brand and somebody else. You have to be still critical about the intent of the other person, and you have to instill taste and your own creative vision into that shoe. [laughs] ICP as analytical creativeSonya Huang: Yeah. Do you think that—you know, do you think a billion people globally will be capable of programming a machine in English language the way you describe, or in Wordware documents the way you describe? Because it does require—you know, it’s almost like pseudocoding. And, you know, there is logic, there’s loops and things like that. I guess maybe talk about today, like, do you need to be technical in order to use Wordware? Like, who is the ICP today, and what is needed to move that ICP so that you can reach a billion developers? Filip Kozera: Yeah, I think right now what we’ve enabled is people who are somewhat technical—CEOs, technical PMs—high up in the org chart to ingrain their own, like, kind of—think that they know what needs to happen and get there quicker. You know, so Max from Instacart, for example, he is a founder, and he spent four days just, you know, refining his idea in Wordware instead of hiring a whole team. But he is somewhat, you know, analytically minded. And for now that’s the case. We did not want to make too much magic because the models were not there. Right now what we’re doing is we are moving more into that blank canvas when you just describe the idea and we take care of guessing the right structure. And you still will be able to, you know, in a very fine-grained way, edit it, but you will start playing a lot more. We’ll probably use o3 to get you to the first draft of how that flow works. And when we kind of look back to the future of how it will all look like and really whether we’ll have one billion developers, you know, working in Wordware, it becomes a much bigger question here. It becomes a question of, like, will a billion people want to do productive work? Like, you know, we just talked about the shoe. How many people will have the drive to put out something to the world, and they will want to express that creative vision? Maybe in, you know, post-resource scarcity world, most of us won’t want to work, but I think we’ll still have the equivalent of billionaires. And it will be about influence, it will be about taste, and it will be about how you utilize your own resources and how do you multiply it to have the equivalent of future money? And I went a little bit deep here. Sonya Huang: No, but for what it’s worth, I think the innate drive to create is like a deeply human drive. And I think that exists in a post-capitalistic world. Filip Kozera: I also have that opinion, and I really believe in humans. Like, I want them to succeed. Like, somebody asked me, one of our prospective employees asked me, like, “Filip, in 10 years, what do you want there to be—like, what have you done?” And I want to save, like, the human creative vision. I don’t want everything to be AI. I really have the pleasure when I go to an artisan shop on my holiday, and I know that somebody put in the intent and put in the work, and I want to interact with it and I want to interact with the story of it. Sonya Huang: Totally. Okay, so today your ICP is the analytical creative, which is a little bit of a unicorn. And over time, as you kind of lower—as the models get better, as you iterate on your interface, you’ll lower the bar. So it’ll really be just more of the creative as your ideal user. You’re going to lower the bar of how analytical you need to be in order to use Wordware. Filip Kozera: Yes, but at the same time, my use of the word ‘creative’ is not to what most people associate it with right now. I think a good creative is also, you know, using growth channels in the right manner. They are creative about everything that they do in this new, uncertain world of AI, where everything is changing. And, you know, I’m not thinking only about an artist that’s painting on the canvas, I think creativity can basically show itself in so many different aspects of work. Transformers are the new transistorSonya Huang: Yeah. Let’s talk about user interfaces and, you know, the future GUIs—the GUIs of the future. Right before we filmed this podcast, you made the analogy that, you know, transformers are the new transistor. Maybe say a little bit more about that, and what you think the new GUI is going to be. Filip Kozera: So I think the analogy here is that if the LLM is the—well, if transformer is the new transistor and it’s being packaged as the model, the model is kind of the mainframe, let’s call it, and then we took our sweet time to utilize the power of that mainframe in a GUI that’s accessible by billions of people. You know, there has been really two big spikes there. The first was the desktop, you know, and Apple coming up with their GUI. And the second one was mobile. And, you know, right now we are almost exposing the numbers and the logic in a chat-style thing, and nobody has had a better idea. We think that the document style is better for doing kind of more complex work, because often when you’re trying to achieve something, you just give it two sentences and the model just runs on its own. And it’s just enough, the two sentences. Our lead investor recently said that the two sentences is just about enough for a model to hang itself on. And, you know, you will get something completely different than what you actually wanted. And this is a problem of, like, the Lovables and Devins of this world as well. But I basically think that there are better GUIs coming and, you know, whether they will be based on AR or, you know, there will be an assistant that’s listening to everything that we do. That was actually my first company, augmenting human memory of always-on listening devices using GPT-2 and BERT. I’ve been in this … Sonya Huang: Ah, you’ve been in this since the GPT-2 days. Filip Kozera: I mean, my research was into LSTMs which are the precursor to the transformer architecture. And I’ve been in this for a while. I think nobody has yet delivered on this. I want everything that I hear to be somewhere in a searchable database that also has the perfect context about me, you know, the way that I want to do things. And I think those affordances and those—like, we called it GUI but it’s really the underlying, like, way of interacting with intelligence, it’s not going to be mainly chat. I just don’t believe it. Programmable documentsSonya Huang: Totally. Programmable documents. Do you think that is fundamentally what Wordware looks like, UI wise, in, call it, five years? Filip Kozera: I think there is more and more magic in it, and I would believe that I want people still to be able to do that fine-grain work. You know, we’ve linked it with George Lucas doing the movie, you know? In a way you almost want to firstly start with the high-level thing, the two-sentence description and then zoom in and zoom in and zoom in, and create modules which make the best scene that is five seconds, and then combine them together in that way. So what I would like Wordware to be is to transcend abstraction layers and be able to zoom it all out. Start with a sentence and have it run, maybe see whether it’s working in the right manner. And then as you’re seeing that some things are not doing the thing that you want them to do is to be able to zoom in and see maybe four sentences of exactly what it’s doing. What are the inputs to this, what it’s trying to do in the middle, and what are the outputs? You know, that’s kind of the most simple one level in. And then you want to zoom in more and more and more as you redefine and reiterate on your idea of how this should be done. Sonya Huang: Yeah. How did you arrive at the current user interface? I think it does feel really novel compared to how others are enabling AI builders today. How did you arrive at the current user interface? Was it more experimentation, listening to users? Was it you philosophizing about what it should be? Filip Kozera: I think currently, the—currently and before, the approach to creating these agents was a block based on a 2D canvas. And once—I’ve been building agents for a long time, I think March, 2023, I put out the first article about how to build agents, and me and Robert, my co-founder, we’ve been in this for a long time. And the more—the better the models got, the prompting became more difficult because you can do more complex things with it. So at some stage there was this movement of, like, the prompt is going away, and so on. We actually really disagreed with it, and that that idea is gone a little bit. It’s like, you know, we came back, did a loop again and be like, actually communicating your vision is really important. And when we tried to communicate our vision, which was a little bit ahead of what the models could have done at the time, we started to notice that the 2D canvas is just not enough. Like, if you do a reflection loop inside of a reflection loop, you run out of dimensions. And we basically really like the way that code is structured. Code has an ability to express very, very complex concepts in a way that is still—like, you can still manipulate it and understand it. Think about trying to structure the whole Uber app with all of, like, everything in it on a 2D canvas. It would become so cluttered and so messy. You know, you can do the big picture thing, but not really the—you know, you don’t want engineers to be interacting in that way. You want the engineers in the future—Wordware engineers to be interacting with something that’s easy to grasp the structure of very complex systems. Sonya Huang: Whereas the Uber app actually could probably be described in pseudocode. And it seems like you’re getting people closer to that vision versus the 2D canvas. Filip Kozera: Yes. And I think the most important part here is that Uber has an agent equivalent, and this is what we are trying to build, you know? If you want an agent to decide where is that person going and where are they starting their journey and where they will accept that charge, or, you know, you want to maybe make sure that the charge is right for that particular person, there is an agent equivalent there. And, you know, people are going—like, people can build that agent on Wordware. It’s not like you’re going to create that whole UI for Uber. And I think, you know, probably Uber is the right abstraction layer. You don’t want to be ordering an Uber through a chatbot or through, like, a voice-based thing or, you know—but you might want an Uber to be ordered for you if you have a calendar invite. So, you know, in a way that, like, for your personal use, Uber is nice because you can click around and the agent will not always know. But I was coming here, and I wanted a Waymo. Actually, Waymo can’t get that far yet, but I wanted the Waymo to be ordered and to be ordered perfectly when I need this. And it’s almost like a personal assistant would do this for me. And now that capability is open to everyone. So we’ll soon have these kind of affordances and these kind of abstraction layers there. Lightning roundSonya Huang: Totally. I think that’s a great note to end on. Should we end on a lightning round? Filip Kozera: Let’s go. Yes. Sonya Huang: Okay. One- or two-sentence answers only. Okay, first question. What is your most hot take or contrarian take in AI, not related to Wordware or everything we just discussed? Filip Kozera: Pre-training is still going to matter. And DeepSeek is a little blimp that people liked to—people jumped on because people love a good drama, and it was connected to China, and actually it doesn’t matter that much. Sonya Huang: Okay, I know I said lightning round, but you have to say more. What do you mean it doesn’t matter that much? Filip Kozera: I mean, they utilized some cool techniques and the rest of the community is going to learn from that. However, you know, the fact that they, like, trained it for a little bit cheaper, for a lot cheaper, does not involve all the experimentation that they did before that. And, you know, I don’t know if I’m supposed to say that, but I’m pretty sure they had access to the best Nvidias as well for that experimentation. And it’s not that novel. Like, people jumped on it because they were like, “Oh my God, China is taking over the race!” And so on. And Nvidia stock price, like, plummeted. And I just think it’s another place where some models were trained that were open sourced, and it’s not going to—you know, we’re not going to remember it in a year or, like, even six months. Or maybe they will take over, but the model doesn’t really matter that much. How you kind of work with that best model out there, that’s what matters. Sonya Huang: That is a hot take indeed. Okay, next question. Who’s going to have the best frontier model next year? Filip Kozera: Oof. I think OpenAI is always super bullish and they always promise a lot. And then I was just on a talk with Sam Altman on the YCAI retreat, and the o3 the way that he pictured it sounded great. But I think we both know that they overpromise a little bit—a lot. And I love Antropic. I think their kind of vision and their kind of the way that they’ve created this is great. But recently, Gemini 2.0 Pro with their abilities to ingest 6,000 pages of PDF is really blowing my mind. So end of the story is I have no clue. This is a place where it’s super fragmented and people have zero loyalty. Sonya Huang: Pre-training is hitting a wall. I think famous people including Ilya have been quoted saying something to that extent recently. Agree or disagree? Filip Kozera: Disagree. Right now I think, you know, it’s the intelligence of a model is linked logarithmically to the resources that are needed to train it. But, you know, doing a 2X of intelligence is, on its own, exponential. Like, if I’m smarter 2X than somebody else, it doesn’t mean I’ll do 2X of the work. It means that I’ll find ways that probably mean I’m a 10X or even more. Sonya Huang: Favorite new AI app, not Wordware. Filip Kozera: I would say I started to edit content because we need to explain and educate people a little bit more about both Wordware and AI. So Descript is something that I’ve been loving. And I use Granola every day. And the newest model that I’m really impressed is the Gemini 2.0 Pro. I really like it. Sonya Huang: That’s a hot take as well. I haven’t heard much of that from people. Filip Kozera: I think it came out, like, four days ago, so people have not been playing around with it. Their PDF capabilities are awesome. Sonya Huang: What application or application category do you think will really go mainstream and hit this year? Filip Kozera: I would love to see—I’m personally very, very involved with that whole, AI having the context of your life, and being able to basically make better decisions based on the context. And, you know, Rewind, which, you know, I think they are called limitless right now. Sonya Huang: Yeah. Filip Kozera: I’ve ordered their pendant, by the way. It’s been, like, a year and a half and I still don’t have it. I don’t know, send it to me. And I had to change a color because they didn’t have the color. But I would love for there to be a provider which has a lot more context and can do the personal stuff for me. Sonya Huang: Don’t you think that’s Apple, over time? Filip Kozera: I was just about to say, I think ideally that N421 model, or whatever it’s called, of the AR glasses that they are trying to push out there, which I think Facebook has taken over a little bit, maybe we’ll see early stages of that. And I think they’re the only ones where the privacy really—like, they have a good brand around privacy. And two, even if your new AR glasses run out of battery, it’s still cool to be wearing a $5,000, you know, piece of hardware. And maybe that’s the UX, but I don’t know what’s that UX. And, like, a microphone so far failed. Yeah. Sonya Huang: Single piece of content that an AI aficionado should read or watch. Filip Kozera: I would say all of the DeepLearning.AI resources. Everyone—like, we have a bunch of candidates apply for jobs. By the way, we are hiring. Whatever. I should be looking very, very aggressively. So come join Wordware. But the DeepLearning.AI resources are awesome, and they explain everything from the bottom layer all the way to the practical layer of how to actually get it done. I also think if you don’t understand the underlying technology, go see 3Blue1Brown, an incredible channel on YouTube. And they explain everything super well. Sonya Huang: Wonderful. Your lightning round was full of hot takes. I didn’t even have to ask you for a specific hot take. Well, Filip, thank you so much for coming on. I really enjoyed chatting about how you see the world evolving from developers, word artisans or Wordware engineers, if everything goes right. And appreciate you sitting down to share your vision and your hot takes. Filip Kozera: Thank you for having me. Sonya Huang: Thank you. Mentioned in this episodeMentioned in this episode: Lovable: Generative AI app that builds UIs and web apps Her: 2013 Spike Jonze film that Filip uses as an example of how voice will not be the best modality to express knowledge work. Descript: AI video editing app that Filip uses a lot.  Granola: AI notetaking app Filip uses every day..  Gemini 2.0 Pro: Google’s newest long context model that can handle 6000 page pdfs. Limitless pendant: Wearable device for collecting personal conversational context to drive AI experiences that Filip can’t wait for to ship. DeepLearning.AI: Andrew Ng’s amazing resource for learning about AI 3Blue1Brown: Grant Sanderson’s incredible channel on YouTube that explains math and AI visually. <div class="framer-mcvrsd" id="

Filip Kozera sees parallels between Excel’s democratization of data analytics and Wordware’s mission to put AI development in the hands of knowledge workers. Drawing inspiration from Excel’s 750 million users (compared to 30 million software developers), Wordware is creating tools that balance the rigid structure of programming with the fuzziness of natural language. Filip explains why effective AI development requires working across multiple abstraction layers—from high-level concepts to detailed implementation—while preserving human creative control. He shares his vision for “word artisans” who will use AI to amplify their creative impact.

Hosted by Sonya Huang, Sequoia Capital

Mentioned in this episode:

Lovable: Generative AI app that builds UIs and web apps

Her: 2013 Spike Jonze film that Filip uses as an example of how voice will not be the best modality to express knowledge work.

Descript: AI video editing app that Filip uses a lot.

Granola: AI notetaking app Filip uses every day..

Gemini 2.0 Pro: Google’s newest long context model that can handle 6000 page pdfs.

Limitless pendant: Wearable device for collecting personal conversational context to drive AI experiences that Filip can’t wait for to ship.

DeepLearning.AI: Andrew Ng’s amazing resource for learning about AI

3Blue1Brown: Grant Sanderson’s incredible channel on YouTube that explains math and AI visually.

本集资源与出处