Stan Miroshnik

Founder and Managing Partner of TenSquared Capital - @10SQFund Investing In The Web3-enabled Attention Economy

[Stan Miroshnik @Stan_AM]

@nic_carter Culture

[Jeffrey Katzenberg @jeffreykWNDR]

The World is Changing: AI For Creativity

By Jeffrey Katzenberg

A few months ago, I sat in my office in Silicon Valley and watched as a tech founder showed me something extraordinary. On the screen was a fully realized, beautifully lit, well-composed animated scene. It was stunning and it made me feel exactly what I felt in 1986 watching Luxo Jr. That was the first time I watched a computer-animated 3D character take a breath and seem, against all reason, to have life. It left me in awe.

Later that day, I received a text from an artist I've known for thirty years, 350 miles to the south, in the city where I spent most of my career. After seeing a similar video, she texted: "Is this the end of us?" My answer was, "Certainly not.”

I have spent the better part of the last decade in Silicon Valley, but the heart of my career has been in Hollywood. Being deeply connected to both worlds means I have deep loyalties to each and a responsibility to speak honestly to both.

In 2023, I said that these new AI tools would cut the time and cost of producing world-class animation by as much as ninety percent within three years. Some colleagues were alarmed, many were furious.

There is growing fear and resistance surrounding AI within the creative community. I deeply understand it, because I've spent countless hours walking through animation studios watching gifted artists bent over their desks, rebuilding a single second of film for the tenth time because the ninth version wasn't quite right. I've sat in screening rooms where four years of people's labor played out in minutes, and I knew the name of every person that had spent countless hours bringing those images to life. The creative process is a calling, there's really no other way to describe it. From the outside some see resistance. From the inside, it is love.

People do not fight this hard for things they don't care about. The pushback coming out of Hollywood represents the collective effort of people who are deeply passionate about their craft.

Is History Repeating Itself?

The history here is more complicated than either side may realize. In 1906, the most famous composer in America, John Philip Sousa, published an essay titled “The Menace of Mechanical Music." He warned that the phonograph would become "a substitute for human skill, intelligence and soul."

Sousa's fight was not really about the machine, it was about money. The machines were playing his compositions, and the men who built them weren't paying him a cent. His campaign helped create the Copyright Act of 1909. He did not stop the technology. He changed the terms under which it could use his work.
A hundred years ago, sound came to the movies. We remember it now as a miracle, and it was. What we forget is who paid for it. Before sound, tens of thousands of musicians made their living in the orchestra pits of movie houses, scoring every film live, every night, in towns all over the world. When the soundtrack arrived, the work of one composer and one orchestra was recorded for a film that went into thousands of theaters. The union fought back with everything it had, taking out newspaper ads across the country warning against the menace of "canned music," one of them showing a mechanical man tearing the strings out of a harp while an angel wept.

They were not fools, and they were not Luddites. They were right. Those pit jobs did not come back. And yet (this is the part we have to be brave enough to admit), sound gave us the movie musical, the modern score, sfx, sound design, audio engineering, and an art form vastly larger than the one it disrupted. And it helped keep Hollywood in the forefront of world entertainment for the rest of the century and into the next. The loss was real. And yet the art form expanded.

This is a story that has been told over and over again. To resist technology is to risk irrelevance. Just look at Kodak or Blockbuster. To embrace technology is to open doors of new possibility. Just consider Apple and Netflix.

What I Learned From Walt Disney

In the mid-1980s, I was tapped to lead Disney's animation division at a moment when the studio was at an inflection point. Animation wasn't just another business unit. It was the soul of the company, a medium revered because of Walt's genius and his passion. But the production system was cumbersome and unforgiving. A single movie was 125,000 individual hand-drawn and painted cels, photographed one frame at a time. Every revision carried a cost measured in months. These degrees of difficulty shaped the kinds of stories we could tell.

We found our way forward in an unexpected place: Walt himself. The Disney archives held astonishing recordings of Walt explaining his creative process. His own writings. His notes and storyboards. Work product captured at every stage of his process. This was truly a gift. Listening, reading, sitting with the work itself, we heard him talk about character, about emotion, about how an audience feels when a character truly comes alive. He talked about making bold choices and refining a scene until it genuinely moved people. We didn't hear a word about pencils or paintbrushes. In fact, Walt was famous for being a technologist, forever hunting for state-of-the-art tools, often inventing them himself to achieve the images he saw in his head. But he never defined animation by the tools. He defined it by whether the audience believed the character. His principles were timeless. The tools were not.

That realization changed everything. We co-developed the Computer Animation Production System (CAPS) with a young Northern California company called Pixar, replacing hand-painted cels with CGI. In The Little Mermaid, the final scene shimmered with a dimensionality and light that the old process simply couldn't achieve. In Beauty and the Beast, the ballroom sequence moved with a cinematic sweep that placed the audience inside the emotion of the moment. In Aladdin, the Cave of Wonders felt vast and alive, and the Magic Carpet became an intricate, compelling character all its own. In The Lion King, the stampede carried a scale and intensity that raised the emotional stakes beyond anything we'd done before. Technology didn't diminish the craft, it expanded the canvas. It gave artists more room to create.

A decade later, the canvas expanded again. When Disney released Pixar's Toy Story, it wasn't simply a technical milestone. It was proof that a fully computer-animated film could carry real emotional weight, that it could make audiences laugh, cry, and believe. At DreamWorks, we made the difficult decision to sunset hand-drawn animation and become a fully computer-animated studio. It was the right thing to do, but it was not without pain. It cost talented people their place in an industry where they had worked their whole lives. Some made the leap to the new tools and did the finest work of their careers. Some never did.

Tools are never the point. The instruments change with every generation. What endures is taste and imagination. The magical ability to make an audience feel. One of the greatest storytellers of our generation, George Lucas, succinctly captured the eternal essence of this issue: “It’s not the how, it’s the why.”

A Distinction With a Difference

I asked one of the leading AI models a question that has been challenging me for months. What is the difference between reasoning and creating? Its answer changed how I think about almost everything happening in this industry. It said . . .

Reasoning and creating are two distinct cognitive modes, though they also work together. Reasoning is fundamentally evaluative and analytical. It operates on what already exists: facts, premises, evidence. It moves toward a conclusion that was in a sense already implied by the input. Reasoning is constrained by logic and truth. Its goal is to arrive somewhere correct, not to invent somewhere new.

Creating is fundamentally generative. It produces something that didn't exist before. And crucially, there's no single right answer waiting to be found. A blank page has infinite valid responses. Creation involves choices that can't be fully justified by logic alone. Taste, intuition and vision fill the gap where deduction runs out.

Reasoning is what Silicon Valley has been perfecting. Creating is what Hollywood has been practicing for more than a century. AI today operates almost entirely on the reasoning side of the line. It can deduce, evaluate, optimize, and pattern-match brilliantly. And while it can create, there is a real distinction to being creative. What it doesn’t yet have is those things that make us human: empathy, devotion, serendipity, the kind of creativity that comes from a person trying to say something only they could say. When the bot generates a piece of art, it is not trying to communicate anything. It is statistics, not soul; it is emulating things that have been done. By contrast, human creativity isn’t about repeating patterns of zeros and ones; it is about doing something new.

One day, AI may close this gap. Three years ago, the leaders building AI would have called what they are achieving today, improbable, if not impossible. Impossible is no longer improbable.

Today, the line between reasoning and creating is real. Even the leading technologists acknowledge we are not there yet. There is no scientific path to crossing this divide that anyone in the field can articulate today. Understanding that gap is where we will find common ground.

A Path Forward

In 2016, I closed one chapter in Hollywood with the sale of DreamWorks and opened another in Northern California, co-founding WndrCo. We’ve backed more than 50 founders building the next generation of technology and watched how breakthroughs in Silicon Valley emerge, first as experiments, then as platforms, and finally as infrastructure that reshapes entire industries. It's worth remembering that the last great revolution in animation also came from the north. Pixar was a Northern California company, forged not in the conventions of the Hollywood studio system, but in the technological breakthroughs of Silicon Valley. I've spent years on both sides of this bridge. For sure, I don’t have all the answers (take Quibi, for one!). But, from my past and present vantage points of my long career, here is what I see . . .

Brilliant people in Northern California building this technology have made something extraordinary. They have earned the right for the rest of us to be, if not believers, at least optimistic that what comes next will be remarkable. But they have not made an artist. The tools are powerful, but they are not what makes a story matter. That knowledge lives 350 miles to the south, inside people whose life's work has informed the very models you are building. The right path forward includes them by design, with credit, with consent, and with compensation. Build this with the storytellers. Not on top of them. Taste is not something that can be synthesized, it is uniquely human.

At the same time, Hollywood needs to accept that AI is not going away. The energy they are spending trying to make it disappear is energy they are not spending deciding the terms on which it will exist. And the terms are everything. The north needs something from it that they cannot build and cannot buy: creativity. The kind that takes a blank page and conjures a single right answer where there was none and has held audiences for a century. Without it, the most powerful reasoning engine ever invented will still be missing the only thing that makes a story worth telling.

The artists who learn to wield these new instruments will do things the engineers never dreamed of. They always have. Edison invented the motion picture but made terrible movies. It took Chaplin, Lloyd, Keaton and so many others to make movies emotional. Now, the canvas is about to expand yet again. We should decide now that we intend to paint on it.

There are so many valuable lessons in history. This has happened many times before, and it was never settled by the technology. It was settled by the terms. Sousa did not stop the phonograph; he helped write the law that made sure composers got paid. And two years ago, when the writers and the actors walked out, they were fighting for the very things Sousa was fighting for in 1906. Consent, compensation, the basic recognition that human creative work has a price that must be paid. The terms of that fight are still being negotiated, but the principle is older than any of us.

The tools-versus-no-tools argument is a trap. First, we must all agree that there should be terms. Then we can have the crucial debate about what fairness requires.

What I Learned From Steve Jobs

Years ago, Steve Jobs said, "It's in Apple's DNA that technology alone is not enough. It's technology married with the liberal arts, married with the humanities, that yields us the result that makes our hearts sing." He was describing a device. But he could just as easily have been describing this tale of two cities.

What I See Coming Soon

As the barriers and the costs come down, more films will get made, not fewer. Studios will get to take more risks. There will be more seats at the table, and very soon entirely new forms of storytelling. In the 1980s, animation was dismissed as a niche corner of the business. Today it is one of the most beloved and profitable forms of storytelling in the world. In live action, filmmakers like Steven Spielberg, James Cameron and Peter Jackson embraced new visual tools not as shortcuts, but as instruments, and expanded cinema in the process. Every time storytelling has met a genuine technological shift, from synchronized sound to color to computer animation, it has redefined the boundaries of the medium and grown larger in the process.

Assuredly, I don’t have all the answers, but I am confident that the creative opportunities will expand yet again. How we come through this is a choice. The north has the new tools. The south has the creative soul. The best future will draw on the best of both worlds.

[Stan Miroshnik @Stan_AM]

@JedBreed @breed_vc Congrats Jed! Just in time for the market turn :)

[Stan Miroshnik @Stan_AM]

@katiekirsch sfMOT

[Stan Miroshnik @Stan_AM]

Wesley Wang Launches Digital Media Studio Wesley Wang Media, Sets Caellum Allan As Head Of Film & Television & Unveils Initial Slate https://t.co/LLyuaD7PnX via @Deadline

[Stan Miroshnik @Stan_AM]

Suno Tries to Break Into Music Mainstream With New Label-Backed Model ‘v6’ https://t.co/pV59QdHCTE via @variety

[Suno @suno]

Welcome to the v6 era. Our best models yet, built in partnership with artists and producers. Here’s how the family works 🧵

[TBPN @tbpn]

Microsoft Builds! SUNO on Fire, AI Roll Up Roll Ups, Mysterious Data Centers https://t.co/TNKauGWMz1

[Stan Miroshnik @Stan_AM]

If you love music, and haven't played around with @suno, you are missing out on pure creative joy. Like discovering a new super power. Early foray here:

https://t.co/vBtnGzRg9f

[Tim Draper @TimDraper]

I was stuck in traffic in an Uber. Two hours. Couldn't move.

I realized the driver was the same one I'd had months ago.

Back then, I'd told him about AI music and showed him a song. He loved it.

Six months later, in that traffic jam, he reminded me. Then he said: "So I started playing around with it."

He played us the best music. This incredible vibe of meshing two cultures. Unbelievably fabulous.

It kept us interested the entire time we were stuck.

That's AI spreading. That's an artist thinking: "Now we've got AI, what do we do with it?"

Not "AI is going to take my job."

It's "I got to use AI. I got to be a better musician."

AI is just the new guitar.

Some artists will resist it. Some will master it.

Those who master it will create things we can't yet imagine.

By the way, that driver? He's proof that AI democratizes creativity. Anyone with curiosity and access can make something extraordinary.

[Phineas @Phineas_Sol]

Martin Shkreli decides to open a Pumpfun account, goes live on X, endorses a few tokens, and eventually decides to launch one himself.

He starts preparing the launch live while more than 30,000 viewers are watching and decides to launch $CITRINI.

This sniper wallet: Cg3GP8ZGDCqydaKxKVMYnBVfaHWXNKgvZAUyNiXEFCqc, had a sniper set on Martin’s dev wallet and paid a 67 SOL tip (~$6,500) to make sure it would be the first tx.

The sniper then managed to buy around 35% of the supply, for roughly $3,000.

That same sniper wallet eventually made more than $250,000 dumping on all other snipers and people following the live.

Genius.

[Variety @Variety]

Dr. Dre Says the Only People Who See AI as a Threat Are Those 'Who Have Trouble Creating' https://t.co/HCDaSVyldX

[matthew sigel, recovering CFA @matthew_sigel]

DISPATCH FROM NORTH DAKOTA -->

This week we visited Applied Digital's $APLD Polaris Forge 2 site in Harwood, ND and were very impressed by the sheer scale of the operation. Parking lot overflows, school bus shuttles across the campus and an endless sea of hardhats gave us a greater appreciation for what the company has constructed in just ~11 months.

Our day began with a company presentation and Q&A with management, where key topics included 1) the anticipation of higher yields and pricing on upcoming leases, with management guiding to 15-20% higher pricing on new deals, 2) the regulatory, power, and climate advantages of building in North Dakota, where sites may carry greater terminal value than Tier-1 markets given superior ability to scale and customer preference to co-locate training with inference, 3) the ~1.7GW of gross capacity currently being marketed, split between expansions with existing customers and potential new logos, and 4) management's belief that contract structure (SLA terms and caps), not initial headline yields/pricing, will determine realized returns over a 15-20 year lease.

From there we headed to the PF2 site, where we toured several data halls, viewed the backup power generation, and saw the substation under construction. Walking the site and speaking with the Campus Director left us with a few takeaways: 1) the company is prioritizing high-quality equipment from established US partners, and has scaled into a large enough buyer to place purchase orders well ahead of needs, 2) learnings from each data hall are being applied to the next room and future sites, which can accelerate deliveries and lower costs, and 3) the standardized base build creates a repeatable playbook the company can deploy across future developments, with customization limited to the tenant-specific requirements in the data hall.

Our Take: We think the market continues to undervalue the entire BTC to AI pivot cohort, ascribing little terminal value to signed leases and minimal credit to future pipeline, and APLD is a poster child. The company has already contracted 1.4GW of CITL with an expected base term lease value >$35B (up to $86B if all renewals are exercised), all planned for delivery by 2028 and to ~70% IG customers.

With only ~100MW operational today, APLD is in an execution window where construction delay risk may outweigh the upside from new lease announcements. However, walking the site and speaking with the team gave us confidence that the projects are tracking to plan and that management is building something repeatable, a platform that is capable of converting powered land into operating data center capacity at scale in a region where each incremental campus makes the next customer easier to land (management sees a path to 500MW of incremental deliveries annually through 2031). With >1.5GW currently being marketed, we expect proven execution to improve credit terms and free up equity at refinancing, grinding APLD's multiple higher as the company moves from a few individual assets into a compounding platform.

On the topic of rising "NIMBYism" against data centers across the US, APLD's relationship with its local communities stands out. Construction workers on site are earning six-figure incomes on average, materially lifting the surrounding economy through standing up new businesses, and management has been deliberate about reinvesting in the towns it operates in, funding schools, parades and local recreation (pickleball courts). At Ellendale, the tax base is going from ~$400K a year to nearly $4M, enough to fund schools and emergency services at a level the community could not previously contemplate, while drawing back residents who had left the area for work. In a sector where community opposition is a key risk to permitting and expansion, we view this goodwill as a real asset, and is one reason why management sees further runway to scale each of its existing campuses.

More to come in the next monthly.

H/T Griffin MacMaster

[Patrick OShaughnessy @patrick_oshag]

Really interesting parallel from Ben, comparing Google to Berkshire Hathaway.

He says Google's search business is See's Candies. Its AI bet is Berkshire's move into the railroad:

"They have See's Candies. Tremendously high margin business.

The problem with a lot of high margin businesses is the percentage profit you can make is very high, but the absolute profit is small.

So the brilliance of the BNSF Railway thing was they took the See's Candy profits and said, here's another industry whose margins are worse, but the absolute dollar amounts are so large that those worse margins result in absolute profits that are much larger.

BNSF in one year threw off more free cash than See's Candies had thrown off in its entire lifetime.

The reason why I find that story so interesting is it seems to capture where Google itself might be going.

This unbelievable high margin business of search, one of the most perfect, beautiful business models of all time.

And meanwhile there's this AI opportunity which requires astronomical spend. It's a cash incinerating machine.

But if AI is intelligence and its TAM is basically all white collar work and eventually more, the margins are lower but the absolute profits available are much larger.

Will we look back and say Google was See's Candies? It feels like that's happening.

In that world, you use all your free cash flow. They've done that. You tap the debt markets to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars. They've done that.

You issue equity. What does an equity issue do? It dilutes your interest in your shareholders. So you have a smaller percentage of the pie.

Well, you have a smaller percentage of an astronomically larger pie. At the end of the day, no one's going to be complaining.

Berkshire is actually not just an investor in Google, but a model for Google and where they're going."

[Suno @suno]

“From “The Puerto Rico Song” to viral text-to-song moments, Suno has been behind some of the summer’s biggest music moments. As Bloomberg writes, “all of this has led to huge increases in downloads,” making Suno “the most popular music app in Apple’s store for a few weeks, surpassing Spotify.”

Check out the full feature:
https://t.co/FbivSEzvTr

[Stan Miroshnik @Stan_AM]

Refreshing the look and feel :)

https://t.co/y55YLhhTy4

[Suno @suno]

Inside the new Suno Studio 2.0. 🎛️

We’ve added a completely new way to take the custom plugins you imagine in your head and drop them directly into your sessions.

[Stan Miroshnik @Stan_AM]

Smartphone-sized soap operas called microdramas may be China’s most potent form of influence on US culture https://t.co/tlxdbhhRoo @GabrielaTafur #idileotv

[Stan Miroshnik @Stan_AM]

AI Could Help More ‘Mid-Budget Films’ Get Made if It’s ‘Used as a Tool’: ‘Gonna Be a Very Interesting Experiment’ https://t.co/PNjyrqD5ve via @variety

[Stan Miroshnik @Stan_AM]

Two-minute episodes. Billionaire romances. Cliffhangers every few minutes. Microdramas have exploded into an $11 billion global business — and AI is making them cheaper than ever. @GabrielaTafur https://t.co/UpfGLrdxp0