Now really, well, Hello everybody. Happy Tuesday if you're listening on a Tuesday, if not, happy, whatever day you're on. I am Jason Alexander here with my best pal Peter, and this is the podcast really really and this is a glorious day for many reasons. But the biggest thing for me is if you've been following the show. Peter has refused for many episodes to wear are really no really branded logo shirt, But today you have either given in.

Now really, well, Hello everybody. Happy Tuesday if you're listening on a Tuesday, if not, happy, whatever day you're on. I am Jason Alexander here with my best pal Peter, and this is the podcast really really and this is a glorious day for many reasons. But the biggest thing for me is if you've been following the show. Peter has refused for many episodes to wear are really no really branded logo shirt, But today you have either given in.

I've given risen to, You've given it.

I've given risen to, You've given it.

You know what, I don't care. I don't care what direction you've gone to achieve this end.

You know what, I don't care. I don't care what direction you've gone to achieve this end.

You look like a failed racing team. This is what it looks like. But it's fine. I'll logo. I feel better.

You look like a failed racing team. This is what it looks like. But it's fine. I'll logo. I feel better.

I feel better about the whole. That's good because the topic we're doing today, I'm a little I make no bones about it. This is we're we're scared. We're going into waters that I find treacherous and scary and dark.

I feel better about the whole. That's good because the topic we're doing today, I'm a little I make no bones about it. This is we're we're scared. We're going into waters that I find treacherous and scary and dark.

And then I find I think treacherous, scary and dark. Although in reading as much as I have about AI and chat GPT, it's there are a lot of questions about the accuracy of what we're reading. And there's always an underlying reason that people are putting out information. And I'm a little bit questioning what we're hearing out of Silkoon Valley because I don't know how much you can trust the tech guys to give you transparency about what's really going on.

And then I find I think treacherous, scary and dark. Although in reading as much as I have about AI and chat GPT, it's there are a lot of questions about the accuracy of what we're reading. And there's always an underlying reason that people are putting out information. And I'm a little bit questioning what we're hearing out of Silkoon Valley because I don't know how much you can trust the tech guys to give you transparency about what's really going on.

Absolutely, so to state our really know really for the day we are all aware of the emerging technology of artificial intelligence AI. Our really know really today is that Elon Musk and three thousand other tech influencers, tech executives, academics have created an open letter where they have asked that we pause our work on the advancements of AIS. I'm moratorium on what could be a dangerous AI and the race to advance it. The guys who are creating it, pushing it, promoting it, and are probably going to profit from it are at the moment saying maybe we should slow this down.

Absolutely, so to state our really know really for the day we are all aware of the emerging technology of artificial intelligence AI. Our really know really today is that Elon Musk and three thousand other tech influencers, tech executives, academics have created an open letter where they have asked that we pause our work on the advancements of AIS. I'm moratorium on what could be a dangerous AI and the race to advance it. The guys who are creating it, pushing it, promoting it, and are probably going to profit from it are at the moment saying maybe we should slow this down.

A little bit. Really, no, really, so we wanted to find out Number one. I don't think it's a nice letter. I haven't seen it. Are they pausing? I don't think so. And there's theory that Elon must wanted to slow it down so he can catch up everybody else. We wanted to get on somebody who was amazingly invested in this and Jarrel Nier. You look at his bio, first of all international bestseller, on many many books. I've watched a bunch of his talks and I'm fascinated with his take because he was right there at the start of virtual reality, the beginning of the Internet, and talks about it.

A little bit. Really, no, really, so we wanted to find out Number one. I don't think it's a nice letter. I haven't seen it. Are they pausing? I don't think so. And there's theory that Elon must wanted to slow it down so he can catch up everybody else. We wanted to get on somebody who was amazingly invested in this and Jarrel Nier. You look at his bio, first of all international bestseller, on many many books. I've watched a bunch of his talks and I'm fascinated with his take because he was right there at the start of virtual reality, the beginning of the Internet, and talks about it.

Do we have Al Gore?

Do we have Al Gore?

I think there? I got confused for him. He was. He was named one of the twenty five most influential people in the previous twenty five of tech history. Also one of the hundred most influential people in the World by Time magazine, top fifty World thinkers by Prospect magazine.

I think there? I got confused for him. He was. He was named one of the twenty five most influential people in the previous twenty five of tech history. Also one of the hundred most influential people in the World by Time magazine, top fifty World thinkers by Prospect magazine.

Really the people who named him this were any of them on the list?

Really the people who named him this were any of them on the list?

I don't know?

I don't know?

Or is this the low hanging fruit going that looks sparkly?

Or is this the low hanging fruit going that looks sparkly?

Jared?

Jared?

Thank you for coming on. Jared.

Thank you for coming on. Jared.

Hey, Hey, I am doing splendidly. How are you?

Hey, Hey, I am doing splendidly. How are you?

Guys do very well? Thanks for visiting with us. I know how busy you are, and also telling you are the fact that he would talk to us is just an immense.

Guys do very well? Thanks for visiting with us. I know how busy you are, and also telling you are the fact that he would talk to us is just an immense.

We're always impressed with people who we'll talk, who are willing to talk down to two little idiots like us.

We're always impressed with people who we'll talk, who are willing to talk down to two little idiots like us.

Well, you know, in Silicon Valley, we aspire to become as wise as Hollywood. We aspire were trustworthiness, good and your business acumen. Yes, I'm very high to learn at your feet.

Well, you know, in Silicon Valley, we aspire to become as wise as Hollywood. We aspire were trustworthiness, good and your business acumen. Yes, I'm very high to learn at your feet.

Let me so, you said so many fascinating fascinating Number one, Let's address the pause? Am I right to say? Hold on a second?

Let me so, you said so many fascinating fascinating Number one, Let's address the pause? Am I right to say? Hold on a second?

So? Well, look, I'm I mean the pause letter was written by a buddy of mine who lives like almost he's a near neighbor. That's a anthony from the Institute, the Future of Life Institute. I mean I I A lot of my dear friends signed the pause letter. I didn't. The problem I have with it is I think we sometimes overdramatize or sort of exaggerate what we're doing, and it sounds in the near time like we're doing it in order to be careful and safe. But I'm afraid we're actually Oh God, I want to say this in a nice way. I feel like we're kind of a little bit saturated by the science fiction movies we grew up with instead of looking clearly at what we're doing. And so, you know, we grew up on the lovely portrayal of Commander data on the ninety Star Trek. We grew up with the Matrix movies. We grew grew up with the Terminator movie and so on, and cumulatively that becomes almost like a religion you grew up with. It's like, you know, at the we just had a satyr and we repeat this story of leaving Egypt there every year. And I think something like that happens in computer science, where we see these stories of like that, our own programs will take over every year. And now there might be something like that that could happen, but that would be some other kind of program than what we're doing now or what we know how to do now. What we're doing now is a giant mashup technology where we take everything we can get that anybody's written, anything's photographed or painted, anything people have coded, where we grabbed the code and we put it into this giant mashup machine and then we can make new combinations of what's there from people. So what we're really looking at is a new giant social collaboration mediated by this amazing mashup technology. Can it do harm? Sure? Can we make ourselves crazy? Yeah? Can we screw up our economy? Yeah, can we You know, we can do a lot of stupid stuff with it, but this is not skyn it. This is not this thing that's going to take over. And I feel like when we overdramatize it, when we let it become a monster, we're actually in a way making the problem worse. We're doing harm. So I that's why I didn't sign it, you know, so, But that's you know, I say, I'm not saying anything that I don't say to the people who wrote it, who were, like I say, friends, And what I'm what I'm trying to do right now is go around to the community and see if we can all agree on something a little bit more concrete and constructive. But that's I'm not ready to say what that might be it. But I believe we can do things that express our concerns and try to I think we can try to be more careful and ethical, because I do you think we need to do that, but I think we need to do it without terror. We can't allow ourselves to be paralyzed by our childhood fantasies.

So? Well, look, I'm I mean the pause letter was written by a buddy of mine who lives like almost he's a near neighbor. That's a anthony from the Institute, the Future of Life Institute. I mean I I A lot of my dear friends signed the pause letter. I didn't. The problem I have with it is I think we sometimes overdramatize or sort of exaggerate what we're doing, and it sounds in the near time like we're doing it in order to be careful and safe. But I'm afraid we're actually Oh God, I want to say this in a nice way. I feel like we're kind of a little bit saturated by the science fiction movies we grew up with instead of looking clearly at what we're doing. And so, you know, we grew up on the lovely portrayal of Commander data on the ninety Star Trek. We grew up with the Matrix movies. We grew grew up with the Terminator movie and so on, and cumulatively that becomes almost like a religion you grew up with. It's like, you know, at the we just had a satyr and we repeat this story of leaving Egypt there every year. And I think something like that happens in computer science, where we see these stories of like that, our own programs will take over every year. And now there might be something like that that could happen, but that would be some other kind of program than what we're doing now or what we know how to do now. What we're doing now is a giant mashup technology where we take everything we can get that anybody's written, anything's photographed or painted, anything people have coded, where we grabbed the code and we put it into this giant mashup machine and then we can make new combinations of what's there from people. So what we're really looking at is a new giant social collaboration mediated by this amazing mashup technology. Can it do harm? Sure? Can we make ourselves crazy? Yeah? Can we screw up our economy? Yeah, can we You know, we can do a lot of stupid stuff with it, but this is not skyn it. This is not this thing that's going to take over. And I feel like when we overdramatize it, when we let it become a monster, we're actually in a way making the problem worse. We're doing harm. So I that's why I didn't sign it, you know, so, But that's you know, I say, I'm not saying anything that I don't say to the people who wrote it, who were, like I say, friends, And what I'm what I'm trying to do right now is go around to the community and see if we can all agree on something a little bit more concrete and constructive. But that's I'm not ready to say what that might be it. But I believe we can do things that express our concerns and try to I think we can try to be more careful and ethical, because I do you think we need to do that, but I think we need to do it without terror. We can't allow ourselves to be paralyzed by our childhood fantasies.

Jared. The examples you're citing, you know how, nine thousand and space, otasy and Skynet what seems to be dominant in those fictions is that this technology has become both sentient and self directed. Is any of that true in what is being established right now?

Jared. The examples you're citing, you know how, nine thousand and space, otasy and Skynet what seems to be dominant in those fictions is that this technology has become both sentient and self directed. Is any of that true in what is being established right now?

Well, you know, there's a kind of edge of uncertainty about all this because this question of what's sentient and what's intelligent is not a very well formed or precise question. And actually, we humans treat each other as sentient as a matter of faith, if it's okay to use that word, you know, And I think the approach that I've come to, which is not the common one in the tech community, but I do think think it's where people land after they really considered what's going on here, is that the pragmatic choice, is it okay to say? Can I use word? It's like this? Does this offend your Hollywood? So I should I be playing softball? I'm sorry?

Well, you know, there's a kind of edge of uncertainty about all this because this question of what's sentient and what's intelligent is not a very well formed or precise question. And actually, we humans treat each other as sentient as a matter of faith, if it's okay to use that word, you know, And I think the approach that I've come to, which is not the common one in the tech community, but I do think think it's where people land after they really considered what's going on here, is that the pragmatic choice, is it okay to say? Can I use word? It's like this? Does this offend your Hollywood? So I should I be playing softball? I'm sorry?

Any Way, we're doing a podcast. We are Hollywood adjacent at this point.

Any Way, we're doing a podcast. We are Hollywood adjacent at this point.

Yeah, the Hall of Hollywood's about to be Hollywood. But look, we should talk about the Writer's Guild while we're on it. But well we'll get back to that. So look, the pragmatic issue here is does it make any difference what you think, like if you think that the big computer programs like the GPTs are possibly sentient or whatever. Does that make any difference or is that just how you feel, because sometimes you can have opinions and feelings about things and it's really just your private thing, and it does doesn't matter. In this case, I think it matters a bit because people treat the programs differently in a way that could have consequence for others. Like for instance, let's say, let's just say, hypothetically, it's a few years from now and we've made our models even bigger, and we can just ask for a movie and it appears. We can say I want I want to have Gone with the wind redone by Spielberg, except with an all midget cast, and it should be a musical in the style of Soundheim, and blah blah blah. Okay, you do this thing. It doesn't sound like a very good movie, but anyway, we don't care, because we'll make that thing. When we make it, there won't be a script because the script will happen automatically. There won't be a composer because the soundtrack will happen automatically. There won't be a director of photography because that'll happen automatically. It'll just pop out. But the thing is there will have been writers and directors of photography, and everybody who would normally contribute and get a credit to a movie will be back there. It's just that they'll have provided the example material that's mashed up to make this new thing, so the process will be different. It'll just pop out out of a giant statistical calculation for better or for worse, even if it's not a good movie. But if we want to remember who created the examples that are used to create that, we can still calculate whose examples are important. Those people can get credited and paid even if there's not any explicit, explicit stage where things to do happen. So the thing is, if you believe that we have as a giant alien brain that's just totally freestanding and doesn't depend on people, you're less likely to want to adopt a system where you acknowledge the people and come up with a new kind of economy where people can feel proud for what they've done authentically and honestly. If you're willing to accept that this whole thing is just a giant mashup of people, and you're not so concerned with whether it's sentient or something. If you just treat it as a giant tool, then you open your eyes and you can have this new kind of economy where people can still be proud and paid honestly based on what they've actually done. So this thing about whether we believe the programs are sentient, there's no absolute yes or no. It's all based on faith anyway. But pragmatically, if you believe that computers aren't sentient, you have a better chance of seeing a way to make a decent society, or let me put it in another way, if you want the world to benefit people, it's just easier if you think people are special. That doesn't mean in some absolute sense people are special from the point of view of every possible alien or God or whatever. But for us, if we think people are special, we have a better chance of doing a civilization together in which people are special. I mean, it's just obvious.

Yeah, the Hall of Hollywood's about to be Hollywood. But look, we should talk about the Writer's Guild while we're on it. But well we'll get back to that. So look, the pragmatic issue here is does it make any difference what you think, like if you think that the big computer programs like the GPTs are possibly sentient or whatever. Does that make any difference or is that just how you feel, because sometimes you can have opinions and feelings about things and it's really just your private thing, and it does doesn't matter. In this case, I think it matters a bit because people treat the programs differently in a way that could have consequence for others. Like for instance, let's say, let's just say, hypothetically, it's a few years from now and we've made our models even bigger, and we can just ask for a movie and it appears. We can say I want I want to have Gone with the wind redone by Spielberg, except with an all midget cast, and it should be a musical in the style of Soundheim, and blah blah blah. Okay, you do this thing. It doesn't sound like a very good movie, but anyway, we don't care, because we'll make that thing. When we make it, there won't be a script because the script will happen automatically. There won't be a composer because the soundtrack will happen automatically. There won't be a director of photography because that'll happen automatically. It'll just pop out. But the thing is there will have been writers and directors of photography, and everybody who would normally contribute and get a credit to a movie will be back there. It's just that they'll have provided the example material that's mashed up to make this new thing, so the process will be different. It'll just pop out out of a giant statistical calculation for better or for worse, even if it's not a good movie. But if we want to remember who created the examples that are used to create that, we can still calculate whose examples are important. Those people can get credited and paid even if there's not any explicit, explicit stage where things to do happen. So the thing is, if you believe that we have as a giant alien brain that's just totally freestanding and doesn't depend on people, you're less likely to want to adopt a system where you acknowledge the people and come up with a new kind of economy where people can feel proud for what they've done authentically and honestly. If you're willing to accept that this whole thing is just a giant mashup of people, and you're not so concerned with whether it's sentient or something. If you just treat it as a giant tool, then you open your eyes and you can have this new kind of economy where people can still be proud and paid honestly based on what they've actually done. So this thing about whether we believe the programs are sentient, there's no absolute yes or no. It's all based on faith anyway. But pragmatically, if you believe that computers aren't sentient, you have a better chance of seeing a way to make a decent society, or let me put it in another way, if you want the world to benefit people, it's just easier if you think people are special. That doesn't mean in some absolute sense people are special from the point of view of every possible alien or God or whatever. But for us, if we think people are special, we have a better chance of doing a civilization together in which people are special. I mean, it's just obvious.

But Jared, you know what I love about all the stuff I've seen and read that you've done. It's positive, it's hopeful, which is real refreshing with all of these doom and gloom scenarios. But we call people that were fired from factories that you automated to learn code, and now they can't even find work doing that because technology is going to be writing the code. And then you read that a gold Maenzacs are one of the investment firms, said three hundred million jobs should be eliminated. And I'm thinking, what are they teaching in schools to the next generation. And I think the head of our podcast division even said his kid will probably have a job that doesn't even exist today. So how do you take that into consideration when we're looking out for people to tell those people, what should we be doing to make sure you're not disenfranchised?

But Jared, you know what I love about all the stuff I've seen and read that you've done. It's positive, it's hopeful, which is real refreshing with all of these doom and gloom scenarios. But we call people that were fired from factories that you automated to learn code, and now they can't even find work doing that because technology is going to be writing the code. And then you read that a gold Maenzacs are one of the investment firms, said three hundred million jobs should be eliminated. And I'm thinking, what are they teaching in schools to the next generation. And I think the head of our podcast division even said his kid will probably have a job that doesn't even exist today. So how do you take that into consideration when we're looking out for people to tell those people, what should we be doing to make sure you're not disenfranchised?

Well, look, the future is going to be different from the past, and I think it's hard to it's a fools game to try to solve all these things perfectly in advance. But can I give you like sort of one scenario that I'm sure it's hopeful and and you know, I'm sure it's not perfect, but it's like a start. So here's this scenaria. Where I live part of the time is at the top of the ridge in Berkeley, California. And before the recent extraordinary rains, we went through a tremendously damaging series of fire seasons, you.

Well, look, the future is going to be different from the past, and I think it's hard to it's a fools game to try to solve all these things perfectly in advance. But can I give you like sort of one scenario that I'm sure it's hopeful and and you know, I'm sure it's not perfect, but it's like a start. So here's this scenaria. Where I live part of the time is at the top of the ridge in Berkeley, California. And before the recent extraordinary rains, we went through a tremendously damaging series of fire seasons, you.

Know, with.

Know, with.

For us, it meant five mandatory evacuations. And the fire marshal came around and said, you know, you really shouldn't count on your neighborhood continuing to exist. And maybe, you know, in La people are familiar with this problem. Certainly people in Malibu are very familiar with this problem. And I became really interested in, like, why does our neighborhood still exist? Why hasn't it burned down like so many other places? And what I realized is that sometimes the city and county get people to trim their trees or improve their roofs, not that often, because we're all really prickly and difficult up there. Sometimes sometimes somebody will fix the area around their own house or whatever. But there's this whole other thing in between, which is the people who are hired to trim the trees and be the gardeners and keep the grounds. They talk to each other over the fences, and they coordinate to reduce fire threat by reducing how trees touch each other and stuff, you know, And I was like amazed that this is going on unofficially and without any mandate. A lot of them are undocumented a lot of them don't speak English. Some of them are multi generation American citizens with great businesses and are doing well. Some of them are marginal. But I was amazed that these people are there keeping us alive. So why am I talking about them? Because there's also a prototype robot we play with the lab once in a while, which looks like a mechanical snake that can slither up trees or phone poles and do trimming and then slither down. It looks really cool. It's not quite ready for primetime yet, but some kind of robot will be out there doing trees at some point. And the question is what happens to these people?

For us, it meant five mandatory evacuations. And the fire marshal came around and said, you know, you really shouldn't count on your neighborhood continuing to exist. And maybe, you know, in La people are familiar with this problem. Certainly people in Malibu are very familiar with this problem. And I became really interested in, like, why does our neighborhood still exist? Why hasn't it burned down like so many other places? And what I realized is that sometimes the city and county get people to trim their trees or improve their roofs, not that often, because we're all really prickly and difficult up there. Sometimes sometimes somebody will fix the area around their own house or whatever. But there's this whole other thing in between, which is the people who are hired to trim the trees and be the gardeners and keep the grounds. They talk to each other over the fences, and they coordinate to reduce fire threat by reducing how trees touch each other and stuff, you know, And I was like amazed that this is going on unofficially and without any mandate. A lot of them are undocumented a lot of them don't speak English. Some of them are multi generation American citizens with great businesses and are doing well. Some of them are marginal. But I was amazed that these people are there keeping us alive. So why am I talking about them? Because there's also a prototype robot we play with the lab once in a while, which looks like a mechanical snake that can slither up trees or phone poles and do trimming and then slither down. It looks really cool. It's not quite ready for primetime yet, but some kind of robot will be out there doing trees at some point. And the question is what happens to these people?

Right?

Right?

So it's not a factory job, but it's a blue collar job, right, So I want to give you a vision of what happens to them. All right, So what happened in a few years. There's some van that's painted like it was in a nursery school, and it drives up beside them with all of these cameras and other sensors looking at them, and it's operated by oh, let's just say Google, which likes doing that sort of thing. But it's like one of us tech company things, you know, there's just like and that the people who were going to change saying, oh crap, okay, it's coming. They're studying what they do and the robots will come, and now we're gonna what will become of us? What'll we do? And we'll live on tents, you know, and by the Starbucks. I guess what are we going to do? And there's another option, though, which is they say, Aha, the robots are coming, we're going to form a data union and we're going to negotiate for them to get data from us. And we're going to become We're going to not be a manual labor class anymore. We're going to become a new creative class. Like all those fancy writers and and set designers and composers and all those people. We're going to be the new creatives. And the way we're going to do it is every single year, we're going to start designing extraordinary things in trees. We're going to trim tree so that they're also holograms. We're gonna trim lawns so that they have mazes in them. We're going to do all these incredible things, and we're going to go through fashions and then people are going to want that, and they're going to ask for it from their robots, and the robots are going to depend on our designs, and we're going to get royalties from it. So instead of becoming a dependent class once things are automated, there's this option to create a new creative class where there wasn't one before, because the technology makes that possible. All right, that's the sort of buzzword for that approach of inverting everything and making it a person first technology. We call that data dignity. Now, anybody who hears it might response skeptically. They'll say, well, how many possible jobs like that could there be for that particular example of supplying examples for gardening and tree trimming robots. Probably not a whole lot of jobs. But on the other hand, there'll be a zillion examples like that, because there are about to be tons and tons of kinds of robots, and tons and tons of examples of AI what we call AI programs. I don't like the term, but there'll be tons of examples of this stuff. And every time there's a new example of some kind of fancy automation, there's an opportunity for a new world of creative people to turn that thing into an art form instead of just purely a functional activity. And so I think what you can have is an image of a future advanced economy where you have an expanding set of creative professions based on what technology allows to become creative, instead of an expanding set of dependent people. Now does that mean everybody gets to be creative? I mean that math probably doesn't work out. But the point is to get to a society where you don't have a gigantic preponderance of people who feel useless. People who feel useless turn into the very most dangerous kind of creature, which is a seeker of meaning. And we don't want that. That doesn't end well. So we want we want to have this pleasant concordance, this pleasant consilience between economic value, personal meaning, personal connection, and provision of things that are valued on all their other terms with other people. That's what we want. That's how you make a decent society.

So it's not a factory job, but it's a blue collar job, right, So I want to give you a vision of what happens to them. All right, So what happened in a few years. There's some van that's painted like it was in a nursery school, and it drives up beside them with all of these cameras and other sensors looking at them, and it's operated by oh, let's just say Google, which likes doing that sort of thing. But it's like one of us tech company things, you know, there's just like and that the people who were going to change saying, oh crap, okay, it's coming. They're studying what they do and the robots will come, and now we're gonna what will become of us? What'll we do? And we'll live on tents, you know, and by the Starbucks. I guess what are we going to do? And there's another option, though, which is they say, Aha, the robots are coming, we're going to form a data union and we're going to negotiate for them to get data from us. And we're going to become We're going to not be a manual labor class anymore. We're going to become a new creative class. Like all those fancy writers and and set designers and composers and all those people. We're going to be the new creatives. And the way we're going to do it is every single year, we're going to start designing extraordinary things in trees. We're going to trim tree so that they're also holograms. We're gonna trim lawns so that they have mazes in them. We're going to do all these incredible things, and we're going to go through fashions and then people are going to want that, and they're going to ask for it from their robots, and the robots are going to depend on our designs, and we're going to get royalties from it. So instead of becoming a dependent class once things are automated, there's this option to create a new creative class where there wasn't one before, because the technology makes that possible. All right, that's the sort of buzzword for that approach of inverting everything and making it a person first technology. We call that data dignity. Now, anybody who hears it might response skeptically. They'll say, well, how many possible jobs like that could there be for that particular example of supplying examples for gardening and tree trimming robots. Probably not a whole lot of jobs. But on the other hand, there'll be a zillion examples like that, because there are about to be tons and tons of kinds of robots, and tons and tons of examples of AI what we call AI programs. I don't like the term, but there'll be tons of examples of this stuff. And every time there's a new example of some kind of fancy automation, there's an opportunity for a new world of creative people to turn that thing into an art form instead of just purely a functional activity. And so I think what you can have is an image of a future advanced economy where you have an expanding set of creative professions based on what technology allows to become creative, instead of an expanding set of dependent people. Now does that mean everybody gets to be creative? I mean that math probably doesn't work out. But the point is to get to a society where you don't have a gigantic preponderance of people who feel useless. People who feel useless turn into the very most dangerous kind of creature, which is a seeker of meaning. And we don't want that. That doesn't end well. So we want we want to have this pleasant concordance, this pleasant consilience between economic value, personal meaning, personal connection, and provision of things that are valued on all their other terms with other people. That's what we want. That's how you make a decent society.

I mean, okay, and that sounds amazing, But to your your point, you've said that the internet tech. The problem is not the system, it's the monetary system behind it, which rights is what drives. It's a business model Okay, are there enough Jaron's out there that are going to be creative, They're going to feel it's important not to disenfranchise people that we have to create and put together labs to create this stuff, because not everybody can do it unless there's a business model that makes sense, because the business mode may not originally make sense.

I mean, okay, and that sounds amazing, But to your your point, you've said that the internet tech. The problem is not the system, it's the monetary system behind it, which rights is what drives. It's a business model Okay, are there enough Jaron's out there that are going to be creative, They're going to feel it's important not to disenfranchise people that we have to create and put together labs to create this stuff, because not everybody can do it unless there's a business model that makes sense, because the business mode may not originally make sense.

And I if I can just tag onto them. Going back to your Hollywood example, where you know we're talking about credit and payment and royalty, it presumes a Hollywood like structure in which the producer, the financier is willing to afford credit to the to the originators. You know, we're we're I don't know much about the rap world, but you know I hear about people using samples of other artists' music and not crediting and not necessarily paying for them.

And I if I can just tag onto them. Going back to your Hollywood example, where you know we're talking about credit and payment and royalty, it presumes a Hollywood like structure in which the producer, the financier is willing to afford credit to the to the originators. You know, we're we're I don't know much about the rap world, but you know I hear about people using samples of other artists' music and not crediting and not necessarily paying for them.

Well, that goes back to Mote, It goes back. That's that's the history of recorded music. Yeah, ripping off people.

Well, that goes back to Mote, It goes back. That's that's the history of recorded music. Yeah, ripping off people.

So I just worry about those original creators that are building the database not receiving those credits from people that are after pure profit.

So I just worry about those original creators that are building the database not receiving those credits from people that are after pure profit.

The scenario I just described to you is technically feasible. You're bringing up a very important question, which is it is it politically feasible. So what we have to remember is the reason that artists get paid is not that producers love paying artists. Now it's possible that neither of you have ever met any Hollywood producers, but I have, and I can assure you they don't enjoy paying artists, and I don't want to burst your bubble or shock you with that information. Now. The reason they do is that a century ago there was this world of political activism around unions and union rights, and different kinds of creatives were able to establish rights to be paid. For instance, musicians had this thing called mechanicals, which computers have kind of blasted apart, and I within tech culture there's a lot of this idea, well everything should be free, and musicians wanting to be paid as terrible. That was a big deal for years. I think the worst example of things falling apart is local news. We've lost local news because we central all advertising, including localized advertising, and I think the world suffered terribly for that. And so there needs to be a political process to acknowledge contributions and commercial value of people out of the periphery, not just the people who own the hubs like we do, and that'll be good for everyone. So that is a political question. That's that's not a technical question. Is it possible to get there? I mean, we did it a century ago, you know, so it's clearly possible. Whether whether we can do it again, I'm not certain, but I do want to give you a couple of signs of hope here. Okay.

The scenario I just described to you is technically feasible. You're bringing up a very important question, which is it is it politically feasible. So what we have to remember is the reason that artists get paid is not that producers love paying artists. Now it's possible that neither of you have ever met any Hollywood producers, but I have, and I can assure you they don't enjoy paying artists, and I don't want to burst your bubble or shock you with that information. Now. The reason they do is that a century ago there was this world of political activism around unions and union rights, and different kinds of creatives were able to establish rights to be paid. For instance, musicians had this thing called mechanicals, which computers have kind of blasted apart, and I within tech culture there's a lot of this idea, well everything should be free, and musicians wanting to be paid as terrible. That was a big deal for years. I think the worst example of things falling apart is local news. We've lost local news because we central all advertising, including localized advertising, and I think the world suffered terribly for that. And so there needs to be a political process to acknowledge contributions and commercial value of people out of the periphery, not just the people who own the hubs like we do, and that'll be good for everyone. So that is a political question. That's that's not a technical question. Is it possible to get there? I mean, we did it a century ago, you know, so it's clearly possible. Whether whether we can do it again, I'm not certain, but I do want to give you a couple of signs of hope here. Okay.

Sure.

Sure.

The business model that really screwed with people in the last couple decades is called the advertising model for the Internet. But it's not really advertising. It's it's a paid influence model where you're supposed to be sharing for free. You get free services, but then the money goes to the companies off to the side, out of view, and some of the money is from traditional advertisers, some of it isn't. Some of the advertising is totally fine, a lot of it isn't. And in fact, since the whole system is turned into a persuasion machine, it's like laying out a carpet for unsavory persuaders. Like the whole structure is just an invitation to putin to send fake people and to try to screw up our elections and whatnot. Now, the thing is part of the reason that that worked was that people have such low Oh god, sorry, I just got a pop up. Anyway, part of the reason that works people can you can your computer restart?

The business model that really screwed with people in the last couple decades is called the advertising model for the Internet. But it's not really advertising. It's it's a paid influence model where you're supposed to be sharing for free. You get free services, but then the money goes to the companies off to the side, out of view, and some of the money is from traditional advertisers, some of it isn't. Some of the advertising is totally fine, a lot of it isn't. And in fact, since the whole system is turned into a persuasion machine, it's like laying out a carpet for unsavory persuaders. Like the whole structure is just an invitation to putin to send fake people and to try to screw up our elections and whatnot. Now, the thing is part of the reason that that worked was that people have such low Oh god, sorry, I just got a pop up. Anyway, part of the reason that works people can you can your computer restart?

Now?

Now?

Would that be okay with you? Like? No, actually that would not be okay.

Would that be okay with you? Like? No, actually that would not be okay.

So somebody's listening, Yeah you can.

So somebody's listening, Yeah you can.

She'd complain to some Microsoft scientist about that, and we'll ignore you, okay. So look, the expectation of search was really low, and so search is kind of a corrupt thing where you get a ton of commercial stuff and it's actually not that well organized for your benefit. When you use GPT, when you use a chat to do the same search as you get better stuff. But suddenly that paid link thing is a little less powerful if we started. I mean, I don't know where this will go. Maybe the standard practice in five or ten years will be that the AIU ask for information is secretly measuring you and figuring out how to manipulate you, and it only gives you information if it also persuades you about some other thing politically or whatever it is. That could be the world we enter into. That's the world where we all get crazy enough that I question human survival. And I hope that's not the world we enter into a better world we enter into is one where we start to acknowledge that if we're going to live in a market economy at all, it has to be comprehensive and inclusive for everyone who participates. And so, yeah, you might you might still get free chat, you might get research, but only at a certain level. It might be what we call a freemium model, where people who are using it to help out with taxes or whatever start to pay some for it, so it just becomes normal commerce instead of sneaky commerce. And nobody likes paying money. But you know, when you're saving money by being manipulated, your whole world gradually gets dark and everything gets kind of crazy the way it has lately, and it's just too high a price to pay. So the fact that the GPT interface tends to pull people away from the traditional advertising business model actually could be the very best thing about it.

She'd complain to some Microsoft scientist about that, and we'll ignore you, okay. So look, the expectation of search was really low, and so search is kind of a corrupt thing where you get a ton of commercial stuff and it's actually not that well organized for your benefit. When you use GPT, when you use a chat to do the same search as you get better stuff. But suddenly that paid link thing is a little less powerful if we started. I mean, I don't know where this will go. Maybe the standard practice in five or ten years will be that the AIU ask for information is secretly measuring you and figuring out how to manipulate you, and it only gives you information if it also persuades you about some other thing politically or whatever it is. That could be the world we enter into. That's the world where we all get crazy enough that I question human survival. And I hope that's not the world we enter into a better world we enter into is one where we start to acknowledge that if we're going to live in a market economy at all, it has to be comprehensive and inclusive for everyone who participates. And so, yeah, you might you might still get free chat, you might get research, but only at a certain level. It might be what we call a freemium model, where people who are using it to help out with taxes or whatever start to pay some for it, so it just becomes normal commerce instead of sneaky commerce. And nobody likes paying money. But you know, when you're saving money by being manipulated, your whole world gradually gets dark and everything gets kind of crazy the way it has lately, and it's just too high a price to pay. So the fact that the GPT interface tends to pull people away from the traditional advertising business model actually could be the very best thing about it.

But you also, you know, I think this is you saying that social media has become a behavior modification machine, right.

But you also, you know, I think this is you saying that social media has become a behavior modification machine, right.

Oh yeah, I've been known to say that. I've only been saying that. God, you know, my first my first piece of that about that, I was looking at my old publications ninety two I was worried about that. There were already some discussions about this sort of notion, and it just seemed like such And if you really want to go back, there's some other people like Norbert Wiener who were saying it in nineteen fifty.

Oh yeah, I've been known to say that. I've only been saying that. God, you know, my first my first piece of that about that, I was looking at my old publications ninety two I was worried about that. There were already some discussions about this sort of notion, and it just seemed like such And if you really want to go back, there's some other people like Norbert Wiener who were saying it in nineteen fifty.

So, like, that's worrisome if I don't know how I'm being moved. And there are tech companies are becoming more and more powerful, and like you, you know, AI is this wizard of Oz thing over there, but it's really people behind it who are putting in the algorithms.

So, like, that's worrisome if I don't know how I'm being moved. And there are tech companies are becoming more and more powerful, and like you, you know, AI is this wizard of Oz thing over there, but it's really people behind it who are putting in the algorithms.

Where did that metaphor come from?

Where did that metaphor come from?

Yeah? Sure, right, I mean it's it's people, and I don't know what their agenda is, and I don't know how pure their agenda is. So all of a sudden, I'm moving in the direction that I'm not even capable of understanding knowing, and I don't know that I'm moving there. That to me is really that sounds dangerous.

Yeah? Sure, right, I mean it's it's people, and I don't know what their agenda is, and I don't know how pure their agenda is. So all of a sudden, I'm moving in the direction that I'm not even capable of understanding knowing, and I don't know that I'm moving there. That to me is really that sounds dangerous.

Yeah, that's a horrible creepy thing, and it's resulted in it's I think it's really made the Internet into overall a negative force in the world, which breaks my heart because I worked so hard to try to make the Internet where you know that that was, you know, in the in the latter part of the last century. And it's sad. It's it's devastating how it turned out when you look at the statistics on team mental health and suicides, when you look at what's happened to politics around the world a few years after Facebook shows up consistently, when you look at well, as I said, local news, the devastation of it, it's it's it's really a drag, it's really a nuisance. Uh. But but but here we have a moment of transition. This is a big deal. We have a chance to reset things, and I hope we use it wisely. It's why I'm talking to you guys and getting starting to get around a little bit.

Yeah, that's a horrible creepy thing, and it's resulted in it's I think it's really made the Internet into overall a negative force in the world, which breaks my heart because I worked so hard to try to make the Internet where you know that that was, you know, in the in the latter part of the last century. And it's sad. It's it's devastating how it turned out when you look at the statistics on team mental health and suicides, when you look at what's happened to politics around the world a few years after Facebook shows up consistently, when you look at well, as I said, local news, the devastation of it, it's it's it's really a drag, it's really a nuisance. Uh. But but but here we have a moment of transition. This is a big deal. We have a chance to reset things, and I hope we use it wisely. It's why I'm talking to you guys and getting starting to get around a little bit.

That's great.

That's great.

I really think there's an opportunity here to make this better.

I really think there's an opportunity here to make this better.

I need you because it's so non transparent. I don't know if you know, if you can address the algorithm. Can somebody go in there and know the concern is it keeps grabbing information and adding to information, but we don't know the inputting of that, and is anybody going to be transparent?

I need you because it's so non transparent. I don't know if you know, if you can address the algorithm. Can somebody go in there and know the concern is it keeps grabbing information and adding to information, but we don't know the inputting of that, and is anybody going to be transparent?

Yeah, So in my want to I want to answer you with scrupulous honesty. There's a level of this tracing of who mattered to the input to the big model for a particular output, like which artist was really important for a particular piece of synthetic art. There's a level that's been demonstrated that their academic paper's about. But there's a more important level of that possible attribution, or we call it providence, that we haven't achieved or demonstrated. And there's a chance that we can't because there is until something's been done, you can't be sure. My very best guess as an informed computer science is that we can do it, and we will for them. I think an interesting question is why haven't we because it means that other things were prioritized, and perhaps those priorities worth the right priorities, and that might have a little bit to do with this science fiction culture of wanting. I think the whole Internet has this problem of being unnecessarily obscure, Like the whole Internet is based on having this cash. We don't know anything where anything came from, and there's not any particular reason for the Internet to be that way. That was a choice, and it's possible that we really want this science fiction scenario of this mysterious thing even if we think it might kill us, that there's something the draw of building that is just so powerful, the mythological intensity of it just gets to people, so that there might be something like that. But we just have to kind of blow past that, and we have to do what we can to measure providence. And that's going to be a bit of a technical project. It's not going to happen tomorrow, but it can happen pretty soon, I think hopefully.

Yeah, So in my want to I want to answer you with scrupulous honesty. There's a level of this tracing of who mattered to the input to the big model for a particular output, like which artist was really important for a particular piece of synthetic art. There's a level that's been demonstrated that their academic paper's about. But there's a more important level of that possible attribution, or we call it providence, that we haven't achieved or demonstrated. And there's a chance that we can't because there is until something's been done, you can't be sure. My very best guess as an informed computer science is that we can do it, and we will for them. I think an interesting question is why haven't we because it means that other things were prioritized, and perhaps those priorities worth the right priorities, and that might have a little bit to do with this science fiction culture of wanting. I think the whole Internet has this problem of being unnecessarily obscure, Like the whole Internet is based on having this cash. We don't know anything where anything came from, and there's not any particular reason for the Internet to be that way. That was a choice, and it's possible that we really want this science fiction scenario of this mysterious thing even if we think it might kill us, that there's something the draw of building that is just so powerful, the mythological intensity of it just gets to people, so that there might be something like that. But we just have to kind of blow past that, and we have to do what we can to measure providence. And that's going to be a bit of a technical project. It's not going to happen tomorrow, but it can happen pretty soon, I think hopefully.

Jen just tangentially our producers, sent in a question for us, going back a step, the controversy of a TikTok right now in the Chinese ownership and what it may or may not be nefariously doing, just in your opinion, because you are one of the great opinion makers about this technology. Should TikTok be banned? Should we be wary of this?

Jen just tangentially our producers, sent in a question for us, going back a step, the controversy of a TikTok right now in the Chinese ownership and what it may or may not be nefariously doing, just in your opinion, because you are one of the great opinion makers about this technology. Should TikTok be banned? Should we be wary of this?

This is a deeply uncomfortable topic because of the intergenerational dynamic of it. I I've always believed that you should extend every possible sliver of good faith that you can muster two younger generations, and I always thought that that would mean their crazy music and habits and relationship patterns or whatever. But this is different, because this is they've been, for the most part, captured by this thing that's h potentially quite malicious depending on how things go. There are scenarios for what the Chinese Communist Party could expect from TikTok and the event of heightened tensions that are very disturbing and yet plausible. I think the usual way the threat is described is incredibly understated. I mean, well, all right, here's the scenario. The Chinese just feel they must invade Taiwan because they're just certain it's a necessary thing, and they just can't abide by this island being out there. They're just obsessed, obsessed, obsessed. And so the morning of the invasion, every American military member, whether or not they have TikTok, every American politician, every member of the intelligence establishment, major people in industry all get on their phones through some channel a very convincing looking video of their children being abducted or tortured in their own house that's synthesized by you know, an ai synthetic video thing. All at once, it's all fake, or maybe there's a handful of situations that are real, you know. Just to make it even more confusing, it takes people a day to figure out it's all fake. But that's the day, you know, that's the day of the vision. That's not something that Chinese could do today. Could they do it in a year or two? Yeah? Would they? I don't know. I mean I've had occasion to meet a lot of people high up in the Chinese party, and they vary as much as people in any community. I think a lot of the ones I met would not do that, but some of them, yeah maybe, you know, so I think it becomes a little uncertain how much a foreign adversary who is just so certain of their cause, how much they might be willing to stoop to something like that. And is that plausible? Yeah, you know, it's technically not, like I say, not yet, based on what we've seen from the AI efforts from the big Chinese companies in recent weeks today, in fact, there was one that wasn't that great. But you know, you can figure it out. It's not that big a deal. It's all all the techniques are published. Yeah, So like I I would personally, I would personally band TikTok entirely or nationalize it in some extremely serious way or something. I would also, I mean, this is a tricky thing. Do we turn off the Internet in the US on the day of an invasion because of fear of something like that? I maybe, you know, I don't know, because I mean, if we looked at just how strongly Putin really, really, really believes it's worth any cost to just destroy Ukraine to gain it, Putin's abilities in this department are not remotely as strong as China's could be if they wanted to focus them. You know, China's just a bigger, richer place with honestly with more computer science talent, and they make the chips and I mean looks like they could. So yeah, yeah, I mean I really do think TikTok is a problem. Now I have to say I like a lot about TikTok. I like the dance culture on TikTok. I really do. Some might scoff at it, but I think it's great. I think it does have all the problems with social media of encouraging this kind of nervous vanity and irritability and people who use it too much. It's not alone in that. Yeah, but yeah, I think it's a real problem. It breaks my heart to say I want to stay with the young people, you.

This is a deeply uncomfortable topic because of the intergenerational dynamic of it. I I've always believed that you should extend every possible sliver of good faith that you can muster two younger generations, and I always thought that that would mean their crazy music and habits and relationship patterns or whatever. But this is different, because this is they've been, for the most part, captured by this thing that's h potentially quite malicious depending on how things go. There are scenarios for what the Chinese Communist Party could expect from TikTok and the event of heightened tensions that are very disturbing and yet plausible. I think the usual way the threat is described is incredibly understated. I mean, well, all right, here's the scenario. The Chinese just feel they must invade Taiwan because they're just certain it's a necessary thing, and they just can't abide by this island being out there. They're just obsessed, obsessed, obsessed. And so the morning of the invasion, every American military member, whether or not they have TikTok, every American politician, every member of the intelligence establishment, major people in industry all get on their phones through some channel a very convincing looking video of their children being abducted or tortured in their own house that's synthesized by you know, an ai synthetic video thing. All at once, it's all fake, or maybe there's a handful of situations that are real, you know. Just to make it even more confusing, it takes people a day to figure out it's all fake. But that's the day, you know, that's the day of the vision. That's not something that Chinese could do today. Could they do it in a year or two? Yeah? Would they? I don't know. I mean I've had occasion to meet a lot of people high up in the Chinese party, and they vary as much as people in any community. I think a lot of the ones I met would not do that, but some of them, yeah maybe, you know, so I think it becomes a little uncertain how much a foreign adversary who is just so certain of their cause, how much they might be willing to stoop to something like that. And is that plausible? Yeah, you know, it's technically not, like I say, not yet, based on what we've seen from the AI efforts from the big Chinese companies in recent weeks today, in fact, there was one that wasn't that great. But you know, you can figure it out. It's not that big a deal. It's all all the techniques are published. Yeah, So like I I would personally, I would personally band TikTok entirely or nationalize it in some extremely serious way or something. I would also, I mean, this is a tricky thing. Do we turn off the Internet in the US on the day of an invasion because of fear of something like that? I maybe, you know, I don't know, because I mean, if we looked at just how strongly Putin really, really, really believes it's worth any cost to just destroy Ukraine to gain it, Putin's abilities in this department are not remotely as strong as China's could be if they wanted to focus them. You know, China's just a bigger, richer place with honestly with more computer science talent, and they make the chips and I mean looks like they could. So yeah, yeah, I mean I really do think TikTok is a problem. Now I have to say I like a lot about TikTok. I like the dance culture on TikTok. I really do. Some might scoff at it, but I think it's great. I think it does have all the problems with social media of encouraging this kind of nervous vanity and irritability and people who use it too much. It's not alone in that. Yeah, but yeah, I think it's a real problem. It breaks my heart to say I want to stay with the young people, you.

Know, let me ask you this, Jaren, if you could, knowing what you know and what we're talking about, if there was a golden rule or a five or ten commandments that you can impose upon this technology going forward. Are there a couple of principles that you wish were absolutes going forward?

Know, let me ask you this, Jaren, if you could, knowing what you know and what we're talking about, if there was a golden rule or a five or ten commandments that you can impose upon this technology going forward. Are there a couple of principles that you wish were absolutes going forward?

Well, I think there's a danger in expecting anybody to have like perfect knowledge and advance of how to deal with something complicated. So the first answer to you is would be no, I don't. However, one thing I've been trying to do, especially since that letter asking for a pause started going around from my friends, is I've been calling people in the community and I'm trying. I believe there are like five or ten rules that are held essentially unanimously by AI scientists and technologists, but they have been assembled. I'd like to assemble them because I think we sometimes give the impression that we're just flailing about and unable to do anything but receieve our own work with paralytic terror and so, for instance, I believe everyone thinks that there should be a quantitative limit on how much an algorithm can model a p and manipulate that person without the person's informed consent. So it can't be an absolute, absolute rule, because a little bit of that's going to happen just to sort of figure out how you like your pizza delivered, whether you want the pizza person to knock on the door, just leave it by the door, you know, like that kind of thing. There has to be a little bit, but we can quantify it and say, you know, there's not going to be more than that. Another thing is people feel, universally, so far as I can tell, that deep fakes need to be not only identified, but identified in an actionable way, meaning not super fine print, and there's a way to understand who made the deep fake and to trace it back and to have its origins clear. That's so far as I can tell, a universally held idea. Another one is people feel very strongly that there should be informed consent with any presentation of a fake person, a person who isn't real or is a modified version of a real person, that that should be very strongly identified in a very clear and actionable way, in an informative way. So there are things like that where I think we have community consensus, and it's important to point that out because there's I've lost count, but there's something like twenty processes going on in the world where there are people having meetings and talking about principles for AI policy. And I've been involved in these types of processes. I co founded the Data Protection Advisory Board in the EU many years ago that eventually turned into the European Union's Privacy Framework, and it took decades. I'm not exaggerating. It's like this gigantic thing and what came out was pretty confusing compared to what the original goal was. And I'm not anti process. I think it's great that these things, but it's like it's a slow thing and if we already have some consensus principles, we shouldn't least acknowledge that so we don't appear as a community like I say, to be uh, just afraid of our own work. We have to we have to be able to at least say what we actually do agree on. And there are some things.

Well, I think there's a danger in expecting anybody to have like perfect knowledge and advance of how to deal with something complicated. So the first answer to you is would be no, I don't. However, one thing I've been trying to do, especially since that letter asking for a pause started going around from my friends, is I've been calling people in the community and I'm trying. I believe there are like five or ten rules that are held essentially unanimously by AI scientists and technologists, but they have been assembled. I'd like to assemble them because I think we sometimes give the impression that we're just flailing about and unable to do anything but receieve our own work with paralytic terror and so, for instance, I believe everyone thinks that there should be a quantitative limit on how much an algorithm can model a p and manipulate that person without the person's informed consent. So it can't be an absolute, absolute rule, because a little bit of that's going to happen just to sort of figure out how you like your pizza delivered, whether you want the pizza person to knock on the door, just leave it by the door, you know, like that kind of thing. There has to be a little bit, but we can quantify it and say, you know, there's not going to be more than that. Another thing is people feel, universally, so far as I can tell, that deep fakes need to be not only identified, but identified in an actionable way, meaning not super fine print, and there's a way to understand who made the deep fake and to trace it back and to have its origins clear. That's so far as I can tell, a universally held idea. Another one is people feel very strongly that there should be informed consent with any presentation of a fake person, a person who isn't real or is a modified version of a real person, that that should be very strongly identified in a very clear and actionable way, in an informative way. So there are things like that where I think we have community consensus, and it's important to point that out because there's I've lost count, but there's something like twenty processes going on in the world where there are people having meetings and talking about principles for AI policy. And I've been involved in these types of processes. I co founded the Data Protection Advisory Board in the EU many years ago that eventually turned into the European Union's Privacy Framework, and it took decades. I'm not exaggerating. It's like this gigantic thing and what came out was pretty confusing compared to what the original goal was. And I'm not anti process. I think it's great that these things, but it's like it's a slow thing and if we already have some consensus principles, we shouldn't least acknowledge that so we don't appear as a community like I say, to be uh, just afraid of our own work. We have to we have to be able to at least say what we actually do agree on. And there are some things.

Like that, well, let's we're going to do this later. But I'd love to do this in front of you, Jason at a theory about why tech can be so popular and why we're okay to give it all up and see five words five words.

Like that, well, let's we're going to do this later. But I'd love to do this in front of you, Jason at a theory about why tech can be so popular and why we're okay to give it all up and see five words five words.

To what I do believe all all tech, all tech, where we're going, all AI, all the answernet, all the wells. Down to five words. And here's the five words. Okay, I don't want to do it. I don't want to want to vacuum the bedroom. I don't want to do it. You want to drive? I don't want to drive. Yeah, I don't want to drive the car. I don't want to do it. Let's got to stef driving a car. I don't want to I don't want to clean my house. I don't want to vacuum whatever. I don't want to do.

To what I do believe all all tech, all tech, where we're going, all AI, all the answernet, all the wells. Down to five words. And here's the five words. Okay, I don't want to do it. I don't want to want to vacuum the bedroom. I don't want to do it. You want to drive? I don't want to drive. Yeah, I don't want to drive the car. I don't want to do it. Let's got to stef driving a car. I don't want to I don't want to clean my house. I don't want to vacuum whatever. I don't want to do.

Yeah, yeah, you know, I'm there with that. I think the important question is what do you want to do well?

Yeah, yeah, you know, I'm there with that. I think the important question is what do you want to do well?

That I would like to be, you know what. I would like to be informed enough. And this is not of friends too, because I couldn't wait to talk to you that they don't have to talk to you to find out what's going on, and I have to rely on somebody else to tell me what's going on. Who has to fight for transparency? I use my computer, I'm on the internet, I'm on Facebook, I'm on I would like to know what's going on with these products, you know, and I don't know that we'll ever know what's going on.

That I would like to be, you know what. I would like to be informed enough. And this is not of friends too, because I couldn't wait to talk to you that they don't have to talk to you to find out what's going on, and I have to rely on somebody else to tell me what's going on. Who has to fight for transparency? I use my computer, I'm on the internet, I'm on Facebook, I'm on I would like to know what's going on with these products, you know, and I don't know that we'll ever know what's going on.

Yeah, I mean, you'll find yourself more informed for than a week or two if you get off Facebook and Twitter like that stuff's garbage. Yeah, you can stuff on it, but whatever is worthwhile on it, we'll get to you other ways. You'll see what.

Yeah, I mean, you'll find yourself more informed for than a week or two if you get off Facebook and Twitter like that stuff's garbage. Yeah, you can stuff on it, but whatever is worthwhile on it, we'll get to you other ways. You'll see what.

Do you do? Are you what do you want? Like if we look what apps? What do you download? What do you look at? Or do you have to look at everything because of research.

Do you do? Are you what do you want? Like if we look what apps? What do you download? What do you look at? Or do you have to look at everything because of research.

There's something I do which is not replicable, which is I'm in the middle of it all. I'm in the middle of the community, and so i just talk to people and I'm just there every day seeing things. So that's not something you can do. However, I read a few good newspapers every day, and I subscribe to them and pay for them like a good mench and you know, the New York Times and the Guardian and the Post, you know, and so I read things that are well edited and considered and curated, of which there are many People send me articles all the time, but they do it on email or texting rather than through social media account. I'm not on any of the social media sites. And I want to say one thing about that. I know a great many people who feel that they need to be on the social media sites to promote whatever they're doing. But podcast or whatever. Yes, now here's the thing. It's true that I'm well known to a degree. It's true that I have whatever assets going for me. However, I want to point out a few things that are also true. I'm not a teenager in a bikini like so many are TikTok by a long shot. Yet somehow, somehow, despite that, despite not being on social media, I seem to have my independent, you know, intellectual or whatever it is, career. I get people buy my books, I was on I was on TV this morning. People invited me for that. And I don't notice any deficit from not being on these social media things. And I keep on wondering if all the people on social media are like little hamsters on their wheels, you know, like I gotta run, I gotta run. I'm gonna be the less famous if I don't. I have to post every day, And maybe it's actually kind of a scam. And the truth is, if you just get off the wheel, it's fine. You know. I really have to wonder about that.

There's something I do which is not replicable, which is I'm in the middle of it all. I'm in the middle of the community, and so i just talk to people and I'm just there every day seeing things. So that's not something you can do. However, I read a few good newspapers every day, and I subscribe to them and pay for them like a good mench and you know, the New York Times and the Guardian and the Post, you know, and so I read things that are well edited and considered and curated, of which there are many People send me articles all the time, but they do it on email or texting rather than through social media account. I'm not on any of the social media sites. And I want to say one thing about that. I know a great many people who feel that they need to be on the social media sites to promote whatever they're doing. But podcast or whatever. Yes, now here's the thing. It's true that I'm well known to a degree. It's true that I have whatever assets going for me. However, I want to point out a few things that are also true. I'm not a teenager in a bikini like so many are TikTok by a long shot. Yet somehow, somehow, despite that, despite not being on social media, I seem to have my independent, you know, intellectual or whatever it is, career. I get people buy my books, I was on I was on TV this morning. People invited me for that. And I don't notice any deficit from not being on these social media things. And I keep on wondering if all the people on social media are like little hamsters on their wheels, you know, like I gotta run, I gotta run. I'm gonna be the less famous if I don't. I have to post every day, And maybe it's actually kind of a scam. And the truth is, if you just get off the wheel, it's fine. You know. I really have to wonder about that.

But looking you up, I can find you on YouTube, I can find talks. I can find you on social media, not on Twitter, et cetera. But you're represented where I can find you and find out about you and search.

But looking you up, I can find you on YouTube, I can find talks. I can find you on social media, not on Twitter, et cetera. But you're represented where I can find you and find out about you and search.

Yeah yeah, but I'm not there promoting myself. In other words, it happens organically from people who are interested in what I do, which I think is you know, what I'm saying is that you don't have to like if you just say things that people are interested in, it'll don't work out, even if you're not maniacally self promoting all the time.

Yeah yeah, but I'm not there promoting myself. In other words, it happens organically from people who are interested in what I do, which I think is you know, what I'm saying is that you don't have to like if you just say things that people are interested in, it'll don't work out, even if you're not maniacally self promoting all the time.

From your mouth, from your mouth is my mother God's ears. Yeah yeah, yeah, yeah right.

From your mouth, from your mouth is my mother God's ears. Yeah yeah, yeah, yeah right.

And the nice thing is when you're not I was going to say, when you're not doing all of this, I know that you're playing some unusual instruments, some very unique, specialized, ancient, indigenous, crazy things that we've never heard of.

And the nice thing is when you're not I was going to say, when you're not doing all of this, I know that you're playing some unusual instruments, some very unique, specialized, ancient, indigenous, crazy things that we've never heard of.

Yeah, that's all true. I love doing that. I love instruments. Instruments are the most expressive technology and they put everything digital to shame. I just love them.

Yeah, that's all true. I love doing that. I love instruments. Instruments are the most expressive technology and they put everything digital to shame. I just love them.

Well, what I love about, you know, an unusual like a you know, I'm trying to think of some of the ones that i've I just like an instrument where if I play it wrong. If I hit a clinker, nobody really knows. They have no idea.

Well, what I love about, you know, an unusual like a you know, I'm trying to think of some of the ones that i've I just like an instrument where if I play it wrong. If I hit a clinker, nobody really knows. They have no idea.

There's something to be said for that.

There's something to be said for that.

Yeah, but you have stuff on your wall. You have mandolin? Do you what kind of stuff do you collect?

Yeah, but you have stuff on your wall. You have mandolin? Do you what kind of stuff do you collect?

Well?

Well?

I play everything, you see, I'm not a collector, and I won't have anything in place. So and this isn't a lot of instruments. This is actually a small number for me, like.

I play everything, you see, I'm not a collector, and I won't have anything in place. So and this isn't a lot of instruments. This is actually a small number for me, like.

Two keyboards and maybe a half a dozen different stringed instruments.

Two keyboards and maybe a half a dozen different stringed instruments.

Back, there's a bunch of a bunch of Well here, I can let me see if I get it. If I this is a Chinese. Uh, it's a Chinese. It's called a guzog, and it's I just played it. I just played a concert in l A. I sort of I should time these podcast things to be just some concert to promote them, to promote the Hamster on the wheel. But promotional, yeah, yeah, but no, no. I love I love I love the instruments. I love playing with musicians. I think there's I think one of the sweetest kinds of connection between people is playing music with people. I think there's something once in a while you run into a musician who's a jerk, but less often than in other spheres of life. Like people, people who decide to play music and play together tend to be sweet together. And there's something just so.