Radio Better Offline: Brian Koppelman, Cherlynn Low & Mike Drucker

This is an iHeart podcast.

Be honest, how many tabs do you have open right now?

Too many?

Sounds like you need Close All Tabs from KQED, where I, Morgan Sung, Doom Scroll so you don't have to.

Every week, we scour the internet to bring you deep dives that explain how the digital world connects and divides us all.

Everyone's cooped up in their house.

I will talk to this robot.

If you're a truly engaged activist, the government already has data on you.

Driverless cars are going to mess up in ways that humans wouldn't.

Listen to Close All Tods, wherever you get your podcasts.

There's more to San Francisco with the Chronicle.

More to experience and to explore.

Knowing San Francisco is our passion.

Discover more at sfchronicle.com.

Every business has an ambition.

PayPal Open is the platform designed to help you grow into yours with business loans so you can expand and access to hundreds of millions of PayPal customers worldwide.

And your customers can pay all the ways they want with PayPal, Venmo, Pay Later, and all major cards so you can focus on scaling up.

When it's time to get growing, there's one platform for all business, PayPal Open.

Grow today at PayPalOpen.com.

Loans subject to approval in available locations.

In business, they say you can have better, cheaper, or faster, but you only get to pick two.

What if you could have all three at the same time?

That's exactly what Cohere, Thomson Reuters, and Specialized Bikes have since they upgraded to the next generation of the cloud.

Oracle Cloud Infrastructure.

OCI is the blazing fast platform for your infrastructure, database, application development, and AI needs, where you can run any workload in a high-availability, consistently high-performance environment and spend less than you would with other clouds.

How is it faster?

OCI's block storage gives you more operations per second.

Cheaper?

OCI costs up to 50% less for computing, 70% less for storage, and 80% less for networking.

Better?

In test after test, OCI customers report lower latency and higher bandwidth versus other clouds.

This is the cloud built for AI and all your biggest workloads.

Right now with zero commitment, try OCI for free.

Head to oracle.com/slash strategic.

That's oracle.com/slash strategic.

Call zone media

your scientists have yet to discover how neural networks create self-consciousness, let alone how the human brain processes two-dimensional retinal images into three-dimensional phenomena known as perception.

Yet you somehow brazenly declare seeing is believing?

Yes, I do.

I'm Ed Zittron.

This is Better Offline.

I'm your host.

Buy our merchandise.

Go to my newsletter, where's youred.out.

Anyway, fuck all that.

Brian Koppelman is joining us here in the studio.

He's the incredible writer, producer, and he's in the bear.

The flippin bear.

He's a real-deal actor.

He's also the co-creator, showrunner, and executive producer of Showtime's Billions and Superpump, The Battle for Uber.

Brian, thank you so much for joining us.

Thrilled to be here with you, man.

We've, of course, got Mike Drucker, the wonderful comedian.

And of course, you have a book, don't you, Mike?

Yes, sir.

It's called Good Game, No Rematch.

Ooh.

Get out

embarrassing myself with video games throughout my entire life.

wonderful i'll be embarrassing myself with tech on this show shirlyn lowe as well joining us from engadget how you doing sherlin i am about to down a protein shake hopefully yes yeah we're just talking about the ninja creamy and all our various slops they're great ninja creamy i'll tell you there's uh no endorsement out there for any of us they don't need it because people just get these things and they immediately go to tick tock uh because they want to share how good they are yeah they're honestly they're so good that's all i full endorse full endorsement this is the ninja creamy show now now.

I'm going to get...

What's great about this is literally anytime I mention any product, I will get an email from someone being like, here's a post from 2003 from the CEO, in which case they shot a doctor.

Like some insane nice thing.

They'll be like, Ed, how dare you bring up.

I'm like, I don't know everything.

Please help me.

Well, Fairlife's bottles have a lot of phthalates in them.

So, you know, that's our thing today.

Yeah, I just eat like too much yogurt.

So I want to actually start with a really good thing.

So, Mike, you wrote a really great piece for the gamer, I think, that went out very recently.

It's called, I'm Starting to Worry This Industry Has No Respect for the People Who Work on It.

Why don't you walk us through the article?

Because I think it's a good subject matter.

Sure.

Well, as listeners may or may not know, Microsoft recently laid off about 9,000 people, most of which were in their gaming department.

Simultaneously, they were claiming that their gaming department's quite profitable and they're making a ton of money and everything's going well.

I don't know if that's actually true, but they are saying that.

And they've kind of also said that a lot of the money that they were paying these employees isn't about losses.

it's that they want to move this money into ai development did they say that yeah yeah that's horrifying yeah it's kind of in i mean they didn't say that word for word but it was very implied that the budget was you know they're more focused that was kind of the language the language was like you know as we restructure we're more focused on ai going forward which is so ironic is like video games is one of the first real exposures to AI for most people.

Yeah.

I remember when fear came out.

Anyone remember fear?

Yeah.

It was one of the first one of the first real, it was the first time a guy would like shove his head over and look around before just jumping up and getting shot.

Yeah, it's just the reason this really spoke to me, other than the fact it was very well written, is that I feel like this is the central problem with a lot of tech, entertainment,

everything right now, where it's like the people at top, and you make this point well in the article, that the industry is the problem because the industry is not being piloted by the people creating.

Right, exactly.

I mean, you know, and it's a problem that also extends to the, you know, Hollywood, which I also work in because I'm famous.

No, no, that's not true at all.

But it's this problem that, like, you know, a lot of the decision makers

are not as close to the product as they used to be.

I mean, I mean, you could even say the same for things like Boeing, where, you know, you don't have engineers running the department anymore.

You have business people who've been brought in because they're good at Jack Welltrack Alliance.

Exactly, exactly.

And, you know, these people are far away from the product.

They're far away from the development of it.

So they see these, you know, workers as numbers on a spreadsheet.

And for better or worse, video game development is a very long process.

It takes a lot of time.

It takes a lot of money.

And it's getting longer.

It's getting longer

horizon as well.

And so it's very easy for these companies that are looking for a short-term next financial quarter boost to go, we fired all these people.

And this product wasn't going to come out for two years, so it really doesn't matter.

And that's the thing with Microsoft as well.

They've laid off 15,000 people this year as well.

It's nuts.

And is the money really even going anywhere?

It's just so confusing.

But you're seeing it everywhere with Hollywood.

There was the Acme versus Coyote thing.

Yeah, sorry, Coyote versus Acme thing where they just like mothballed it.

They're releasing it now, but they mothballed a movie to save on taxes.

I feel like that shouldn't be a loophole.

I hate that loophole.

I hate the idea of that loophole.

I mean, it almost reminds me of that loophole from, and Brian, you could maybe correct me on this, but remember like in the 90s, they made a Fantastic 4 film they weren't going to release just so they could maintain rights for it because the rights for it were you have to make a movie to keep the rights.

You don't have to release it.

I don't remember that exactly, though.

Now you say it, it rings a bell, but I don't have particulars on it.

But I think what you're talking about,

really the answer, I agree completely as you diagnose it with how depressing it is.

But to me, these things feel like a systems response, like complexity theory.

And system, well, they're like systems responses to what's happening in the world as opposed to feeling like, because I think it's easier for us to look at the human being and go, that motherfucker, and that may be a motherfucker.

But another possible answer is that from a far remove, like

something's happening, right?

And when this thing is happening,

it gets into quantum theory, but

it is a complexity systems response to this giant change of artificial intelligence having certain capabilities.

And all of this, you can look at all of it.

And I mean, we've seen people who had one set of beliefs for so long and on the record in your industry completely switch.

And they may think that's an autonomous decision they're making.

But I have found a little bit of solace by reading about complexity theory because that, for me, offers a potentially more

not hopeful, but

sort of a more complete understanding.

So you're saying like a systemic response to conditions, because I don't know about the AI capabilities side, but the existence of capabilities potentially being there makes sense in that they're all trying to reconfigure for a future.

They don't know if it's actually there.

The generative AI doesn't seem to do it.

But the potential of that, the idea of it, is motivating them so much.

Microsoft, of all people as well, should know how little money is actually being made from this, considering out the 30%.

But that's it.

But yes.

But executives, obviously, because I've studied these people so much and written about them so much, and I understand how venal they are and how short-term they think times.

But they're also,

I think, looking at data that we don't have very often.

And

they're trying to forecast out

a long time.

Why do you think they have data we don't have, though?

Because, like, with Microsoft, for example, and I have probably studied Satchinadella too much at this point.

I really, I learned too much about the growth mindset and Carolyn Dweck and all of that nonsense.

But the data,

if the data is there, they're acting very peculiar about the data because they're only making $13 billion this year from AI.

10 billion is

AR I was from Open AI burning giraffes and whatever they put into the machine for chat GPT.

But it's

it feels almost like they are reacting to what they hope will happen or what may happen.

I'm just trying to-that data might just be when everyone reacts to quarterly like the problem in our business, the entertainment thing is that these people are responding to quarterly earnings calls that they have to make.

And maybe the data isn't about the long-term possibility.

Maybe the data is literally that we don't know that they're looking at is their little cohort of people and the exact moment they can exercise which kinds of options, some of which they have to declare, and maybe some of which they are somehow able to flip on a different market.

Well, I mean, that's what Anthropic basically, Amazon did with Anthropic.

They flip their investment into a certain kind of thing they could tax deduct.

Little fuck.

I mean, there's no doubt that there's heartlessness, but I just, because Drucker's here, I just want to say, you know, even in the most depressing times or in moments where the technology, the platform seems brutal,

people's humanity can transcend it.

Absolutely.

And I remember in some dark days with Twitter,

Drucker was, and it was really amazing, man.

And I remember, you know, you and I don't know each other well, but we've known each other a long time.

Like 20 years.

And yeah, it's true.

And I remember that there were many nights you were like not sleeping that well, or sleeping at the wrong times.

Yeah.

No, doubt and like sleeping during the day up at night but

i remember him really like like um very vulnerably talking about sadness and depression and getting

people

to um in trust sharing and him actively trying to like save people and i'll in a place where like where people were so callous almost by profession on there by like everything they wanted to do that right well everyone was at home playing grand theft auto which could you guys fix that and get the next one out

everyone was at home playing Grand Theft Auto and being callous.

And he was like literally going, let me explain depression to you and what you can do and what the resources are and why you shouldn't kill yourself.

And

which I think is great.

Of course, you would lead with empathy on this too and look at these assholes and think about all the engineers.

And it's the right way to...

process it.

I just think often it's not a binary.

No, and that makes sense.

And that's the thing I've been saying.

Like a lot about the show is, yeah, I talk about the pigs and the assholes and the scumbags and all the different names and the voices I do for them, but it's also about the fact that there is like I'm pissed off.

Keisu Kagawa, friend of the show, said this to him a lot.

It's I'm broken-hearted romantic because things like what Mike did.

Actually, one of the reasons I read Engadget as well is it's like, yeah, there are a lot of these financial horrors in there, but there's fun dorky shit online still.

There's still one, like most of my friends are from the internet.

I know it's like I'm like the drill crying between

like being online.

It's like, like everything I got is through emails.

But I still think there is a lot of joy in this.

And I think the central thing about your article is just like beneath this capitalism crush is actually some really like wonderful things being built.

There are still wonderful games being built.

Yeah.

There's like an entire economy on Minecraft, for better or for worse, about selling mods and stuff.

There are people on Roblox.

Other problems with Roblox, obviously, who are like building games on there and selling them.

There's still some cool shit happening in tech.

Yes.

It's just being interfered with because every three months, someone gets upset at them or finds a new way to make money off it, which you have to shove into a new category.

But it's going to chase, right?

Like, that's what it is right now.

I think that what you're talking about, the like macro picture of everyone sort of having that reaction, and I think we will, of course, correct in time.

I think we're right now at that stage in history where it's not as cut and dry to me as the NFT crypto sort of bubble, where like it was clearly.

That was the word that was criminals.

Yes, criminals.

Fucking people over, knowing it.

Con Con people, right?

And I'd argue that on some level, these are criminals.

There are criminals at play in this scenario right now.

I will say that with what Mike was writing about in your article, the Microsoft thing was all the more like, I think when my team saw the news last week, my instant reaction was, didn't they just ratify a union contract with like their first ever in the US too?

Like to be saying that on one hand, we really care about workers' rights and really want to protect workers.

And the other, you're like, and those are the quality people, right?

And now we're like, oh, game developers, nah, 9,000 of you can go because AI NPCs are all the rage right now, and they really make a lot of sense.

AI NPCs, they never said a bad thing, never said anything that was.

That was that NVIDIA demo from last year,

or was it this year?

I can't remember.

I think they've done two.

Like, every year Nvidia wheels out a demo and be like, the generative AI NPCs are here.

And within one day, someone has made it SASLA.

Yes.

Or like it's just said something in Spain.

Oh, Tay was the 2016 AI bot that learned from the internet.

To be racist.

Like kind of a protomeca Hitler situation.

Oh, that was Grok.

Yeah, Tay walked so.

Was that the Microsoft back from

like years and years ago?

2012 or something like that.

I forgot about that.

It's been, but the thing is, back to Brian's point, is that this keeps happening and then we keep, of course, correcting back.

Like, it feels like there is a systems response.

And

Ed, I think you're looking for the joy.

I wouldn't use the word intervening or interfering.

I would say it's noise.

And the way for companies and people existing in this industry to deal with that is to focus on what you think is good.

I find the irony in saying that, which is I think these tech bros that you're referring to, Brian, they're also trying to focus on what they think is good.

So they're cutting out noise from their perspective.

And I don't know.

It's that movie that was just released featuring those four dudes in the mountain lodge.

Oh,

not mountainhead, mountain head.

Mountain head, yes.

So it feels like that.

It feels like everyone's got their little bubble, which is also at the same time,

created maybe and supported by tech.

And if we continue to operate in silos, I don't know.

I feel like

if we only think of those,

and often they are men in those roles, though they're not all, but often they are.

If you think of some of those, you said bros, but if we only reduce them to those guys running around trying to kill someone in a sauna,

where I think in a way,

in a way, it allows us to

not worry about them because we can do them.

Right.

That's fair.

Some of them are smarter, like just raw synthesizing power.

Yeah.

Some of those people, not all of them, they're smarter than everyone in this building combined.

Yeah.

A couple of them.

And I'm not saying that that makes them good or anything.

In any way good.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Or in any way good for now, because even if you say, like, I agree with you, that some of them may believe that they're doing this, that they're doing good, right?

But if they're thinking in thousand-year chunks, that's really bad for people.

Yuval said this, and Yuval, I think, is amazing.

And he said, well, the problem is historians like me, he goes, you may look at it now.

He was on a podcast.

He said, you may look at it now and say, but those things worked out okay.

Look where we are.

But as a historian, I have to look at the cost of human life

that happened for all the interval, all the little intervals to get from there to here.

And that's really what you guys are just talking about, rightly so, is all the, you know, the devastation and the wake.

But can I just ask, because you might all might be so jaded, but do you not think AI is like mind-bogglingly great at times?

I can see the balance.

I think Ed's like far off.

You don't, wait, you really, I think it's like the single, I think think it's the single greatest invention in my life.

What is, what is your favorite thing that AI has done?

I think the ability to have super high-level conversations about really esoteric, about systems theory.

Complexity is theory, how do you know it's correct in them?

Well, you can, well, you have to do a bit of work, right?

I don't want to talk to something that I have to verify constantly.

I talk to people.

Well, you have to do that with people too, Ed to some extent.

You can't trust everything I do.

How do you feel about the automobile?

Or is the horse-drawn carriage still your thing?

thing?

Damn.

No, I'm just saying.

No, I'm wondering what the point is.

Blake looks very uneasy, right?

I mean, the point.

No, I just have jokes in my head.

No, no, I'm sure you got raised.

No, I'm just saying.

Well, because I think you can decry the industry and the way people are using it.

And

I'm pretty sure I was reading Eliezer Yudkowski before anyone in this room.

I mean, How to Actually Change Your Mind is a book that I was obsessed with giving as Christmas gifts.

I can't take Yudowski seriously.

I just, it's.

You got to take him seriously.

I mean, you have to take, one has to take that guy's brain seriously.

Everything you guys are worried about, he called out 15 years ago

in detail.

Okay.

I mean, like, here's the thing.

The automobile is not a comparison because we knew we had to go forward side to side and everything like that.

Like, we had an actual use case for that.

With generative AI, the way that these conversations happen and large language models can be conversing with documents.

It's one of the only use cases that is actually remotely useful because you can actually verify based on the parts of the document.

Having a conversation with one of these, fine.

It's a thing.

I'm not amazed by it because there have been chatbots doing this with KMS since like, what, what, 2013, 2014?

Um, and the Eliza effect goes back to the 60s.

Yeah, and Eliza, even then, there's a Karen Howe's Empire of AI is a great thing about Eliza.

The creator was just like, why is everyone so fucking impressed?

But they're just like, really, just like, what the fuck is this?

I think what it is, is

I am just not that impressed by it based on the larger discussion.

Everyone acts like this is the fucking future, and it just feels like a growth of the past.

What Chat GPT has become, for better or for worse, is what Google could have potentially been it's insane that attention i agree with you but like okay i got a tick bite okay and you can literally the second you get a tick bite everybody says antibiotics you gotta go if you can't find the thing i got a picture i put it on there the uh

AI was immediately able to, and yes, I could verify it afterwards because I called, the AI was able to say, this is the kind of tick it is.

This is the area you're in.

This kind of tick, you don't need antibiotics.

You're not going to get Lyme disease.

Here's why.

Sent it to my doctor who that it's feedback.

And they agreed.

That would be harder to do anything.

Why didn't you send it to your doctor before you asked him?

Well, he doesn't.

His job isn't to like identify what tick it is.

Oh, sorry.

I misunderstood what you said.

Yeah, I want more clarity on the doctor thing.

I raised my hand as you were talking because I'm like, did you trust the chat GPT answer and leave it at that?

No, then I took that.

When it said that, then I searched for what it said and compared, and it was right.

Okay, so you got to.

But it was a

dog tick, not a deer tick.

Out of curiosity, and Ed, you might be able to answer this question.

Is that, and I don't actually know the answer.

Is that iterative AI or is that generative AI?

So we're using ChatGPT.

So

we're going to have a quad.

I don't know which one.

So that would be generative AI.

And so that would still be...

And by the way, sounds like a use case.

It is the growth of...

So what you just said.

No, I was going to say, I think a version of Google could have done that for you in the past, too, before ChatGPT.

What ChatGPT, the generative side of it is providing is the LLM, the natural language interface, about pulling a lot of different sources of data and putting that together for you.

That is ChatGPT.

You could have done that with Google, or I think there were apps, right, that you could do a photo sort of recognition of.

For a while on Google.

Yeah, and to my knowledge, parts of Google and Google Health researchers with their AI divisions were working on apps that could identify different things, like skin things.

So like, is that a bug bite or is that eczema kind of thing through the pixel phones?

I don't think they've ever broadly released it, but they were experimenting way before ChatGPT was even a thing.

I would argue that I think the LLM portion of this is more about how it converses with you and how it understands what you're actually concerned about.

So, if you didn't give it the exact words of look up this thing and should I see a doctor, even if you didn't input the see a doctor request, it might you know divine that that's what you really

like.

Chat GPT, I don't think would have been a big deal if Google had actually innovated in search at all.

If they have instead of something adds into it, Google search has been the same for like 15, 20 years, except worse.

What you were describing there, valid.

It's inference basically it's it infers the understanding of from the image and all this and then spits out an answer it's a use case i think that in the way you used it that was responsible the problem is at scale that is not gonna work out so great because oh i believe you know way more about this than i do

no i'm genuinely glad you brought this up because it's like but what about that

is

extrapolating out to the greater ai replacing jobs thing because that's where where my principal problem is people are taking what is what Google should have been in 2017 and turned it into this is going to replace half of workers.

A quote from Dario Amade that was fucking made up, which he said off the top of his head, it's not a butt.

Sorry, just getting mad.

Wario himself.

Warrior O'Aamade.

I think what you're also bringing up, Brian, is that there is this marketing, I guess, problem with AI, which is that like AI has existed for a very long time.

And the current version that everyone's really obsessed with is Gen AI.

And generative AI is all about what it can generate for you.

Using large language models, using art, like creating art, creating videos, all of that stuff is this current like iteration of AI we're all talking about.

But the previous stuff has existed before and this is all like just more of the same.

And I think that's why so many of us in the industry are so frustrated with it because there's a misconception.

There's also this idea that the jobs that it's trying to replace are in that field of coming up with art, music, and words that are not jobs that A, pay well to begin with, but B, like are the parts of our life that we want it replaced, right?

We want it competitive.

When I talk about Yudkowski, the reason I do is that it freaked is that he was somebody who he's right on your side in a way.

I mean, his thing always was:

this is not going to be a net good for society.

But that's not even where my artist is.

And

I'm sure you remember when Astro Teller wrote Exegesis.

I remember reading that book like the day it came out, and it really did freak me out about what was possible.

Now, we're not even there yet, right?

It even isn't where that

version of AI and Yudowski, but Yudowski's

Yudkowski, sorry.

He's so find him quite distasteful.

But on top of that, he's a fucking AGI doomer.

And he's just, yeah, sure, if

a frog had wings, it could fly.

It's like, yeah, if the computer wakes up and does this, this could be scary.

He's one of the few people that seems to actually think about what AGI could do.

But also, we're so far off from it that I can't see him as anything but a grifter because all he is doing is grift.

It's just.

He's been on it long before there was grift in it.

He was on it as a non-profit.

No, he non-profit grifts exist.

No, I'm you

think about what I've written.

You think I don't know non-profit AFS?

Yeah, you're in this.

What the fuck's the matter with you?

You were the one that you saw.

In my domain, experts.

Brian won.

Yeah.

But he's,

I have a different view.

Now, I'm not saying all his opinions are correct.

What I'm saying is that

that's somebody who flagged a bunch of these potential issues a long time ago.

And of course, it shouldn't.

I mean, it's horrible that these people in charge are so willing to slough off human beings.

They're hated.

The moment they think there's this much of an edge.

But also, because of what I study in life, I can't be so.

We've all of us who write about this stuff in fiction, right?

You do it because, okay, you guys have to report on something.

You have to, I can take sort of like my partner and I can take what's in there and try to dramatize what might happen.

And

always would try to point out exactly that these motherfuckers will do all this shit.

It's not surprising to me.

It's horrific, but not surprising.

Be honest, how many tabs do you have open right now?

Too many?

Sounds like you need close all tabs from KQED, where I, Morgan Sung, Doom Scroll so you don't have to.

Every week, we scour the internet to bring you deep dives that explain how the digital world connects and divides us all.

Everyone's cooped up in their house.

I will talk to this robot.

If you're a truly engaged activist, the government already has data on you.

Driverless cars are going to mess up in ways that humans wouldn't.

Listen to Close All Tabs, wherever you get your podcasts.

So I've shopped with Quince before they were an advertiser and after they became one.

And then again, before I had to record this ad, I really like them.

My green overshirt in particular looks great.

I use it like a jacket.

It's breathable and comfortable and hangs on my body nicely.

I get a lot of compliments.

And I liked it so much I got it in all the different colours, along with one of their corduroy ones, which I think I pull off.

And really, that's the only person that matters.

I also really love their linen shirts, too.

They're comfortable, they're breathable, and they look nice.

Get a lot of compliments there, too.

I have a few of them, love their rust-coloured ones as well.

And in general, I really like Quince.

The shirts fit nicely, and the rest of their clothes do too.

They ship quickly, they look good, they're high quality, and they partner directly with ethical factories and skip the middleman.

So you get top-tier fabrics and craftsmanship at half the price of similar brands.

And I'm probably going to buy more from them very, very soon.

Keep it classic and cool this fall.

With long-lasting staples from Quince, go to quince.com/slash slash better for free shipping on your order and 365-day returns.

That's q-u-in-ce-e.com slash better.

Free shipping and 365-day returns.

Quince.com slash better.

This fall, let your home smell as good as it looks.

Pura's app-controlled diffusers bring you premium scents from brands like Nest New York, Capri Blue, and Anthropology.

From Spice Pumpkin to Whitewoods, your fall favorites are just a tap away.

It's home fragrance that feels as elevated as it smells, and right now, it's the perfect time to stock up.

Visit Pura.com and bring home the best scents of the season.

Today, we're exploring deep in the North American wilderness among nature's wildest plants, animals, and

cows.

Uh, you're actually on an Organic Valley dairy farm where nutritious, delicious organic food gets its start.

But there's so much nature.

Exactly.

Organic Valley small family farms protect the land and the plants and animals that call it home.

Extraordinary.

Sure is.

Organic Valley, protecting where your food comes from.

Learn more about their delicious dairy at ov.coop.

What bothers me as well with it, and I think you're completely right.

And also, like, I'm not completely saying everything you're saying is wrong.

Like, you actually are well read on this, which is nice because a lot of people who mention the AGI stuff don't read anything.

But I think the thing is as well is so much about this AI-AGI thing is not about what it can actually do.

The best fiction about AGI, my girlfriend Sarah showed me the Kill Switch X-Files episode.

Fantastic AGI episode.

It's scary because it's not about the people making it, it's about the computer itself and the intentions spilling into it.

A lot of what the AGI discussion now is, and it will automate jobs.

And that's the last time I'm going to think about it before I say, here's Anthropic.

Kevin Roos.

And it's, and I think what it is, is there are discussions to be had around what this stuff could do.

If AI could do the things that they're saying it could do, if it could replace jobs, it would be doing it, but also it would actually require a change in society.

It's almost as if they're like, they want all of the profits from AI, all of the exposure and the ability to lay people off without actually doing anything to earn it.

And it comes back to what you said about the people running this shit aren't even trying to build AI.

Mark Zuckerberg's building a Manhattan-sized data center to build super intelligence.

I wonder, though, when you say, and you guys all speak to this, I wonder

when you talk about that Google could have done this or should have done this, and then it's a great point that you made about

that it is the way that it communicates.

Because what I wonder is you're all expert.

You're all native, early

adopters, native to

not only the internet, but native to tech.

And so sure, you could have used Alta Vista to do

stuff.

Jeeves, for fuck's sake, right?

But I'm saying you could have used all that.

But for generations of people who aren't literate,

billions of people.

Exactly.

Even if that was possible through Google image search, but you ever try Google image, watch people try to do a Google image search change?

No, I shouldn't.

I agree.

I'm saying this is making it for people

friendly to them, as you've said,

easy for them.

And I wonder if that's the...

That's exactly what I'm saying.

That's why people like Chat GPT.

It's not because it's this amazing product.

It's because it does what people, people go to Google for

sure.

But communicating well

in an inviting, seductive way

is very challenging.

Yes.

Yeah.

So for tech people to do that to regular people is the amazing thing.

It's almost like you're saying this Google invented this tech.

The attention, the 2017 attention is all you need paper was eight Google scientists.

I just looked this up.

I thought it was several.

But it's like Noam Shazir, they ended up paying like $2 billion for character A just to bring him back.

Google had this technology.

And had this movement just been, we're going to make inference of meaning better, exactly what you're talking about, it would not be this big story.

The thing is, they need it to be what you were describing are use cases, good, bad, whatever.

They are things that people use it for.

The actual things they're describing are, oh, it's a PhD-level intelligence.

It's going to solve physics.

It's like, no, it's not.

But if they say, what if Google search worked?

They can't make a trazillion dollar.

They can't be like, this is going to be everything we need.

We're going to build data centers.

It's just, because what you're describing, Brian, is

the most evil thing in the world.

Go back to Mike Drucker.

Yeah.

You really should say that.

Because I think what

I think in all these things, what I've learned, just being curious, is to look at the incentives.

Yes, that's what I'm saying.

And Google was

disincentivized to make search work for the user.

Yeah.

Because of the profit agenda, right?

You said, oh, should these things should make a fucking profit?

But here's the thing: in a weird way, them not making a profit is better for the users.

Yes.

And in the original Google wasn't, but I'm sure it's all in the Google paper that nobody's fucking reading except you.

I'm talking about the 1984.

But I'm talking about

for the user.

I'm trying to,

you're raising these amazing questions, but if I try to think about how to answer them, it's that these companies are like in the early days of social media and all this stuff.

In the beginning, they try to super serve the user to get you addicted to it so that then they can just, but the incentive structure is what you got to look at.

And obviously, Microsoft's incentive structure has been locked in for a very long time.

And that is for the people who have the most stock in Microsoft to make the most money.

That's the incentive structure.

Google, too, to an extent.

And that's why they had that stuff for that long, but they never, because they never found a way to integrate it into all the different parts of its businesses that matter.

The ads part, the search parts, the likes.

That's also the monopoly.

They already have a monopoly.

They have no reason to be.

I don't know if you remember this Google IO io 2017 2018 even 2019 uh when they first showed kitchen sink which was their version of chat gpt but it wasn't as conversational it was you can ask this app to come up with ways to learn about a new hobby or to plan a thing for you before chat gpt even was known widely to everyone i think it was open ai wasn't really even a thing and it just wasn't a chat interface and i think to brian's point the incentive that chat gpt was has brought to people and to my parents who by the way discovered chat gpt last year very annoying to me but

it's like it's so much easier.

It brings them into technology in a way that technology used to be kind of looking down on people for not knowing things.

And you deal, you do away with that with the chat bot.

My parents not only like feel so hip now, which sorry, mom and dad, you're not.

But, but also, like, there's people who seek comfort in the companionship brought on by AI chat bots, like chat bots.

Differently hip.

They are amazingly hip.

They've danced at their age, and I love that.

That's actually lovely.

But the thing is, if you look at the use of Gen AI from the last, and I think I talked about this on that Kevin Roos episode on Huron, but the use of chat AI services has changed, right?

It used to be like very interest based and very search-based, but it's now companionship-based as the top few uses.

And that's why people are drawn to it.

And I think that,

one last point that came up really when I was like listening to you talk, Ed, is that like

the incentive...

for them to push towards like, yes, let's go towards AGI.

It's not just like laying off people.

It's also who can get there first.

It's that this race of like it's like it's the tech AI ego thing, the tech AI, the tech CEO ego thing.

And then from the ego standpoint, then they push down to profits.

But so many businesses are already

sort of the industries are already acting in bad faith.

Oh, yes.

Yeah.

Like, okay, look at the, here's it.

Here's, you know, I'll give you not a you, like a real industry that I think will be transformed by it, and I think that's not a bad thing, is like money management.

Money management, which is a billions of dollars.

AI already can replace AI working in very separate

between

AI though.

But well, you can do that.

No, no, I'm saying that.

That whole business is about a front face.

Money management, I'm not talking about the high net worth.

I'm saying in general, people who use for their retirement accounts, money managers, wealth run future devices.

All that stuff.

But within those companies,

they're front-facing language of humans who are just trying to keep you invested.

They don't know that stuff, they are not offering value, really, and they're taking this big percentage from regular people trying to save for their retirement.

And they're bleeding off my.

And in the end, they're going.

I was listening to like.

No, I'm smiling because you were right already.

This was the 2015 through 2020 wealthy.

No, I know all that stuff, but I'm talking about even now, like big banks, like the big banks.

I'm not talking about their AI front.

I'm saying that I was listening to a talk given by Josh Brown

and one of his partners, I think.

And he was talking about how

essentially all of the

back end of all that stuff, meaning you might still have a person talking to the user,

but everything else is going to be done by

the businesses.

I think it's Michael Batnik from his company who was talking about.

Because here's the thing with that is, from my knowledge of basically financial regulation, they don't want an LLM touching much of this.

There's a lot of stuff within financial research happening now with generative AI.

There's a ton of companies doing like insanely high compute burn to do these massive kind of like evaluations of stuff.

I don't know if anyone wants to touch the money with LLMs, and they've actually been quite resistant to it, partly because they don't know how they work.

Like they truly don't know.

Oh, I know the black box thing.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

And so it's like

a lot of these things also, when are they going to happen though?

Because they've been saying this for two years.

Wait, Do you think there's a scenario?

Do you think there's a scenario where this

goes away?

This goes away?

I don't think.

I think I think it's a good idea.

No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.

You think it's going to reveal itself as being fraudulent for what it

reports to be?

No, no.

I think you're going to see what...

Call him a shot.

So I believe that...

Open AI will, as an ongoing concern, eventually go into nothingness.

Matt Hughes, my editor, believes they'll become a pattern troll.

I actually think it's an amazing thing.

I think that what we experience of large language models will vastly pull back.

I think there will be rate limits.

What do you mean pull back?

What do you mean?

There'll be rate limits on Cat GPT.

People are going to be horrifyingly sad because those companions.

Your companions are going to go away.

No, they're not going to go away.

They're just going to be much, much, much more limited.

And I think that everything we see today, the kind of, and you look in any of the reds behind any of the serious like GPTs, they're all kind of saying, like, yeah, we know that the abundance, the free ride is over.

So, no, it's not going away, but you're not going to hear about it constantly.

And everything you use today is going to be so severely rate-limited or dead.

Those companies that are charging for generative AI things, beneath the surface, all of the API rates behind these companies, so the things that you plug in to run the models, are vastly subsidized by big tech and by the companies.

But AltaVista goes away, but Google takes over.

Well, Google Gemini exists, but the Gemini requests perhaps don't hit the LLM as much.

They have

to be able to see that.

You're kind of saying this consolidation that's going to happen.

But it won't be this big thing where you hear about all the time.

I think you were going to.

So, of course, it'll just be the back end of lots of stuff.

It will be, well, no, it would just be something that sits

smaller in scale, right?

It's also not good as a back end.

Large language models are not good back end.

I understand.

Yeah, they're good at talking to you.

They're good energy.

They can divine stuff as well.

One thing we're kind of circling on the consumer level that we're not talking about is it's still a novelty.

Now, I think it's going to continue to be used.

I do think that people are going to continue to make lists and scheduling and

summarize my thing or like, you know, what's a a good vacation.

And there are on-device models that are able to do that.

Right.

I just think that right now it's such a big deal that everyone's using it because it's cool, because they, you know, your parents hear about it, because you're told you should use it for work.

Yep.

And I do think that it'll stick around.

I do think there will be a contraction in the sense that, you know, it'll be a cool thing, but I think in 15 years, it's no longer going to be as funny to produce like a picture of a pig with like Mickey Mouse's head and three boobs.

And I feel like now that's a big

comedy is timeless.

But I just don't imagine that in like 15 years having the same novelty as it does because you take away or five years, 10 years.

If you take away all the headlines, if you take away all of the money and you actually look at what's there, it is everything you've, what you're describing is probably the most useful thing.

It's like, do I know this?

Okay, this seems plausible.

I'm going to double check it.

It's kind of like what Incarter could have been.

I don't even mean that sarcastically.

I, as a very cool child, I was very cool.

I would sit on Incarter for hours reading stuff because it was kind of like, wow, you have access to everything.

And I think human beings are curious.

So, of course, they're going to talk to it if it talks back.

I just think right now there is no business model.

That's the biggest one.

The biggest one is there really is no business model.

Ads do not work.

Ads are not going.

How do you put, you inject ads within an LM?

Look at what happened with Grok.

Grok happened because they tried to make us,

let's make it just, how do we crank up this racism dial?

And like, how do we mess with this system prompt?

But the thing is, those subtle changes for even advertising will be bad.

Perplexity's been talked about doing ads for for a fucking year.

Not heard much of that, Aravind.

And it's like,

on some level, regardless of how useful it is, the economics do not make sense.

They're nothing like an Uber.

Uber was,

yes, you well know.

Uber was a complete fucking, and it still barely makes sense.

They're raising another $1.2 billion.

But you can at least tell someone exactly what Uber is and why you'd use it.

And it's just kind of chugging along through necessity.

I don't know how necessary Chat GPT is.

A large language model, a Google Gemini, and Google is claiming they're doing efficiency stuff.

That could last.

I think it will be heavily rate limited.

I'm certain you are all right about the business models and the viability of this from a business standpoint.

You know so much more than I do.

I'm learning and it's fascinating.

As a user of it who is not on the inside of the business,

my prediction is you're dead wrong.

No, Brian,

it's going to become the dominant thing in most of society in lots of ways.

I think here's people are going to use it and be it's going to be part of them,

like William Gibson predicted a really long time ago.

Like, I think that it's fine.

I think it's bad at creative things, the thing people think it's good at.

I don't, it's bad at that.

I don't think it can write a story yet.

None of them can convincingly write a story like Drucker could.

Like, there's lots of that stuff that's not there yet.

I have no idea.

Again, you all know way better than I do the science behind it.

But you were asking about working out before.

You could, there are are

95% of people who are trainers can't do as good a job of programming.

And you could play different AIs against each other.

And a couple of people.

It's also because 90% of them are influencers with no serious background.

Yes, but I'm saying, even if you talk to science,

because you can show programming, it can track for, it can just, now you may, you may, and I'm sure you're correct.

That's not the AI doing it.

It's other people could have done it.

But the way AI can program and interact with you and allow you to catch up.

If someone asks me all day long, people are asking me weightlift questions about programming.

Well, I can't program for you.

I don't know you well enough.

I'm fair.

But

if we talk generally about what your goals are, I could definitely talk to ChatGPT or Claude

and

build something that you could then iterate.

That is a search engine.

We're describing the iterations of search, though.

Yeah.

But it's packaged in this way now.

Go ahead.

The thing that three of us are going to tell you are at different levels.

I think that's coming to you at the business model, the very like micro level.

Sure, right.

And sure.

And yeah, that's the way kind of how it's got to play out financially.

And druggers come in with the like medium level of the use case and everything.

And I'm going to tell you that at the top level, I'll draw another parallel for you, which is two things come to mind.

One is how Bitcoin and crypto, very exciting.

Everyone found a novelty factor and it ran for everyone wanted to make NFTs and crypto a thing.

And then that was kind of dialed back down to a less fever pitch and more of a regular body temperature pitch.

The macro metaphorical level is what I'm going to say.

I think AI will dial back down to that

normal regulatory sort of body temperature.

And then to draw another parallel, Tinder was everyone was making their app the Tinder of this, Tinder of real estate.

And what you're describing is like an interface that works really well for something like a use case.

The chat GPT model is an interface that works really well for question and answers, seeking help, assisting you with things.

That might never go away.

That might just get built into every app as access to LLMs becomes easier for developers.

They'll build it into the Bank of America chatbot, they'll build it into everything.

And so, I think that's where it balances out eventually over time.

Maybe through rate limits.

I don't know that that's going to be the way.

I think some consolidation might happen.

You have rate limits on actually accessing yourself.

The question back and forth for the people who are using Chat GPT, right?

Or

yeah, yeah, I think that will come too.

But I think eventually we're talking like five years with druggers.

I think with the rate limits, maybe in the short term, but I think even longer term than that, we're seeing

that might eventually go away those apps may not even exist standalone yeah and i think i actually don't know if i fully disagree with you about everything you're saying it's just that the scale of what we're talking about might be different everyone having a large language model to access just saying that this is the future we're talking about doesn't really change that much i don't like the economics effect i know i'm going to do the business bullshit thing i do but it's

The economic effects are quite limited right now.

Now, if you're saying everyone will have a large language model, it'll be hamstrung in some way or what have you, fine, I can buy that for good or for bad.

I could see that happening.

I just don't think that it goes much further than what we see today.

And I think what you're describing is what Google search should have become.

And like, that was what I remember when Bard came out, I wrote about this.

I was kind of like, surely what Chat GPT is, is what search was meant to be, right?

As the Comb brothers said, you know, sure, if a, if a, if a, if a frog, you know,

had

wings, it wouldn't bump its ass hopping.

You know what I I mean?

And so.

And I'll say that, you know, I think that even as it's completely absorbed into our culture, we're still going to be on the phone listening to an AI list medical options and going, human, human, operator, human.

Like, I don't think that's going away.

I agree.

In 771.

Right.

Yeah.

Like, I don't think, like, I do think that people are going to be like, yeah, okay, I'll talk you through my problems until I hit this part with my insurance.

And I just want a human right now.

And I don't think that's going away.

No, not at all.

I actually think we're we're really more on the same page than we even seem because it's like, my whole thing is what you're describing is a use case.

I think there are real harms, but I think we kind of agree where the dangers would be.

My thing is, is that people are extrapolating from that to this insane level.

Like this whole, they keep talking about agents everywhere.

You've got Matthew McConnell.

But agents is kind of what I'm describing, which is like every

app, every service has its own chatbot, more or less.

They're just using a different way of doing it.

They're just using a different.

Yeah.

And I mean, that's kind of what like Bank of America already has a chat bar.

and it does not work.

It's the bot you use when you're trying to search for a transaction.

That's what I was talking about for sure.

The human.

Of course, we all do that.

I guess I think it'll fool us better.

That's fair.

That's fair.

I don't think right now.

It's already fooled a lot of people very well.

It's fooled people into killing themselves.

Oh, God.

Well, that's

that old character, AI.

Of course.

Google paid $2 billion for them.

I'm not making an argument that this is a beneficent force.

No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, I wasn't accusing you of daddy.

In any way, shape, or form.

Like I said, I've been reading about this for so long, but I do think that to just sort of, that's why I brought up the horse and buggy, because, no, the people who wanted the horses, right,

they were right about a lot of stuff, about the harms it would do.

Yeah, the pollution.

The pollution, the noise, the way it would take us away from our communities.

They were right about so much.

What they were wrong about was the inevitable march of the future and time.

I think the same before coming to this podcast, I was reading Mike Earpiece and I was like, oh, yeah.

Are we like in the Industrial Revolution, forgetting about the Agricultural Revolution, forgetting all the revolutions that came before?

Because I've seen it all from when I was, I remember when AOL showed up and CompuServe, and I remember I was invited to my message board when I was 14.

I'm 59.

Like this guy I knew had a message board in New York and he had to dial up.

And I mean, so I've seen this all.

I'm an early adapter of stuff, even though I'm an old dude.

But not from a tech side, from a user side.

I was on YouTube as an 11-year-old.

This is the single, just as a user, meaning I don't know how it works or why.

Yeah.

But I can explain to you why people are so fascinated.

And NFTs, I was on, you could find the old tweets going

calling people, buying one.

Are you fucking mad?

Hell yeah.

I don't know what kind of thing.

Studying con people is like literally like why I started doing what I do.

But like, no, of course I recognize that as a con from the moment one.

But this doesn't be like a con to you.

But even when you say the Bitcoin thing, it's at 120 today.

Yeah, I know.

Okay.

So Bitcoin won.

There is actual value, yeah.

NFTs were always huckster devices to separate suckers from their money.

And look, Theodore Veblen said, and David Mammet quotes it all the time: every profession is a conspiracy against the laity.

Every profession fucks over the regular professional.

Yes.

I think that's super.

That's the

doubt about that.

The big short squish

people get harmed.

Yeah, Mamet was ahead of that by 20 years.

But you got to

look at it.

And not me, Mammet.

And

then me.

But so

you got to just understand that it is very effective for people.

I'm just trying to bridge from what you're describing to the automobile, which changed everything.

I don't think large language models, I think they're going to create harms.

I think there are going to be things that change, but it's like

what happens now.

Because what we have right now is basically what we've had for two years.

If you want to email me about reasoning, please do.

I will email as much as you want.

But the thing is, you look at this and people are going, okay, and then this will happen.

It's like that thing that with an LLM that goes and does something, really basic thing, an LLM that you tell to go and do a thing online, they are bad, bad at it.

There was a Salesforce study that says like 35%,

they like it was like 30-something percent they fail or that was the only ones they complete it.

I don't think I've never asked an AI to do a task for me.

But that's saying I've never asked it to do one of those agent kind of functions.

I wouldn't.

I agree with you.

I wouldn't, well, I don't think it's there yet.

I mean, again, as a user, but research, I've had good research done.

Really?

Well, I mean, AI and Gen AI has done a lot of good stuff in the medical fields, too, right?

CRISPR and all of that stuff.

There's been a lot of discoveries about what sort of mutations you find in certain types of cancer that, like, I don't think humans could have done that.

If I want to study an industry to consider writing about it,

I can ask, you have to ask good questions.

I mean, it's like in anything else, right?

I can ask really good questions of an AI and send it, you know, for the $200 a month model one where they'll do that research thing.

And if I ask it to do research, and then you can, it'll, like,

it will come back.

And maybe you have to send it back three times, but you have to do it.

The speed and accuracy, yeah, but you can very quickly

accelerate the stuff.

A lot of it, because you can, like the book list thing, that I can't fathom being that irresponsible, like those idiots who in the paper.

But you literally, all you have to say to them is, when it presents any kind of list, all all you say to it is, go verify that list, please.

How do you know what right is?

Or verify it myself.

I mean, I would verify

at some point.

But you go verify the list.

It immediately goes, you're right.

I was hallucinating.

These three books don't exist.

That happens.

Then you go do it one more time and make sure that these titles are available in these stores.

Then it'll give you links, and then you can go look at the story.

So it's about the prompt thing that you're doing.

And I think sometimes we're splitting here, though, is you're both of you are extraordinarily intelligent people who have done a lot of research in your life.

So you know how to do those statements.

You know how to be like, I need to follow this up.

I need to search this, make sure.

I do think that one of the problems, again, coming from like the low-level consumer level, is it's often being marketed as an impartial referee, impartial reference.

Oh, you're totally right, Mike.

You're totally right.

It's not that.

You cannot, you'll be fucked so bad.

But most people don't interact with it like you do, is what I'm saying.

Well, but they can.

They can.

And I agree with you.

They can.

I think it's almost.

They don't lead them to do that.

It's not like they have things that guide them.

This is really interesting here what you're saying about this.

Yeah.

Well, I mean, I think that, you know, when you see people, and we all saw the Grok Nazi thing, but if you see people on Twitter, they don't use it,

I would say fewer use it to do Nazi shit as much as they go, hey, Grok, is this true?

Is this true?

Is this true?

And depending on what finger is on which scale, the answer is different each time.

But I think that's what I'm saying.

Oh, yeah, so I understand why you're saying, I mean, I did.

I haven't been on Twitter since October, whatever that date is.

So I don't know.

But I would never, of course, you can't just say, let's go to the ARI as though that's a final arbiter.

And certainly not today.

But it's being positioned as that.

I think that's my problem, is it's being positioned that way.

And I think you're absolutely right.

I think you're absolutely right how useful it is, especially if you have the skill to use it.

I think the problem is it is being marketed as this is a catch-all solution.

This is a panacea to your knowledge problems.

And you know what I mean?

And of course, there's a dumbing that's not a problem.

And the thing.

Well, it is like believing Rockstar Games that they're going to get fucking Grant Dead Auto out, right?

I mean, it's no debt, Rand.

No, I mean, I literally waver.

Look at the actuarial table.

If you had to build one on my life expectancy versus when the next fucking iteration of GTA, I might lose.

But here's the thing, though.

Here's the thing, though, with your describing the research.

It isn't an invalid use case.

What you're describing is how people use Google search to do research.

They pull up a bunch of stuff, they go through them, they look at it, and they go, is this right?

That's a slog.

It is a slog.

Why

I think it's a slog?

No, no, it is not.

It's a pleasure.

It's not.

No, you got to be honest about it.

It is a total pleasure.

I should be clear.

I'm also, I have actually used these things.

I've genuinely tried because I love my dude at McGizmos.

And I've really sat down and been like, What am I missing?

You just became Paul McCartney.

That was a true Paul McCartney moment.

He has not accepted my invite for the show, though.

No, he had not invited me.

My mom would be so happy.

No, it's just,

I really feel like this keeps coming back to the, you are using it in a totally fine way.

I'm mad at the fact that everyone's like, and this is the only thing you'll need.

You can fully trust this.

This is the best thing.

The information's the best.

You're looking at it and going, this is a way of digging through information and passing stuff and having a conversation with the information.

It's the lowest common in the broad society.

Yes, the lowest, that's the lowest common.

But unfortunately, yes, you're right.

Our educational system is really fucked up.

Disadvantaged people have no chance.

Mike went to a school that allowed people from disparate areas to get, we got to, yeah, we got to reform the education system in the country so that everyone has a fair shot.

I agree.

But there's a very basic thing.

So let's do it.

Yeah, but there's actually a very basic thing we don't have to.

What's that?

There should be regulation that says that these things need big fucking disclaimers that say, hey, check everything.

They won't do it because the incentives we discussed.

But that would actually be, I think, all the stealing is also bad.

I think the environmental damage is bad, but I think we agree on that.

It's just...

Safeguards are always great.

But then you got to figure out who decides what those safeguards are.

And who's, like you talked to Bill Gurley, he'll talk about regulatory creep, right?

So where do you want to...

I'm just saying, you speak.

No, no, no, I agree with you.

He's a smart person, and he's thoughtful about this stuff.

And so who do you want?

I mean,

do you want the current government deciding

on this guardrails?

Who's to do?

But here's a very basic guardrail.

It's just a disclaimer that says.

Everything with generative AIs, blah, blah, blah, that you cannot.

Some of them have it now, but they're all in preview, right?

And that's probably what I'm couching against.

They do say right on Check GT now

double check every single time yes

every single time really every single time it's an apple intelligence i saw it today actually for sure yeah because they they they have been criticized but to brian's larger point there are guardrails put in place into a lot of these i'm most familiar with the gemini's and the apple intelligences and the amazon ones of the world and they their guardrails are around like um csam right child sexual abuse material or like not presenting people's faces or like trying to avoid photorealism because then you get very deceptive very quickly.

You don't see any of that in Grok, maybe.

It depends.

I just looked.

I know, I mean, I don't know.

I just use the Grok.

Which one?

GPT?

I don't use the game.

GPT does really, it does.

But I'm not going to turn on my phone.

No, but I'm like, I'm just like, here's the thing.

If they're there sometimes and not others, that's also bad.

It's because when you've got people who are killing themselves, people that are having,

it was Miles Klee, I think it was over at Rolling Stone, wrote this piece about people having psychotic reactions.

Yeah, I agree.

This administration have probably done one regulating this.

But the answer being let's regulate nothing is terrifying.

Well, it's really, but it is confusing because if you think about, let's say, Facebook,

there's no doubt that Facebook was used in Myanmar to

foment a genocide.

People were warned inside.

Who knows where it got to?

This is very well documented.

How could one,

after the fact, it's okay,

it's really hard to sort of figure out these use cases.

And then should all social media have gone away?

Like some people think it should be

all social media, media.

I should feel better about that if Andrew Bosworth, the CTO.

I know that.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

I mostly say it for listening.

Yeah.

Because also that yellow.

No, but if I know, I'm a Muddy.

Well, that's good.

Because if I know

he did an internal letter in 2016, 2017, where he said that all things were justified for growth, including a terror attack.

And that's kind of how they approach everything.

No, it was monstrous.

Like, when I saw that Myanmar thing, it made me say, like, I should never use Facebook.

I mean, I think that is as bad a thing as I've ever seen.

I mean, literally.

But this is still an example, though.

And Meta's LLM allows children, and

Jeff

Horwitz reported this at the journal, allowed children to have sexual conversations with John Cena.

Very peculiar.

Like, there was like a

body actually.

Let's be super clear.

It was not John Cena.

You sang with John Cena.

I was going to say John Cena voice.

It was just John Cena.

He's going to jail for 100 years.

John the Bear, I was in a scene with John,

lovely guy, and he definitely wasn't doing that.

No, no, he seems like it's down to the scene.

I'm saying it was the voice of John Cena you're glad to have pedo conversations with.

But again, it's this lack of restriction because no particular technology is evil at its core.

Hi, I'm Morgan Sung, host of Close All Tabs from KQED, where every week we reveal how the online world collides with everyday life.

There was the six-foot cartoon otter who came out from behind a curtain.

It actually really matters that driverless cars are going to mess up in ways that humans wouldn't.

Should I be telling this thing all about my love life?

I think we will see a Twitch stream or president maybe within our lifetimes.

You can find Close All Tabs wherever you listen to podcasts.

Run a business and not thinking about podcasting?

Think again.

More Americans listen to podcasts than ad-supported streaming music from Spotify and Pandora.

And as the number one podcaster, iHeart's twice as large as the next two combined.

So whatever your customers listen to, they'll hear your message.

Plus, only iHeart can extend your message to audiences across broadcast radio.

Think podcasting can help your business?

Think iHeart.

Streaming, radio, and podcasting.

Call 844-844-iHeart to get started.

That's 844-844-IHERT.

Elite Basketball returns to the Elite Caribbean destination.

It's the 2025 Battle for Atlantis men's tournament happening November 26th to 28th.

Don't miss hometown team St.

Mary's, along with Colorado State, Vanderbilt, Virginia Tech, Western Kentucky, South Florida, VCU, and Wichita State, playing 12 games over three days.

It's basketball at its best, plus everything Atlantis has to offer.

Aqua Venture Water Park, White Sand Beaches, World Class Dining, and more.

Get your tickets and accommodations at battleforatlantis.com.

It's time to head back to school and forward to your future with Carrington College.

For over 55 years, we've helped train the next generation of healthcare professionals.

Apply now to get hands-on training from teachers with real-world experience.

And as few as nine months, you could start making a difference in healthcare.

Classes start soon in Pleasant Hills, San Leandro, and San Jose.

Visit Carrington.edu to see what's next for you.

Visit carrington.edu/slash SCI for information on program outcomes.

I think what Brian was saying, and I don't know if I'm misinterpreting you, but like it's there is some fatigue at seeing these things throughout all the pharmaceutical warnings you get at the end of every commercial, every warning you're going to get from Gemini from now, and every Apple intelligence warning that's like notification summaries can be wrong sometimes.

Like, sometimes you just

see them on my phone.

Where are you seeing the notifications?

I'll show you later.

No, no, no, no.

I believe you.

It's just

is that you're guessing that,

but why I brought up Myanmar is, no, we, as a society, unfortunately, we default to the convenient, fun, easy.

Yeah, that's that guy.

What we all should have done when Facebook, and I'm not even blaming exactly, like, you can blame Boz.

I don't know enough to blame anybody there.

We know that the technology, that Facebook itself was used by these generals in Myanmar.

Right.

Yes.

And nobody took pause.

Like,

I think very few people left Facebook as a a result of that.

I think so, I just don't know what the fix is for these problems because we gravitate like bees to honey.

Right, there, they're also like tools that can be used as weapons, and it depends on the perpetrator and the person using these, right?

And it's an age-old question.

Again, coming back to the industrial and agricultural revolution, this can be just a tool for hacking a plant off of its husk, or it can be used as a murder weapon.

Back to AI, it can be very informative, very helpful for people who need companionship.

It can be used like people will send me scam texts all the time.

The technology keeps keeping up with them and filtering them out.

So they keep changing their spam.

Bad actors are going to bad act.

That's just

the way it's going to be.

What can we do?

We can.

I stop using Facebook.

I try to educate my parents every single time they use a GPT answer with me.

I'm like, mom and dad, stop using that.

But then they just keep using it because they're the sort of person that's susceptible to this.

They will just use it because convenience and they don't want to do the extra work of maybe the Google search method, which you were saying, Ed, or they just want something that's easy and they don't care if they get it wrong.

Yeah, I guess I love the idea of you using your brains to figure out how to make these things safer and more useful as you agitate within the industry.

I think trying to

find a way for them to disappear seems

impossible.

And again, like NFTs were obviously going to disappear.

But the underlying Bitcoin thing wasn't because there's too much.

Well, the moment this election happened, the moment this election happened, Bitcoin was going to too much.

Bitcoin was going because

we could have stopped crypto.

I was writing about it at the time.

How are you going to stop crypto?

By informing people about the inherently criminal aspect that underlies everything, the fact that Tether is more than likely in the hands of multiple different crews.

I tried and I failed.

And you know what?

It sucks.

But you try, you can put ideas out there, you can see if people pick them up.

And I mean, that's kind of what you do there.

In the case of crypto, it's such a weird thing as well, because it's there, but it isn't.

It doesn't really do anything other than fund things or be funded.

And it just kind of exists where it's just like, they kind of, they don't even, I kind of respect the fact they don't even try and be.

You're literally, you're talking the Charlie Munger and Warren Buffett's book.

That's what they always say.

I know, but that's what they always said

because of that.

That's their whole point, that it forget the blockchain.

It doesn't really do, you know,

do anything.

And the thing is, though, there was real money in that, which there isn't in generative AI.

And I think that what's funny is this convenience thing you're talking about may actually be their downfall because those 500 million weekly active chat GPT users are costing them billions of dollars.

It's probably all going to be fascinating.

It's not as fascinating.

That is interesting.

I mean, their popularity is going to destroy those companies, not

the underlying tech, but that the companies themselves.

That's fascinating.

I'm really like I'm saying you're teaching me something.

I had no idea about that.

I'll explain it very simply, which is OpenAI last year spent $9 billion to lose $5 billion.

Anthropic spent $5.3 billion.

No, sorry, they spent like 9,

7, 8,

they spent billions to lose 5.3 billion dollars, of which a chunk of that was just given to Amazon for servers.

It's very fucking weird.

They lose money, their conversion rate on chat GPT is awful.

So 500 million, I think they have 15.5, 60 million paying subscribers.

They don't publish monthly active users, because if they did, you could do the math and see it's trash.

And on top of that, they just can't find a way to make money.

They lose so much money.

So what's more than likely is, yeah, these companies might die.

LLMs will hang around because there are use cases.

And Google is, like, Jeff Dean over at Google is one of the least evil tech people.

There are actually people there who like the tech and give a shit about it.

And there's more efficiency stuff coming out of Google's models.

The thing is...

What we see today, I do not believe, is, I think the most annoying scenario is going to be the longest life large language model with unlimited access is going to be on fucking Meta because of their unrestricted tripe that's on every fucking app.

But I think things like ChatGPT are just going to be limited.

You may still have people who use them in the way with the gym.

But it's interesting what you're saying about

maybe the maybe an answer and you think about the Industrial Revolution is eventually is that people are going to have to be trained on, instead of firing 9,000 people, train 9,000 people.

Become prompt engineers.

And yep, become prompt engineers.

And the fact that they didn't, I mean, look, no one is less surprised than me by incentive structures making these motherfuckers act like evil,

completely non-caring, you know, monsters.

But if they can be convinced that there's a profit motive in training people.

There's no profits.

No, if they can be convinced of it.

No, but I must be clear, though.

But in all these businesses, there was no profit until there was no problem.

Nothing even close.

How long did it take Amazon to become profitable?

Amazon took about 11 years with AWS, but AWS was a concern that reduced costs for Amazon itself to run their business.

But in 2000, a lot of people thought it was never going to become profitable, right?

Yeah, but that's not the same.

It is the wrong thing.

Yeah, but no, but the economics are completely different.

It's completely different economics.

Can I ask, though, Brian, how much would you pay to keep using ChatGPT a month?

I'm a bad.

I'm older and I've done well.

Do you know what I'm saying?

Do you pay anything right now, I guess?

I pay $200 a month.

$200 a month.

Okay, so Google one's like $250 a month.

Why do you pay $200?

That's a lot of fun.

For the research.

Because for the supercharged research.

Research.

I've seen the same research on the $20 a month one, not the same level of the original research.

But that's an interesting thing to point out, too, is that you're getting better quality by paying for a higher level.

I'm aware of it.

No, but seriously, is there a quality difference?

Yeah, if you look at it, we could, yeah, I mean,

Mike's saying,

they would tell you there isn't.

And in the amount of

user rate, what is it?

The rate of the business.

So they sell you shit product to make you buy them less.

Well, I don't know if they sell you shit product, but you're saying the use rate.

Someone told me, someone I trust a lot, a person who's tech savvy, was like, this is, when that happened, happened, they used it for a while.

And a couple of months ago, I was in a meeting with someone and they were like, if I was going to tell you to spend money on anything, spend 200 bucks a month.

Do you want to know something crazy though?

Yes.

They lose money on every 200 bucks a month customer.

I believe you because I'm using, because when they do that search, you're saying it's burning so much.

But that's the thing.

How likely do you think that that will continue?

Because the deep research stuff is going to be a lot of people.

If they start charging you more or you can quit, I guess.

Yes.

Well, of course, there's a number very soon.

I'm already at the.

Yeah, you're very high end of it, yeah.

Yeah, for sure.

Double this,

I would not pay double.

Right, I guarantee, I would not pay double.

And I will be honest, and this is not even me being like a hate or anything, it may not be that cheap.

Uh, because right now, I just did a big story of my newsletter, please pay for it.

Um, 500 a month.

For a 200-a-month power user who's already lose using,

pardon me, losing the money, they lose so much money on them that it's like $400,000, $500, $1,000 a month.

Claude Code, right now, which is slightly different because of the way they do context stuff.

Nevertheless, on the $200 a max user on Claude, they could be losing.

They had someone on, I saw on Twitter, they spent $10,000 in compute on a 200-month subscription.

These are the majority of power users.

Power users go nuts, as you well know.

This is why I'm so pushy on the economics, because what we are seeing today, it's like if every Uber weighed 40,000 pounds and the fuel was giraffe blood.

It was just like this insane economic.

And I sound like I'm kidding, but the economics are completely bonkers.

So as much use as you're getting today, I just don't know how practically they'll provide that.

And they might be cheaper models, but the cheaper models might not be able to do.

I assume you use O3.

Yeah, of course.

Yeah, of course.

Yeah, and sometimes it still takes such a long time.

And that's the thing.

You can even have a conversation.

And that's the thing.

It's incredibly long time.

How much of this is sustainable long term?

And I know the business stuff is annoying because you still have your experience, which you like.

No, it's not annoying.

It's fascinating.

I'm fascinated by the whole thing.

This is great.

It's just the long term here, and I'm talking long term as in 18 months, is I don't know if we will have deep research at any price point approaching the one we'll have.

Well, the deep research is the only reason anyone should pay the money.

And that's the thing, though.

The only reason that people should pay is a thing that is not sustainable and has no profit.

So, when you talk about how we bring this towards like an AWS situation, AWS's lack of profitability was built on infrastructure expansion.

It was because they were building the rails of cloud writ large.

It was never in the billions and billions a year with no, there is no path to profitability here.

There was one model that OpenAI said they were going to deliver to OpenAI Microsoft in 2023 called Arrakis.

And they failed to do it.

They have yet to discover or make...

because it may not be mathematically possible, a really good large language model that can do the kind of reasoning like that that would be reliable and have the web search to it.

And I want to say you do have to, when you talk about prompts, sorry, I was thinking about this when I was learning about complexity theory.

I read this book by a guy named Neil Thiest that I loved.

He's a professor at NYU.

And I'm not good at physics.

And I really want to understand quantum physics.

And so

I would ask questions, right?

Do research on this and then find a way to be able to explain it.

So go read these books, go find documentaries.

And then I just quickly realized at some point that

the AI hadn't, it was clear to me it hadn't read something.

Because it doesn't have access, but I could figure it out.

It hadn't.

And I just said, like, did you really look at that video?

Like, it was a video.

I go, did you really look at that video?

That speech?

And then it immediately went, No, you got me there.

I didn't look at the speech, but I'm going to go now find it a different way.

So you do, and you do have to be

acculturated to having those kinds of,

like you have to maybe have advanced degrees or have trained yourself.

So I'm not, this is fascinating, right?

Because I take for granted the steps I've, I take for granted.

You're learning behavior, right?

Yeah, to

and make my way through the world.

Yes.

And

like the way that I would interrogate something like that to get to an answer that's useful.

Yeah.

As opposed to maybe my parents would be like, oh, okay, you watched that video.

Oh, okay.

Yeah.

Okay.

Right.

I read that's your answer, right?

And they might get wrong information from it.

So I can't argue with that.

You're right about that.

And I think that a lot of this, a grand theory of this, comes down to,

I think people have a lot of questions and not a lot of people to ask them to.

Questions about their life, how they're feeling.

That's the lonely thing.

I think it starts with the medical side, where it's, it's quite hard to ask a doctor a question in any country.

It's hard to know whether they, and also doctors regularly make you feel annoying.

I'm not talking about my doctor.

He loves me.

But if you can't go to a doctor regularly with little questions, they don't have the time because they must maximize profits or they are busy, one of the two.

And ultimately, we are sitting there going, I've got this weird rash, or like, I might leg itched in this place in the same day, three days running.

What could that mean?

And you can't really Google that.

It's just cancer.

That's what people do.

But you can't really Google that.

But ChatGPT, whatever, can do an impressive impression of it.

Or, in your case, Brian, and I think this is reasonable, lead you in a direction towards like a mayo clinic article about a particular thing.

Something you could raise to your doctor.

That makes sense.

People are lonely.

People just have weird questions.

And I think that there is partially a bad side where it's like everyone wants everything immediately.

We must have everything we want immediately.

But also, people are curious, and we are more disconnected as people, we are more decentralized as people.

We don't meet people.

We don't have, we are by at scale overworked, underpaid.

So we don't have the time to be generous with our time.

Yeah.

I'll give you one other use case, though.

Because, and it goes to the question of training.

Training, but you could use this for, you said your parents dance or whatever.

So I'll tell you that

if you are somebody who is, I'll use like deadlifting or squatting with a barbell as an example.

If I put a 30-second clip into

ChatGPT and I say, please watch this.

Tell me, is this form at risk of injury?

How should I modify it?

Is it good enough?

What do you think about the load of this weight?

The answer it will give is, and I have checked it against like the world, the answer it will give is outstanding.

And that's it.

And that's how would you get that in another way?

I don't think there is.

And that's a very small example.

Well, that's different than search.

There's an expert.

No, that's.

It's searching using a video.

No, it's not that.

The matching is a bit less sophisticated in regular Google search.

No, I'm saying that.

No, that is.

It's not merely matching it against a perceived perfect form.

It's looking at your femur.

Literally, it'll go with your femur size.

This is the kind of squat that you could do if I low bar versus high bar.

Here's why.

Here's what this looks like.

You're overmatching.

I'm agreeing with you.

I'm just saying that search as a term has grown to look at this image and compare it to these sources which is theoretically what search but then in the good language right yeah

how to fix my how to fix it and i do worry if you ask a bad question like if you not ask a bad question phrase a question incorrect sure and

I'm not saying you.

If one phrases, let's say they ask a fitness question, but they phrase it a little bit weird and the answer they get is harmful, it almost I'm worried about

situations like that.

And also, it feels like we're removing an element of human responsibility or accountability where it's like, well, the machine answered weird rather than like a doctor answered weird.

And I think that lots of corporations love that idea.

They love that because it's like

if my AI accidentally denies your insurance, it was the AI.

It wasn't us.

It's the algorithm.

Yeah.

It's the same algorithmic pass-on thing.

But I think you're right in that that is kind of cool.

I also have used O3 because I do pay for this.

I'm not a baseless hater.

I did ask, what's the distance between this bottom of this photo frame and the floor?

And it spent 10 minutes to give me a completely, insanely wrong answer.

They're not good with numbers.

Oh, fascinating.

See, the other day in this example I just gave you, it said, I can't see.

It just said, like, I can't see.

Which is good.

That was great.

That should do that.

That was great.

Both of you are using the same audience.

I was using O3 on ChatGPT Plus, though.

So now I can...

Try the pros.

Oh, I don't know how I feel about giving Clammy Sammy 200 bucks.

You should try it for a month and see what it does.

Yeah, I.

You can write it off.

I don't want to write.

I already gave $200 to Warrior Amateur.

No, because I would love you to do that and then call me and say it's the same.

No, no, no.

No, no, no.

I would love you to tell me.

I'm now actually really curious.

I would love you to say to me, dude, just spend 20 bucks.

It's the same.

That would be fun.

Then you could save your 180 a month.

Yeah, that'd be great news.

Please.

I am what Mike was bringing up, I thought was going to be similar to the point I had been mulling over when you were talking about the training stuff, which is that we already deal with, due to like, you know, capitalism, lower barriers to entry, an influx of individuals who may not actually be fully equipped for the jobs they purport to do so whether it be journalists like myself or like again fitness influencers or trainers that say they have whatever types of physical health degrees that are just the result of a 10-hour course online that sort of thing yeah we're already dealing with the like quality dilution of like information coming from sources like that to throw ai into the mix feels like making it even worse like harder than ever to tell what the truth is and i don't know about you all but i find myself gaslighting myself all the time now, regardless of like my own life, whether it's the truth in the world, whether I'm being too sympathetic to multiple different perspectives.

I don't know what the truth is anymore.

I can't tell you what the cold, hard, scientific truth of anything ever is.

And that's where it's led me.

You also have to be willing.

I agree with that.

It's a brilliant point.

I think one of the things I would say to people, if someone asked me,

how should you communicate?

I would say, and it's really painful for people, because I've seen them talk online about what they love about

conversing with AI.

you gotta say click every toggle that says be mean tell me the truth don't tell me i'm smart yeah like you gotta

instruct it to

really be withholding in that way if you want to actually engage so that so that you're i you're not getting gaslit because yes i agree that this is dangerous the default setting is to gaslight you you got to actually go i don't need to hear like that blaze you i think the young people blaze you sure wait can we talk about one topic before we're done can we talk about it?

You didn't hear the producer just laugh out loud.

I was laughing.

Can we talk about just one?

I think they used to say glaze, but can we just talk about one

positive, purely positive tech thing that happened the last week?

Sure.

It's July 4th.

Okay.

Who's on TikTok and knows all about the Antipasto party in Texas?

No.

Biggest story on TikTok.

Was it the one that one person went to?

Yeah, okay.

It's the greatest thing.

Please run the study.

Okay, they're in Texas.

These people have a July 4th party.

There's a woman.

She's just moved there recently.

Her kid becomes friends with someone else's kid.

And this woman, Sarah is the parent of one boy, says, come with me over to these people party, these people's party.

Woman A makes the apotheosis of all antipasto salad, the greatest salad you've ever seen in your life, goes to their house.

Yeah.

And these people are like, who's this stranger in our house?

And they kick her out, even though she brought this incredible thing.

She goes home and gets on TikTok and she's crying.

And she's like, I brought this salad and they kicked me out of their house.

And the entire internet

and loves her so much.

And it's like, it's an incredible story.

Everybody I know is like

everybody of all ages, like nieces and nephews of mine and then older, people older than me are all sending.

And it's an amazing thing.

It's a huge community has rallied.

to hate these fucking people and to love her and her homemade mozzarella and home grown tomatoes that she brought to their house.

It's like the scaling locality.

I saw something else, but

no, I saw something else altogether.

It's really worth it.

But like Reddit does things like that too.

And that's the thing.

Reddit, like this is, and I liked ending this in a positive note.

That's a lovely.

Reddit does that.

You were going to say something, Sean.

Well, yeah, no, community and social forums like that.

That's what the internet is great for.

And

a lot of AI is present in a lot of that.

And it's almost Reddit, especially right now, has got good because it isn't.

The CEO keeps thinking of shoving it places, but even like the better offline, Reddit, we've got 9,000 of you now.

Hey, guys.

But it's great because one of my biggest stories I wrote recently was on cursor and them falling apart.

And it was because someone on the red, the forum was just like looking through their stuff.

I'm like, ah, you, and everyone had this full conversation about it.

You've got these people out there in this morass of...

fake stuff or generated stuff or SEO stuff.

You've got genuine people.

There is still a joy to all of this crap.

I love Blue Sky as well, but Reddit has really just, I'm shocked.

I've spent a lot of time on Reddit.

I read it.

I'm shocked.

And there are groups I won't ever go to on.

Oh, yeah, yeah, of course.

You got to pick your own.

I mean, no, but I'm saying, you know,

like, but, but there are where people have a hobby or a thing, like, whether it's music, you know, you're like, I text stuff.

Yeah, it's great.

And you must love the like the Claude Reddit because they hate every day.

Someone's like, why does Claude suck Discord?

You must love stuff.

I love R slash Google, yes.

I like R slash SAS because it's all just people like running SAS gum.

No, it's all people of software as a service.

No, no, no.

You're thinking of a different SaaS one.

I'm talking S-A-A-S.

Software as a service.

Yeah, I'm a loser.

So,

no, you watch people being like, my app has been up for six months and it's made $7.

Should I continue?

A bunch of people are like, yes.

And those subscriptions are.

No, I kind of love them

that you've got these niches.

But I hate to say it, I do need to call this episode to an end.

Brian, where can people find you?

Oh,

Instagram.

Nice.

We'll have a link link to there as well.

Yeah.

You can find me on Instagram at Mike DruckerIsDead and on Blue Sky at Mike Drucker.

And by Good Game No Rematch, it is a book that's available digital, hardcover, or audio with the audio read by myself.

Hell yeah.

Very nice.

Sherlin?

I'm at Engadja.com or on threads at Sherlin Instagram, C-A-E-R-O-I-N-N-S-T-H-R-E-M.

Type in Google, the man who destroyed Google search.

That's me.

I'm Ed Sitch on.

Thank you so much for listening as ever.

This is recording in the wonderful New York studio in iHeartRadio.

Daniel Goodman, of course, is our producer.

Thank you so much, Daniel.

Thank you all for listening.

Thank you for listening to Better Offline.

The editor and composer of the Better Offline theme song is Matt Osowski.

You can check out more of his music and audio projects at mattosowski.com.

M-A-T-T-O-S-O-W-S-K-I dot com.

You can email me at easy at betteroffline.com or visit betteroffline.com to find more podcast links and of course my newsletter.

I also really recommend you go to chat.where's your ed.at to visit the Discord and go to r/slash betteroffline to check out our Reddit.

Thank you so much for listening.

Better Offline is a production of CoolZone Media.

For more from CoolZone Media, visit our website coolzonemedia.com or check us out on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Be honest, how many tabs do you have open right now?

Too many?

Sounds like you need close all tabs from KQED, where I, Morgan Sung, Doom Scroll so you don't have to.

Every week, we scour the internet to bring you deep dives that explain how the digital world connects and divides us all.

Everyone's cooped up in their house.

I will talk to this robot.

If you're a truly engaged activist, the government already has data on you.

Driverless cars are going to mess up in ways that humans wouldn't.

Listen to Close All Tabs wherever you get your podcasts.

Ah, Smart Water Alkaline with Antioxidant.

Pure, crisp taste, perfectly refreshing.

Mmm.

Whoa, that is refreshing.

And a 9.5 plus pH.

For those who move, those who push further, those with...

A taste for taste.

Exactly.

I did take a spin class today after work.

Look at you.

Restoring like a pro.

I mean, I also sat down halfway through.

Eh, close enough.

Smartwater alkaline with antioxidants.

For those with a taste for taste, grab yours today.

This is Bethany Frankl from Just Be with Bethany Frankl.

Here's my summer tip.

Don't overthink your dog's meals.

My pups love just fresh from just food for dogs, complete, balanced, fresh, shelf-staple meals that go everywhere from New York City to weekends in the Hamptons.

I mean, you can have real food ready to go for your pup anywhere.

No cooler, no hassle, just grab and go.

I've seen the difference.

Healthier coats, more energy, tails wagging at mealtime.

Biggie and smalls love it, and I'm all about stuff that just makes sense when life is busy.

Go to justfoodfordogs.com and get 50% off your first order right now.

No code needed.

Hey, it's Brian Christopher.

Ready to show the summer?

You're in luck.

I'm hanging out at Chumpa Casino, and you're in for a treat.

Chillax with hundreds of games, daily bonuses, exciting spins, and epic prizes.

It's all here, always free to play.

Kick back, have fun, and head to chumpa casino.com.

Let's make the summer legendary.

Sponsored by Chumpa Casino, no purchase necessary, VGW Group, void where prohibited by law, CTNC's 21 Plus.

This is an iHeart podcast.