The Investor's Edge Lives in Their Head — Anekha Sokhal, Moshi
Slide chapters
22 slide and demo groups · Timestamps are approximate. 4 additional groups were omitted from this pass.
Read the talk
The Investor’s Edge Lives in Their Head
Anekha Sokhal explains why financial AI should absorb the market-data grind, expose sources and assumptions, and leave consequential trading judgment with the investor.
From a talk by Anekha Sokhal
At a glance
Ideas worth remembering
Investor edge combines earlier awareness, detection of second- and third-order effects, and enough conviction to size a trade.
Widely available models and connectors do not reproduce the tacit context accumulated through years of market experience.
A production financial system must solve security, storage, reliability, current-data, cost, and accountability problems that a weekend dashboard can ignore.
The useful human-machine boundary assigns collection, cleaning, monitoring, and cross-checking to machines while leaving consequential judgment with the investor.
Fresh context is valuable only when claims are traceable and the system exposes the assumptions behind its conclusions.
The hard open problem is not gathering more data; it is determining how much tacit investor context can be represented without erasing human responsibility or apprenticeship.
More market data creates an attention gap
Financial investors face a bad asymmetry: the available data keeps multiplying while the attention available to interpret it does not. Anekha Sokhal, founder and CEO of Moshi and formerly a derivatives trader, opens with the familiar inputs—PDFs, paid subscriptions, podcasts, social feeds, books, and newspapers. Access is no longer the scarce resource. Synthesis is.
The presentation cites 175 zettabytes of data produced in 2025 to dramatize that growth, then draws the more useful relationship: everyone receives a similar flood, but an investor’s attention remains roughly flat. The widening space between those lines contains the work—deciding what matters, connecting events, and discarding noise. The recording does not establish the cited global-data estimate independently, but the operational constraint does not depend on its precise value.
That constraint changes where AI should sit in the decision process. Sokhal contrasts the human brain’s roughly 20-watt operation with the much larger energy demands of machine-learning infrastructure, then asks whether AI should replace the reasoning engine or feed it. The energy comparison is rhetorical rather than a controlled measure of equivalent computation. Its architectural point is sharper: use machines where their scale helps, without assuming that scale transfers responsibility for a financial decision.
Suggest correction
This note stays in this page until you copy or download it. Nothing is submitted; reloading clears the draft.
Edge is learned context, not a downloadable component
In this account, an investor’s edge has three parallel parts:
- Know sooner: detect a relevant development before other market participants.
- See blind spots: follow second- and third-order effects rather than stopping at the first event.
- Act with conviction: understand the case well enough to size a trade when the evidence supports it.
A model, prompt, skills file, or collection of MCP connectors may help with those tasks. If everyone can acquire the same component, however, possession of that component alone is not a differentiated edge.
The harder-to-copy part lives in an investor’s accumulated context: years of watching markets, learning beside experienced traders, and remembering how comparable events unfolded. That knowledge can leave a firm when the investor moves or retires. AI therefore has a second possible role beyond answering questions: help make tacit analytical context more usable without pretending that every instinct has already been captured in a database.
Before a trade, the investor continuously monitors markets, relates current events across many data connections, finds historical analogues, asks why those earlier events occurred, observes the market response, and applies internal models. Only then comes the decision. Treating the final click as the whole job hides the research chain that produced conviction—and hides the portion machines can most plausibly accelerate.
Suggest correction
This note stays in this page until you copy or download it. Nothing is submitted; reloading clears the draft.
A weekend dashboard is not financial infrastructure
AI makes the old staffing model look deceptively compressible. A conventional desk might combine traders, quants, data scientists, and data engineers; a prototype can appear to replace that stack with one person and a few API calls. The illusion breaks when another person must rely on it. Production introduces security, databases, storage, reliability, and metered inference costs. The dashboard is only the visible layer.
Two tool patterns create different burdens:
- Pull tools: the investor prompts a model and supplies the missing context. If the model has stale temporal knowledge, the user wastes time correcting basic premises—Sokhal’s example is debating whether an event such as an FOMC meeting is today or tomorrow.
- Push tools: the system continuously sends developments to the investor. That can expose useful surprises, but without ranking and filtering it merely recreates the information flood as a data-engineering problem.
The product problem is to combine current information with investor-specific relevance, rather than choosing between stale answers and indiscriminate alerts.
There is also a training cost. Junior staff traditionally sit beside traders, listen to the desk, and absorb repeated patterns—“one ear on the desk and one ear” on the surrounding market. If every professional becomes a one-person pod supported by private agents, fewer people may share the environment where that context is learned. The efficiency calculation can therefore miss the loss of apprenticeship and institutional memory.
Full agent autonomy creates a more immediate boundary. The other side of a financial decision may be a client, a company, or a physical cargo. When something fails, the institution needs a person who can explain why the decision was made. An agent’s apology after leaking a credential is neither accountability nor recovery. The recording warns that small errors can compound, although it does not specify the controls, execution paths, or failure measurements behind that claim.
Suggest correction
This note stays in this page until you copy or download it. Nothing is submitted; reloading clears the draft.
Split the grind from the judgment
The proposed correction is to keep the brain in the loop and feed it better. Before deciding, an investor reads, gathers, cross-checks, and watches the market. Conflicting sources create additional questions: what is true, where do accounts diverge, and which source deserves trust? Those activities consume attention before judgment begins.
This creates a practical division of labor. Machines handle the grind: collecting material, cleaning data, monitoring updates, comparing sources, and preparing evidence. The investor handles judgment: deciding what the evidence means, whether it changes the thesis, and whether to trade. The line is not based on a claim that machines never reason; it is based on retaining human responsibility where uncertainty meets consequential action.
That boundary also changes the interface goal. A trader who says “I just want to trade” does not necessarily want a conversational partner for every fact. Useful assistance should reduce avoidable debate, push relevant blind spots, and preserve enough provenance for the investor to challenge the result. Conversation is optional. Inspectability is not.
Suggest correction
This note stays in this page until you copy or download it. Nothing is submitted; reloading clears the draft.
Moshi turns continuous monitoring into inspectable context
Moshi applies this split as a continuously running quant analyst for institutional traders. In the recording, six agents monitor markets around the clock and combine external market information with investor material from PDFs, email, and subscriptions. The orchestration is described as deterministic, but the talk does not reveal its routing, retry, consensus, or execution controls, so “deterministic” should not be read as a complete technical specification.
Scale alone is not the product. Sokhal reports that Moshi has processed 2.4 billion data points and learns 300 new things in four seconds. New context becomes useful only if the investor can ask where it came from, whether it is trustworthy, and whether the source’s opinion deserves weight. A confident statement with no reliable basis has no trading value.
The trust layer therefore measures hallucination, checks individual claims for traceability, and exposes the assumptions behind a conclusion. This mirrors the accountability expected from a human analyst: an investor wants both the answer and the path used to reach it. The recording does not specify the hallucination metric, evaluation set, acceptance thresholds, or treatment of conflicting sources, so it establishes the intended mechanism rather than its measured reliability.
The resulting flow keeps execution authority with the investor. Market and private inputs feed monitoring agents; their output passes through claim, source, and assumption checks; the resulting context reaches the person who decides whether and how to trade. Moshi’s job is to expand what that person can inspect, not to become the accountable trader.
Sokhal reports up to 35% greater efficiency, arguing that saved research time creates headroom for conviction and deeper analysis. The 2.4-billion scale figure, the four-second learning rate, and the efficiency claim are company-reported; the talk supplies no study design or denominator. The current supplied Moshi page also describes four specialist agents plus a manager rather than the recording’s six-agent setup, so the recorded topology may represent a different product version.
Push delivery is central to the intended benefit. A prompted model receives context from the user; a monitoring system can instead introduce a cross-asset development the investor did not know to ask about. That surprise can expose a blind spot and trigger a focused deep dive across broad market data and investor-specific material. Relevance matters as much as freshness: an endless stream of unranked novelty would simply rebuild the original attention problem.
Continuous coverage, reliability, and traceability are what turn this from a weekend tool into infrastructure. Other people must be able to trust the system, inspect its claims, and reconstruct the reasoning that informed a decision. The comparison with a human analyst is instructive: the important property is not that the analyst never errs, but that the institution can question the work and assign responsibility for acting on it.
How machine-scale monitoring feeds human judgment
Read the diagram as text
- Market data. inputs — Continuous developments across markets and other external sources.
- Investor data. inputs — PDFs, emails, subscriptions, and other investor-specific material.
- Monitoring agents. processing — The recording describes six agents watching and synthesizing information around the clock.
- Claims, sources, and assumptions. verification — Outputs are measured for hallucination, traced to sources, and accompanied by assumptions.
- Human investor. decision — Interprets the context and retains responsibility for the trade decision.
- Market data → Monitoring agents: continuous input.
- Investor data → Monitoring agents: personal context.
- Monitoring agents → Claims, sources, and assumptions: generated claims and synthesis.
- Claims, sources, and assumptions → Human investor: traceable context for judgment.
Suggest correction
This note stays in this page until you copy or download it. Nothing is submitted; reloading clears the draft.
The unresolved question is how much edge can be captured
The ending resists a clean automation claim. If edge lives in accumulated human context, how much of it can a machine capture? The talk leaves that open. Historical comparisons, source preferences, recurring assumptions, and explicit analytical procedures can be represented. Instinct formed through years of market exposure may be harder to extract, and encoding it can change what gets taught to the next generation.
Moshi’s public proposition is institutional-grade analysis without requiring every investor to operate a personal quant and data-science team. The ambition is economic as well as technical: spread the monitoring and synthesis capacity of a large desk across more individual decision-makers. But the final decision boundary remains the same. Before a trade, the machine can gather, compare, challenge, and explain. The investor still has to stand behind the choice.
Suggest correction
This note stays in this page until you copy or download it. Nothing is submitted; reloading clears the draft.
Resources
From the talk
The product page expands on Moshi’s market-monitoring, source-traceability, security, and invite-only institutional workflow. Its current four-specialist-plus-manager description differs from the six-agent architecture stated in the recording.
Related talks
- Build for the Memo, Not the Demo — Notes from 200 Investment Committees
A complementary finance-AI perspective on source weighting, contradictions, linked evidence, and producing defensible investment work rather than impressive demonstrations.
- How Kepler Built Verifiable AI for Financial Services
Explores the same need for auditable financial reasoning by separating probabilistic AI work from deterministic retrieval, computation, verification, and provenance.
- Trading Desks to Clinical Trials: Parallels in Applied Vertical AI
Extends the discussion of durable advantage in vertical AI through domain expertise, proprietary data, observability, and expert judgment.
Read the complete timestamped transcript
19 slide groups · 3 demo milestones. Extracted from the recording; expand builds to follow changes. Timestamps are approximate. 4 additional groups were omitted from this pass.
The best context is in the investor’s head
Anekha Sokhal introduces a talk on using the context financial investors carry in their heads when building with machines.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 The best context isn't in your database. It's in the investor's head. Anekha Sokhal Founder & CEO, Moshi AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 01 OCTOBER 13, 2026 BREAKOUT SESSION McCarthy Room Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p1#slide=id.p1
- 0:12
Hi, everyone. Thank you so much for coming to my talk. I'm Anekha. I'm the founder and CEO of Moshi, and I'm gonna be talking about a financial investor's context that lives in their head and how we can use that when we're building with machines today. So I wanna do a quick show of hands. How many people in this room are overwhelmed by the amount of data they have when making a decision?
More data, less attention
IDC’s 2018 forecast puts 2025 data at roughly 175 zettabytes. The chart contrasts its steep rise with flat attention, a gap Sokhal frames as a daily challenge for financial investors.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 02 · THE PARADOX More data. Less attention. IDC forecast ~175 zettabytes of data for 2025. The flood went vertical. Your attention stayed flat, and money is lost in the gap. 175 ZB data / year your attention · flat Timeline: 2010, 2015, 2020, 2025 Source: IDC Data Age 2025, 2018 forecast AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 02 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p2#slide=id.p2
More data, less attention
IDC’s 2018 forecast puts 2025 data at roughly 175 zettabytes. The chart contrasts its steep rise with flat attention, a gap Sokhal frames as a daily challenge for financial investors.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 02 · THE PARADOX More data. Less attention. IDC forecast ~175 zettabytes of data for 2025. The flood went vertical. Your attention stayed flat, and money is lost in the gap. 175 ZB data / year your attention · flat Timeline: 2010, 2015, 2020, 2025 Source: IDC Data Age 2025, 2018 forecast AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 02 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p2#slide=id.p2
- 0:37
Okay. And how many feel like they've got less attention now today with all the amount of data? And so that's the exact paradox that financial investors have every day. So in 2025 last year, the world made about 175 zettabytes of data. That's expe- exponentially higher than what we had two decades ago. So before we were lucky if we had an internet connection, we had newspapers, books. But
More data, less attention
IDC’s 2018 forecast puts 2025 data at roughly 175 zettabytes. The chart contrasts its steep rise with flat attention, a gap Sokhal frames as a daily challenge for financial investors.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 02 · THE PARADOX More data. Less attention. IDC forecast ~175 zettabytes of data for 2025. The flood went vertical. Your attention stayed flat, and money is lost in the gap. 175 ZB data / year your attention · flat Timeline: 2010, 2015, 2020, 2025 Source: IDC Data Age 2025, 2018 forecast AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 02 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p2#slide=id.p2
- 1:07
nowadays we have all of that, plus the context that lives in PDFs, subscriptions, lots of different, uh, podcasts, and also a stream of never-ending information coming on X and LinkedIn. So what does that mean for financial investors? Because more data does not equate to more information. It actually just gives everyone the same flood of information, but your attention is the flat line across everything. So for financial professionals who actually are
Finance has a synthesis problem
Financial professionals must synthesize a growing flood of information while their attention stays flat, widening the gap between available data and the time to make sense of it.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 03 · THE PARADOX Finance doesn’t have a data problem. It has a synthesis problem. More data than ever. Less time to make sense of it. AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 03 OCTOBER 13, 2026 BREAKOUT SESSION McCarthy Room Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p3#slide=id.p3
- 1:37
paid on financial synthesis, what happens between the gap between attention and data? It just gets wider and wider and wider.
Finance has a synthesis problem
Financial professionals must synthesize a growing flood of information while their attention stays flat, widening the gap between available data and the time to make sense of it.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 03 · THE PARADOX Finance doesn’t have a data problem. It has a synthesis problem. More data than ever. Less time to make sense of it. AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 03 OCTOBER 13, 2026 BREAKOUT SESSION McCarthy Room Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p3#slide=id.p3
I've sat on both sides of this
Anekha Sokhal moved from nearly a decade trading energy derivatives into machine learning, then combined the two in Moshi, a 24/7 AI quant analyst for institutional investors.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 04 · WHO'S TALKING I've sat on both sides of this. Nearly a decade on the desk • Trading energy derivatives • The context lived in my head. Then, machine learning • Fulbright-Elsevier Data Analytics Award • ML Systems NASA • ICLR 2026 Now building Moshi • 24/7 AI quant analyst for institutional investors J.P.Morgan FULBRIGHT RICE UNIVERSITY NASA MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 04 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p4#slide=id.p4 OCTOBER 13, 2026 BREAKOUT SESSION McCarthy Room
- 1:47
So who am I? I've sat on both sides of the table. So I was... Uh, I've spent my career fascinated by data, um, and I've spent my career working in it. So I was a tr- derivative trader for nearly a decade, and then I moved into data science and machine learning. Uh, so I got a Fulbright scholarship to study machine learning, and I got a paper at ICLR, uh, working on machine learning systems with NASA, and now I've married those two. So those two worlds being Moshi. Moshi is your 24/7 quant analyst,
I've sat on both sides of this
Anekha Sokhal moved from nearly a decade trading energy derivatives into machine learning, then combined the two in Moshi, a 24/7 AI quant analyst for institutional investors.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 04 · WHO'S TALKING I've sat on both sides of this. Nearly a decade on the desk • Trading energy derivatives • The context lived in my head. Then, machine learning • Fulbright-Elsevier Data Analytics Award • ML Systems NASA • ICLR 2026 Now building Moshi • 24/7 AI quant analyst for institutional investors J.P.Morgan FULBRIGHT RICE UNIVERSITY NASA MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 04 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p4#slide=id.p4 OCTOBER 13, 2026 BREAKOUT SESSION McCarthy Room
- 2:17
which works watching the markets 24/7 and understanding what is going on and what matters to a financial investor. Having sat on both sides, I can understand what the strengths are for both of them, and that's what I wanna go into deep today.
The machine you're trying to beat
Sokhal contrasts the whole brain’s roughly 20 watts with 100 MW+ of facility-scale demand, then asks where AI should support human decision-making. The slide cautions that this is not an efficiency ratio.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 05 · THE MACHINE YOU'RE TRYING TO BEAT The most powerful machine in finance already runs on 20 watts. THE HUMAN BRAIN 20 watts roughly 20 watts for the whole brain HYPERSCALE AI DATA CENTRES 100 MW+ facility-scale power demand Different strengths. Very different energy budgets. Sources: Levy & Calvert, PNAS (2021); IEA, Energy and AI (2025). Whole brain vs. facility, not an efficiency ratio. AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 05 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p5#slide=id.p5 OCTOBER 13, 2026 BREAKOUT SESSION McCarthy Room
- 2:34
So I wanna talk about the machine that everyone is trying to beat. So a human brain, to give you context, runs on about 20 watts, which is the power of a dim light bulb. Uh, so it's 86 billion neurons in the brain, and it's making connections that we still can't understand. And that is on the power of a light bulb. And the systems that we are trying to imitate, which we're trying to imitate just a sliver of that power, they
The machine you're trying to beat
Sokhal contrasts the whole brain’s roughly 20 watts with 100 MW+ of facility-scale demand, then asks where AI should support human decision-making. The slide cautions that this is not an efficiency ratio.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 05 · THE MACHINE YOU'RE TRYING TO BEAT The most powerful machine in finance already runs on 20 watts. THE HUMAN BRAIN 20 watts roughly 20 watts for the whole brain HYPERSCALE AI DATA CENTRES 100 MW+ facility-scale power demand Different strengths. Very different energy budgets. Sources: Levy & Calvert, PNAS (2021); IEA, Energy and AI (2025). Whole brain vs. facility, not an efficiency ratio. AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 05 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p5#slide=id.p5 OCTOBER 13, 2026 BREAKOUT SESSION McCarthy Room
- 3:04
need a whole power plant to, to run. So just in terms of efficiency, the human brain is something like multiple millions, multiple times more powerful than whatever systems that we're trying to... Uh, whatever we're trying to build. And so that actually... What that actually means is it, it's important for where you're trying to point that technology. So at which point in the decision-making, uh, cycle do you point the technology, which is AI, which we're what... We're
- 3:34
building? Because if the most efficient reasoning engine sits between your two ears, then... And it's running on a 20-watt light bulb, where does machine learning actually sit in that? And so do you try and replace it, which is what AI is trying to... What I feel that AI is trying to do every day, or do you actually feed it?
The machine you're trying to beat
Sokhal contrasts the whole brain’s roughly 20 watts with 100 MW+ of facility-scale demand, then asks where AI should support human decision-making. The slide cautions that this is not an efficiency ratio.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 05 · THE MACHINE YOU'RE TRYING TO BEAT The most powerful machine in finance already runs on 20 watts. THE HUMAN BRAIN 20 watts roughly 20 watts for the whole brain HYPERSCALE AI DATA CENTRES 100 MW+ facility-scale power demand Different strengths. Very different energy budgets. Sources: Levy & Calvert, PNAS (2021); IEA, Energy and AI (2025). Whole brain vs. facility, not an efficiency ratio. AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 05 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p5#slide=id.p5 OCTOBER 13, 2026 BREAKOUT SESSION McCarthy Room
What an investor actually wants: edge
Sokhal describes investor edge as knowing information first, seeing blind spots and having the conviction to size up a trade.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 06 · WHAT AN INVESTOR ACTUALLY WANTS EDGE Know it first asymmetric information See the blind spot the risk you can't see Size up with conviction the trade that makes your year AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 06 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p6#slide=id.p6 OCTOBER 13, 2026 BREAKOUT SESSION McCarthy Room
- 3:56
So let's take a few steps back to understand how a trader's brain or a financial investor actually thinks. So what do people actually want? Any investor you speak to is looking for the same thing, edge. What is edge? So edge is in practice just three things. I want to know what's going on before anyone else is. I want to know my blind spots, so tell me the second- and third-order derivatives of what's happening. And also I want to have the conviction on what I'm doing so that I can size up on a trade that I believe in.
What an investor actually wants: edge
Sokhal describes investor edge as knowing information first, seeing blind spots and having the conviction to size up a trade.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 06 · WHAT AN INVESTOR ACTUALLY WANTS EDGE Know it first asymmetric information See the blind spot the risk you can't see Size up with conviction the trade that makes your year AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 06 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p6#slide=id.p6 OCTOBER 13, 2026 BREAKOUT SESSION McCarthy Room
- 4:27
All those three together give you edge. So now here's the problem. If you're building in this space and everyone has access to the same models and they have access to the same systems, then what is edge, right? Is it a skills file? Is it a whole bunch of MCP connectors? Is it just a better prompt? Is it a better model? Every con- everyone has access to all of that. So if everyone has access to all of these things, then
The uncomfortable question
Sokhal argues that an investor’s edge comes from expertise built over decades, while models and connectors are readily available. When the investor leaves or retires, that knowledge leaves with them.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 07 · THE UNCOMFORTABLE QUESTION If everyone calls the same models, where's the edge? A .skills file Better MCP connectors The model itself Everyone can buy all of that by this afternoon. The edge is the thing you can't download. It's in the trader's head. And when they leave, their IP walks out the door with them. AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 07 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p7#slide=id.p7
The uncomfortable question
Sokhal argues that an investor’s edge comes from expertise built over decades, while models and connectors are readily available. When the investor leaves or retires, that knowledge leaves with them.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 07 · THE UNCOMFORTABLE QUESTION If everyone calls the same models, where's the edge? A .skills file Better MCP connectors The model itself Everyone can buy all of that by this afternoon. The edge is the thing you can't download. It's in the trader's head. And when they leave, their IP walks out the door with them. AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 07 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p7#slide=id.p7
The uncomfortable question
Sokhal argues that an investor’s edge comes from expertise built over decades, while models and connectors are readily available. When the investor leaves or retires, that knowledge leaves with them.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 07 · THE UNCOMFORTABLE QUESTION If everyone calls the same models, where's the edge? A .skills file Better MCP connectors The model itself Everyone can buy all of that by this afternoon. The edge is the thing you can't download. It's in the trader's head. And when they leave, their IP walks out the door with them. AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 07 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p7#slide=id.p7
- 4:56
what is edge? So the edge is actually what you can't download. It what... It's what sits in an investor's head. And how do they get that? It's decades of working and learning from some of the best traders in the industry and sitting next to them. And here's the concerning part. What happens when you have an investor and everything lives in their head when they move firms or they retire? That IP leaves with them.
- 5:24
So I think before we even start to think about how AI fits into all of this, we have to actually understand what a financial investor is doing. They're keeping up with the markets, which are now moving 24/7. They're trying to understand what is going on and how they relate to each other, so those billions of different data connections. They're trying to compare and understand the historical significance of the event happening right now, what happened in the past, why it happened, and what the market did when it
A financial investor’s day
Investors follow markets, connect information, compare events, aggregate and run models before deciding. The purple final box keeps the decision with the investor.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 09 · WHERE COULD A MACHINE FIT? A financial investor’s day. Keep up → Synthesise → Compare → Aggregate → Run models → Decide The last box is a different colour on purpose. Hold onto who it belongs to. AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 09 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p9#slide=id.p9 OCTOBER 13, 2026 BREAKOUT SESSION McCarthy Room
A financial investor’s day
Investors follow markets, connect information, compare events, aggregate and run models before deciding. The purple final box keeps the decision with the investor.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 09 · WHERE COULD A MACHINE FIT? A financial investor’s day. Keep up → Synthesise → Compare → Aggregate → Run models → Decide The last box is a different colour on purpose. Hold onto who it belongs to. AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 09 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p9#slide=id.p9 OCTOBER 13, 2026 BREAKOUT SESSION McCarthy Room
- 5:54
happened, and trying to piece all of that together and then run it on the models that they have. And then the last part is actually make a decision. So there's a lot that takes place before actually making a financial decision. So I just wanna keep the last bit with you, which is the decision-making. So let's take think about what AI actually changed. So before, if you worked in finance, you'd have a team of quants, data scientists, data engineers, traders
- 6:24
who are all working together to build this decision-making engine. So it's a whole stack of very expensive and very qualified people. However, with AI, these tools made you believe that you actually don't need any of these people. What you need is one person, a few API calls, and you've replaced that whole stack of people. But here's the gap that no one actually talks about. Once you've spent your weekend building a dashboard, the moment you actually want to productionize that and share it with
- 6:54
one more person, you now have to think about security, a database. You have to think about storage, reliability, and the biggest thing in all is credits. How do you actually run the systems? And so what we've seen is pricing has changed. People are no longer pricing by tools, but they're pricing for every API call. So now if everyone is building the same tools, what actually makes it different? And so there's two types of tools in finance. One is the p- tools that you pull data
The bill changed shape
Moshi contrasts paying for people and software licences with pricing for every API call. A system shared with others also needs security, storage and credits.
Text in image
10 · WHAT AI ACTUALLY CHANGED The bill changed shape. BEFORE You paid for tools a stack of expensive people + software licences NOW You pay for every call anyone can build it, few can differentiate A dashboard for you ≠ a system for everyone (database, security, storage, credits). MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 10 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p10#slide=id.p10
- 7:24
from, and one, the tools you push data to. And so if you're prompting a model, you are the context. You're explaining to it. You're arguing with a model that's frozen in time, which is telling you, "Hey, go to bed at 2:00 AM. It's late now," when actually it's 3:00 PM on a Wednesday. And all of that, if you think about comparing it to reasoning with a human, it's absolutely no comparison. And then you've got the type of tool which pushes data to you, and that's the tool where it's flooding you with information, and that's a data engineering problem.
Pull, push, and a model stuck in time
Pull tools depend on users for context; without live data, a model can miss recent changes. Push tools bring a flood of information, making it a data engineering challenge to determine what's real, true, or disputed.
Text in image
Pull, push, and a model stuck in time. MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 11 · TWO KINDS OF TOOLS PULL You supply the context. You sit and prompt. You supply the context, and without live data the model can miss what changed today. PUSH The world comes to you. The hard part isn't the model. It's data engineering: in a flood this big, what's real, what's true, where do people disagree? AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 11 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p11#slide=id.p11 OCTOBER 13, 2026 BREAKOUT SESSION McCarthy Room
- 7:54
So when you have these two tools, and you've got different problems that you're solving for, one is context, and then the other one is the amount of data, you've got to think about what the trader's actually using and what's... what they think about in each of these different tools. And the one thing that it... we're seeing is quietly breaking is that in finance, when you join a bank or you join, join a fund, you sit next to a trader or a team, and you absorb everything that's going on, and you
Pull, push, and a model stuck in time
Pull tools depend on users for context; without live data, a model can miss recent changes. Push tools bring a flood of information, making it a data engineering challenge to determine what's real, true, or disputed.
Text in image
Pull, push, and a model stuck in time. MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 11 · TWO KINDS OF TOOLS PULL You supply the context. You sit and prompt. You supply the context, and without live data the model can miss what changed today. PUSH The world comes to you. The hard part isn't the model. It's data engineering: in a flood this big, what's real, what's true, where do people disagree? AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 11 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p11#slide=id.p11 Engineering the future of AI
The judgment stops compounding
Analysts learn judgment by sitting beside traders and absorbing their decisions. Sokhal argues that one-person pods could interrupt that transfer to the next generation.
Text in image
12 · THE QUIET COST The judgment stops compounding. MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 In banking, training an analyst is years of sitting next to risk. Consistency is what pays, not the one lucky win. That knowledge transfers human to human. human → human judgment compounds across people everyone a solo pod ...and that transfer just stops happening AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 12 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p12#slide=id.p12 Engineering the future of AI
- 8:23
learn from them, and you just listen to everything. You have one ear on the desk and one ear around everything else that's going on, and it's consistency that pays off. And if everyone is going to be running their own teams as one-person pods, then what happens to that future generation of context that's coming in? And that's the real cost that right now people are not pricing in. And so in finance, you can't just hand the decision-making loop to a team of agents. Why? Because the other side of the trade is a client. If
- 8:53
it's in a commodities trade, it's a cargo, a physical cargo. If it's a company, it's a team of c- people. And so what happens in finance when something goes wrong is you need a human to go and stand up and say, "I made the decision for this reason." If an agent leaks your API key, all it says is, "Oops, I'm sorry. I shouldn't have done that. Please rotate it." And you can't have that in finance because im- like, an agent is just self-correcting, and the one small error is just exponentially getting bigger.
Why the human still decides
Sokhal argues that financial decisions need a human who can explain them. An agent’s apology is inadequate when $100M and five people’s jobs are at stake, and unchecked agents can repeat errors.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 13 · WHY THE HUMAN STILL DECIDES An agent leaks your API key and says: “oops, sorry.” Fine in a demo. Not when the decision moves $100M and five people's jobs. Without independent checks, a chain of agents can repeat a small error instead of catching it. AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 13 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p13#slide=id.p13
Why the human still decides
Sokhal argues that financial decisions need a human who can explain them. An agent’s apology is inadequate when $100M and five people’s jobs are at stake, and unchecked agents can repeat errors.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 13 · WHY THE HUMAN STILL DECIDES An agent leaks your API key and says: “oops, sorry.” Fine in a demo. Not when the decision moves $100M and five people's jobs. Without independent checks, a chain of agents can repeat a small error instead of catching it. AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 13 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p13#slide=id.p13
- 9:26
So this is the question that I've been leading to, which is if the brain is the most powerful tool we have, why are we spending everything trying to push it out of the loop? Why don't we flip that problem, and instead of replacing it, why don't we just feed it? And so if you think about what's in a trader's head, they've got everything leading up to the, uh, to the trade itself, but before that, there's a whole bunch of other work that takes place. They're reading. They're gathering information. They're
The reframe
Sokhal proposes feeding the human brain with information instead of pushing it out of the loop.
Text in image
14 · THE REFRAME If the brain is the most powerful tool we have, why spend everything pushing it out of the loop? Don’t replace the brain. Feed it. MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 14 Event overlay: OCTOBER 13, 2026 · BREAKOUT SESSION McCarthy Room Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p14#slide=id.p14
Show 2 builds
- 9:28
A slide asks why the brain is being pushed out of the loop and says to feed it instead of replacing it.
Text in image
14 · THE REFRAME If the brain is the most powerful tool we have, why spend everything pushing it out of the loop? Don’t replace the brain. Feed it. MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 14 Event overlay: OCTOBER 13, 2026 · BREAKOUT SESSION McCarthy Room Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p14#slide=id.p14
- 9:31
Slide asks why the brain is pushed out of the loop and says to feed it rather than replace it.
Text in image
14 · THE REFRAME If the brain is the most powerful tool we have, why spend everything pushing it out of the loop? Don’t replace the brain. Feed it. MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 14 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p14#slide=id.p14
- 9:28
Inside an investor’s head
Sokhal proposes assigning the time-consuming reading, gathering, cross-checking and monitoring to machines, while the human makes the decision.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 15 · SPLIT THE WORK Inside an investor’s head. THE GRIND machines are extraordinary at this Reading · Gathering Cross-checking · Watching Monitoring risk & trades THE JUDGMENT stays human The decision. And the grind is exactly what eats the whole day. That's the opening. AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 15 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p15#slide=id.p15
Inside an investor’s head
Sokhal proposes assigning the time-consuming reading, gathering, cross-checking and monitoring to machines, while the human makes the decision.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 15 · SPLIT THE WORK Inside an investor’s head. THE GRIND machines are extraordinary at this Reading · Gathering Cross-checking · Watching Monitoring risk & trades THE JUDGMENT stays human The decision. And the grind is exactly what eats the whole day. That's the opening. AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 15 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p15#slide=id.p15
- 9:55
cross-checking. Uh, they're watching the market. Because we have so much information now, the biggest question people have is what is the truth? What is, what is actually the different sources saying? What is the divergence of information? How can I trust what is out there? And once I've done all of that, then I've actually got the decision. So if we split it into two different parts, we understand that some of it, well, is all the grind, the reading, the gathering, the data cleaning,
Inside an investor’s head
Sokhal proposes assigning the time-consuming reading, gathering, cross-checking and monitoring to machines, while the human makes the decision.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 15 · SPLIT THE WORK Inside an investor’s head. THE GRIND machines are extraordinary at this Reading · Gathering Cross-checking · Watching Monitoring risk & trades THE JUDGMENT stays human The decision. And the grind is exactly what eats the whole day. That's the opening. AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 15 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p15#slide=id.p15
- 10:25
and some of it is judgment, which is the decision. And machines are incredible at the grind. They're incredible at cleaning data. They're incredible at gathering data. And then the human is incredible at the decision-making. So why not just split those into two separate parts? And this is what brings us to Moshi, which is what we've built. It's a 24/7 quant analyst for institutional traders, and what that means is we are running a team of six different agents, which are built in
- 10:55
a deter- de- deterministic manner, which are watching the market 24/7, more data than is humanly possible, plus the investor's data, which lives in PDFs, emails, different subscriptions, understanding all of that in a way that is making the t- the trader a better decision-maker. So Moshi has read 2.4 billion data points, and in the four seconds it took you to read that sentence, Moshi has learnt 300 new things.
2.4 billion data points
Moshi has read 2.4 billion data points and, the slide says, learned more than 300 new things in four seconds. The speaker describes those new things as context for the model.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 Moshi has read 2.4 billion data points. In the four seconds it took to read that sentence, Moshi learned more than 300 new things. AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 17 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p17#slide=id.p17 AI Engineer
- 11:25
And in those 300 new things that it's learnt, that's new context for the model. The issue with that is new context is worthless if you don't actually know is it trustworthy, where does it come from, do I even value this analyst's opinion? Because in finance, even if it's a really confident answer, if it's wrong, then it's worth nothing. And so what do we do? We measure it. We measure the hallucination. We measure every claim. We sh- see how it's
New context must be trustworthy
Moshi shows sources behind an answer for investors to inspect. Sokhal says the team measures hallucinations and every claim because a confident wrong answer can cost money.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 18 · EARNED, NOT ASSUMED New context is worthless if you can't trust it. Inspect the evidence Sources behind the answer NEWS firstpost.com HCLTech partners with Anthropic to set up dedicated agentic AI business unit 15h NEWS moneycontrol.com Microsoft bets on homegrown AI chip to challenge Nvidia 15h NEWS indiatimes.com Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan may have just agreed with Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang and Meta's former chief AI scientist Yann L... 15h NEWS yahoo.com Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang: AI data center buildout could create 1 million jobs and reshape the US economy 13d NEWS seekingalpha.com Jacobs wins three-year SaaS contract for Nvidia R&D facility 13d NEWS digitaltrends.com AI’s massive appetite could make cheap smartphones much harder to find 8d NEWS firstpost.com ‘Huge shortage’: Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei turns to Elon Musk amid AI chip crunch 1h NEWS indiatimes.com NTT Data in final talks to build Anthropic's first data centre in Japan, Nikkei reports 1h For an investor, a confident but wrong answer costs real money. AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 18 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p18#slide=id.p18
- 11:54
traceable, and we also, uh, give the user the assumptions that we've had and how we've led to that decision. Because if an investor asks you about your opinion, they don't just wanna know what you think. They want to know how you came to that reasoning
- 12:11
And so what we do is we leave the decision-making with the human because we believe that that is what humans do best. There's no machine more powerful than the brain. But everything else that you need to run is what we give you. So we believe that every single firm is running these desks of quants, of data engineers, of data scientists, and that's what we give you because it's impossible to run that per human. It's impossible to run your own quant and data science team, and it also doesn't make sense. Economics-wise, it
The decision stays yours
Moshi presents a quant and data-science desk for each person while leaving the decision to the human, shown by the YOURS label above the Decide button.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 19 · WHAT WE DO, PRECISELY The decision stays yours. We give every team the thing only the biggest firms could afford: your own quant and data-science desk, per person, working exactly the way it works inside a top shop. YOURS Decide Not to make the call for you. To give you the conviction to make it better. AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 19 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p19#slide=id.p19
- 12:41
just is too much to run per person. And so that's what we do. We run an institutional-grade anal- uh, analyst how it works in bigger institutions to actually give you that conviction to make better trades. So what does that actually buy you? It buys you more efficiency, up to 35% more, so that you can actually spend time to have the head space to have more conviction on the trades that you wanna do. So if you speak to a lot of traders, they'll say to you, "Hey, I don't wanna speak to anyone all day. I
The outcome
Moshi claims up to 35% greater efficiency, giving traders more time and headspace for decisions instead of spending the day prompting a chatbot.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 20 · THE OUTCOME 35% more efficient “I just want to trade. I don't want to talk to anyone.” a trader So why hand him a chatbot to prompt all day? Moshi is you, on steroids, so you spend your day doing the one thing you're best at. measured: hallucination · data lineage · latency AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 20 Interface text: docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p20#slide=id.p20 OCTOBER 13, 2026 BREAKOUT SESSION McCarthy Room
- 13:11
just want to trade." So why are you giving these people just LLMs to talk to and to debate, "Hey, is FOMC today or is it tomorrow?" And then the LLM is saying it's tomorrow when it's today. That's just a complete waste of time. And so that's the opposite of what investors want. They want something that can give them the power to reason more and use their brain. So Moshi isn't you. Moshi isn't a model. It's, um-- it is you on steroids, which is the same instinct, but
The outcome
Moshi claims up to 35% greater efficiency, giving traders more time and headspace for decisions instead of spending the day prompting a chatbot.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 20 · THE OUTCOME 35% more efficient “I just want to trade. I don't want to talk to anyone.” a trader So why hand him a chatbot to prompt all day? Moshi is you, on steroids, so you spend your day doing the one thing you're best at. measured: hallucination · data lineage · latency AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 20 Interface text: docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p20#slide=id.p20 OCTOBER 13, 2026 BREAKOUT SESSION McCarthy Room
The outcome
Moshi claims up to 35% greater efficiency, giving traders more time and headspace for decisions instead of spending the day prompting a chatbot.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 20 · THE OUTCOME 35% more efficient “I just want to trade. I don't want to talk to anyone.” a trader So why hand him a chatbot to prompt all day? Moshi is you, on steroids, so you spend your day doing the one thing you're best at. measured: hallucination · data lineage · latency AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 20 Interface text: docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p20#slide=id.p20 OCTOBER 13, 2026 BREAKOUT SESSION McCarthy Room
The outcome
Moshi claims up to 35% greater efficiency, giving traders more time and headspace for decisions instead of spending the day prompting a chatbot.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 20 · THE OUTCOME 35% more efficient “I just want to trade. I don't want to talk to anyone.” a trader So why hand him a chatbot to prompt all day? Moshi is you, on steroids, so you spend your day doing the one thing you're best at. measured: hallucination · data lineage · latency AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 20 Interface text: docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p20#slide=id.p20
The outcome
Moshi claims up to 35% greater efficiency, giving traders more time and headspace for decisions instead of spending the day prompting a chatbot.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 20 · THE OUTCOME 35% more efficient “I just want to trade. I don't want to talk to anyone.” a trader So why hand him a chatbot to prompt all day? Moshi is you, on steroids, so you spend your day doing the one thing you're best at. measured: hallucination · data lineage · latency AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 20 Interface text: docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p20#slide=id.p20 OCTOBER 13, 2026 BREAKOUT SESSION McCarthy Room
- 13:41
fed by all the data that lives in different parts so that you can actually spend your time decision-making instead of debating when FOMC is.
The outcome
Moshi claims up to 35% greater efficiency, giving traders more time and headspace for decisions instead of spending the day prompting a chatbot.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 20 · THE OUTCOME 35% more efficient “I just want to trade. I don't want to talk to anyone.” a trader So why hand him a chatbot to prompt all day? Moshi is you, on steroids, so you spend your day doing the one thing you're best at. measured: hallucination · data lineage · latency AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 20 Interface text: docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p20#slide=id.p20 OCTOBER 13, 2026 BREAKOUT SESSION McCarthy Room
- 13:52
In, in terms of the scale, we watch over two point four billion data points, and it's growing every millisecond. And so that's decades of derivatives trading knowledge around the clock, which is what it-- no, no one person can build. And then it's the pushing of the data. So when you're pulling data from an LLM, you are giving it the context on an old model. When you're getting pushed new data, it's forcing your brain to think about new things and make connections in ways that you didn't
Live demo: follow-up answer
Moshi demonstrates a follow-up on how AI chip shortages affect data-center demand, asking it to separate reported facts from inference and cite sources. The speaker says Moshi watches over 2.4 billion data points.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 21 · LIVE DEMO Billions+ data points. Growing every millisecond. 1 Scale, shown not claimed 2 The blind-spot push 3 Deep dive, with sources Ask a follow-up 02 / Generation wait shortened What does this AI chip shortage mean for data-center demand? Separate reported facts from inference and cite the sources. What the AI Chip Shortage Means for Data-Center Demand 1. The Supply-Demand Gap — Reported Facts CLSA estimates GPU and custom AI chip demand currently exceeds supply by approximately 73%. That gap is not narrowing quickly: CLSA projects the AI chip shortage could persist until roughly 2030, not peak in 2028 as some expect. On the manufacturing side, TSMC is effectively sold out until 2029, and memory supply is similar. Even Nvidia cannot close the gap: Nvidia can only meet 70% of the demand they have for calendar 2027, with visibility into 2028 and 2029. Intel is in a worse position: Intel stated capacity to meet only about 50% of orders, with Broadcom discussing a shortage that might ease by 2028 or 2029, while the broader imbalance could persist into 2030. The asymmetry between demand and supply growth is stark: Reconciling sources... 94s · Thought for 3s Enough data to answer Connect your PDFs, emails and subscriptions, and Moshi brings them into the analysis. AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 21 OCTOBER 13, 2026 BREAKOUT SESSION McCarthy Room Interface text: Google Slides: docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p21#slide=id.p21
13:52Demo milestone
Live demo: agreements and differences
Moshi compares claims about the AI chip shortage, separating agreements from differences over its duration and whether power or capital is the main constraint.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 21 · LIVE DEMO Billions+ data points. Growing every millisecond. 1 Scale, shown not claimed 2 The blind-spot push 3 Deep dive, with sources Review agreements and differences 03 / Answer AGREEMENTS · 4 GPU and AI chip supply is severely constrained, with demand exceeding supply by approximately 73% and TSMC sold out until 2029 while Nvidia can only meet 70% of 2027 demand. Power infrastructure, not chip supply, is the binding constraint on data-center buildout, with Morgan Stanley forecasting a 34% net power shortfall through 2028 and 57 gigawatts of incremental shortfall from 2026–2028. Hyperscalers are responding to the shortage by accelerating capex, with combined capex expected to exceed $1 trillion in 2027 and Microsoft tripling data-center capacity from 12 GW to 38 GW. Memory costs are rising sharply due to AI demand, with H100 rental costs up 60% over the past year and Nvidia planning a 15% price increase on Vera Rubin and Grace Blackwell processors. DIVERGENCES · 2 Shortage duration estimates vary: CLSA projects shortage persisting until 2030 while Broadcom expects shortage to ease by 2028–2029. On the primary constraint: Morgan Stanley identifies power as dwarfing semiconductor constraints while Intel and Broadcom CEOs warn capital and cost of capital could be the binding constraint. CAVEATS · 4 Worked for 168s · 4 analysts · 11 steps · View SQL · Sources (263) · Partial grounding 16/39 · 0.41 · past 89 days Connect your PDFs, emails and subscriptions, and Moshi brings them into the analysis. AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 21 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p21#slide=id.p21 OCTOBER 13, 2026 · BREAKOUT SESSION McCarthy Room
13:56Demo milestone
Live demo: sources
Moshi says it watches over 2.4 billion data points and pushes new data to prompt connections. The demo shows 263 sources behind the analysis.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 21 · LIVE DEMO Billions+ data points. Growing every millisecond. 1 Scale, shown not claimed 2 The blind-spot push 3 Deep dive, with sources Go back to the evidence 04 / Sources Sources (263) NEWS brantfordexpositor.ca Contracted Capacity Becomes Key Metric for AI Infrastructure Investors to Watch · 15h NEWS yahoo.com FTAI Aviation, Custom Truck One Source, EMCOR, Caterpillar, and Alta Stocks Trade Up, What You Need To Know · 6d NEWS yahoo.com Can Meta’s C$13 Billion Alberta Bet Strengthen its AI Infrastructure Advantage? · 14d NEWS marketscreener.com HCL Technologies Enters Global Premier Partnership with Anthropic · 15h NEWS yahoo.com ChatGPT Sells Broadcom (AVGO) and Buys This Online Retailer · 15h NEWS yahoo.com Amazon Reportedly In Talks To Acquire AI Startup Decart For $7 Billion · 15h NEWS firstpost.com HCLTech partners with Anthropic to set up dedicated agentic AI business unit · 15h NEWS moneycontrol.com Microsoft bets on homegrown AI chip to challenge Nvidia · 15h NEWS indiatimes.com Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan may have just agreed with Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang and Meta’s former chief AI scientist Yann L... · 15h NEWS yahoo.com Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang: AI data center buildout could create 1 million jobs and reshape the US economy · 13d NEWS seekingalpha.com Jacobs wins three-year SaaS contract for Nvidia R&D facility · 13d NEWS digitaltrends.com AI’s massive appetite could make cheap smartphones much harder to find · 8d NEWS firstpost.com ‘Huge shortage’: Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei turns to Elon Musk amid AI chip crunch · 1h NEWS indiatimes.com [illegible] Connect your PDFs, emails and subscriptions, and Moshi brings them into the analysis. AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 21 OCTOBER 13, 2026 BREAKOUT SESSION McCarthy Room Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p21#slide=id.p21
13:59Demo milestone
Live demo: agreements and differences
Moshi compares claims about the AI chip shortage, separating agreements from differences over its duration and whether power or capital is the main constraint.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 21 · LIVE DEMO Billions+ data points. Growing every millisecond. 1 Scale, shown not claimed 2 The blind-spot push 3 Deep dive, with sources Review agreements and differences 03 / Answer AGREEMENTS · 4 GPU and AI chip supply is severely constrained, with demand exceeding supply by approximately 73% and TSMC sold out until 2029 while Nvidia can only meet 70% of 2027 demand. Power infrastructure, not chip supply, is the binding constraint on data-center buildout, with Morgan Stanley forecasting a 34% net power shortfall through 2028 and 57 gigawatts of incremental shortfall from 2026–2028. Hyperscalers are responding to the shortage by accelerating capex, with combined capex expected to exceed $1 trillion in 2027 and Microsoft tripling data-center capacity from 12 GW to 38 GW. Memory costs are rising sharply due to AI demand, with H100 rental costs up 60% over the past year and Nvidia planning a 15% price increase on Vera Rubin and Grace Blackwell processors. DIVERGENCES · 2 Shortage duration estimates vary: CLSA projects shortage persisting until 2030 while Broadcom expects shortage to ease by 2028–2029. On the primary constraint: Morgan Stanley identifies power as dwarfing semiconductor constraints while Intel and Broadcom CEOs warn capital and cost of capital could be the binding constraint. CAVEATS · 4 Worked for 168s · 4 analysts · 11 steps · View SQL · Sources (263) · Partial grounding 16/39 · 0.41 · past 89 days Connect your PDFs, emails and subscriptions, and Moshi brings them into the analysis. AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 21 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p21#slide=id.p21 OCTOBER 13, 2026 · BREAKOUT SESSION McCarthy Room
14:02Demo milestone
Live demo: agreements and differences
Moshi compares claims about the AI chip shortage, separating agreements from differences over its duration and whether power or capital is the main constraint.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 21 · LIVE DEMO Billions+ data points. Growing every millisecond. 1 Scale, shown not claimed 2 The blind-spot push 3 Deep dive, with sources Review agreements and differences 03 / Answer AGREEMENTS · 4 GPU and AI chip supply is severely constrained, with demand exceeding supply by approximately 73% and TSMC sold out until 2029 while Nvidia can only meet 70% of 2027 demand. Power infrastructure, not chip supply, is the binding constraint on data-center buildout, with Morgan Stanley forecasting a 34% net power shortfall through 2028 and 57 gigawatts of incremental shortfall from 2026–2028. Hyperscalers are responding to the shortage by accelerating capex, with combined capex expected to exceed $1 trillion in 2027 and Microsoft tripling data-center capacity from 12 GW to 38 GW. Memory costs are rising sharply due to AI demand, with H100 rental costs up 60% over the past year and Nvidia planning a 15% price increase on Vera Rubin and Grace Blackwell processors. DIVERGENCES · 2 Shortage duration estimates vary: CLSA projects shortage persisting until 2030 while Broadcom expects shortage to ease by 2028–2029. On the primary constraint: Morgan Stanley identifies power as dwarfing semiconductor constraints while Intel and Broadcom CEOs warn capital and cost of capital could be the binding constraint. CAVEATS · 4 Worked for 168s · 4 analysts · 11 steps · View SQL · Sources (263) · Partial grounding 16/39 · 0.41 · past 89 days Connect your PDFs, emails and subscriptions, and Moshi brings them into the analysis. AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 21 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p21#slide=id.p21 OCTOBER 13, 2026 · BREAKOUT SESSION McCarthy Room
14:21Demo milestone
- 14:21
initially think about. So that means that you're then thinking about these blind spots which you've been told about, which you are then trying to understand, "Okay, well, I wouldn't have caught this, so what am I gonna do with this new information?" And then it's the deep dive, the ability to deep dive into one thing with a 360-degree view of information that you wouldn't have had before. And so we do that with the big data and all of the specific data.
Live demo: agreements and differences
Moshi compares claims about the AI chip shortage, separating agreements from differences over its duration and whether power or capital is the main constraint.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 21 · LIVE DEMO Billions+ data points. Growing every millisecond. 1 Scale, shown not claimed 2 The blind-spot push 3 Deep dive, with sources Review agreements and differences 03 / Answer AGREEMENTS · 4 GPU and AI chip supply is severely constrained, with demand exceeding supply by approximately 73% and TSMC sold out until 2029 while Nvidia can only meet 70% of 2027 demand. Power infrastructure, not chip supply, is the binding constraint on data-center buildout, with Morgan Stanley forecasting a 34% net power shortfall through 2028 and 57 gigawatts of incremental shortfall from 2026–2028. Hyperscalers are responding to the shortage by accelerating capex, with combined capex expected to exceed $1 trillion in 2027 and Microsoft tripling data-center capacity from 12 GW to 38 GW. Memory costs are rising sharply due to AI demand, with H100 rental costs up 60% over the past year and Nvidia planning a 15% price increase on Vera Rubin and Grace Blackwell processors. DIVERGENCES · 2 Shortage duration estimates vary: CLSA projects shortage persisting until 2030 while Broadcom expects shortage to ease by 2028–2029. On the primary constraint: Morgan Stanley identifies power as dwarfing semiconductor constraints while Intel and Broadcom CEOs warn capital and cost of capital could be the binding constraint. CAVEATS · 4 Worked for 168s · 4 analysts · 11 steps · View SQL · Sources (263) · Partial grounding 16/39 · 0.41 · past 89 days Connect your PDFs, emails and subscriptions, and Moshi brings them into the analysis. AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 21 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p21#slide=id.p21 OCTOBER 13, 2026 · BREAKOUT SESSION McCarthy Room
14:32Demo milestone
Not a weekend tool. Infrastructure.
Sokhal argues that serving every market around the clock takes infrastructure: it must handle big data and make decisions trustworthy and traceable, with judgment encoded rather than prompted.
Text in image
MOSHI AI ENGINEER NYC · 2026 22 · “COULDN'T I JUST BUILD THIS?” Not a weekend tool. Infrastructure. Too much to run for one seat, or even one desk A decade of judgment encoded, not promptable Every market trustworthy enough for real risk, 24/7 A layer you plug into, not a thing you rebuild. AI ENGINEER NYC 2026 22 Interface text: Moshi - AI Engineer NYC 202[illegible] docs.google.com/presentation/d/[illegible]/edit?slide=id.p22#slide=id.p22 AI Engineer
- 14:50
And so how does it differ from a tool that you're building on the weekend when a tool that you need to build 24/7 on every market on big data, which is running in a way that you can understand the context, which is reliable and trustworthy, that becomes infrastructure. It's no longer a weekend tool because you need it to be something that other people can trust and you can trace back because that's what you have with a human, which is someone being able to stand up and say, "Hey, I made this decision because of XYZ,"
- 15:20
not calling an agent who's never-- who's just gonna apologize to you.
- 15:25
So the one question that I think we haven't answered yet, which is if real edge lives in a human brain, how much of a machine can it act- how much can a machine actually capture? And I don't think we have an answer to that yet, um, and I think whoever answers it is not building a product. They're building a new way of thinking in finance, and that's what we're trying to explore.
- 15:49
So we've been building very quietly with, uh, a few of the biggest players in the trading industry in finance. And so this is the first time we're opening up to talk to the public, uh, because we believe that every single person should have access to institutional-grade analysis without having to run their own data science or quant team. Um, so if that's interesting to you, come talk to me. I love talking about everything to do with data and finance and financial engineering. Um, and yeah, before you trade, we want people
- 16:19
to talk to Moshi. Thank you.